GR 143171; (September, 2004) (Digest)
G.R. No. 143171; September 21, 2004
PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY, ET AL., petitioners, vs. ARTURO RAYMUNDO TOLENTINO, respondent.
FACTS
Respondent Arturo Tolentino was a 23-year employee of PLDT, holding the position of Division Manager. In 1995, a subordinate, Jonathan de Rivera, was dismissed after being found involved in an anomalous “internal arrangement” regarding a land acquisition, where a portion of the purchase price was to be personally delivered to him. After his dismissal, de Rivera submitted a sworn statement implicating Tolentino as the mastermind behind the scheme. Tolentino denied the allegation, pointing out his limited approval authority for land valued only below ₱200,000. PLDT dismissed Tolentino for loss of trust and confidence without granting his request for a formal hearing.
Tolentino filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in his favor, finding PLDT failed to substantiate the charges. The NLRC reversed, holding that as a managerial employee, loss of trust was sufficient for dismissal. The Court of Appeals reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s decision, prompting PLDT’s appeal to the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that Tolentino’s dismissal was not founded on clearly established facts sufficient to warrant separation.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals with modification. While loss of trust and confidence is a valid ground for dismissing a managerial employee, it must be substantial and founded on clearly established facts. The employer bears the burden of proving this by substantial evidence. The Court found PLDT’s evidence insufficient. The sole basis for dismissal was the sworn statement of de Rivera, a dismissed employee, which was uncorroborated and self-serving. Tolentino’s denial and his demonstration of limited authority created reasonable doubt regarding his participation.
The right of management to dismiss must be balanced with the employee’s constitutional right to security of tenure. The alleged loss of confidence was not convincingly established. Therefore, Tolentino’s dismissal was illegal. The Court ordered reinstatement with full backwages but deleted the awards for moral and exemplary damages, finding no bad faith in the dismissal. Attorney’s fees were reduced to 5% of the monetary award.