Recently, the Court of Appeals rejected for lack of merit the appeal of an employee dismissed by a private company three years ago for being dishonest.
The ruling of the Third Division found that the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) did not commit grave abuse of discretion when it affirmed the factual findings of the Labor Arbiter that the petitioner’s dismissal was valid.
The former employee had filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, unpaid incentive, separation pay, damages and attorney’s fees against a motorcycle dealer and its president.
The case stemmed from an incident in August 2020, when a customer who wanted to buy a repossessed motorcycle asked the branch to have the vehicle repainted and its rear tire replaced with a brand-new mag wheel.
He handed over P2,500 to the branch head for the mag wheel and P900 to the mechanic for the paint and brake fluid, with both amounts not covered by any receipt.
When the customer returned to pick up the motorcycle, he discovered that the rear tire replacement was second-hand and not brand-new, with the motorcycle not repainted as requested.
When he demanded a refund of the amount he gave, no refund was made, prompting him to cancel the intended purchase and to file a customer complaint with the company.
Acting on the report, the company issued a Notice to Explain to the employee, who admitted in his response that he received P2,500 from the customer to facilitate the sale of the motorcycle.
In November 2020, the company terminated the branch head’s employment for violating the company’s Code of Conduct, specifically non-remittance of cash collections, failure to issue receipts for the cash collected, and offering, soliciting or receiving anything of value to perform any act prejudicial to the interest of the company.
Three months later, the fired employee filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the Labor Arbiter, which dismissed the same for lack of merit, as the circumstances and evidence warranted the application of serious misconduct as a just cause for dismissal.
The case was appealed to the NLRC, which affirmed the arbiter’s ruling and noted that the petitioner’s service of more than 19 years should not invalidate an otherwise valid dismissal.
“Because of his vast experience, petitioner should have known better than to engage in malpractices at work,” the NLRC stated. “Unfortunately here, his seniority in the company worker against him.”
In backing the NLRC’s decision, the appeals court also set aside the petitioner’s claim that he was deprived of the opportunity to be heard because no hearing or conference was conducted by the company regarding the disciplinary charges against him.
Actual hearing or conference is not a condition for procedural due process in labor cases, the Court noted, pointing out that the employee was in fact given the opportunity to address and eventually answer the charges against him via his written explanation.
Instead of protecting the company’s interest, petitioner abused his position and facilitated a transaction outside the business of the company, the Court stressed, rendering him no longer fit to continue performing his functions.
For willful breach of the trust reposed on him by his employer, the erring employee lost his job and threw away 19 years of service.
The entire process took just over three years, even for a case that involves only the amount of P2,500.00 which is a pittance compared to the millions that our nation’s politicians take from just one transaction.
How sad that many of the crocodiles we elect to positions of power in government regularly betray the public trust, remain unpunished and instead get reelected again and again by their gullible constituents.
It seems the justice system, as far as betrayal of trust is concerned, works well only in the private sector.