G.R. No. 106374 June 17, 1993
PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, LUCIO ZABAYLE and JOSE TINIO, respondents.

FACTS

On May 4, 1988, Philippine Airlines (PAL) security guard Michael Beldad witnessed respondent Lucio Zabayle, a cabin crew member, loading his personal bottles of whiskey and cigarettes into a taxi at the Inflight Center. Beldad informed Zabayle’s companion that an out-gate pass was required, but was ignored. The taxi was stopped at the gate, and Zabayle was taken to the Security Office to fill out an interception report. Respondent Jose Tinio, a union adviser, was informed of the incident. Tinio called for assistance from CAPCOM and went to the Security Office, where he angrily confronted the Chief Security Officer, questioned Zabayle’s detention, and demanded to speak with higher officials. CAPCOM elements arrived, and Zabayle was released without signing the report. Subsequently, Zabayle and Tinio were administratively charged and dismissed by PAL. They filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in their favor, ordering reinstatement and payment of backwages, a decision affirmed by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).

ISSUE

Whether the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in affirming the Labor Arbiter’s finding that the dismissal of Lucio Zabayle and Jose Tinio was illegal.

RULING

No, the NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The Supreme Court affirmed the NLRC’s resolution, with modification on the computation of backwages. The Court held that the findings of fact by the Labor Arbiter, as affirmed by the NLRC, are binding. On the merits, PAL failed to prove grave abuse. First, the items Zabayle brought out were his personal property, not stolen. Second, Zabayle was not aware of the out-gate pass rule prior to the incident, and PAL failed to properly disseminate its security policies. Tinio, a union officer, called CAPCOM as he believed Zabayle was being illegally detained, given prior incidents of harassment. Third, the security guards inconsistently applied the rules. While Tinio’s shouting of invectives and Zabayle’s failure to heed the guard cannot be countenanced, their infractions were their first offenses in over 20 years of service, making the penalty of dismissal too harsh and disproportionate. The infractions were not related to their positions but arose from a misunderstanding of security measures. The finding of illegal dismissal warrants reinstatement. Backwages are to be computed for three years only, as the dismissal occurred before the effectivity of R.A. 6715 on March 21, 1989.