G.R. No. 168421; June 8, 2007
JENNIFER FABELLO PASAMBA, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL., AND ST. LUKE’S MEDICAL CENTER INC., ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Jennifer Fabello Pasamba was a probationary staff nurse at St. Luke’s Medical Center (SLMC). A complaint was filed against her by Dr. Pacita Lopez, attaching a letter from a patient’s mother, Hazel Cabales, alleging that Pasamba made slanderous remarks questioning Dr. Lopez’s competence and age. SLMC required Pasamba to explain and conducted a hearing where Cabales was present. Pasamba, through counsel, denied the allegations, claiming Cabales fabricated the story after being barred from a restricted hospital area.
SLMC subsequently found Pasamba guilty of violating the company Code of Discipline against slanderous utterances and terminated her employment. Pasamba filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, submitting affidavits from co-workers and former patients stating they never heard her disparage Dr. Lopez. The Labor Arbiter dismissed her complaint, finding the dismissal valid. This decision was affirmed by the NLRC and the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the NLRC’s ruling that petitioner’s dismissal from her probationary employment was valid.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the dismissal. The legal logic centered on the nature of probationary employment and the sufficiency of the grounds for termination. A probationary employee may be dismissed for failure to meet reasonable standards made known at the time of engagement. SLMC’s Code of Discipline, which prohibits slanderous utterances, was communicated to Pasamba, establishing the standard of conduct.
The Court upheld the factual findings of the lower tribunals that Pasamba committed the slanderous act. It ruled that the positive identification by Cabales, who had no proven ill motive to lie, carried more weight than the general denials and negative testimonies presented by Pasamba’s witnesses. The requirement of due process was satisfied as Pasamba was given notice, an opportunity to explain, and a hearing where she could confront her accuser. Consequently, her termination was based on a just cause—violation of company rules—and effected with procedural due process. Her status as a probationary employee who failed to meet the prescribed standards of conduct justified her dismissal.