G.R. Nos. 63127-28, February 20, 1984
Adelaida Dangan, Petitioner, vs. National Labor Relations Commission, Second Division and Tierra Factors Corporation, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Adelaida Dangan was employed by Tierra Factors Corporation, starting as a probationary purchasing clerk in 1977. She was later promoted to Secretary to the Manager of the Financial Services Department. Following the resignation of her boss, Manager Andres Roy F. Lim, in early 1981, Dangan was reassigned to various clerical positions in different departments. After returning from maternity leave in October 1981, she was transferred to the position of Secretary to the Technical Training Senior Manager at the company’s Bicutan office. Dangan filed a complaint for illegal demotion, alleging the transfer was discriminatory and intended to ease her out due to her association with the resigned manager. Subsequently, after informing the company she would not report for work pending resolution of her case, she was dismissed for abandonment, leading her to file a second complaint for illegal dismissal.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) whether Dangan’s reassignments and transfer to Bicutan constituted illegal constructive dismissal or a valid exercise of management prerogative; and (2) whether her subsequent dismissal on the ground of abandonment was legal.

RULING

The Supreme Court upheld the NLRC’s finding that the reassignments and transfer did not amount to illegal constructive dismissal. The Court found substantial evidence supporting the company’s legitimate retrenchment program, which included the abolition of the Financial Services Department. The lateral transfers were a valid exercise of managerial prerogative to optimize manpower during economic difficulties, negating claims of discrimination or harassment. The Court emphasized that findings of quasi-judicial agencies like the NLRC, when supported by substantial evidence, are accorded respect and finality.
However, the Court ruled that Dangan’s termination for abandonment was illegal. Her refusal to report to the Bicutan assignment was based on a sincere, albeit mistaken, belief that the transfer was discriminatory, pending resolution of her case. This did not constitute willful abandonment. Consequently, the Court ordered her reinstatement to the Bicutan secretary position without backwages, as she did not work during the period. Alternatively, she was entitled to separation pay due to the retrenchment. The petition was denied insofar as it sought reinstatement to her former department with backwages, as that position was legitimately abolished.