8/26/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Despite the finding, however, that the CA erred in ruling that the petition was filed out of time, the Court nevertheless upholds the ruling of the CA as regards the merits of the case. De Leon's dismissal was anchored on his violation of PTC's Code of Discipline, the pertinent provision again reads: Section O. CONCERTED ACTIONS AGAINST COMPANY OFFENSES & OTHER 5. No employee shall offer or accept directly or indirectly any gift with a collective value of Php 500.00 and above. Any item worth Php 500.00 and above should be returned or surrendered to HR Department. In addition, an employee who accepts any amount of money or any gift in kind from a crew member, ex-crew member, or representative of a crew member shall be dismissed. Offering or accepting any gift with collective value of P500.00 and above should be dealt with DISMISSAL. 1st Offense - DISMISSAL[38] A plain reading of the above rule would reveal that what is punished are two separate acts: (1) offering or accepting, whether directly or indirectly, any gift with a collective value of P500.00 or more, regardless of who it came from, and (2) acceptance by an employee of any gift — regardless of value — from a crew member, ex-crew member, or representative of a crew member. It is likewise clear from the said rule that a violation, even on the first instance, merits the dismissal of the employee from his employment. It is without question that de Leon received a gift during his tenure with PTC — his only contentions are: (1) that it did not constitute a violation of the foregoing rule as he did not receive it from a crew member, ex-crew member, or representative of a crew member, and (2) that the rule was vague, unreasonable, and unfair. With regard to his first contention, de Leon's contention is untenable for his act clearly falls under the first act punished by the rule. He received a gift with a value of $36, which was clearly above the P500.00 threshold under the rule. Without doubt, therefore, de Leon's acts violated PTC's Code of Conduct. As regards his second contention, he argues: Careful analysis of the said provision however will reveal that the same is utterly vague. From the Notice of Dismissal, it shows that petitioner was dismissed for violating the policy that "No employee shall offer or accept directly or indirectly any gift with a collective value of Php500.00 and above." It was his mere acceptance of the gift that he was meted with the supreme penalty of dismissal. Such provision was however noticeably couched in general and vague manner, without any qualification as to https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65291 6/12