Title
Mabeza vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 118506
Decision Date
Apr 18, 1997
Hotel employee Norma Mabeza was illegally dismissed after refusing to swear to a false affidavit, with the Supreme Court ruling in her favor, citing unfair labor practices, underpayment, and invalid grounds for termination.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 118506)

Facts:

  • Employment and Joint Affidavit
    • Petitioner Norma Mabeza was employed by Peter Ng, first at the Belfront Hotel and later at the Hotel Supreme in Baguio City.
    • In early May 1991, management required eight employees, including petitioner, to sign a “Joint Affidavit” attesting to compliance with minimum‐wage and labor‐standards laws.
  • Refusal to Swear and Management’s Reaction
    • Petitioner signed the affidavit but refused to appear before the City Prosecutor to swear to its contents; management nevertheless submitted it to the DOLE Regional Office on May 7, 1991.
    • That same day, petitioner was ordered to surrender her lodging keys, remove her belongings, and was denied an informal leave of absence; on May 10, 1991, she was barred from returning to work.
  • Filing of Complaint for Illegal Dismissal and Money Claims
    • On May 13, 1991, petitioner filed a complaint before the NLRC–CAR Arbitration Branch (NLRC Case No. RAB‐CAR‐05‐0198‐91), alleging illegal dismissal and underpayment of wages, holiday pay, service incentive leave pay, 13th‐month pay, night differential and other benefits.
    • She prayed for reinstatement, backwages and payment of all statutory benefits.
  • Private Respondent’s Defenses and Counterclaims
    • Initially, Peter Ng alleged that petitioner “abandoned” her job and that alleged monetary claims were settled in kind (meals, lodging, electric and water consumption).
    • Eleven months later, he raised loss of confidence, supported by a qualified‐theft complaint filed against petitioner on July 4, 1991, for allegedly stealing hotel property.
  • Labor Arbiter and NLRC Resolutions
    • On May 14, 1993, Labor Arbiter Felipe P. Pati dismissed petitioner’s complaint, finding serious misconduct (theft of a blanket, bedsheet, towels) as just cause for dismissal.
    • On April 28, 1994, the NLRC affirmed the Arbiter’s decision by Resolution, prompting petitioner’s certiorari petition before the Supreme Court.

Issues:

  • Whether petitioner’s dismissal was for just cause (abandonment and loss of confidence) under the Labor Code.
  • Whether the termination constituted an unfair labor practice by coercing employees to attest to management compliance.
  • Whether petitioner is entitled to deficiency wages and benefits, separation pay, backwages and other monetary awards.
  • Whether part of petitioner’s money claims are barred by prescription.
  • Whether due process (notice and hearing) was observed in petitioner’s dismissal.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.