G.R. No. 107541 November 16, 1995
PAMPANGA II ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., and JESUS S. NICDAO, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (Third Division) and RAFAEL TIGLAO, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Pampanga II Electric Cooperative, Inc. (PELCO II) dismissed its bill collector, private respondent Rafael Tiglao, for failure to account for P75,238.87 in collected payments. Tiglao claimed the money and receipts were lost when he fled from three intoxicated men, whom he had previously warned about illegal electrical connections, and reported the incident immediately. An internal audit confirmed the unremitted amount. Tiglao proposed a settlement through salary deductions or a deed of conveyance for his property, but management rejected this. He was initially suspended indefinitely and later terminated for failure to settle the accountability.
The Labor Arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) ruled in favor of Tiglao, declaring his dismissal illegal. They found the loss was not due to his willful fault but to a fortuitous event, and that the penalty of dismissal was too harsh given his 18 years of service and offer to settle. The NLRC affirmed the decision but deleted the award for unfair labor practice. Petitioners PELCO II and its General Manager filed this petition for certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in affirming the Labor Arbiter’s finding that Rafael Tiglao was illegally dismissed.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the NLRC and dismissing Tiglao’s complaint. The legal logic centered on the existence of a just cause for dismissal and the observance of due process. The Court found that Tiglao’s failure to remit the collected funds constituted gross negligence in the performance of his duties and a breach of the trust reposed in him as a cash collector, which are valid grounds under Article 282 of the Labor Code. His claim of loss due to a fortuitous event was unsubstantiated, and his immediate flight, leaving behind the collections, demonstrated a lack of the diligence required for his fiduciary role.
Furthermore, the Court held that due process was satisfied. Tiglao was given notice through memoranda demanding explanation and settlement, and a hearing in the form of an opportunity to respond. He was afforded a five-day period to settle and even proposed a payment plan, which constituted his participation in the process. The subsequent suspension and final termination after his failure to comply were procedurally sound. The NLRC’s finding of illegal dismissal, despite this clear evidence of a just cause and procedural compliance, constituted a capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment, amounting to grave abuse of discretion correctible by certiorari.