Case Digest (G.R. No. 116635)
Facts:
De la Cruz v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 145417, December 11, 2003, Supreme Court Third Division, Corona, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Florencio M. de la Cruz, Jr. was hired by private respondent Shemberg Marketing Corporation on May 27, 1996 as Senior Sales Manager (Visayas–Mindanao) with a monthly salary of P40,500. The position was newly created and the appointment and attached job description expressly stated that petitioner’s “performance shall be periodically evaluated in accordance with performance standards” and that his “performance [is] subject to evaluation and trial period for six (6) months or more,” indicating probationary status.
On September 14, 1996, Ms. Lilybeth Y. Llanto (HRD) informed petitioner that management had decided to terminate his services; petitioner’s requests for the reason, for a meeting with the company vice president Ernesto U. Dacay, Jr., and for a 30-day written notice were refused. Petitioner then filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and related claims against Shemberg, Dacay and Llanto.
At the hearing before Labor Arbiter Ernesto F. Carreon, respondents defended the dismissal on grounds of poor performance, low morale among subordinates (supported by a joint affidavit), alleged unauthorized overseas calls on a company cellular phone, and petitioner’s alleged unauthorized reimbursement of plane tickets for his wife and child. The labor arbiter, in a decision dated August 25, 1997, found the dismissal illegal and awarded separation pay, backwages and unpaid wages totaling P438,750.00; claims against Dacay and Llanto were dismissed.
On appeal the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) initially dismissed respondents’ appeal (May 13, 1998). Respondents then filed a motion for reconsideration submitting additional evidence (affidavit of a vice‑president, appointment letter, job description, memoranda warning petitioner about sales declines, and a memorandum questioning ticket reimbursement). On July 9, 1999 the NLRC partially granted the motion for reconsideration, abandoned its May 13, 1998 resolution, modified the labor arbiter’s decision and instead ordered Shemberg to pay petitioner P23,900.00 (P18,900 unpaid wages; P5,000 indemnity). The NLRC denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration on November 19, 1999.
Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals; the CA, in a decision pen...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in refusing to award backwages notwithstanding a failure by respondents to give petitioner a 30‑day written notice, in light of the Serrano v. NLRC rule on backwages?
- Did the Court of Appeals commit grave abuse of discretion in finding that the submission and reimbursement of petitioner’s family’s plane tickets constituted unauthorized use of company funds amounting to fraud or deceit and loss of trust and confidence?
- Is petitione...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)