In illegal dismissal cases, the burden of proof works in two stages. First, the employee must establish, by substantial evidence, the fact that they were actually dismissed — because there can be no illegal dismissal to speak of if there was no dismissal at all (for example, if the worker simply stopped reporting or abandoned the job, or resigned voluntarily). Once the fact of dismissal is established, the burden shifts to the employer to prove that the dismissal was for a valid or authorized cause and that due process was observed. This is because the employer, having the resources and the records, is in the best position to justify the termination, and the law tilts in favor of labor. If the employer fails to discharge this burden, the dismissal is deemed illegal. Substantial evidence — such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion — is the standard in labor cases, which is lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt or preponderance of evidence.
In an illegal dismissal case, a common question is: who has to prove what? The answer involves a burden that shifts between the worker and the employer.
Stage 1: The Worker Proves the Fact of Dismissal
First, the employee must establish, by substantial evidence, the fact that they were actually dismissed. This makes sense: there can be no illegal dismissal if there was no dismissal at all. If the worker:
- Simply stopped reporting or abandoned the job; or
- Resigned voluntarily,
then there is nothing to complain of. So the worker must first show they were dismissed (actually or constructively).
Stage 2: The Burden Shifts to the Employer
Once the fact of dismissal is established, the burden shifts to the employer to prove that the dismissal was:
- For a valid or authorized cause; and
- Attended by due process.
The employer, not the worker, must justify the termination.
Why the Employer Bears This Burden
The law places this burden on the employer because:
- The employer has the resources and the records and is in the best position to justify the termination; and
- The law tilts in favor of labor in case of doubt.
If the employer fails to discharge this burden, the dismissal is deemed illegal.
The Standard: Substantial Evidence
Labor cases use the substantial evidence standard — such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. This is lower than:
- Proof beyond reasonable doubt (criminal cases); and
- Preponderance of evidence (ordinary civil cases).
What This Means in Practice
- A worker claiming illegal dismissal should be ready to prove they were dismissed (e.g., a termination notice, being barred from work, or facts showing constructive dismissal); while
- The employer must document the cause and the due process (notices, evidence of the offense or authorized cause) — because they carry the burden to justify it.
Practical Takeaways
- The worker first proves the fact of dismissal — no dismissal, no case;
- Then the burden shifts to the employer to prove a valid cause and due process;
- The standard is substantial evidence, and if the employer fails to discharge the burden, the dismissal is illegal.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who has the burden of proof in an illegal dismissal case? It shifts. The employee must first prove the fact that they were actually dismissed. Once that is established, the burden shifts to the employer to prove the dismissal was for a valid cause and with due process.
Why does the worker have to prove they were dismissed? Because there can be no illegal dismissal if there was no dismissal at all. If the worker simply abandoned the job or resigned voluntarily, there is nothing to complain of, so they must first show they were dismissed.
Why does the employer bear the burden to justify a dismissal? Because the employer has the resources and records and is best positioned to justify the termination, and the law tilts in favor of labor. If the employer fails to discharge this burden, the dismissal is deemed illegal.
What is the standard of proof in labor cases? Substantial evidence, meaning such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. It is lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt or preponderance of evidence.
This commentary is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance specific to your situation, please consult a licensed attorney.
If you have questions about your rights or options under Philippine law, our firm is available to assist. You may reach us via Viber or WhatsApp, call us at 0995 433 5550, or send an email to vivasnobles@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.