Short answer. Article 282 itself does not draw that line. Its four just causes are written to apply to "the employee" and to terminating "an employment" generally, with no separate wording for rank-and-file staff versus managerial staff. The text alone does not set out a different standard for the two groups.
What the law says
An employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes: Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work
Labor Code, Article 282 — Just Causes For Dismissal. Read the full provision →
What the article's own wording says
Article 282 states that "an employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes" and then lists serious misconduct or willful disobedience, gross and habitual neglect of duties, fraud or willful breach of trust, commission of a crime or offense against the employer or immediate family, and other analogous causes. Every one of these is phrased in terms of "the employee" in general — the article does not attach a qualifier limiting any cause to a particular category of worker, nor does it define a separate, heavier or lighter version of any cause for managers.
Why this article alone cannot answer the comparison directly
Because the text does not mention rank-and-file or managerial employees at all, this article by itself does not tell you whether the two groups are, in practice, held to the same standard under each of these causes. It states the causes; it does not classify the workforce. Answering how strictly any one cause is applied to a manager compared to a rank-and-file employee would require looking beyond what this article's own text provides.
What can honestly be said from the text alone
What the article does support is this: on its face, the same four named causes, plus the analogous-causes category, apply to "an employment" without carving out different wording for different job levels. Whatever distinctions might exist in how a particular cause is proven or evaluated for a manager versus a rank-and-file employee are not something Article 282's own language sets out — the article treats the causes themselves as generally stated, not tiered by position.
What this means for reading the article
A worker or employer trying to work out whether a specific dismissal was for just cause should start with the plain wording of Article 282, since that wording governs regardless of the employee's title or level. But because the article itself is silent on any distinction between rank-and-file and managerial employees, this text does not settle the broader question of whether the two categories are actually treated the same way in every situation — it only establishes that the causes as written are not expressly limited to one group or the other.