This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not create, nor shall it be construed as creating, a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. For advice on specific legal concerns, you are encouraged to engage the services of a qualified lawyer. You may also directly consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices for proper guidance tailored to your situation.
The views and information presented herein are based on the laws, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing. They do not take into account subsequent legal developments and should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal advice.
After reading Is an Employee who was Illegally Dismissed from Employment Automatically Entitled to Reinstatement?, read also Dismissal of a Dishonest Employee
It is the duty of the employer to immediately comply with the order of reinstatement
A reinstatement of an employee can be done either actually or through payroll reinstatement
The reinstated employee has no duty to return or reimburse the salary he received during the period that the lower court or tribunal’s decision was for his illegal dismissal
The Labor Arbiter issued an order of reinstatement in favor of an employee. What should the employer do? For a better understanding, let us take the case of Wenphil Corporation vs. Abing, G.R. No. 207983, April 7, 2014.
In this case, the Labor Arbiter (LA), on December 8, 2000, ruled that Abing and Tuazon had been illegally dismissed by Wenphil Corporation (Wenphil). According to the LA, the allegation of serious misconduct against Abing and Tuazon had no factual and legal basis. Consequently, the LA ordered Wenphil to immediately reinstate them to their respective positions or to equivalent ones, whether actual or in the payroll. Also, the LA ordered Wenphil to pay Abing and Tuazon their backwages from the date of illegal dismissal until the date of their actual reinstatement.
Because of unfavorable LA decision, Wenphil appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). In the meantime, Abing and Tuazon asked the LA for the immediate execution of his Decision dated December 8, 2000.
Could the reinstatement of Abing and Tuazon be possible while the decision is on appeal and is not yet final?
The Supreme Court said:
Yes.
The decision of the LA is immediately executory. This means that it is the duty of the employer to comply with the order of reinstatement which can be done either actually or through payroll reinstatement. The immediately executory nature of an order of reinstatement is not affected by the existence of the ongoing appeal.
To be clear, the employer has the duty to reinstate the employee in the interim period until a reversal is decreed by a higher court or tribunal. The employer has to re-admit the employees to work under the same terms and conditions prevailing prior to their dismissal, or to reinstate them in the payroll, and that failing to exercise the options in the alternative, employer must pay the employee’s salaries.
Furthermore, in the case of payroll reinstatement, even if the employer’s appeal turns the tide in its favor, the reinstated employee has no duty to return or reimburse the salary he received during the period that the lower court or tribunal’s governing decision was for the employee’s illegal dismissal.
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.
All rights reserved.