Labor Secretary Rosalinda Baldoz. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines–A labor official implicated in the so-called sex-for-repatriation controversy, who was earlier sanctioned with a four-month suspension for “simple misconduct,” has been appealing for a lesser penalty.
In a motion for partial reconsideration filed by his lawyer, acting Labor Attaché for Jordan Mario Antonio appealed to the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) to reconsider its decision and reduce the penalty meted upon him to the minimum period prescribed for the simple misconduct offense.
“He pleaded for the reduction of the penalty of four months that we imposed. He did not indicate the period in his motion but under the law, the minimum penalty is one month and one day,” said Labor Secretary Rosalinda Baldoz.
Baldoz earlier ordered Antonio’s suspension without pay, saying the DOLE’s fact-finding team found some evidence against him for a “simple misconduct” case, including using vulgar and indecent language while talking with distressed overseas Filipino workers (OFWs).
She added that the labor official also used an office-issued laptop to view pornographic materials.
However, Antonio, in his motion, asserted that there was one instance when he went to the toilet and left his laptop open on his table.
Upon his return, Antonio said he chanced upon several wards [of the OFW center] milling around his laptop and looking at provocative pictures.
He stressed that the pictures were not from the laptop itself or from his own Facebook account.
The pictures were accessed from someone else’s account, Antonio said.
“That respondent willfully intended to transgress the department’s directives on the use of office property was never established or proved by the prosecution in its pleadings and during the proceedings for this case. There was no reference made regarding this incident even in the affidavits of the alleged complainants. It is therefore unfortunate that the respondent now bears the burden of blame for being accommodating to volunteer wards, in being liberal and not mistrustful of these wards,” he said in his motion.
“The fact that the laptop was used for unofficial business is uncontroverted. However, respondent did not in any way actively participate or tacitly allowed this transgression to occur. This significant detail in the narration of facts should merit consideration in the determination of the proper penalty,” he added.
Antonio said he himself recognized the impropriety of his occasional use of foul language. But he claimed that he had apologized for these utterances and had since been mindful of his acts and decorum.
“It’s not as if respondent’s sentences are peppered with invectives and crass words so as to considerably offend both clients and partners of the department,” he said.
“Respondent is of the position that there are more mitigating circumstances present as good faith and lack of malicious intent should likewise be considered. Hence, the minimum penalty should instead be imposed,” the labor official said.
DOLE has yet to decide on Antonio’s appeal but Baldoz earlier said she would temporarily defer the implementation of her decision pending review of Antonio’s plea.