Title
Kondo vs. Toyota Boshoku Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 201396
Decision Date
Sep 11, 2019
A Japanese employee claimed constructive dismissal after benefits withdrawal and department transfer; Supreme Court ruled no dismissal, upholding management prerogative.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 201396)

Employment Details and Initial Claims

Kondo was assured a monthly salary of P90,000, escalating to P100,000 after six months, alongside various employment benefits, including a service car and financial assistance. Despite receiving positive performance evaluations initially, his subsequent evaluation rating led him to protest amid claims of the discovery of anomalies by the company's headquarters in Japan. Following this, he alleged a series of actions by the company that he deemed discriminatory and punitive, including the withdrawal of his benefits and a transfer to a different department.

Allegations of Constructive Dismissal

Kondo claimed that the removal of his service car and assigned driver, coupled with the reassignment to a new department without relevant experience, amounted to constructive dismissal. He filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) citing illegal dismissal, reduction of benefits, harassment, and discrimination. Respondents contested his claims, stating the benefits were time-bound and not guaranteed past a year, and that his transfer was within management’s prerogative.

Labor Arbiter's Decision

Labor Arbiter Michaela A. Lontoc ruled that Kondo was constructively dismissed due to unjustified benefit withdrawals and the transfer to a department for which he lacked the necessary skills. She ordered reinstatement, back wages, moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees, ruling that respondents failed to substantiate their claims of a time limitation for the benefit of the service car and the Caltex card he used.

NLRC Appeal and Ruling

Respondents appealed, leading to the NLRC's ruling on May 24, 2010, reversing Lontoc's decision. The NLRC reasoned that there was no constructive dismissal, asserting that Kondo had abandoned his job and that no substantial evidence supported his claims of harassment or unjust transfer.

Court of Appeals Review

Kondo's subsequent petition to the Court of Appeals was denied, reinforcing the NLRC's findings. The Appeals Court noted the distinction between errors of judgment and jurisdiction, emphasizing that Kondo failed to prove any manner of capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment by the NLRC.

Review by the Supreme Court

Upon review, the Supreme Court reiterated that the petitioner carries the burden of proof regarding the facts of his employment termination. It concluded that Kondo did not establish that his resignation was involuntary or

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.