SERRANO V.

NLRC
323 445 (2000)

Serrano was head of the Security Checker’s Section of Isetann Department Store. In 1999,
as a cost-cutting measure Isetann phased out the entire security section and engaged the services
of an independent security agency. Thus, it wrote a notice of termination to Serrano effective on
the same day, contrary to the provisions of Art. 283 of the Labor Code which requires a one-month
notice. Was the constitutional right of Serrano violated?

Held: No. The employer’s failure to comply with the notice requirement does not constitute a
denial of due process, but a mere failure to observe a procedure for termination. The reason is that
the due process clause is a limitation on government power, not on private power such as the
termination of employment under the Labor Code. Secondly, the notice and hearing are required
under the process clause before the power of organized society are brought to bear upon the
individual. Under Art. 283, the failure to comply with the notice requirement makes the
termination of his employment merely ineffectual, but not illegal. Consequently, he is not entitled
to reinstatement. However, he must be paid backwages from the time his employment was
terminated until it is determined that his termination is for just cause because the failure to hear
him before he is dismissed renders the termination without any legal effect.