PUERTO RICO Trends and Developments Contributed by: Jorge C Pizarro-García, José R González-Nogueras, Karla Rivera-Rubio and Lloyd Isgut-Rivera, Pizarro & González
Digital Evidence and Remote Investigations The modern workplace has transformed the nature of evidence available in internal investigations. Emails, text messages, instant messaging platforms, collabo - ration tools and cloud-based documents now con - stitute a significant portion of investigatory records. Employers must collect, preserve and analyse digital evidence in a manner consistent with legal and privacy obligations. This challenge is compounded by the widespread use of personal devices for work-related communications. Investigators must navigate issues of consent, scope and relevance when reviewing personal communica - tions. As a result, employers increasingly adopt pro - tocols governing digital evidence preservation and review. The rise of remote and hybrid work has further reshaped investigative practices. While virtual inter - views and electronic document review offer efficiency and flexibility, they also introduce risks related to con - fidentiality, credibility assessment and unauthorised recording. Hybrid investigative models have become increasingly common as employers balance practical - ity with procedural rigour. The Role of Internal Investigations in “Just Cause” Terminations and Severance Exposure A critical consideration for employers conducting internal HR investigations in Puerto Rico is the legal framework governing terminations and severance obligations. Unlike most US jurisdictions, Puerto Rico follows a statutory “just cause” system under which employees discharged without just cause are entitled to statutory severance, commonly referred to as “ mesada ” in Spanish. This system significantly ele - vates the importance of internal investigations when misconduct, performance issues or rule violations may lead to termination. Under Puerto Rico’s Wrongful Discharge Act, just cause is defined as a termination that is not moti - vated by legally prohibited reasons and is not the result of the employer’s mere whim or caprice. The statute further recognises as just cause a series of cir - cumstances that affect the proper and normal opera - tion of the business, including patterns of improper
or disorderly conduct, deficient or negligent perfor - mance, repeated violations of reasonable workplace rules, and certain business-driven decisions such as reorganisations, technological changes or reductions in force. In practical terms, this statutory framework requires employers to demonstrate that a termination decision was grounded in objective, reasonable and documented business considerations. While the employee bears the initial burden of chal - lenging a termination, the employer must ultimately demonstrate that the dismissal was supported by just cause. In this context, the existence and quality of an internal investigation have become increasingly relevant factors in judicial analysis. Courts frequently examine whether the employer conducted a reason - able investigation prior to termination and whether the decision was grounded in substantiated facts rather than assumptions or unverified complaints. While the law does not impose a rigid investigative formula, judi - cial scrutiny often focuses on whether the employer acted prudently and in good faith. Internal investigations play a particularly important role when the alleged just cause involves misconduct, policy violations or performance deficiencies. A termi - nation based on an incomplete or perfunctory investi - gation may be viewed as arbitrary, even if the employ - er believed misconduct had occurred. Conversely, a well-documented investigation demonstrating careful evaluation of the facts can significantly strengthen the employer’s position that the termination was justified. From a practical perspective, the risk of severance exposure has driven employers to approach inves - tigations with greater rigour and caution. Employers increasingly recognise that internal investigations serve a dual function: they are tools for workplace governance and compliance, and they are evidentiary foundations that may later be evaluated by courts when assessing the legitimacy of a termination deci - sion. As a result, investigative findings are often care - fully aligned with statutory “just cause” categories, ensuring that conclusions are framed in terms of pat - terns of conduct, documented performance issues or violations of clearly communicated workplace rules.
323 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook