GR 129413; (July, 1998) (Digest)
G.R. No. 129413 July 27, 1998
Rolia Villanueva, petitioner, vs. National Labor Relations Commission (Third Division), Atlas Lithographic Services, Inc., Alejandro A. Maramag, Teresa Alvina and Felix de Jesus, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Rolia Villanueva was hired as a clerk by private respondent Atlas Lithographic Services, Inc. in 1970 and was promoted to Accounting Manager on September 1, 1978. On July 10, 1995, she received a show cause letter from the company regarding a letter-complaint filed by a contractor, Adelina Oguis, alleging that petitioner demanded Two Thousand Pesos (P2,000.00) for every work order she obtained from the company for Oguis. The company viewed this as an act of dishonesty. Petitioner denied any wrongdoing, claiming the money was voluntarily given by Oguis as gratitude for past favors. An investigation was conducted on July 14, 1995. Petitioner’s employment was terminated effective August 2, 1995. She filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in her favor, finding the dismissal illegal due to the company’s failure to prove damage. The NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision, declaring the dismissal valid. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied.
ISSUE
Whether the petitioner was validly dismissed by the private respondent.
RULING
Yes, the petitioner was validly dismissed. The Supreme Court affirmed the NLRC resolutions. Loss of trust and confidence is a valid ground for dismissal. Petitioner, as a managerial employee (Accounting Manager), held a position of trust and confidence. Her admitted acceptance of money from a company contractor, Oguis, on at least four occasions, compromised her impartiality and severely shook the trust and confidence reposed in her. Whether the money was demanded or voluntarily given is immaterial; the act of acceptance itself cast doubt on her integrity. The possibility of future detrimental favors to the contractor existed. The fact that the company did not suffer actual losses does not excuse the culpability. As a managerial employee, she was expected to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. The cited cases on proportionality of penalty involved rank-and-file employees and different, less prejudicial transgressions. Each incident of acceptance constituted a separate offense. Procedural due process was observed. The dismissal was for a just and valid cause.