GR 123880; (February, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 123880 February 23, 1999
MARANAW HOTELS AND RESORT CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and EDDIE DAMALERIO, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Maranaw Hotels and Resort Corporation, owner of Century Park Sheraton Manila, dismissed its employee, respondent Eddie Damalerio, a room attendant. The dismissal stemmed from an incident on April 2, 1992, where hotel guest Jamie Glaser saw Damalerio with his hand inside Glaser’s suitcase. Glaser filed a written complaint, also alleging that Damalerio had previously solicited souvenirs from him. After an administrative hearing where Damalerio denied the theft, explaining he was merely tidying the room and placing scattered belongings into the luggage, the company found him guilty of qualified theft and terminated his employment.
Damalerio filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in his favor, ordering reinstatement with full backwages and benefits, including a share in service charges. The NLRC modified the decision on appeal, upholding the illegality of dismissal but giving the employer the option to pay separation pay instead of reinstating Damalerio. The petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court via certiorari, arguing the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in not finding sufficient evidence for dismissal and in awarding a share in service charges.
ISSUE
Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in: (1) finding the dismissal illegal due to insufficient evidence, and (2) affirming the award of a share in service charges during the employee’s preventive suspension.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the NLRC. On the first issue, the Court held that the employer failed to discharge its burden of proving a valid cause for termination. The accusation of qualified theft was not substantiated by conclusive evidence. Damalerio provided a plausible explanation for his action—he was cleaning the room and organizing the guest’s scattered belongings. Notably, the guest lost nothing and did not testify. Unsubstantiated suspicions and baseless conclusions cannot justify dismissal, especially for a rank-and-file employee. Any doubt must be resolved in favor of the employee under the constitutional principle of social justice.
On the second issue, the Court ruled that since the dismissal was illegal, Damalerio was entitled to full backwages and all benefits, including a just share in service charges, from the start of his preventive suspension until reinstatement. However, the Court sustained the NLRC’s alternative of separation pay in lieu of reinstatement due to the strained relations between the parties. Should the employer opt for separation pay, Damalerio would no longer be entitled to the service charges collected during his suspension. The petition was found devoid of merit.