Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2011 > March 2011 Resolutions > [A.M. No. P-10-28-21 : March 21, 2011] LEAVE DIVISION — O.A.S. OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR V. JERRYPOL M. BUGAWAN, PROCESS SERVER :

Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated 21 March 2011, which reads as follows:

A.M. No. P-10-28-21 - LEAVE DIVISION � O.A.S. OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR V. JERRYPOL M. BUGAWAN, PROCESS SERVER

RESOLUTION 

This administrative matter arose from the Report dated February 4, 2009 of the Leave Division, Office of the Administrative Services (OAS), Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), stating that Jerrypol M. Bugawan (Bugawan), Process Server, RTC-OCC, Cabarroguis, Quirino, had been tardy at least ten times in the months of August and November 2008. Attached to the report were photocopies of Bugawan's time cards with the times when he was tardy highlighted in green.

In his Explanation,^[1] Bugawan admitted that he was tardy 10 times in August 2008 and 12 times in November 2008. To explain his tardiness in August 2008, Bugawan claimed that he had to give his two sick children their medication for chicken pox before he left for the office. He also claimed that in November 2008, he was tardy several times because he had to assist his pregnant wife in attending to the needs of their three children.

He said that he was aware that his reasons would not exonerate him but he asked for consideration and promised to observe the prescribed office hours and to competently use every moment of official time for public service.

The OCA, citing Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 23 Series of l998^[2], found Bugawan to be habitually tardy. Under Section 52 C (4) of CSC Memorandum No. 19, Series of 1999, habitual tardiness is penalized as follows:

First Offense - Reprimand Second Offense-Suspension for 1-30 days Third Offense - Dismissal from the service.

Since this is the first time that Bugawan has been found guilty of habitual tardiness, the OCA recommended that Bugawan be reprimanded with a warning that a repetition of the same or similar offense will warrant the imposition of a more severe penalty.

We find the OCA recommendation to be in order and accordingly adopt it.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Jerrypol M. Bugawan is found to be habitually tardy and is REPRIMANDED with a warning that a repetition of the same or similar offense will warrant the imposition of a more severe penalty.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUCITA ABJELINA-SORIANO 
Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Rollo, pp. 7-8.

^[2] An employee shall be considered tardy if he incurs tardiness regardless of the number of minutes ten (10) times a month for at least two (2) months in a semester or at least two (2) consecutive months during the year.