Case Summary (G.R. No. 86000)
Employment Agreement and Role
Farolan was hired under a letter-offer detailing her salary, allowances, and responsibilities related to passenger and cargo operations for SAS in the Philippines. She was involved in several training seminars to enhance her skills in sales and marketing, particularly regarding the airline's operations.
Sales Performance and Investigation
In September 1993, Farolan reported a significant drop in sales, attributing it to market forces beyond her control. Following a series of poor sales results, Zozobrado was directed to investigate the situation. He reportedly concluded that Farolan did not adopt effective sales strategies, which contributed to the downturn in SAS's revenues.
Termination of Employment
On July 18, 1994, Farolan was terminated based on the company's loss of confidence in her managerial capabilities. Her termination letter cited a string of poor sales performance as the rationale. Farolan contended this dismissal was unfair and filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against the company and its officers.
Labor Arbiter's Decision
The Labor Arbiter, after evaluating the case, ruled in favor of Farolan, finding her dismissal lacked just cause and due process. The Arbiter ordered Asia Pacific Chartering to pay her separation pay, moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees.
NLRC Appeal
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the Arbiter’s decision, asserting the employer's prerogative to terminate based on loss of trust and confidence. Farolan's subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting her appeal to the Court of Appeals.
Court of Appeals Decision
The Court of Appeals set aside the NLRC's decision, reinstating the Arbiter's ruling and adjusting the award of attorney's fees and damages. The court found the NLRC had exercised grave abuse of discretion, leading to formal reinstatement of the Arbiter's findings.
Grounds for Petition for Review
Asia Pacific Chartering sought a review on grounds that the Court of Appeals disregarded the employer's management rights and the evidence supporting Farolan's performance issues. The petition argued that the awards for damages were not justified.
Legal Framework for Dismissal
To validate an employee's dismissal, two requisites must be met: (1) due process must be observed, and (2) there must be a valid cause for termination as per the Labor Code. The burden of proof lies with the employer.
Findings on Due Process
The Court concluded that Farolan was denied due process as she had not been given a chance to defend herself before her termination. The evidence presented indicated that procedures mandated by law were not followed, including failure to provide specific grounds for her dismissal.
Evaluation of Managerial Conduct
The Court assessed
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 86000)
Case Background
- The case revolves around a Petition for Review filed by Asia Pacific Chartering (Phils) Inc. under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
- The petition challenges two key rulings: the June 28, 2001 Decision of the Court of Appeals that set aside the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) decision and the January 9, 2002 Resolution denying the motion for reconsideration.
- Asia Pacific Chartering, until 1996, served as the general sales agent for Scandinavian Airline System (SAS), selling passenger and cargo spaces for the airline.
Employment Details of Respondent
- Maria Linda R. Farolan was hired as Sales Manager for Asia Pacific Chartering on December 16, 1992.
- She accepted the position following a formal letter-offer detailing her salary and allowances.
- During her tenure, she participated in several training seminars aimed at enhancing her skills relevant to her role.
Performance Evaluation and Termination
- In September 1993, Farolan submitted a report analyzing SAS's poor financial performance, attributing it to external market conditions beyond her control.
- An investigation led by Roberto Zozobrado in January 1994, however, found that Farolan had not actively pursued sales strategies or meetings to bolster revenues.
- Despite some improvements in sales noted in communications from SAS, management decided to terminate Farolan's contract on July 18, 1994, citing a "loss of confidence" in her capabilities.
Legal Proceedings Initiated by Respondent
- Following her termination, Farolan filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Asia Pacific Chartering and its executives