first, be sure to answer the show cause order... honestly explain your side on the circumstances which affected your indiscretion... be apologetic as much as possible..
here are some cases which I hope would lessen your anxieties....
Mary Johnston Hospital v. NLRC, where the employee had a heated argument with the department head, the Court held that since the incident was her first offense during her seventeen (17) years of employment the penalty of termination was not commensurate with the act committed.
Manila Electric Company v. NLRC, where the employee was declared guilty of breach of trust and violation of company rules the penalty of dismissal was not meted to him considering his twenty (20) years of service without any previous derogatory record and his two (2) commendations for honesty from the company.
Dolores v. NLRC, where the employee absented herself without permission from her superior, the Court ruled that the penalty of dismissal was too severe considering her twenty-one (21) years of service with the company and it appearing that it was her first offense.
Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Corporation v. NLRC, where the employee was adjudged guilty of tampering a receipt, the Court ruled that the imposition of the supreme penalty of dismissal would certainly be very harsh and disproportionate to the infraction committed, especially after noting that it was his first offense after seven (7) long years of satisfactory service.
Radio Communications of the Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC, where the employee was found guilty of misappropriating company funds and withholding messages for transmission, the Court ruled that in view of the employee's continuous service of ten (10) years with the company the penalty of dismissal for the minor infractions would be unduly harsh and grossly disproportionate.
Bonotan v. NLRC, where the employee shouted at the operations manager, the Court ruled that since the employee has been with the company for twenty-six (26) years and nowhere in the records did it appear that she committed any previous violation of company rules and regulations, dismissal from work would be too severe a penalty under the circumstances.
Tanduay Distillery Labor Union v. NLRC, where the employees were found guilty of eating while at work, the Court ruled that inasmuch as they had served the company without any record of violation or infraction of company rules and regulations prior to the incident for periods ranging from 16 to 26 years, respectively, the dismissal meted out on them was too harsh a penalty.