Title
Supreme Court
Belarso vs. Quality House, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 209983
Decision Date
Nov 10, 2021
Evelina Belarso, a Raw Materials Supervisor, was dismissed after a belt buckle was found in her bag during a routine inspection. Despite her denial and claims of a frame-up, the Supreme Court upheld her termination, citing loss of trust and confidence due to her position and sufficient evidence of rule violations.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 209983)

Factual Background

Evelina E. Belarso was employed by Quality House, Inc., a company engaged in manufacturing and distributing leather goods. Over the years, she progressed within the company, eventually becoming the supervisor of the Raw Materials Warehouse in 1987. Her responsibilities included managing the storage and release of raw materials. On December 10, 2010, an incident occurred when a guard discovered a company belt buckle in Belarso’s bag during a routine inspection as she attempted to exit the premises. When confronted, she denied any wrongdoing.

Initial Proceedings

Following the discovery, Belarso was placed under preventive suspension and asked to provide an explanation regarding the incident. In her defense, she maintained that her bag was left in a visible location and asserted that she was framed by co-workers. On January 4, 2011, after a conference with management, QHI issued a Rule Violation Memo indicating that her explanation was unsatisfactory and that her employment would be terminated effective January 7, 2011, due to loss of trust and confidence.

Labor Arbiter's Ruling

The Labor Arbiter found in favor of Belarso, ruling her dismissal as illegal. The decision was based on the conclusion that it was implausible for her to attempt theft, given the frequent inspections conducted at the company exit, and expressed skepticism regarding the integrity of the evidence provided by QHI, which included multiple affidavits from guards and co-employees.

National Labor Relations Commission Ruling

On appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision, stating that QHI had established just cause for Belarso’s termination based on loss of trust and confidence. The NLRC emphasized the credibility of the evidence against her, including testimonies from security personnel and the context of her supervisory role, which inherently involved a higher standard of trust. The commission found that prior infractions further contributed to QHI’s loss of confidence in Belarso.

Court of Appeals Ruling

Belarso, unsatisfied with the NLRC’s ruling, sought relief from the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA upheld the NLRC's decision, concluding that Belarso failed to substantiate her defense of being framed and noted that her violation of the company ordinance against bringing personal bags to her workstation was significant in determining her trustworthiness. The CA affirmed the dismissal as justified based on the circumstances and supporting evidence.

Argumentation in Petition for Review

Belarso's petition to the Supreme Court raised two main issues: (1) whether there was a just cause for her termination, and (2) whether the penalty of dismissal was proportionate to any violation that may have occurred. She contested the reliability of the testimonies against her, accused of being similarly worded, and highlighted discrepancies in evidence used against her.

Supreme

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.