INSUBORDINATION

Insubordination is defined as a refusal to obey some order, which a superior officer is entitled to
give and have obeyed. The term imports a willful or intentional disregard of the lawful and
reasonable instructions of the employer.

Elements:
(1) reasonableness and lawfulness of the order or directive,
(2) sufficiency of knowledge on the part of the employee of such order, and
(3) the connection of the order with the duties which the employee had been engaged to
discharge.

What is GROSS?
Great; culpable. General. Absolute or entire. A thing in gross exists in its own right, and not as
an appendage to another thing.As to gross “Adventure,” “Average,” “Earnings,” “Fault,”
“Negligence,” and “Weight,” see those titles.

LOAFING

The CSC rules define loafing as frequent unauthorized absences from duty during office
hours.The word frequent connotes that the employees absent themselves from duty more than
once.

Dishonesty
Dishonesty is defined as intentionally making a false statement in any material fact, or
practicing or attempting to practice any deception or fraud in securing his examination,
registration, appointment or promotion. It is also understood to imply a disposition to lie, cheat,
deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in
principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness; disposition to defraud, deceive or betray.
Thus, dishonesty, like bad faith, is not simply bad judgment or negligence. Dishonesty is a
question of intention. In ascertaining the intention of a person accused of dishonesty,
consideration must be taken not only of the facts and circumstances which gave rise to the act
committed by the petitioner, but also of his state of mind at the time the offense was committed,
the time he might have had at his disposal for the purpose of meditating on the consequences of
his act, and the degree of reasoning he could have had at that moment.

DISHONESTY

Has been defined as a form of conduct which connotes untrustworthiness and lack of
integrity, a disposition to lie, cheat deceive, betray."

[BALAGSO, Teodoro Jr. L., et al., CSC Resolution No. 99-1085, May 21, 1999 citing
BRIONES, Rolando A., CAS Res. 97-3740 dated August 28, 1997]

"The concealment or distortion of truth, which shows lack of integrity or a

disposition to defraud, cheat, deceive or betray and an intent to violate the
truth."

[Section 1. RULES ON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSE OF DISHONESTY; CSC

Resolution No. 06-0538, April 4, 2006]

Classification of DISHONESTY

The presence of any one of the following attendant circumstances in the commission of
the dishonest act would constitute the offense of SERIOUS DISHONESTY:
 a) The dishonest act caused serious damage and grave prejudice to the
Government

b) The respondent gravely abused his authority in order to commit the

dishonest act

c) Where the respondent is an accountable officer, the dishonest act directly

involves property, accountable forms or money for which he is directly
accountable and the respondent shows an intent to commit material gain, graft
and corruption

d) The dishonest act exhibits moral depravity on the part of the respondent

e) The respondent employed fraud and/or falsification of official documents in

the commission of the dishonest act related to his/her employment

f) The dishonest act was committed several times or in various occasions

g) The dishonest act involves a Civil Service examination irregularity or fake

Civil Service eligibility such as, but not limited to impersonation, cheating and
use of crib sheets

h) Other analogous circumstances

[Section 3, RULES ON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSE OF DISHONESTY, CSC

Resolution No. 06-0538, April 4, 2006]

The presence of any one of the following attendant circumstances in the commission of
the dishonest act would constitute the offense of LESS SERIOUS DISHONESTY:

a) The dishonest act caused damage and prejudice to the government which is
not so serious as to qualify under the immediately preceding classification
 b) The respondent did not take advantage of his/her position in committing the
dishonest act

c) Other analogous circumstances

[Section 4, RULES ON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSE OF DISHONESTY, CSC

Resolution No. 06-0538, April 4. 2006]

The presence of any one of the following attendant circumstances in the commission of
the dishonest act would constitute the offense of SIMPLE DISHONESTY:

a) The dishonest act did not cause damage or prejudice to the government

b) The dishonest act has no direct relation to or does not involve the duties and
responsibilities of the respondent

c) In falsification of any official document where the information falsified is

not related to his/her employment

d) That the dishonest act did not result in any gain or benefit to the offender

e) Other analogous circumstances

[Section 5, RULES ON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSE OF DISHONESTY, CSC

Resolution No. 06-0538, April 4, 2006]
 MISCONDUCT

The Supreme Court, in the case of Vertudes v. Buenaflor and Bureau of Immigration, ruled as
follows:

Misconduct has been defined as an intentional wrongdoing or deliberate violation of a rule of

law or standard of behavior, especially by a government official. As distinguished from simple
misconduct, the elements of corruption, clear intent to violate the law or flagrant disregard
of established rule, must be manifest in a charge of grave misconduct. Corruption, as an
element of grave misconduct, consists in the act of an official or fiduciary person who unlawfully
and wrongfully uses his station or character to procure some benefit for himself or for another
person, contrary to duty and rights of others. An act need not be tantamount to a crime for it to be
considered as grave misconduct as in fact, crimes involving moral turpitude are treated as a
separate ground for dismissal under the administrative code.

CONDUCT PREJUDICIAL TO THE BEST INTEREST OF SERVICE

While there is no concrete description of what specific acts constitute the offense of conduct
prejudicial to the best interest of the service under the civil service law and rules, it has been
jurisprudentially held to pertain to acts that tarnish the image and integrity of the public office,
even if it not be related or connected to the public officer's function. Among others, the
Court has considered the following acts or omissions such as: misappropriation of public funds,
abandonment of office, failure to report back to work without prior notice, failure to safe
keep public records and property, making false entries in public documents, and falsification of
court orders.