Case Digest (G.R. No. 158251)
Facts:
Hanford Philippines, Incorporated and Victor Te v. Shirley Joseph, G.R. No. 158251, March 31, 2005, the Supreme Court Third Division, Sandoval‑Gutierrez, J., writing for the Court.
Hanford Philippines, Inc. (petitioner) employed Shirley Joseph (respondent) as a sewer beginning July 17, 1978. On August 10, 1998, respondent tendered a voluntary resignation effective September 17, 1998, which petitioner accepted the following day. Petitioner paid respondent her last salary, 13th month pay and the cash conversion of unused vacation and sick leave, but declined to pay separation pay.
On November 19, 1998, respondent formally requested separation pay under Section 1, Article IV of the parties’ Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), which provided termination/termination pay in certain instances and set formulas for computing separation pay according to years of service. Petitioner denied the claim on the ground that the Labor Code does not authorize separation pay for voluntary resignation.
Respondent filed a complaint with the Office of the Labor Arbiter (docketed NLRC NCR CN. 00‑12‑10238‑98). On May 20, 1999 the Labor Arbiter ordered payment of separation pay in the amount of P93,820.00. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s decision in a Resolution dated April 14, 2000, and denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration on July 24, 2000. Petitioners sought relief in the Court of Appeals by a petition for certiorari under Rule 65; on January 23, 2003 the Court of Appeals dismissed the petition, holding the CBA’s reference to separation “without cause” covered voluntary resignation and thus authorized separation pay. The Court of Appeals denied reconsideration in a Resolution dated April 29, 2003 (CA‑G.R. SP No. 60701).
Petitioners filed a petition for re...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is an employee who voluntarily resigns entitled to separation pay under Section 1, Article IV of the parties’ Collective Bargaining Agreement?
- Does the employer’s prior practice of granting separation pay to other separated employees and principles of interpretation favoring labor require that the employer extend sep...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)