Rivera, Katrina G.

2007-00627 1-A Instructions: Read and examine all the listed sources in Philippine Statute Law and search for the answer to your problem by citing the appropriate statute and its implementing rules, if any. Indicate the source where you found the answer and describe your research procedure. DO NOT USE THE INTERNET. 1. Section 1-A Mr. Lorenzo, managing partner of an accounting firm, conducted an orientation for newly-hired employees of the firm, among them, Ms. Maganda. After the seminar, Mr. Lorenzo requested Ms. Maganda to stay, purportedly to discuss some work assignments. Left alone in the training room, Mr. Lorenzo asked Ms. Maganda to go out with him for dinner and dancing. Thereafter, he was able to persuade Ms. Maganda because he told her that most of the lady supervisors in the firm are where they are now because of his favourable endorsement. What acts did he commit in a work-related environment?

On February 14, 1995 Republic Act No. 7877 was approved. R.A. No. 7877 is also known as the AntiSexual Harassment Act of 1995. On October 1995, the Civil Service Commission issued Resolution 956161- the Rules and Regulations implementing R.A. No. 7877 with the CSC Memo Circular No. 19 as suppletory rules. Mr. Lorenzos act can be considered as an act of sexual harassment. According to Section 3 of R.A. 7877, sexual harassment is committed when an employer, manager, supervisor, or any other person having authority over another in work environment requires any sexual favour from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is accepted. The statement of Mr. Lorenzo that most of the lady supervisors got where they are now because of his favourable consent is an implied and indirect way of saying that Ms. Maganda needs to go out with him in order to be promoted. When the individual has been forced to choose between an economic detriment and submitting to sexual demands, it is considered as blackmail (Feliciano, 1996). It can be agued that the statement of Mr. Lorenzo cannot be considered as sexual in nature because it was only a statement, not an act, but what constitutes sexual harassment is often based on perception by the person (Feliciano, 1996). Section 3 of RA 7877 provides that there is sexual harassment when a sexual act would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the employee. Mr. Lorenzo is a person of authority and his acts can be a form of intimidation against an employee. This kind of act is what is prohibited in the declaration of policy of RA 7877.

Research Procedure: I first searched the indices of Republic Acts on the 3rd floor of the UP College of Law Library but the index was only up to 1956. Since no anti-sexual harassment act was passed yet during that time, I

Rivera, Katrina G. 2007-00627 1-A went to the Subject Catalogue and found under the subject of Anti-Sexual Harassment Ra 7877. I also went to the 4th floor of the library and searched in the card catalogue. Under the subject of sexual harassment I found Maam Felicianos article entitled Philippine Law on Sexual Harassment in the Workplace in Philippine Law Journal.

Sources: 91 OG 2144 No. 15 M.S. Feliciano, Philippine Law on Sexual Harassment in the Workplace, 70 PLJ 541 (1996).