GR 102936; (October, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 102936 October 16, 1997
LEVY AGAO, SEBASTIAN OCMER, MARIO MORANTE, ROSITO QUILING, PABLITO GABARDA and EDMUNDO ABITAN, petitioners, vs. HONORABLE THIRD DIVISION OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, HONORABLE LABOR ARBITER JOAQUIN TANODRA and CATHAY PACIFIC STEEL MELTING CORPORATION, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioners were delivery workers (drivers and helpers) for private respondent Cathay Pacific Steel Melting Corporation (CAPASCO), assigned in groups to delivery trucks. On February 10, 1989, an attempt by one group (driver Carlos Elmido and helpers) to pilfer company steel bars was discovered. During a police investigation, helper Columbus Bolabola admitted his participation and implicated his group. On March 6, 1989, Bolabola executed affidavits detailing his participation in and knowledge of pilferages committed by the groups of petitioners Levy Agao and Mario Morante on multiple specified dates between October 1988 and January 1989. Based on these affidavits, the Agao and Morante groups were dismissed from work on March 13, 1989. They contested the legality of their dismissal. The Elmido group later withdrew their complaint, admitting guilt. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the petitioners’ complaint for lack of merit. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the dismissal but modified the decision by ordering CAPASCO to pay each petitioner P1,000.00 for failure to comply with due process requirements prior to dismissal.
ISSUE
1. Whether or not the petitioners were dismissed from employment for a just cause.
2. Whether or not the petitioners were deprived of their constitutional right to due process when dismissed.
RULING
1. Yes, the petitioners were dismissed for a just cause. The Supreme Court upheld the factual findings of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC, which are entitled to great respect and finality when supported by substantial evidence. The Court found that the detailed affidavits of Columbus Bolabola, corroborated by company weighing slip memos and delivery records, constituted substantial evidence of the petitioners’ participation in the pilferage of company property. This act constituted serious misconduct and breach of trust, which are just causes for dismissal under the Labor Code. The Court rejected the petitioners’ argument that the company’s rigid control made pilferage improbable, noting that the pilferage was accomplished by inserting items between longer steel bars intended for delivery.
2. Yes, the petitioners were deprived of due process. The Court affirmed the settled rule that the twin requirements of notice and hearing are indispensable for a valid dismissal. The records failed to show that the required notices (notice of charges and notice of decision) were properly issued to the petitioners. However, the Court also ruled that while the dismissal was for a just and valid cause, the employer’s failure to observe due process does not nullify the dismissal but subjects the employer to a sanction. Therefore, the NLRC correctly ordered CAPASCO to pay each petitioner P1,000.00 as an administrative penalty for non-compliance with due process requirements. The petition was dismissed and the NLRC decision was affirmed.