Photo from Pexels | Ron Lach
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
Termination on the ground of a positive HIV test result is not legal under Philippine law. Section 49(a) of Republic Act No. 11166 makes it unlawful for an employee to be terminated from work on the sole basis of their HIV status.
In the case of Bison Management Corporation v. AAA and Pernito (G.R. No. 256540, February 14, 2024) the Supreme Court held that termination on the ground of a positive HIV test result is not legal under Philippine law.
The Petition for Review filed before the Supreme Court stems from an amended complaint for illegal dismissal and discrimination, non-payment of salary/wages, overtime pay, vacation leave pay, payment of the unexpired portion of the employment contract, attorney’s fees, damages, and legal interest filed by respondents AAA and Dale Pernito against Bison (the recruitment agency), its President Al-Humayed, and Saraya, the foreign recruitment agency of Bison.
Sometime in 2017, AAA applied with Bison. After undergoing the usual screening and interview, he was hired as a Cleaning Laborer under a two (2)-year contract with a monthly salary of SR 1,500.00. He was deployed to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on 18 October 2017 and commenced work thereafter. In January 2019, AAA underwent routine medical examination and was found positive for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). On this basis, his foreign employer terminated the employment of AAA because under the laws of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, an HIV+ individual is considered unfit to work. He was repatriated to the Philippines on February 8, 2019.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for illegal dismissal, it found that under the policy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, persons who test positive for HIV are not allowed to work there. On appeal, the NLRC found that AAA was illegally dismissed. The CA affirmed the NLRC’s decision.
To support its claim that Saudi Arabia allows the termination of employment based on an HIV-positive result, Bison presented a number of documents. However, it failed to present a copy of the relevant foreign law.
It is settled that in order to prove a foreign law, the party invoking it must present a copy thereof and comply with Rule 132, Sections 24 and 25 of the Revised Rules of Court. Failure to prove the foreign law activates the doctrine of processual presumption, whereby the foreign law is deemed to be the same as Philippine law.
While Bison harped on the alleged policy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia prohibiting from employment foreign workers with HIV, it failed to adduce competent evidence to support its claim.
Even if it were truly undeniable and it is all over the internet that Saudi Arabia does not allow persons who test positive for HIV to work there, the Court had already settled that if the foreign law stipulated is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy, then Philippine laws shall govern.
Section 49(a) of Republic Act No. 11166 makes it unlawful for an employee to be terminated from work on the sole basis of their HIV status:
SEC. 49. Discriminatory Acts and Practices. – The following discriminatory acts and practices shall be prohibited:
(a) Discrimination in the Workplace. – The rejection of job application, termination of employment, or other discriminatory policies in hiring, provision of employment and other related benefits, promotion or assignment of an individual solely or partially on the basis of actual, perceived, or suspected HIV status.
Thus, the Supreme Court found that the CA correctly ruled that since Philippine law categorically prohibits the use of a person’s HIV+ condition as a ground for dismissal, the inescapable conclusion is that there was no valid cause to terminate AAA, and that doing so is tantamount to illegal dismissal.
While it is true that disease may be a ground for termination under Article 299 of the Labor Code, as amended and renumbered, Bison has conceded that HIV positive is not yet an illness/disease. There being no other reason proffered for AAA’s dismissal apart from his HIV status, the Court upholds the ruling of the CA that the NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in finding that AAA was illegally dismissed.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 0917-5772207/ 09778050020.
All rights reserved.
