G.R. No. 121324 - Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission

Case Digest (G.R. No. 121324)
Advanced

Facts:

Parties and nature of the petition

Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Incorporated filed a special civil action for certiorari to annul the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) promulgated on January 19, 1995 in NLRC Case No. V-0217-93, and the NLRC resolution dated July 18, 1995 that denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.
Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Incorporated was a domestic corporation engaged in the business of manufacturing, bottling and distribution of softdrink products.
MARCIAL R. DE LIRA was employed as route manager at petitioner’s sales office/warehouse in Borongan, Eastern Samar.

Administrative audit and findings (April 26 and 27, 1991)

Petitioner's plant finance manager Gaudencio Omana and district manager Wilfredo Portula conducted an audit at the Borongan warehouse.
The audit report cited irregularities committed by private respondent in (a) giving complimentary products and (b) retrieval of empty bottles, including the following:

Bonita Store deal discrepancy:

Confirmation of deals given showed that the owner of Bonita Store at Maydulong, Eastern Samar informed petitioner they received only sixteen (16) cases of the fifty-nine (59) cases deals reported under CI No. 358377 dated August 30, 1990.
According to Mrs. Delia Baldono and the wife of Mr. Daniel Baldono, they were told that the reported fifty-nine (59) cases were to be shared by two other customers.

Loaned empties retrieval without acknowledgment:

M. de Lira and salesman J. Alcido pulled out one hundred seventy-six (176) cases of loaned empties from customer Marcela Cabanatan on July 12, 1990 without issuing an acknowledgment document.
The audit report stated that both Mr. and Mrs. Cabanatan confirmed this during the audit visit on April 27, 1991.
The report claimed Alcido reported this matter only recently while following up for his clearance, which petitioner treated as an indication of connivance between de Lira and Alcido.

One-shot complimentary deal extended to an outlet allegedly nonexistent:

De Lira negotiated an extension of a one-shot product deal to Elisa R. Anosa, reported owner of Anosa Store.
The deal, amounting to P1,200 (twenty (20) cases at P-8 per case), under Complimentary Slip (CS) No. 022 dated March 9, 1990 was confirmed as received by Mrs. E. Anosa.
Verification disclosed that the outlet had no store at all, and petitioner treated this as an irregularity.

Preventive suspension and private respondent’s explanations

Private respondent was asked to explain why no disciplinary action should be taken.
Private respondent was placed on preventive suspension without pay for eleven (11) days from May 7 to May 18, 1991.
In his written explanation, private respondent made these clarifications:

Explanation regarding the Bonita Store cases:

Private respondent admitted that sixteen (16) cases of the fifty-nine (59) cases deal were given to Mr. Daniel Baldono at his store in Maydolong, Eastern Samar.
He stated that the remaining forty-three (43) cases were converted to cash amounting to P3,000 plus and handed to Mrs. Naring Picardal, Administrative Officer of the Borongan Emergency Hospital, as incentive to penetrate the hospital cooperative canteen with a potential monthly volume of two hundred (200) cases.

Explanation regarding the loaned empties:

Private respondent admitted that he retrieved one hundred seventy-six (176) cases of loaned empties from Marcela Cabanatan.
He stated Cabanatan was delinquent with an account of about P17,000 for not less than three (3) months, so no delivery could yet be made, rendering the loaned empties idle.

Explanation regarding the one-shot deal to Elisa R. Anosa:

Private respondent admitted negotiating for extension of a one-shot deal worth P1,200 with Mrs. Elisa Anosa.
He described Anosa as an employee in the Borongan Treasurer office assigned as Market Collector.
He explained that through her, the office became a Pepsi exclusive with two cases daily consumption, although they bought Pepsi products in Batingas Store which was also Pepsi exclusive.

Extension of preventive suspension and subsequent termination notice

During the administrative investigation, private respondent allegedly uttered veiled threats and used foul language against his superiors.
Pending resolution of the charges, private respondent’s preventive suspension without pay was extended:

For an additional eighteen (18) days from May 18 to June 5, 1991.
For a third time for an additional twenty-five (25) days from June 6 to June 30, 1991, but this time with pay.

On July 1, 1991, petitioner sent private respondent a notice of termination.
The notice of termination found private respondent guilty of the three irregularities and of uttering threats during the investigation, as follows:

Under Charge Invoice No. 358377 dated August 30, 1990:

The notice alleged de Lira made it appear that fifty-nine (59) cases were given to Bonita Store.
It asserted that Ms. Baldono confirmed only sixteen (16) cases were actually given.

Loaned empties retrieval on July 12, 1990:

The notice alleged de Lira retrieved 176 cases without issuing acknowledgment receipt.
It claimed de Lira allegedly lent the empties to Gloria Omega and Laling Ong, but records of both customers did not reflect the claimed loan.
It stated that de Lira claimed the empties were returned to Cabanatan, which Cabanatan denied.

One-shot deal extension as per Complimentary slip No. 022 dated March 9, 1990:

The notice alleged de Lira extended a one-shot deal amounting to P1,200.00 as negotiated with Mrs. Anosa.
It stated verification revealed no Anosa Store existed and that Anosa started buying PCPPI products only in September 1990 as marginal purchases, contrary to the deal proposal.

Foul language and veiled threats during administrative investigation:

The notice stated the tape-recorded proceedings revealed that de Lira used foul language when he uttered “Di puta ka!” and uttered veiled threats by saying “puede kitang ipapatay” and “Magpamisa ka na lang Boy.”

Company rules cited and termination directive:

The notice stated the acts violated company rules G-8 (Falsification of Company documents), H-4 (Stealing and other forms of dishonesty), and H-20 (Commission of a crime as defined in the Revised Penal Code and other laws within company premises).
It declared termination for cause effective July 1, 1991, without prejudice to appropriate criminal action if private respondent failed to return the amount he allegedly appropriated.

NLRC proceedings and labor arbiter ruling

Private respondent filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the NLRC Regional Arbitration Branch VIII in Tacloban City on July 16, 1991.
On March 31, 1993, the labor arbiter ruled there was no valid and just cause for dismissal.
The labor arbiter ordered:

Immediate reinstatement of private respondent to his former position as Route Manager at Borongan, Eastern Samar, without loss of seniority rights.
Payment of backwages and other benefits from July 1, 1991 until March 31, 1993.
Payment of backwages for twenty-four (24) days covering the period he was preventively suspended without pay in excess of thirty (30) days.
Attorney’s fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the total award.

The labor arbiter computed the award as:

Backwages from July 1, 1991 to March 31, 1993: P170,100.00
Backwages for 24 days suspension: P6,480.00
Attorney’s fees: P17,658.00
Total: P194,238.00

NLRC affirmance and denial of reconsideration

Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Incorporated appealed to the NLRC.

(Subscriber-Only)

Unlock Full Case Digest

Supreme Court E-Library

Case Digest (G.R. No. 121324)
Concise Detailed

Facts:

Issues:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 121324)
Advanced

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 121324) Concise Detailed

Facts:

Issues:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 121324) Advanced

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 121324)
Concise Detailed

Case Digest (G.R. No. 121324)
Advanced