GR 189714; (January, 2017) (Digest)
G.R. No. 189714. January 25, 2017
TPG CORPORATION (FORMERLY THE PROFESSIONAL GROUP PLANS, INC.), PETITIONER, V. ESPERANZA B. PINAS, RESPONDENT.
FACTS
Respondent Esperanza B. Pinas was a Regional Manager and later a Territorial Sales Head for petitioner TPG Corporation. In January 1997, a training session was conducted by her husband, also a TPG employee. Meals were provided, with the cost covered by a receipt from the NTC Employees Multi-Purpose Cooperative. Subsequently, an employee from Pinas’s personal business, Emily Balleras, sought reimbursement from TPG for training expenses using a different official receipt. Pinas claimed no knowledge of this reimbursement request. TPG charged Pinas with gross violation for allegedly tampering with an official receipt, conducted an investigation, and dismissed her on May 30, 1997. Pinas filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, finding valid dismissal due to loss of trust and confidence. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed this, ruling the dismissal illegal. It found the alleged tampering was a mere mistake not attributable to Pinas and that TPG failed to observe due process. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC’s finding of illegal dismissal.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the NLRC’s ruling that Pinas was illegally dismissed based on loss of trust and confidence.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA decision with modification regarding the award of separation pay in lieu of reinstatement. The Court held that Pinas was illegally dismissed. For loss of trust and confidence to be a valid ground, the employee must occupy a position of trust, either managerial or one where the employee is routinely charged with the care and custody of company assets. The Court found Pinas, as a Training Officer, did not occupy such a position of trust. Her duties were primarily recommendatory and involved training, not the exercise of independent judgment over managerial policies or the handling of company assets.
Furthermore, the alleged act constituting the breach of trust—the submission of a tampered receipt for reimbursement—was not proven to have been committed by Pinas herself. The request was made by her personal secretary, who was not a TPG employee, without Pinas’s knowledge. There was no substantial evidence linking Pinas to the fabrication. The employer’s evidence failed to establish a willful breach or that the act was done by Pinas with wrongful intent. Consequently, the dismissal lacked both substantive and procedural due process. The award of backwages and separation pay, in lieu of reinstatement due to strained relations, was upheld.