G.R. No. 114222 - Tatad vs. Garcia, Jr.

Lolita M. Velasco began as a seasonal employee of Del Monte Philippines, Inc. on October 21, 1976, and was regularized on May 1, 1977, with her last position as Field Laborer.
Over her tenure, she received multiple written warnings and forfeitures of vacation leave for unapproved absences in 1987, 1991, and 1992.

Respondent incurred numerous absences from August 15 to September 10, 1994, which petitioner deemed “absences without official leave” (AWOL).
Petitioner served notices of hearing on September 17, 1994 (reset to September 23), then September 30, and October 5, 1994; respondent failed to appear at the first hearing.

On January 10, 1995, petitioner terminated respondent effective January 16, 1995, citing excessive unapproved absences as grounds.
Respondent claimed her absences were due to pregnancy-related urinary tract infection, supported by a company hospital “rest-in-quarters” (RIQ) advice and an external doctor’s medical certificate.

Labor Arbiter (April 13, 1998) dismissed respondent’s illegal dismissal complaint for lack of merit, finding her an incorrigible absentee.
NLRC (May 27, 1999) reversed and declared the dismissal illegal; ordered reinstatement with full backwages under Art. 279, Labor Code.
Court of Appeals (July 23, 2001) denied petitioner’s appeal; its resolution (May 7, 2002) denied reconsideration.
Petitioner filed this Rule 45 certiorari petition before the Supreme Court.

Whether respondent’s termination for excessive absences without permission was valid.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in treating respondent’s AWOL as justified due to her pregnancy.
Whether petitioner’s reliance on prior absenteeism established gross and habitual neglect sufficient for dismissal.
Whether the dismissal violated Article 137(2) of the Labor Code prohibiting discharge on account of pregnancy.
Whether the award of full backwages despite petitioner’s good faith was erroneous.