Title
Pearl S. Buck Foundation, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 80728
Decision Date
Feb 21, 1990
A charitable foundation employee dismissed for borrowing money from a ward's mother; Supreme Court ruled her actions constituted serious misconduct and breach of trust, upholding dismissal.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 240316)

Background of the Case

The petitioner, Pearl S. Buck Foundation, Inc., is a charitable institution established in Delaware, U.S.A., focused on providing aid to indigent Amerasian youth. It functions by utilizing funds collected from individual and church donations in the United States, which are subsequently transferred to its Philippine branch for operational programs and child support. The foundation operates a system where funds allocated for each child are placed into a trust fund intended exclusively for their benefit. Rubini Gosiaco Querimit, employed by the foundation from 1974 to 1985 as a case worker, was responsible for overseeing the welfare of children under its care, including Richard Aliarte.

Employment and Dismissal

Mrs. Querimit's employment ended on April 30, 1985, amid allegations of misconduct related to borrowing money from Andrea Aliarte, the mother of one of her assigned wards. The foundation claimed that this action constituted a breach of trust, prompting her dismissal. The total borrowed amounted to P3,300, with no clear evidence presented to show that it involved funds from the trust designated for the child’s welfare. Following her termination, Mrs. Querimit filed a complaint with the NLRC, alleging illegal dismissal, underpayment, and other grievances.

NLRC Findings

The labor arbiter initially dismissed Mrs. Querimit's complaint, citing her actions as severe misconduct resulting in a loss of trust in her position. However, on appeal, the NLRC reversed this decision, highlighting procedural lapses in the foundation's dismissal process and arguing that borrowing money from a parent of a ward was not justifiable grounds for termination. The NLRC found that the accusations did not warrant such an extreme response, noting the lack of clerical evidence linking the borrowed money to the foundation's trust fund.

Review by the Supreme Court

The petitioner challenged the NLRC's ruling, contending several errors in the Commission's analysis, including procedural due process violations and misinterpretations regarding the nature of the loan transactions. The Supreme Court noted that while the foundation's financial dealings and the ethical standards expected of its employees were critical considerations, the case was framed around the legality of terminating an employee based on the alleged breach of trust.

Burden of Proof

The Court emphasized the importance of the burden of proof, which rested on Mrs. Querimit to demonstrate the source of the funds borrowed. There was insufficient evidence to prove the funds borrowed were indeed from the trust fund, and the Court highlighted the foundational ethical obligations placed on employees managing charitable funds. The implications of trust and fiduciary duty in this professional context were deemed substantial enough to consider her actions inappropriate.

Supreme Court's

...continue reading

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