This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-01-19 |
RE: EMPLOYEES INCURRING HABITUAL TARDINESS IN 1ST SEMESTER OF 2007: MS. MARIVIC C. AZURIN v. SANCHEZ
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| By being habitually tardy, these employees have fallen short of the stringent standard of conduct demanded from everyone connected with the administration of justice. By reason of the nature and functions of their office, officials and employees of the Judiciary must be role models in the faithful observance of the constitutional canon that public office is a public trust.[24] Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.[25] Inherent in this mandate is the observance of prescribed office hours and the efficient use of every moment thereof for public service, if only to recompense the Government, and ultimately, the people who shoulder the cost of maintaining the Judiciary.[26] Thus, to inspire public respect for the justice system, court officials and employees are at all times behooved to strictly observe official time. As punctuality is a virtue, absenteeism and tardiness are impermissible.[27] | |||||
|
2003-04-21 |
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J. |
||||
| There is no question that respondent's frequent unauthorized absences and tardiness have prejudiced the public service.[8] Certainly, such acts have denied the public the efficient service it deserves. The need for strict observance of official time has been emphasized by this Court in Administrative Circular No. 1-99 (Enhancing the Dignity of Courts as Temples of Justice and Promoting Respect for their Officials and Employees)[9] and Administrative Circular No. 2-99 (Strict Observance of Working Hours and Disciplinary Action for Absenteeism and Tardiness) which provide that all court personnel must:"x x x | |||||