G.R. No. 70054 - Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank vs. Monetary Board

Private respondent Lettie P. Corpuz was employed by Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company (PLDT) as a traffic operator at the Manila International Traffic Division (MITD).
Her service spanned for ten years and nine months, from September 19, 1978, until her dismissal on June 17, 1989.

In December 1987, during a period when PLDT’s rank-and-file employees were on strike, MITD supervisors reassigned employees to ensure continuous business operations.
While on emergency assignment, two supervisors received almost simultaneous requests for overseas calls to different Middle East countries, both coming from the same telephone number (98-68-16).
Negative tone verifications prompted supervisors to employ an alternative verification system by calling the same number again; however, the number remained unverified.

The Quality Control Inspection Department (QCID) reported that telephone number 98-68-16 was temporarily disconnected on June 10, 1987, and permanently disconnected on September 24, 1987.
Records showed that 439 overseas calls were made through the disconnected number between May and November 1987.
Microfiche re-run disclosed several notable details:

Out of 439 calls, 235 operators were involved; respondent handled 56 calls (approximately 12.8%), while other operators averaged 1.8% for each.
Respondent completed only one call before disconnection (May 23, 1987) and 34 calls after disconnection, of which 24 involved tone verification and 10 did not follow the required tone verification or call-back procedure.
There were 21 cancelled calls attributed to respondent: among these, one call had a “BU report” with an unusually long operator call duration (OCD) of 13 minutes and 21 seconds, and another had a “BB report” registering 22 minutes and 34 seconds.
Evidence also showed that respondent made several personal calls to her home phone number and other telephone numbers.

On July 26, 1988, MITD Manager Erlinda Kabigting directed respondent to explain her part in facilitating 34 calls using the disconnected number.
Instead of providing the required explanation, respondent requested a formal investigation to enable her to confront potential witnesses and to rebut the evidence against her.
The Legal Department recommended her dismissal on grounds of serious misconduct and breach of trust, prompting the termination letter dated June 16, 1989, effective the following day.

Labor Arbiter Jose G. De Vera, in a complaint for illegal dismissal filed by respondent, ordered her reinstatement with backwages and attorney’s fees.
The decision rendered by the labor arbiter was affirmed by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) on November 16, 1992.
A subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied on August 20, 1993, prompting PLDT to file a petition for certiorari.

Whether the petitioner (PLDT) established sufficient grounds to justify the dismissal of respondent based on the alleged misconduct involving the disconnected telephone number.
Whether the evidence presented was substantial enough to prove the respondent’s complicity in any anomalous transactions and fraudulent conduct.
Whether due process was observed in the dismissal proceedings, particularly the opportunity for the respondent to be heard and to confront the evidence and witnesses.
Whether the operational irregularities in the telephone system and the behavior of other operators mitigate or negate the allegations against the respondent.