Workplace Ethics and Habitual Tardiness Among High School Teachers: Implications for Employee Performance in DepEd

 HAZEL A. DULDULAO

Master of Business Administration

Divine Word College of Laoag, Laoag City

 Abstract

Workplace attendance is an important aspect of personnel management in government institutions because employees are expected to report for work as scheduled and perform their assigned responsibilities during prescribed working hours. In the Department of Education (DepEd), teacher attendance is particularly relevant because teachers deliver educational services to learners. This article examines habitual tardiness among high school teachers from the perspectives of workplace ethics, employee accountability, attendance monitoring, and employee performance. The discussion is informed by the author's experience in checking and monitoring Daily Time Records (DTRs) of employees and by relevant civil service and DepEd policies, including Republic Act No. 6713, Republic Act No. 4670, the Civil Service rules implementing Book V of Executive Order No. 292, and various Civil Service Commission (CSC) memoranda concerning attendance, working hours, leave, and personnel administration. DTR monitoring can provide an objective basis for identifying recurring attendance patterns; however, attendance records should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of poor employee performance. A balanced management approach requires accurate documentation, clear expectations, consistent implementation of applicable rules, consideration of legitimate circumstances, and appropriate intervention. Viewing habitual tardiness as both an administrative and ethical concern may support more evidence-based human resource management in DepEd.

Keywords: workplace ethics, habitual tardiness, Daily Time Record, employee performance, DepEd, attendance management, public service

Introduction

Human resource management is a key component of organizational effectiveness because employees translate organizational policies and objectives into actual services. In public institutions such as the Department of Education (DepEd), personnel management has an additional dimension because employees perform functions intended to serve the public. Teachers, in particular, are expected to perform instructional and related responsibilities during prescribed working hours.

Attendance and punctuality are therefore key concerns in managing government personnel. Government employees must observe established working arrangements, attendance requirements, and personnel rules. These requirements have developed through laws, executive issuances, Civil Service Commission regulations, and agency-specific policies. The legal and administrative framework includes Book V of Executive Order No. 292, the Omnibus Rules implementing the civil service provisions, Republic Act No. 6713, and various CSC issuances concerning attendance, working hours, leave, and personnel administration (Executive Order No. 292, 1987; Republic Act No. 6713, 1989).

This issue is particularly relevant from the perspective of a DepEd employee assigned to check and monitor Daily Time Records (DTRs). In performing this administrative responsibility, recurring patterns of late arrival may become visible through examination of employees' attendance records. While an individual late entry may have a legitimate explanation, repeated occurrences may warrant closer administrative attention. Thus, DTR monitoring is not merely a clerical activity; it can also provide management with information relevant to attendance administration and personnel management.

This article examines habitual tardiness among high school teachers from the perspective of workplace ethics and employee performance in DepEd. It recognizes that punctuality involves both employee responsibility and management responsibility. It also emphasizes that attendance records should be interpreted carefully and should not automatically be treated as a direct measure of employee performance.

Workplace Ethics and Public Service

Workplace ethics refers to the principles and standards that guide employees' behavior and responsibilities within an organization. In government service, ethical behavior is particularly important because public employees are entrusted with responsibilities that affect public welfare. Republic Act No. 6713, or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, establishes standards such as commitment to public interest, professionalism, justness and sincerity, political neutrality, responsiveness to the public, and simple living (Republic Act No. 6713, 1989).

For DepEd personnel, these principles provide an important context for understanding attendance and punctuality. Teachers perform functions that directly contribute to delivering public education. Reporting for work as scheduled enables teachers to perform instructional and non-instructional responsibilities within the prescribed working period.

Punctuality, therefore, may be viewed as part of professional responsibility. However, it is important to distinguish this ethical interpretation from the specific legal requirements established by civil service and DepEd rules. Habitual tardiness becomes an organizational concern when repeated late arrivals interfere with assigned responsibilities, reduce available working time, or create difficulties coordinating work with colleagues.

The ethical dimension also involves management. Supervisors and administrators must implement applicable attendance policies consistently and fairly. Employees should receive clear information about reporting requirements and attendance procedures, and legitimate circumstances affecting attendance should be considered in accordance with applicable rules. Ethical personnel management consequently involves both accountability and fairness.

The Role of Daily Time Records in Attendance Monitoring

Daily Time Records are important administrative documents because they record an employee's attendance and working time. For personnel assigned to monitor attendance, DTRs can help identify patterns such as repeated late arrivals, undertime, absences, or other attendance-related concerns.

From a management perspective, regularly reviewing DTRs can serve several purposes. First, it provides an objective administrative record to verify attendance information. Second, it can help identify recurring patterns that may require clarification or intervention. Third, it can support preparing and consolidating attendance-related reports. Finally, it can help management promote accountability by ensuring that attendance records are properly maintained.

However, a DTR should not be treated as a complete measure of employee performance. Employee performance involves several dimensions, including the quality and quantity of work, work-related behaviors, achievement of responsibilities, and contribution to organizational objectives (Campbell & Wiernik, 2015). A record showing repeated late arrivals may establish an attendance pattern. However, it does not, by itself, establish the quality of an employee's teaching, classroom management, instructional planning, or other professional responsibilities.

This distinction is important for personnel management. DTR monitoring should provide factual attendance information while other appropriate and authorized performance indicators should be used to evaluate employee performance.

Habitual Tardiness as a Workplace Concern

Tardiness refers to failure to report for work at the prescribed time. When late arrival becomes recurring or habitual, it may become an organizational concern because it reduces work time and can affect scheduled responsibilities.

Attendance behavior, however, can be influenced by several factors. Steers and Rhodes (1978) explained employee attendance through a process model involving factors that influence an employee's ability and motivation to attend work. Johns (2008) likewise emphasized that attendance-related behavior is complex and should be understood within its organizational context.

This perspective is important when examining habitual tardiness among teachers. Repeated late arrival may stem from personal circumstances, transportation difficulties, family responsibilities, health-related issues, workload, organizational conditions, or other factors. Therefore, repeated tardiness should prompt appropriate administrative attention but should not automatically lead to assumptions about an employee's character or overall work performance.

For management, the appropriate question is not simply, "Who is late?" but also, "What attendance pattern is occurring, what circumstances are relevant, and what appropriate management response is required?"

Habitual Tardiness and Employee Performance

Employee performance is a multidimensional concept. Campbell and Wiernik (2015) explained that job performance encompasses behaviors relevant to organizational objectives rather than being limited to a single characteristic or outcome. In the school setting, teacher performance may involve instructional preparation, classroom teaching, assessment, learner support, participation in school activities, professional responsibilities, and compliance with organizational requirements.

Habitual tardiness may potentially affect some of these responsibilities by reducing the time available for preparation, instruction, coordination, or other assigned activities. However, tardiness should not automatically be equated with poor performance. Instead, the relationship between attendance behavior and performance should be examined empirically.

Teacher absence provides relevant background. Miller, Murnane, and Willett (2008) found that teacher absence was associated with student achievement in an urban school district. Importantly, they examined absence, not tardiness. Therefore, their findings should not be presented as direct evidence that habitual tardiness causes lower student achievement.

Similarly, Rivkin, Hanushek, and Kain (2005) demonstrated the importance of teacher quality in relation to student achievement. Their findings reinforce the importance of teacher-related factors in education, but they do not establish that tardiness alone determines teacher performance or student outcomes.

Management of Habitual Tardiness

Managing habitual tardiness requires a systematic and fair approach. First, administrators should ensure that employees clearly understand reporting times, attendance procedures, and applicable personnel policies. Clear communication reduces uncertainty and gives employees a shared understanding of organizational expectations.

Second, regular DTR monitoring can help identify attendance patterns. Monitoring should be systematic rather than selective so that employees are treated consistently. Check attendance records for accuracy, and give employees appropriate opportunities to explain discrepancies or circumstances affecting their attendance, consistent with applicable rules.

Third, management may use appropriate communication, consultation, counseling, or other authorized interventions when recurring attendance concerns are identified. Interventions may clarify expectations, identify contributing circumstances, and help employees comply with attendance requirements.

Fourth, implement applicable policies consistently. In public service, inconsistent application of personnel rules can create concerns about fairness and accountability. At the same time, consistency should not mean ignoring legitimate circumstances that are recognized under applicable laws and regulations.

This balanced approach is consistent with the broader principles of public-service professionalism under Republic Act No. 6713 (1989). It recognizes that employees have responsibilities while management also has responsibilities in administering workplace rules.

The Administrative Perspective: Experience in DTR Monitoring

Habitual tardiness is an important workplace concern that can be examined through the lens of personnel administration and employee performance. Personnel staff responsible for reviewing Daily Time Records (DTRs) can observe attendance patterns across employees and periods. The DTR serves as an administrative record of an employee’s attendance and working hours; however, attendance information should not be regarded as a complete measure of overall employee performance. Employee performance encompasses broader dimensions, including work-related behaviors, the quality and quantity of work, fulfillment of responsibilities, and contribution to organizational objectives (Campbell & Wiernik, 2015).

Checking DTRs involves more than identifying a single instance of late arrival. It requires careful examination of dates, reporting and departure times, entries and exits, supporting documents when applicable, and compliance with established attendance procedures. Under the Civil Service Commission's rules on attendance and official time, government employees are expected to observe prescribed working hours and properly account for their attendance. Systematic examination of attendance records can therefore help personnel offices identify recurring patterns that may require administrative attention.

From an administrative perspective, repeated late arrivals may become more apparent when DTRs are reviewed consistently over time. A single late entry may have a legitimate explanation, but recurring instances of tardiness may indicate a pattern that warrants further examination. In this regard, personnel monitoring can serve as an initial source of information for identifying potential management concerns involving attendance and employee behavior.

 Observing repeated tardiness in DTRs does not, by itself, establish that tardiness causes reduced employee performance. Establishing such a relationship requires clearly defined variables, appropriate research methods, reliable data, and systematic analysis. Campbell and Wiernik (2015) emphasized that employee performance is multidimensional and should be assessed using appropriate performance criteria rather than a single indicator.

In the context of the Department of Education, examining habitual tardiness through DTR records can provide useful administrative information while also highlighting the need for evidence-based management. Personnel should not conclude that employees with attendance issues necessarily perform poorly. However, it should ensure that attendance records are properly monitored and that potential management concerns are identified for appropriate investigation. It subsequently determines whether a measurable relationship exists between habitual tardiness and employee performance.

Implications for DepEd Management

The issue of habitual tardiness has several implications for DepEd personnel management. First, attendance monitoring can provide useful information to identify patterns and improve personnel administration. Second, accurate DTR checking can contribute to reliable administrative records. Third, clear communication of attendance expectations can help employees understand their responsibilities.

More importantly, attendance management should be connected with broader human resource management practices. Rather than viewing DTR monitoring solely as a compliance activity, administrators can use attendance information as one source of evidence to understand workplace conditions and identify areas that may require management attention.

At the same time, administrators should avoid using attendance data as the sole basis for evaluating an employee's overall performance. Performance assessment should follow the appropriate performance management system and authorized indicators applicable to the employee's position.

For high school teachers, the ultimate organizational concern is the effective delivery of education services. Teacher availability is relevant because instructional responsibilities must be performed within scheduled working periods. Nevertheless, education quality depends on multiple factors, including teacher practices, learner characteristics, school leadership, learning resources, and organizational conditions.

Ethical Responsibilities of Employees and Management

The ethical dimension of habitual tardiness involves reciprocal responsibilities. Employees are responsible for observing prescribed working hours, accurately recording attendance, and performing their duties conscientiously. These responsibilities align with the principles of professionalism and commitment to the public interest established under Republic Act No. 6713 (1989).

Management, however, also has ethical responsibilities. Administrators should maintain accurate records, communicate policies clearly, apply applicable rules fairly, protect the confidentiality of personnel information, and provide employees appropriate opportunities to clarify attendance concerns.

This reciprocal perspective is important because workplace ethics should not be understood solely as employee compliance. Ethical personnel administration also requires responsible management. Fair and consistent implementation of attendance policies can strengthen employee trust and organizational accountability.

Conclusion

Workplace ethics and habitual tardiness among high school teachers are relevant concerns in human resource management in the Department of Education. Attendance is both an administrative matter and a component of professional responsibility. The Philippine civil service framework, together with Department of Education policies and relevant laws concerning public school teachers, provides a basis for managing attendance and personnel responsibilities.

For personnel staff assigned to check Daily Time Records, DTR monitoring provides an important source of objective attendance information. Repeated late entries can help identify patterns that may require management attention. However, DTR records should not be treated as a complete measure of employee performance. Multiple factors influence attendance behavior, and employee performance is multidimensional.

Therefore, an appropriate management approach combines accurate DTR monitoring, clear communication of expectations, fair and consistent application of applicable rules, consideration of legitimate circumstances, and appropriate intervention. This issue demonstrates how human resource management, organizational ethics, administrative systems, and employee performance are interconnected.

Studying habitual tardiness among high school teachers can support evidence-based personnel management by measuring its extent and examining whether a significant relationship exists between attendance behavior and employee performance. It transforms an observed administrative concern into a systematic organizational inquiry while maintaining fairness, objectivity, and respect for the responsibilities of both employees and management.

References

• Civil Service Commission. (1998). Memorandum Circular No. 23, s. 1998. Civil Service Commission.
• Civil Service Commission. (1998). Memorandum Circular No. 40, s. 1998. Civil Service Commission.
• Civil Service Commission. (1999). Memorandum Circular No. 15, s. 1999. Civil Service Commission.
• Civil Service Commission. (2010). Memorandum Circular No. 16, s. 2010. Civil Service Commission.
• Civil Service Commission. (2010). Memorandum Circular No. 17, s. 2010. Civil Service Commission.
• Civil Service Commission. (2017). Memorandum Circular No. 01, s. 2017. Civil Service Commission.
• Department of Education. (2024). DepEd Order No. 005, s. 2024. Department of Education.
• Department of Education. (2000). DECS Service Manual 2000. Department of Education.
• Executive Order No. 292. (1987). Instituting the “Administrative Code of 1987”. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.
• Miller, R. T., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (2008). Do teacher absences impact student achievement? Longitudinal evidence from one urban school district. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 181–200. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373708318019
• Republic Act No. 2260. (1959). Civil Service Act of 1959. Republic of the Philippines.
• Republic Act No. 4670. (1966). Magna Carta for Public School Teachers. Republic of the Philippines.
• Republic Act No. 6713. (1989). Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.
• Presidential Decree No. 807. (1975). Providing for the organization of the Civil Service Commission in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, prescribing its powers and functions, and for other purposes. Republic of the Philippines.
• Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00584.x
• Steers, R. M., & Rhodes, S. R. (1978). Major influences on employee attendance: A process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(4), 391–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.63.4.391

• Department of Education, Culture and Sports. (1985). MECS Order No. 9, s. 1985.
• Department of Education, Culture and Sports. (1985). MECS Order No. 10, s. 1985.
• Department of Education, Culture and Sports. (1985). MECS Memorandum No. 143, s. 1985.
• Memorandum No. 35, s. 1970.
• Omnibus Rules Implementing Title I, Subtitle A, Book V of Executive Order No. 292. Civil Service Commission.
• Campbell, J. P., & Wiernik, B. M. (2015). The modeling and assessment of performance. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 47–74. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111427
• Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00584.
• Johns, G. (2008). Absenteeism and presenteeism: Not at work or not working well. In C. L. Cooper & J. Barling (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational behavior: Volume 1—Micro approaches (pp. 160–177). SAGE Publications.

 

 

https://maddenwiped.com/q9h97sj5?key=23b279e99ed6a529a30f577cdce2aeb9