G.R. No. 117652 ; April 27, 2000
ROLANDO APARENTE, SR., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, and COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILIPPINES, INC., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Rolando Aparante, Sr., an advertising foreman with eighteen years of service at Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils., Inc. (CCBPI), was involved in a vehicular accident on November 9, 1987. While driving a company truck, he sideswiped a child, causing a skull fracture requiring surgery and a month-long hospitalization. Petitioner reported the incident five days later, and an investigation revealed he was driving without a valid license. Consequently, CCBPI’s insurer refused to reimburse the company for the medical expenses totaling P19,534.45 incurred for the victim. After a company investigation, petitioner was dismissed on May 12, 1988, for violating company rules, specifically Section 12 of Rule 005-85, due to blatant disregard of procedures causing substantial company damage.
The Labor Arbiter initially ruled for reinstatement without backwages, finding the dismissal too harsh. The NLRC, upon CCBPI’s motion for reconsideration, reversed this decision. It held the dismissal was for just cause and with due process, but awarded separation pay as financial assistance equivalent to one-half month’s pay per year of service, considering petitioner’s long tenure and that the infraction did not reflect his moral character. Petitioner challenged this, arguing he was not properly informed that the investigation included the issue of company damages exceeding P5,000, which under the cited rule triggers dismissal.

ISSUE

Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in upholding the validity of petitioner’s dismissal.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the NLRC resolution. On procedural due process, the Court found petitioner was adequately informed. The investigation stemmed from the accident itself, not merely from driving without a license. He was aware of the severe injury, the resulting hospitalization costs borne by the company, and the insurer’s denial of reimbursement. The termination memorandum explicitly stated the violation and the incurred damages of P19,534.45. Petitioner had the opportunity to explain and present evidence to mitigate his liability during the investigation.
On substantive due process, the dismissal was for a just cause under Article 282 of the Labor Code. Petitioner’s act of driving a company vehicle without a valid license constituted willful disobedience of company rules and traffic laws. This gross negligence directly caused a serious accident, resulting in significant financial loss to the employer when the insurer denied the claim. Such loss, exceeding the P5,000 threshold in the company code, justified the penalty of dismissal. However, in the exercise of equitable compassion and recognizing his eighteen years of unblemished service, the award of separation pay as financial assistance was upheld as a valid measure of social justice, balancing the employer’s right to dismiss with the employee’s long-standing service.