G.R. No. 163872 , December 21, 2009
RTG CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND/OR ROLITO GO/RUSSET CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, PETITIONERS, VS. ROBERTO FACTO, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Respondent Roberto Facto was employed by petitioner RTG Construction, Inc. (later renamed Russet Construction and Development Corporation) in March 1982. During his employment, he was suspended on several occasions between April 1997 and May 1998 for various infractions. On June 7, 2000, he received a memorandum suspending him for 14 days for reporting to work under the influence of alcohol on June 3, 2000, with a warning that repetition would cause dismissal. On August 10, 2000, he received another memorandum terminating his employment effective immediately, citing a repetition of the same offense allegedly committed on August 9, 2000. Facto filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, alleging lack of just cause and denial of due process. The Labor Arbiter ruled in his favor, ordering reinstatement with backwages and other monetary awards. The NLRC affirmed this decision. On certiorari, the Court of Appeals modified the ruling, declaring the dismissal legal but awarding backwages, 13th month pay, service incentive leave pay, and attorney’s fees due to procedural due process violations. Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court, contesting the findings on due process and the monetary awards.

ISSUE

Whether the dismissal of respondent Roberto Facto was legal and whether the monetary awards granted by the Court of Appeals were proper.

RULING

The Supreme Court PARTLY GRANTED the petition. It upheld the legality of the dismissal, finding it was for a just cause (repetition of offense after warning). However, it found that petitioners failed to comply with procedural due process requirements. Specifically, the employer did not furnish Facto with the required first written notice specifying the grounds for termination and giving him a reasonable opportunity to explain his side regarding the August 9, 2000 incident, nor was he afforded a hearing or conference. Consequently, while the dismissal was substantively valid, the procedural defect warranted an award of nominal damages in lieu of backwages. The Court modified the CA Decision by deleting the award of backwages and ordering petitioners to pay respondent nominal damages of P30,000.00. The awards for service incentive leave pay, 13th month pay, and attorney’s fees were affirmed, as these were based on lawful claims accruing prior to dismissal and for the unlawful withholding of wages, respectively.