G.R. No. 224854 . March 27, 2019
LUCITA S. PARDILLO, PETITIONER, V. DR. EVELYN DUCAY BANDOJO, OWNER AND MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF E & R HOSPITAL, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Lucita S. Pardillo was employed by respondent Dr. Evelyn Bandojo at E & R Hospital from 1990, eventually rising to Business Office Manager. On November 18, 2010, she was terminated via a memorandum citing loss of confidence, habitual tardiness, and sending insulting and threatening texts. Dr. Bandojo alleged specific infractions: failure to process PhilHealth claims for patients Jamal Alim and Moises Servano, allowing patient Stephen Chiu’s discharge with an unsettled bill, attempting to borrow a hospital “Pay to Cash” check for personal use, and a September 27, 2010 incident where a subordinate was caught punching Pardillo’s time card. An administrative investigation was held on September 30, 2010.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed Pardillo’s illegal dismissal complaint, finding her a managerial employee validly dismissed for loss of trust. The NLRC reversed, ruling dismissal was without substantive and procedural due process. It found Pardillo adequately explained the alleged infractions: the Servano claim was not refiled per Dr. Bandojo’s instruction; Alim had no obligation; Chiu’s bill was to be offset by a relative’s professional fees. On tardiness, a memorandum suggested her schedule was previously adjusted. The time-card incident, while a violation, was not a willful breach of trust as Pardillo was on the premises. The Court of Appeals reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s decision, agreeing Pardillo was validly dismissed for loss of trust and confidence.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Pardillo’s dismissal on the ground of loss of trust and confidence.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the CA and reinstated the NLRC decision, ruling Pardillo was illegally dismissed. For loss of confidence to be a valid cause for dismissal of a managerial employee, the breach of trust must be willful, founded on clearly established facts, and the act must be work-related. The employer must prove the factual basis for the loss of confidence. Here, Dr. Bandojo failed to discharge this burden. The alleged infractions were convincingly explained and did not constitute willful breach. The PhilHealth and billing issues involved operational instructions or arrangements with other hospital personnel, not dishonesty or willful neglect. The time-card incident, while improper, occurred while Pardillo was within the hospital and did not evidence an intent to defraud. Regarding procedural due process, the September 30, 2010 meeting was a preliminary investigation, not the required hearing after a formal charge. The termination notice itself was the first written charge, violating the two-notice rule. Pardillo was ordered reinstated without loss of seniority rights and awarded full backwages, inclusive of allowances, from dismissal until finality of the decision. Separation pay, in lieu of reinstatement due to strained relations, was also granted, plus attorney’s fees. Legal interest was imposed on all monetary awards.