‘Neither are your ways my ways’: Pregnancy and immorality in the workplace

FREEPIK

Should a teacher working for a Christian educational institution be disciplined for engaging in a pre-marital relationship with her boyfriend that led to her pregnancy?

This was the question brought before the Supreme Court in Bohol Wisdom School et al. v. Mabao, G.R. No. 252124, July 23, 2024.

Bohol Wisdom School (BWS), a Christian school, hired Miraflor Mabao as a grade school teacher on June 7, 2007. On Sept. 21, 2016, Mabao informed the grade school principal that she was two months pregnant with her boyfriend. The following day, the school principal verbally suspended her and told her not to report to her classes until she could present documents showing that she was already married to the father of her child.

To BWS, Mabao’s suspension was not illegal as it was an exercise of its management prerogative in keeping with their standard of morality. Considering that there is no absolute standard of morality, the standard must be based on the surrounding circumstances where the questioned action takes place. In this case, Mabao, as a teacher in a Christian educational institution, was obliged to teach and exemplify Christian values.

However, the Supreme Court disagreed with BWS and ruled that Mabao was illegally suspended. In the eyes of the law, the standard of morality that binds all those who come before it is public and secular, not religious (Capin-Cadiz v. Brent Hospital and Colleges, Inc. G.R. No. 187417, Feb. 24, 2016).

Jurisprudence has already defined public and secular morality as conduct proscribed because they are detrimental to conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of society (Leus v. St. Scholastica’s College Westgrove, G.R. No. 187226, Jan. 28, 2015).

To the Supreme Court, sexual relations between two consenting adults who have no legal impediment to marry are not immoral. The fact that a particular act does not conform to the traditional moral views of a certain sectarian institution is insufficient to qualify such act as immoral unless it, likewise, does not conform to public and secular standards. It may have been an unusual arrangement, but it certainly was not disgraceful or immoral within the contemplation of the law.

Thus, on a secular level, premarital sex is not immoral per se. Mabao neither had sexual relations with a married man nor was she married at that time. As Mabao’s pregnancy could not be considered immoral, the Supreme Court held that this could not be a valid ground for her suspension.

This was not the first time the Supreme Court had the occasion to rule on the morality of pregnancy out of wedlock as insufficient just cause for termination. In Union School International v. Dagdag, (G.R. No. 234186, Nov. 21, 2018), the Court ruled that there is no issue on immorality with an elementary school teacher getting pregnant even when the father of her child was marrying another woman. What was vital was that at the time of conception, there was no legal impediment to marry between the teacher and the father of her child. As Justice Francis Jardaleza so eloquently writes in his concurring opinion in Union School: “Christine Joy has the right to decide how she will rear her child. If this choice involves being a single mother for now or for good, no law or government issuance may be used to interfere with this decision.”

However, extra-marital relationships per se are considered immoral, hence, a ground for termination of employment due to serious misconduct. In Santos vs. NLRC (G.R. No. 115795, March 6, 1998), the Supreme Court held that when a teacher engages in an extra-marital relationship, more so when the parties are both married, such behavior amounts to immorality. This is especially so because teachers, who are directly charged with rearing and educating students in their formative years, effectively serve as their role models.

Likewise, in Ogalisco v. Holy Trinity College of General Santos City (G.R. No. 172913, Aug. 9, 2007), the illicit affair between co-teachers was considered a just cause for termination after witnesses confirmed the following circumstances between the petitioner and a married co-teacher: “Moreover, respondent through his witnesses has proven that complainant and (his married co-teacher) were no ordinary friends. They were seen holding hands at the Manokan restaurant, seen walking in the street not in a way ordinary friends do, seen many times at Kimball Plaza having refreshment (alone) [sic] and acting like husband and wife, holding hands while riding in the tricycle, holding hands and complainant kissing (her) and putting his hands around her inside the faculty room.”

Finally, while consensual pre-marital relationships between adults without marital impediments are not inherently immoral, contextual factors can render them terminable offenses. Specifically, circumstances warranting termination include scandalous conduct, on-premise immoral acts, or significant reputational harm to the institution and its members.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. This article is for general informational and educational purposes only and not o ff ered as and does not constitute legal advice or legal opinion.

Lance Ryan J. Villarosa is an associate of the Labor and Employment department of the Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz Law Offices (ACCRALAW).

ljvillarosa@accralaw.com

8830-8000