Case Summary (G.R. No. 146121-22)
Employment Background
Ernesto M. Ibias was employed by SMC beginning December 24, 1978, initially serving as a CRO operator and later becoming a Zamatic operator. He was an active member of a labor organization within SMC.
Company Policy on Absenteeism
SMC’s Policy on Employee Conduct indicated that absences without permission (AWOPs) would result in progressive disciplinary measures. The policy specified that each absence is subject to increasingly severe penalties culminating in discharge after multiple offenses.
Record of AWOPs
In 1997, Ibias was recorded as AWOP on various dates, including multiple days in January, April, and May. He received multiple warnings, and upon incurring certain levels of AWOP, he faced allegations of falsification of company medical records.
Administrative Investigation
Following the accumulation of AWOPs, SMC conducted an investigation where Ibias admitted to being absent without permission but denied any wrongdoing regarding the alleged falsification of records. Testimony from SMC employees suggested that Ibias had committed the act of falsification to mask his absences.
Dismissal and Labor Arbiter's Ruling
On March 30, 1998, Ibias filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The labor arbiter found the dismissal to be illegal, pointing to SMC's failure to consistently apply its absenteeism policy and the lack of proof to substantiate the falsification claim. Thus, he ordered Ibias's reinstatement and the payment of back wages.
NLRC Ruling
The NLRC affirmed the labor arbiter’s findings but modified the ruling to grant separation pay instead of reinstatement due to strained relations. It further denied motions for reconsideration from both parties.
Court of Appeals Decision
The Court of Appeals upheld the rulings of the labor arbiter and the NLRC that Ibias's dismissal was illegal. However, it modified the monetary awards, stipulating that back wages would be calculated from the time after the dismissal until actual reinstatement.
Petition for Review
SMC's appeal to the Supreme Court raised several issues, including the application of the burden of proof and the alleged inconsistency of the Court of Appeals in its evaluation of Ibias's AWOPs.
Supreme Court Findings
The Supreme Court found merit in SMC’s position, noting that substantial evidence indicated that Ibias had falsified his
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 146121-22)
Case Background
- The case is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45, filed by petitioners San Miguel Corporation (SMC) and Geribern Abella against the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and others.
- The Decision dated June 28, 2000, and Resolution dated November 17, 2000, from the Court of Appeals are being assailed.
- Respondent Ernesto M. Ibias was employed by SMC on December 24, 1978, and worked in the Metal Closure and Lithography Plant, eventually rising to the position of Zamatic operator.
- Ibias was an active member of a labor organization, Ilaw Buklod Manggagawa (IBM)-SMC Chapter.
Company Policy on Employee Conduct
- SMC’s policy on unauthorized absences (AWOPs) outlined a structured disciplinary system with increasing penalties for repeated infractions.
- Specific penalties for AWOPs range from written warnings for first offenses to discharge for the ninth AWOP.
- Falsification of company records is punishable by discharge for the first offense.
Facts of the Case
- Ibias was recorded as being AWOP on multiple dates in 1997, incurring various penalties, including a written warning after reaching five AWOPs.
- He was alleged to have falsified his medical consultation card regarding sick leave on specific dates.
- A series of Notices to Explain were issued to Ibias regarding his absences and the alleged falsification.
- An administrative investigation concluded t