Case Summary (G.R. No. L-20864)
Factual Antecedents
Rogel Ortiz was employed by DHL Philippines Corporation in September 1989, initially as a Courier/Driver, later becoming a Customs Representative, and finally a Manifest Clerk. His responsibilities as a Manifest Clerk included preparing manifest documents for cargo. His working hours were from 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., with scheduled breaks. Ortiz was reportedly absent from his post on multiple occasions without justification, often leaving early to engage in personal activities such as watching basketball games.
Incident and Investigation
On March 2, 1999, Ortiz failed to return to work on time after going to a vulcanizing shop. The following incidents involved him missing work on March 19, only to punch out late, leading to further inquiries from management. On March 25, 1999, he received a memorandum demanding an explanation for his absences and inappropriate behavior, which he arrogantly refused to acknowledge. Investigation revealed that Ortiz had a pattern of leaving work early, especially on days when his brother-in-law, who played for a PBA team, had games. His actions prompted a formal investigation, during which he admitted to his infractions, expressing remorse only when he learned that dismissal could ensue.
Dismissal and Legal Actions
DHL management deemed Ortiz's actions as grave misconduct and serious dishonesty, warranting dismissal. Despite his long service to the company, the management noted that continuous violations merited a stringent penalty. Ortiz subsequently filed a complaint for unfair labor practice and illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter dismissed his complaint for lack of merit, a decision later modified by the NLRC, which awarded him separation pay due to the lack of previous complaints against him regarding work performance.
Ruling of the NLRC and Court of Appeals
The NLRC affirmed with modification that Ortiz's dismissal was not illegal but awarded him separation pay recognizing his long service. Ortiz appealed to the Court of Appeals, arguing that the dismissal lacked valid grounds and procedural due process, asserting that his admissions were coerced. The Court of Appeals ruled that while the dismissal was with just cause, procedural due process was not observed, resulting in an award of nominal damages of P30,000.
Supreme Court's Ruling
The Supreme Court upheld the findings of both the NLRC and the Court of Appeals. It concluded that the dismissal was justified based on Ortiz's serious infractions, which
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-20864)
Case Background
- This case involves a petition for review on certiorari filed by Rogel Ortiz (petitioner) against DHL Philippines Corporation (DHL) and its officers, contesting the Decision dated October 27, 2006, and the Resolution dated December 13, 2007, of the Court of Appeals (CA).
- The case arose from the ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in NLRC Case No. V-000499-2000, which the CA affirmed with modifications.
Factual Antecedents
- Employment History:
- Petitioner was hired by DHL in September 1989 as a Courier/Driver.
- Promoted to Customs Representative in 1991, he held various positions until his termination, including Manifest Clerk.
- Job Responsibilities:
- As a Manifest Clerk, Ortiz was responsible for preparing manifest documents for cargo.
- His work hours were from 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., with specified meal and coffee breaks.
- Incidents Leading to Dismissal:
- On March 2, 1999, Ortiz was reprimanded for leaving work without permission to fix his tires.
- On March 19, 1999, he left work early again, purportedly to watch a PBA game, leading to an investigation by his supervisor.
- A memorandum was issued on March 25, 1999, requiring him to explain his absence during work hours.
- Ortiz responded with a defensive and disrespectful attitude, leading to further inquiry into his work habits.
- Evidence revealed that he had a pattern of leaving work early, especial