G.R. No. 209085, June 06, 2018
NICANOR F. MALCABA, CHRISTIAN C. NEPOMUCENO, AND LAURA MAE FATIMA F. PALIT-ANG, Petitioners, v. PROHEALTH PHARMA PHILIPPINES, INC., GENEROSO R. DEL CASTILLO, JR., AND DANTE M. BUSTO, Respondents.
FACTS:
ProHealth Pharma Philippines, Inc. (ProHealth) is a corporation engaged in the sale of pharmaceutical products and health food on a wholesale and retail basis. Generoso Del Castillo (Del Castillo) is the Chair of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer while Dante Busto (Busto) is the Executive Vice President. Malcaba, Tomas Adona, Jr. (Adona), Nepomuceno, and Palit-Ang were employed as its President, Marketing Manager, Business Manager, and Finance Officer, respectively.
Malcaba, Nepomuceno, Palit-Ang, and Adona separately filed Complaints18 before the Labor Arbiter for illegal dismissal, nonpayment of salaries and 13th month pay, damages, and attorney's fees.
The Labor Arbiter found that Malcaba was constructively dismissed. He found that ProHealth never controverted the allegation that Del Castillo made it difficult for Malcaba to effectively fulfill his duties. He likewise ruled that ProHealth's insistence that Malcaba's leave of absence in October 2007 was an act of resignation was false since Malcaba continued to perform his duties as President through December 2007.
The Labor Arbiter declared that Nepomuceno's failure to state the actual date of his flight was an excusable mistake on his part, considering that this was his first infraction in his nine (9) years of service. He noted that no administrative proceedings were conducted before Nepomuceno's dismissal, thereby violating his right to due process.
Palit-Ang's dismissal was also found to have been illegal as delay in complying with a lawful order was not tantamount to disobedience. The Labor Arbiter further noted that delay in giving a cash advance for car maintenance would not have affected the company's operations. He declared that Palit-Ang's dismissal was too harsh of a penalty.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered declaring that complainants were illegally dismissed by respondents.
ProHealth moved for reconsideration but was denied by the National Labor Relations Commission in its January 31, 2011 Resolution. Thus, ProHealth, Del Castillo, and Busto filed a Petition for Certiorari before the Court of Appeals.
On February 19, 2013, the Court of Appeals rendered its Decision reversing and setting aside the National Labor Relations Commission September 29, 2010 Decision.
Malcaba, Nepomuceno, and Palit-Ang moved for reconsideration but were denied in a Resolution38 dated September 10, 2013. Hence, this Petition39 was filed before this Court.
Petitioners argue that the Court of Appeals should have dismissed outright the Petition for Certiorari since respondents failed to post a genuine appeal bond before the National Labor Relations Commission. They allege that when Sheriff Ramon Nonato P. Dayao attempted to enforce the judgment award against the appeal bond, he was informed that the appeal bond procured by respondents did not appear in the records of Alpha Insurance and Surety Company, Inc. (Alpha Insurance). They also claim that respondents were notified by the National Labor Relations Commission four (4) times that their appeal bond was not genuine, showing that respondents did not comply with the requirement in good faith.
ISSUES:
(1) whether or not the Labor Arbiter and National Labor Relations Commission had jurisdiction over petitioner Nicanor F. Malcaba's termination dispute considering the allegation that he was a corporate officer, and not a mere employee;
(2) whether or not petitioner Christian C. Nepomuceno was validly dismissed for willful breach of trust when he failed to inform respondents ProHealth Pharma Philippines, Inc., Generoso R. Del Castillo, Jr., and Dante M. Busto of the actual dates of his vacation leave; and
(3) whether or not petitioner Laura Mae Fatima F. Palit-Ang was validly dismissed for willful disobedience when she failed to immediately comply with an order of her superior.
RULING:
(1) Finding that petitioner Malcaba is the President of respondent corporation and a corporate officer, any issue on his alleged dismissal is beyond the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter or the National Labor Relations Commission. Their adjudication on his money claims is void for lack of jurisdiction. As a matter of equity, petitioner Malcaba must, therefore, return all amounts received as judgment award pending final adjudication of his claims. This Court's dismissal of petitioner Malcaba's claims, however, is without prejudice to his filing of the appropriate case in the proper forum.
Effective on August 8, 2000, upon the passage of Republic Act No. 8799, otherwise known as The Securities Regulation Code, the SEC's jurisdiction over all intra-corporate disputes was transferred to the RTC, pursuant to Section 5.2 of RA No. 8799.
(2) Nepomuceno was not validly dismissed.
Article 294 [279] of the Labor Code provides that an employer may terminate the services of an employee only upon just or authorized causes.94 Article 297 [282] enumerates the just causes for termination, among which is "[f]raud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized representative[.]"
Loss of trust and confidence is a just cause to terminate either managerial employees or rank-and-file employees who regularly handle large amounts of money or property in the regular exercise of their functions.
For an act to be considered a loss of trust and confidence, it must be first, work-related, and second, founded on clearly established facts. The breach of trust must likewise be willful, that is, "it is done intentionally, knowingly and purposely, without justifiable excuse, as distinguished from an act done carelessly, thoughtlessly, heedlessly or inadvertently."
Nepomuceno turned over all of his pending work to a reliever before he left for Malaysia. He was able to reach his sales quota and surpass his sales target even before taking his vacation leave. Respondents did not suffer any financial damage as a result of his absence. This was also petitioner Nepomuceno's first infraction in his nine (9) years of service with respondents.101 None of these circumstances constitutes a willful breach of trust on his part. The penalty of dismissal, thus, was too severe for this kind of infraction.
(3) Article 297 [282] of the Labor Code, an employer may terminate the services of an employee who commits willful disobedience of the lawful orders of the employer:
Article 297. [282] Termination by Employer. — An employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes:
(a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work.
There was no ill will between Gamboa and petitioner Palit-Ang. Petitioner Palit-Ang's failure to immediately give the money to Gamboa was not the result of a perverse mental attitude but was merely because she was busy at the time. Neither did she profit from her failure to immediately give the cash advance for the car tune-up nor did respondents suffer financial damage by her failure to comply. The severe penalty of dismissal was not commensurate to her infraction.
WHEREFORE, the Petition is PARTIALLY GRANTED. Petitioner Christian C. Nepomuceno and petitioner Laura Mae Fatima F. Palit-Ang are DECLARED to have been illegally dismissed. They are, therefore, entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights, or in lieu thereof, separation pay; and the payment of backwages from the filing of their Complaints until finality of this Decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment