FACTS : Virex Enterprises, a service center for air-conditioning installations, assigned a team led by Marcial Dimaya, with two helpers, to perform a job in July 2007. During the job, they used a drain pipe not listed in their material request form and received an undeclared additional ₱300 from the client, which they divided among themselves without issuing an official receipt or recording the transaction in the service report. Afterward, some excess materials like copper tubes and wires were unreturned. The employer investigated and fined the team double the value of the missing items, to be deducted from their salaries. According to the employer, Dimaya refused to pay and subsequently stopped reporting for work. Dimaya denied abandonment, claiming that he believed the ₱300 was a tip, and that he was effectively dismissed when Mr. Bernardo told him “Huwag ka muna magpakita, mainit ang dugo ko sayo!” and later, “Tapos na tayo!” Prompting him to file an illegal dismissal complaint. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Dimaya, declaring illegal dismissal due to lack of due process, noting that no memorandum or directive was issued requiring him to explain or return to work. The LA awarded backwages (until he refused reinstatement), separation pay, unpaid salaries, 13th month pay, holiday pay, SIL pay, and attorney’s fees, but denied overtime as he was a field personnel. The NLRC dismissed the employer’s appeal for failure to attach a certificate of non-forum shopping, and denied reconsideration. The CA affirmed, holding that the NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion and that factual issues could not be revisited via certiorari. Before the Supreme Court, the employers argued there was no dismissal, only Dimaya’s refusal to comply with penalties and eventual abandonment, insisting that the remarks were not dismissal but expressions of displeasure. They also contested the monetary awards, particularly holiday pay and SIL pay, given the LA’s finding that Dimaya was a field personnel, and sought recomputation of ECOLA, attorney's fees, and 13th month pay. The core issues revolve around illegal dismissal, abandonment, procedural lapses in appeal, and entitlement to monetary benefits.
ISSUE : WON the circumstances in the present case warrant a relaxation in the application of the rules of procedure.
HELD : The Supreme Court partly granted the petition, recognizing that while procedural lapses occurred, substantial justice required a factual review. Virex Enterprises failed to attach a certificate of non-forum shopping, which is required to perfect an NLRC appeal, but the Court allowed liberal application of the rules due to the substantive issues involved. Upon review, the Court held that while Dimaya committed misconduct for failing to account for missing materials, refusing to comply with company policy, and blaming his team members, his actions constituted willful disobedience warranting dismissal for just cause under Article 297 of the Labor Code. However, his dismissal was procedurally defective as he was not given the required twin notices or hearing; thus, the Court awarded him ₱30,000 nominal damages under Agabon v. NLRC. Dimaya did not abandon his job, as the employer presented no evidence showing a clear intent to sever employment, nor was he asked to return to work. The Court affirmed that Dimaya was not a field personnel since his work hours could be reasonably monitored; therefore, he was entitled to holiday pay and service incentive leave. The awards of backwages, separation pay, and attorney’s fees were deleted since dismissal was based on just cause. Petitioners were ordered to pay only unpaid monetary benefits and nominal damages, with legal interest from finality until full payment.
No comments:
Post a Comment