Photo from Pexels | CQF-Avocat
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
Factual findings of the NLRC are accorded great respect, but the Court of Appeals is not precluded from reviewing evidence alleged to be arbitrarily considered or otherwise disregarded by the former.
On September 15, 2008, petitioner G&S Transport Corporation hired respondent Reynaldo A. Medina for the position of driver. Medina was in the employ of G&S for seven years with no derogatory record. However, on February 12, 2015, Medina was engaged in a heated argument with his co-employee, Felix Pogoy. A heated argument with shoving then ensued.
G&S countered that Medina was drunk when he assaulted Pogoy to the point of boxing and strangling the latter. G&S concluded that Medina violated the Code of Discipline when he fought with a co-employee inside the work premises. Thus, Medina was terminated from employment on March 20, 2015.
Aggrieved, Medina filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, actual, moral, and exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed Medina’s complaint, finding that there was no illegal dismissal because fighting with a co-employee within work premises is considered serious misconduct and a valid ground for termination of Medina’s employment.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s decision. Undaunted, Medina filed a Petition for Certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA), which reversed the findings of the labor tribunals and found that Medina was illegally dismissed from employment. Hence, this petition for review on certiorari.
The issue in this case is whether the CA committed grave abuse of discretion in reversing the uniform decisions of the labor tribunals and exceeded its appellate jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court Decides
The Supreme Court denied the petition for review on certiorari.
It is well within the powers and jurisdiction of the CA to evaluate the evidence alleged to have been capriciously, whimsically, or arbitrarily disregarded by the NLRC.
There is no serious misconduct to warrant the dismissal of Medina from employment. Under Article 297 of the Labor Code, an employer may terminate the services of an employee on the ground of serious misconduct committed in connection with or relative to the performance of his duties.
To justify termination on the ground of serious misconduct, the following requisites must concur: (1) the misconduct must be serious; (2) it must relate to the performance of the employee’s duties, showing that the employee has become unfit to continue working for the employer; and (3) it must have been performed with wrongful intent. Here, none of the requisites for serious misconduct is present.
A petty quarrel involving shoving or slight pushing that transpired between Medina and Pogoy did not cause work stoppage nor posed a threat to the safety of the other employees. G&S did not show how Medina’s misconduct has adversely affected its business, or how Medina has become unfit to continue working for the company. Thus, there was no just cause for the termination of Medina’s employment with G&S.
Source: G & S Transport Corporation Vs. Reynaldo A. Medina (G.R. No. 243768. September 5, 2022)
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 09175772207/ 09778050020.
All rights reserved.