GR 143998; (April, 2006) (Digest)
G.R. No. 143998. April 29, 2006.
MERCURY DRUG CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. ARACELI DOMINGO, RESPONDENT.
FACTS
Respondent Araceli Domingo, a cashier at Mercury Drug’s Cubao-Romulo branch, was preventively suspended on June 10, 1992, after being accused of leaking confidential information to her husband, a former employee then working for a competitor. During a confrontation, a company officer made hostile remarks, including urging her to resign. A Special Investigating Committee was formed. While the investigation was pending, the company reinstated her salary but kept her suspended. The committee eventually found her innocent, dropped all charges, and lifted the suspension.
The company, however, refused to reinstate Domingo to her former position, claiming it was already filled. She was ordered to report to either the Divisoria or Baclaran branch, asserting that animosity existed at her old branch. She refused this transfer, viewing it as punitive for filing a complaint. A year later, in August 1994, she was ordered to report to the San Juan branch. Domingo filed a complaint for illegal suspension and constructive dismissal.
ISSUE
Whether the employer’s act of transferring the employee to a different branch after being exonerated from charges constitutes illegal constructive dismissal.
RULING
Yes, the transfer constituted illegal constructive dismissal. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ ruling, which reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s decision with modifications. The legal logic centers on the employer’s burden of proof for justifying a transfer. Management prerogative includes the right to transfer employees, but it must be exercised in good faith and without grave abuse of discretion. The transfer must not be unreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial, nor involve a demotion or diminution of benefits.
Here, Mercury Drug failed to discharge this burden. The transfer orders were issued in bad faith, intended to harass Domingo for pursuing her complaint. The company’s claim of animosity at the original branch was a bare assertion, unsupported by substantial evidence. The hostile remarks during the initial confrontation further evidenced ill will. Since the transfer was unreasonable and prejudicial, it amounted to constructive dismissal. The Court, however, reduced the awarded moral and exemplary damages from P50,000 each to P20,000 each, finding the original amounts excessive. Reinstatement was ordered, but with the alternative of separation pay given the case’s protracted litigation.