G.R. No. 145800; January 22, 2003
CENTRAL PANGASINAN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., petitioner, vs. GERONIMA MACARAEG and MARIBETH DE VERA, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Central Pangasinan Electric Cooperative, Inc. is an electric cooperative. Respondents Geronima Macaraeg (cashier) and Maribeth de Vera (teller) were employees at its Area V office. From January 1998 to January 1999, respondent de Vera, with the knowledge and consent of respondent Macaraeg, encashed 211 crossed checks issued by de Vera’s sister, Evelyn Joy Estrada, payable to the cooperative despite no existing obligation. They paid the checks’ full value from the cooperative’s cash collections, credited the checks as part of their daily collection, and deposited them with the cash to the cooperative’s bank account. In January 1999, petitioner discovered several of these checks had been returned for insufficiency of funds. After a confrontation where de Vera admitted the acts, petitioner placed respondents under preventive suspension, required written explanations, and conducted a hearing where they testified with counsel. Petitioner terminated respondents on March 19, 1999, for serious misconduct and breach of trust. Respondents contested their dismissal before the National Conciliation and Mediation Board, and the parties submitted the case to a voluntary arbitrator. The voluntary arbitrator ordered reinstatement and payment of backwages, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the dismissal of respondents Geronima Macaraeg and Maribeth de Vera was valid.

RULING

Yes, the dismissal was valid. The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the Court of Appeals and the voluntary arbitrator. The Court held that respondents were dismissed for a just cause and with due process. Their acts of encashing third-party checks from company funds without permission, in violation of company policy and for over a year, constituted a willful breach of the trust reposed in them as cashier and teller—positions of utmost confidence. The employer had reasonable grounds to believe they committed the acts, which were inimical to the cooperative’s financial interests as they deprived it of the immediate use of its cash collections. Procedural due process was observed as respondents were notified of the charges, given opportunity to explain, heard with counsel, and notified of the termination decision. Their long tenure (22 and 19 years) and lack of prior offenses did not preclude dismissal given the gravity of their breach of trust, which made reinstatement untenable. The issue regarding alleged violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement grievance procedure was deemed moot as the parties voluntarily submitted the case to arbitration.