Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1


G.R. No. 118978, May 23, 1997


Private respondent de Guzman was hired by petitioner PT&T as fixed-period reliever for 3 periods
between November 1990 and August 1991. On Sept. 1991, de Guzman was asked to join PT&T as a
probationary employee. In the job application form, de Guzman indicated in her civil status that she was
single although she had in fact contracted marriage on May 26, 1991. PT&T dismissed de Guzman from
the company after learning about her real civil status and being unconvinced of her explanation for the
discrepancy. De Guzman contested by initiating a complaint for illegal dismissal, coupled with a claim for
non-payment of COLA.


WHETHER OR NOT the alleged concealment of civil status can be a ground for terminating the services
of an employee


NO. In the case at bar, petitioner’s policy of not accepting or considering as disqualified from work any
woman worker who contracts marriage runs afoul of the test of, and the right against, discrimination
afforded to all women workers by our labor laws and by no less than the Constitution. Contrary to
petitioner’s assertion that it dismissed private respondent from employment on account of her
dishonesty, the record discloses clearly that her ties with the company were dissolved primarily because
of the company’s policy that married women are not qualified for employment in PT&T, and not merely
because of her supposed acts of dishonesty.