Case Digest (G.R. No. 131653)
Facts:
Roberto Gonzales v. National Labor Relations Commission, Pepsi Cola Products, Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 131653, March 26, 2001, Second Division, De Leon, Jr., J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Roberto Gonzales (hereafter petitioner) was a Route Manager employed by private respondent Pepsi Cola Products, Philippines, Inc. (PCPPI) and also operated a dealership under the trade name RR Store; public respondent is the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).Petitioner worked for PCPPI beginning in 1989 (though he claimed an earlier hire date) and was promoted in 1990 to Route Manager at the Northbay Sales Office. As Route Manager he supervised salesmen and had knowledge of company processing of sales and settlement transactions. In November 1992 petitioner purchased on credit P116,182.00 of Pepsi products covered by Charge Invoice No. 365508 and issued a post-dated check for that amount dated December 25, 1992. Claiming he had concession receivables of about P109,766.00, petitioner issued a second post-dated check (maturing January 4, 1993) and directed his subordinate salesman, Gerry Alhambra, to issue an official receipt for P116,182.00 — despite a company policy that official receipts be issued only for cash or currently dated checks. The settlement clerk discovered a discrepancy: Alhambra declared P116,182.00 but remitted only P3,128.66; Alhambra admitted petitioner pressured him to issue the receipt and could not produce the post-dated check because post-dated checks must be covered by a post-dated check receipt (PDCR) signed by the Sales Office Manager.
On December 31, 1992 petitioner issued a third post-dated check (dated January 15, 1993) together with a PDCR that bore petitioner’s own signature rather than the Sales Office Manager’s. In January 1993 PCPPI approved payment of petitioner’s concession only up to P91,000.00; petitioner then paid various amounts and empties so that his account was ultimately settled with a small excess. Petitioner demanded return of his post-dated check on January 15, 1993.
PCPPI conducted administrative investigations (notice dated April 14, 1993; hearings April 16 and June 25, 1993). On September 30, 1993 (notice dated September 20, 1993) PCPPI terminated petitioner for “loss of confidence” and violation of company rules (frauds, fictitious transactions, false invoicing, deals padding, breach of trust and confidence). Petitioner filed for illegal dismissal, backwages, damages and attorney’s fees with the Department of Labor and Employment — National Capital Region; the case was assigned to Labor Arbiter Ramon V. C. Reyes.
On October 15, 1996 the Labor Arbiter found dismissal illegal, concluding petitioner had been denied due process and that the irregularities were committed in his capacity as dealer/concessionaire rather than as an employee; the Arbiter ordered reinstatement with backwages. PCPPI appealed to the NLRC Second Division. The NLRC,...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was petitioner afforded procedural due process prior to termination?
- Was petitioner’s dismissal substantively justified as a loss of trust and confidence under Article 282(c) of the Labor Code?
- Did the NLRC commit grave abuse of discretion in reversing the Labor...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)