Title
Building Care Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 94237
Decision Date
Feb 26, 1997
Worker alleged unpaid wages, illegal suspension, and dismissal; employer claimed abandonment. Courts ruled in favor of worker, citing procedural errors and lack of proof by employer.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 94237)

Facts:

Employment and Allegations

  • Private respondent Rogelio Rodil was employed by petitioner Building Care Corporation.
  • Rodil alleged that his wages, 13th month pay, and service incentive leave pay were unpaid.
  • He claimed he was not paid for work rendered during legal holidays.
  • On February 11, 1988, he was suspended for one week by his supervisor, H. Silvestre, without just cause or due process.
  • After the suspension, he was not given any assignments despite repeated follow-ups.

Respondent’s Defense

  • Petitioner Building Care Corporation contended that Rodil was paid his wages and holiday pay in accordance with the law.
  • It admitted a delay in complying with R.A. 6640 due to client delays in approving adjusted contract rates.
  • Petitioner claimed Rodil was suspended for failing to report to his supervisor after being instructed twice.
  • It alleged that Rodil took a long absence without leave starting February 12, 1988, and only showed up on March 28, 1988.
  • Petitioner claimed Rodil was advised of FEBTC’s decision not to accept him anymore and was offered a temporary assignment, which he declined.

Complainant’s Rebuttal

  • Rodil maintained that he performed his work properly.
  • He explained his absences were due to illness (his own and his wife’s) and the illegal suspension.
  • He denied being given any assignments after the suspension and claimed he was denied due process.

Procedural History

  • On April 19, 1988, Rodil filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, underpayment, and non-payment of legal holiday pay.
  • The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Rodil, declaring his suspension and dismissal illegal and ordering reinstatement with backwages, holiday pay, salary differentials, and attorney’s fees.
  • The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s decision.

Issue:

  1. Whether the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) committed grave abuse of discretion in affirming the Labor Arbiter’s decision.
  2. Whether the Labor Arbiter and NLRC erred in finding that Rodil was illegally dismissed.
  3. Whether the burden of proving dismissal and just cause for termination was properly allocated.
  4. Whether the award of holiday pay, salary differentials, and attorney’s fees was justified.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.