Verified Reply to Respondent's Position Paper

I, John Nicole Ermoso Elumba, Complainant in the above-entitled case, respectfully submit this Verified Reply to the Position Paper filed by TDCX (PHILIPPINES), INC..

When I first filed this case, I included Mr. Patrick Allan Fajardo as a respondent because he was directly involved in the termination process. However, based on the clarification provided in the company's Position Paper, and in line with labor jurisprudence, I now respectfully set him aside as a party to this case. I recognize that he acted solely in his official capacity as HR representative of TDCX (PHILIPPINES), INC. This Verified Reply is therefore directed solely against the corporate Respondent.

I. PREFATORY STATEMENT

I am respectfully submitting this Verified Reply to directly controvert the factual assertions and legal conclusions presented in Respondents' Position Paper. This Reply aims to reinforce my unequivocal claim of illegal dismissal, emphasizing the absence of just cause and the egregious lack of due process in my case. The statements herein are made in good faith, based on my personal knowledge, supported by sworn affidavits, relevant documentation, and operational records which conclusively establish my continuous availability and dedication to my employment.

II. FACTUAL CLARIFICATIONS AND REBUTTALS

1. Undisputed Absence of My Assigned Team or Essential Tools During Alleged Infractions: Respondents themselves concede that I was effectively divested of a team assignment after April 10, 2024. Crucially, from this date until September 24, 2024, I was deliberately denied access to critical operational tools, specifically Workbench and Whalek. During this extensive period, I was neither formally reassigned, provided with new training, nor given any clear, formal duties commensurate with my position as Team Manager. My limited physical presence on the production floor was a direct consequence of the company's own operational decisions to sideline me, not due to any neglect or dereliction of duty on my part.

2. The May 8, 2024 Incident: A Commendable Humanitarian Act: On May 8, 2024, I provided essential assistance to a fellow agent, Mr. Meneleo, during a medical emergency. This humanitarian act was undertaken with the explicit verbal approval of SME Mayrita and was conducted in full view of management personnel. Sworn affidavits from both Agent Meneleo and SME Mayrita, attached hereto as Annexes A and B, unequivocally corroborate my account. To penalize me for acting in good faith to ensure a colleague's well-being not only contradicts the company's purported values but also constitutes a failure in its fundamental duty of care towards its employees.

3. Badge Logs Do Not Establish Abandonment; My Availability is Undeniable: The badge logs selectively cited by Respondents merely indicate my movement within the premises, not a deliberate intent to abandon my employment. To the contrary, I consistently reported for work and remained available for assignment and duties. My active participation in the "Hotline revival" initiative and other crucial operational efforts, as detailed below, stands as clear proof that I harbored no intention whatsoever to sever my employment ties or abandon my post.

III. LEGAL REBUTTALS: ABSENCE OF JUST CAUSE AND DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS

1. No Just Cause for My Dismissal Under Article 297 of the Labor Code: Respondents' reliance on "gross and habitual neglect of duty" and "abandonment" as grounds for my dismissal utterly fails to satisfy the stringent legal standards required for termination of employment.

2. Procedural Due Process Was Not Meaningfully Observed in My Case: The administrative conference, touted by Respondents as adherence to due process, was nothing more than a perfunctory exercise designed to justify a pre-determined outcome against me.

3. Company Policies Cannot Justify Managerial Failures or My Illegal Dismissal: Respondents' invocation of their Code of Discipline and Attendance Policy cannot serve as a blanket justification for their own dereliction of responsibility. These policies cannot override the employer's fundamental obligation to provide an employee with the means to perform his duties. I was hired and designated as a Team Manager but was systematically denied the very tools, team, and assignments necessary to fulfill that role. To hold an employee accountable for not performing duties that were effectively withheld by the employer constitutes an act of bad faith and a grave abuse of management prerogative.

IV. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INTERVENTION: LIABILITY REMAINS WITH TDCX (PHILIPPINES), INC.

I acknowledge the acceptance of the intervention filed by TDCX Holdings Pte. Ltd. However, it must be emphasized that during the initial mandatory conference, TDCX (PHILIPPINES), INC. was correctly identified and admitted as my direct employer. All critical employment actions, including my hiring, day-to-day supervision, and ultimately, my illegal dismissal, were carried out by the local entity. Thus, direct and primary liability for my illegal dismissal rests squarely with TDCX (PHILIPPINES), INC.

V. WORKPLACE DYNAMICS AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT: A TESTAMENT TO MY DEDICATION

During the critical transition period from "Hotline Hiatus" to "Seller," my working relationship with then-Supervisor Julie Ann Calderon (now Operations Manager) experienced strain, culminating in an unfortunate incident on April 1, 2024, where she publicly berated me. Despite this, I, upholding my professionalism, chose not to escalate the matter, extending understanding and maintaining a composed demeanor.

Subsequently, with the revival of the Hotline, our working relationship gradually improved. Operations Manager Julie Calderon eventually entrusted me with key tasks, including the preparation of her crucial presentation for the Operations Manager post. While I no longer have access to this specific file, I diligently fulfilled this request in good faith and provided my full support.

Throughout the Hotline revival initiative, I consistently contributed far beyond the confines of my formal designation. I proactively served as a Subject Matter Expert, Report Analyst, Data Analyst, Graphic Designer, and Engagement Support, actively assisting in conducting graduation ceremonies and preparing certificates for agents. Furthermore, I conducted interviews for agent hiring, stepping in to fill gaps when the two assigned Team Leads were preoccupied with other tasks. These significant contributions clearly demonstrate my unwavering commitment to the success and operational excellence of the Hotline, irrespective of my formal title.

During my tenure in the "Seller" program, I reasonably anticipated being assigned a team. Instead, two external Team Leads were hired. Several agents, recognizing my experience and established presence, openly questioned why I was overlooked for such roles. Despite being a designated Team Manager, I was left without a team. Upon the Hotline's revival, I again harbored hopes of leading a team, especially given the absence of other available Team Managers. However, OM Julie Calderon opted to transition TM Ruby Ann Macapagal and QA Paolo Arquiza—both of whom are reportedly close to her—into Team Lead roles. While not personally close to them, I maintained a respectful working relationship and did not harbor feelings of jealousy or resentment. Instead, I actively supported their leadership and contributed wholeheartedly to improving the Hotline's operations.

These detailed experiences unequivocally demonstrate my consistent professionalism, collaborative spirit, and steadfast commitment to the company's objectives, even in the face of persistent exclusion from formal leadership roles. My actions were consistently rooted in selfless service and dedication, not in personal gain or self-interest.

VI. ADDITIONAL INDICATORS OF BAD FAITH AND ILLEGAL DISMISSAL

1. Prolonged and Unexplained Tool Deactivation and Non-Assignment: For a period exceeding five (5) months, I was systematically denied access to essential work tools and deliberately excluded from any meaningful team leadership responsibilities. This sustained pattern of exclusion strongly indicates a targeted and intentional "sidelining" by management, constituting an act of bad faith calculated to lead to my constructive, if not actual, dismissal.

2. Failure to File DOLE Termination Report: Respondents inexcusably failed to file the mandatory termination report with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). This critical omission directly prejudiced me, as it prevented me from accessing legitimate Social Security System (SSS) unemployment benefits, thereby causing further financial distress and harm. An email from Respondent confirming this failure is attached as Annex I, and SSS documentation evidencing the denial of benefits is attached as Annex J.

3. Absence of Clear Communication or Reassignment: Despite numerous opportunities and my continued presence, Respondents utterly failed to clarify my role, provide me with a new assignment, or implement any performance improvement plan. Instead, I was deliberately left in a state of indefinite limbo—present at the workplace but systematically unsupported, unassigned, and ultimately, made redundant without due process.

4. SSS Unemployment Benefits Cancellation: I also attempted to file for SSS unemployment benefits following my dismissal. However, I was forced to cancel the application because the required termination report (ERS) was not filed by TDCX (PHILIPPINES), INC. As shown in Annex J, the SSS portal reflects this cancellation. This failure to comply with basic post-employment obligations further demonstrates Respondent's disregard for my rights and contributed to the financial and emotional distress I experienced.

VIII. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable Commission that judgment be rendered:

1. DECLARING my dismissal as ILLEGAL;
2. ORDERING Respondent to pay me my full back wages, separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, and all other unpaid benefits, computed from the date of my illegal dismissal until the finality of the decision;
3. ORDERING Respondent to pay me moral damages for the suffering and distress caused by my illegal dismissal, and exemplary damages to deter similar acts in the future;
4. ORDERING Respondent to pay me attorney's fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the total monetary award;
5. ISSUING subpoenas for documentary production as previously requested; and
6. GRANTING such other reliefs as may be just and equitable under the circumstances.

ANNEXES