Article 282 of the Labor Code states that, an employer may

terminate an employee from employment for any of the following causes:

(a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the
lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work;
(b) Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties;
(c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him
by his employer or duly authorized representative;
(d) Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the
person of his employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly
authorized representative; and
(e) Other causes analogous to the foregoing.
As stated above, Other causes analogous to the above grounds may
also be a just cause for termination of employment. An example of this is
abandonment of job which is a form of neglect of duty. There is
abandonment when the employee leave his job or position with a clear and
deliberate intent to discontinue his employment without any intention of
returning back.
Pursuant to Agabon vs. NLRC, Supreme court held that there was a
just cause for the termination of the employment of the petitioners, as their
abandonment of work had clearly been established.
Here, employee Bs act of not appearing for work for a period of one
month constitute abandonment because he leave his job with a clear intent
of not returning back as when he is already finalizing his employment with
the competitor company.
Another example of other causes analogous to the above grounds, as
held by the supreme court in Elizalde International vs. Court of Appeals,
is disloyalty or conflict of interest whereby one who asserts an interest,
or performs acts adverse or disloyal to one's employer commits a breach of
an implied condition of the contract of employment which may warrant
discharge, as, for example, where one engages in a business which renders
him a competitor and rival of his employer."

An employer has the right to expect loyalty from his employees as

long as the employment relationship continues. Implicit in the contract of
employment is the undertaking that the employee shall be faithful to the
interest of the employer during the term of the employment. When an
employee deliberately acquires an interest adverse to his employer, he is
disloyal, and his discharge is justified.
Here, employee B engages in a company which necessarily renders
him a competitor and rival of his employer, no matter how much or how little
time and attention he devoted to it, he is deemed to have an interest which
conflicts with his duty to his employer, and for this cause he may be
dismissed on the ground of disloyalty or conflict of interest analogous to
willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or
duly authorized representative.

PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
The procedural requirement for a company to validly dismiss an
employee in case there is a valid reason is provided under the Rules
Implementing the Labor Code, Book 6, Rule 1, section 2 which consist
of the following:
a. Furnishing the employee with a written notice specifying the ground
or grounds for termination, and giving the latter reasonable opportunity
within which to explain his side.
b. Providing the employee a hearing or conference during which the
employee concerned, with the assistance of counsel if he so desires is given
opportunity to respond to the charge, present his evidence, or rebut the
evidence presented against him.
c. Serving the employee a written notice of termination indicating that
upon due consideration of all the circumstances, grounds have been
established to justify his termination.
For termination of employment as defined in Article 289 of the Labor
Code, the requirement of due process shall be deemed complied with upon
service of written notice to the employee and the appropriate Regional Office
of the Department of Labor and Employment atleast 30 days before the
effectivity of the termination.

Here, assuming that there is a valid ground, Company A must comply

with the following procedural requirement to put the termination into effect.

Consequences of Termination
If the dismissal is for just cause but without prior notice and hearing,
the dismissal is valid but the employer may be required to pay nominal
damages to the dismissed employee.
In the case of Agabon v. NLRC, supreme court held that there was a
just cause for the termination of the employment of the petitioners, as their
abandonment of work had clearly been established. However, the company
did not comply with the twin-notice requirement in Book VI, Rule I, Section
2(d) of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code. This rule mandates
the sending of the notices to the last known addresses of the employees. For
failing to comply procedural due process, the employer in this case was
directed to pay each petitioner an indemnity in the form of nominal damages
of P30,000.
In DEOFERIO vs. INTEL TECHNOLOGY PHILIPPINES, INC., Supreme court
ruled
that
the
petitioner
is
entitled
to
nominal
damages
for
violation
of
his
right
to
statutory procedural due process and pegged the nominal damages
at P30,000.00 if the dismissal is based on a just cause but the employer
failed to comply with the twin-notice requirement.
As held in the case of Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co., Inc. v. NLRC:
The law requires that the employer must furnish the worker sought to be dismissed with two (2)
written notices before termination of employee can be legally effected: (1) notice which apprises
the employee of the particular acts or omissions for which his dismissal is sought, and (2) the
subsequent notice which informs the employee of the employers decision to dismiss him (Sec. 13,
BP130, Sec. 2-6 Rule XIV, Book V, Rules and Regulations Implementing the Labor Code as
amended). Failure to comply with the requirements taints the dismissal with illegality. This
procedure is mandatory; in the absence of which, any judgment reached by management is void
and inexistent (Tingson, Jr. vs. NLRC, 185 SCRA 498 [1990]; National Service Corp. vs. NLRC, 168
SCRA 122, Ruffy vs. NLRC. 182 SCRA 365 L [1990]).