G.R. No. 179702 - Ancheta vs. Destiny Ficial Plans, Inc.

Petitioner: Sutherland Global Services (Philippines), Inc. (“Sutherland”), a company engaged in business process outsourcing and technology consulting services for international clients.
Respondent: Larry S. Labrador, a call center agent hired by Sutherland in August 2006.

During his two years of employment, Labrador committed several infractions, evidencing a pattern of non-compliance with company standards.
On September 24, 2007, Labrador was issued a Red Flag document for failing to appropriately disclose customer information and for creating a duplicate account without proper verification, which resulted in a Last Written Warning emphasizing the seriousness of the offense.
On February 8, 2008, Labrador committed another offense described as a “fatal error” in handling a client’s query, prompting immediate counseling and placement under the Monitoring Improvement Program.
On May 13, 2008, Labrador again violated company standards by creating a second account for a customer—after initially requesting the customer’s credit card details for verification purposes—resulting in the customer being billed twice and causing undue financial burden on the customer.

On May 24, 2008, Sutherland served Labrador with a Notice to Explain, demanding justification for his conduct pursuant to the company’s Employee Handbook.
An administrative hearing was conducted on May 28, 2008, wherein Labrador’s past infractions were considered along with the most recent offense.
After the hearing and the subsequent recommendation that found Labrador guilty of gross or habitual neglect of duty, it was suggested that, given his request for resignation, his termination be effected through his resignation for “humanitarian purposes” and to preserve his future employment record.
Consequently, on June 17, 2008, Labrador submitted his resignation letter.

On October 27, 2008, Labrador filed a complaint for constructive/illegal dismissal before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).
On February 27, 2009, Labor Arbiter Reynaldo Abdon initially dismissed the complaint, ruling that Labrador’s resignation was voluntary and that just cause existed for his termination.
Labrador subsequently filed a Memorandum on Appeal, which despite containing technical defects (e.g., failure to state the receipt date of the appealed decision and lacking a certificate of non-forum shopping), was admitted by the NLRC on May 21, 2009 based on a liberal interpretation of procedural rules.
Sutherland filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied via a resolution dated July 14, 2009.
Sutherland's petition for certiorari was reviewed by the Court of Appeals (CA) on December 18, 2009, where the CA dismissed the petition while affirming the NLRC’s finding that Labrador was illegally dismissed, basing its ruling partly on the premise that Labrador’s "resignation" was in fact compelled by the circumstances of his termination.

Sutherland contended that technical defects in Labrador’s appeal should render the decision of the Labor Arbiter final and executory.
The company also argued that there was no illegal dismissal since Labrador had voluntarily resigned, and even if a dismissal occurred, his offenses connoted gross negligence justifying termination.

Whether the failure of Labrador to strictly comply with the requisites under the NLRC Rules of Procedure—specifically, the omission of the receipt date of the appealed decision and the absence of a certificate of non-forum shopping—should be deemed fatal to his appeal.

Whether the decision of the CA, which found that Labrador was illegally dismissed and that his resignation was not voluntary but rather a measure taken to forestall a derogatory record, is correct.

Whether Labrador’s repeated infractions, which allegedly amounted to gross negligence, justified his dismissal from employment according to the provisions of Article 282 of the Labor Code.