GR 111515; (July, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 111515 July 14, 1995
JACKSON BUILDING CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION and/or RAZUL REQUESTO, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSIO and FERDINAND GUMOGDA, respondents.
FACTS
Private respondent Ferdinand Gumogda was employed as a janitor by petitioners. On November 15, 1991, he filed a 45-day leave of absence for an appendectomy, supported by a medical certificate recommending 30 days of bed rest. Petitioners granted the leave. Upon reporting back for work on January 3, 1992, Gumogda was refused reinstatement. Petitioners contended he had abandoned his work, alleging he was still weak and failed to submit a required medical clearance.
Gumogda filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, underpayment, and non-payment of benefits. The Labor Arbiter ruled in his favor, ordering reinstatement with full back wages and payment of monetary benefits. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the decision in toto. Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court via certiorari, arguing grave abuse of discretion.
ISSUE
The core issues are whether Gumogda abandoned his work, thereby justifying his dismissal, and whether he is entitled to back wages and other monetary benefits.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, upholding the findings of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC. On the question of abandonment, the Court reiterated the two-fold requisite: there must be a clear intention to sever the employment relationship, coupled with an overt act demonstrating that intention. The factual findings of the quasi-judicial agencies, supported by substantial evidence, revealed no such intent. Gumogda reported for work after a 50-day absence, exceeding the recommended 30-day recuperation period, which demonstrated his intention to return. His immediate filing of an illegal dismissal complaint is logically inconsistent with an intent to abandon.
Consequently, his dismissal was illegal. Under Article 279 of the Labor Code, as amended, an illegally dismissed employee is entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and to full back wages computed from the time compensation was withheld until actual reinstatement. The award of back wages is a consequence of the illegal dismissal, not compensation for unrendered service. Furthermore, Gumogda is entitled to his thirteenth-month pay pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 851, as amended, which applies to all rank-and-file employees. The Court found no grave abuse of discretion in the NLRC’s decision.