G.R. No. 154503; February 29, 2008
UNIWIDE SALES WAREHOUSE CLUB and VIVIAN M. APDUHAN, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and AMALIA P. KAWADA, respondents.

FACTS

Amalia Kawada was a Full Assistant Store Manager at Uniwide. In 1998, management issued several memoranda charging her with various infractions, including mismanagement of inventory, selling damaged goods at unreasonable prices, and other irregularities. Kawada submitted written explanations in response. The situation escalated on July 31, 1998, when Kawada presented a medical certificate to return to work after a sick leave. The certificate erroneously bore the surname of the company nurse. Store Manager Vivian Apduhan allegedly shouted at Kawada, refused to accept the certificate, and prevented her from working. Kawada claimed this confrontation caused her to collapse and suffer injuries.
On August 2, 1998, Uniwide issued a notice for Kawada to attend a hearing on August 12 regarding the charges against her. However, on August 3, 1998, Kawada preemptively filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with the Labor Arbiter. Uniwide subsequently sent a letter on August 8 ordering her to return to work or be deemed to have abandoned her job. After she did not report, Uniwide issued a termination memorandum on September 1, 1998, dismissing her for loss of trust and confidence and abandonment.

ISSUE

Whether Kawada was illegally dismissed.

RULING

Yes, Kawada was illegally dismissed. The Supreme Court ruled that Uniwide failed to prove a just cause for termination and violated due process. On the substantive aspect, the charges of loss of trust and confidence were not supported by substantial evidence. Kawada held a managerial position, but the alleged acts of mismanagement and irregularities were not proven with clear and convincing evidence. Her detailed written explanations countered the accusations. The Court found the charges appeared to be a mere afterthought to justify her dismissal following the hostile July 31 incident.
Regarding abandonment, the Court held it was not proven. Abandonment requires a clear, deliberate, and unjustified refusal to resume work. Kawada’s filing of the illegal dismissal complaint on August 3 was a proactive assertion of her rights, negating any intention to abandon her job. Her failure to attend the August 12 hearing and report for work was justified by the prior filing of her case and the antagonistic work environment created by Apduhan’s actions. Procedurally, the notice of hearing sent after she had already filed her complaint was invalid. The termination for abandonment was thus unlawful. Consequently, Kawada was reinstated and awarded full backwages.