G.R. No. 118159 April 15, 1998
JONERI ESCOBIN, et al., petitioners,

vs.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, PEFTOK INTEGRATED SERVICES, INC., TEODOLFO E. SANTOS, and/or UP-NDC BASILAN PLANTATIONS, INC., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners, security guards employed by respondent PEFTOK Integrated Security Services, Inc. and assigned to UP-NDC Basilan Plantations, Inc., filed a complaint for illegal termination/constructive dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of petitioners, declaring their dismissal illegal for lack of just cause and ordering the payment of backwages, separation pay, attorney’s fees, and litigation expenses. On appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision. The NLRC found that petitioners were validly dismissed for willful disobedience and/or abandonment. It held that petitioners’ refusal to comply with a lawful transfer order from Basilan to Zamboanga City, after their security services contract at the plantation was not renewed, constituted willful disobedience. The NLRC also found that petitioners’ failure to report to the new assignment indicated abandonment. Petitioners filed this petition for certiorari assailing the NLRC Resolutions.

ISSUE

Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in reversing the Labor Arbiter’s decision and ruling that petitioners were validly dismissed for willful disobedience and/or abandonment.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed the NLRC Resolutions, and reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s decision with modification regarding attorney’s fees. The Court held that the NLRC gravely abused its discretion. For willful disobedience to be a valid cause for dismissal, the employer must prove that the order violated was (1) reasonable and lawful, (2) sufficiently known to the employee, and (3) connected with the employee’s duties. The transfer order in this case was not shown to be reasonable and lawful. The order was a reaction to the non-renewal of the security services contract in Basilan, and the new assignment in Zamboanga City was not a mere transfer but a completely new employment arrangement with different terms and conditions, including a lower salary rate. Furthermore, petitioners immediately filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, which negated any finding of abandonment, as abandonment requires a clear, deliberate, and unjustified refusal to resume employment coupled with a lack of intention to return. The Court also deleted the award of attorney’s fees for lack of factual and legal basis, as the Labor Arbiter failed to justify its grant.