G.R. No. 175869. April 18, 2016.
ROBINA FARMS CEBU/UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. ELIZABETH VILLA, Respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Elizabeth Villa was employed as a sales clerk by petitioner Robina Farms Cebu/Universal Robina Corporation since August 1981. In late 2001, she applied for the company’s special retirement program. On March 2, 2002, she received a memorandum requiring her to explain her failure to issue invoices for unhatched eggs for January to February 2002. She explained that the delivery receipts were delayed and overlooked. Despite this, she was suspended for 10 days from March 8 to 19, 2002. Upon reporting back to work, she was advised to cease working because her retirement application had been approved. She was later informed that her application was disapproved and was advised to tender her resignation with a request for financial assistance instead. When she manifested her intention to return to work, the petitioner confiscated her gate pass, prevented her from entering the company premises, and replaced her with another employee. Villa filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, among other claims.
The Labor Arbiter found that Villa was not dismissed but ordered her reinstatement without backwages, awarding only service incentive leave pay. Both parties appealed to the NLRC. The NLRC dismissed the petitioner’s appeal due to a defective verification and certificate of non-forum shopping, and granted Villa’s appeal, reversing the Labor Arbiter’s decision. The NLRC declared Villa illegally dismissed, ordering her reinstatement with full backwages, service incentive leave pay, overtime pay, and attorney’s fees. The petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied. The petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which dismissed the petition and affirmed the NLRC decision with modification, absolving the individual petitioner Lily Ngochua from liability.

ISSUE

1. Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petitioner’s appeal on a technicality (lack of proper verification) and in not resolving it on the merits.
2. Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that Villa was illegally dismissed.
3. Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in awarding backwages, service incentive leave pay, overtime pay, and attorney’s fees.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals.
1. On the procedural issue: The NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petitioner’s appeal for lack of proper verification. The verification attached to the appeal memorandum was signed by Florabeth P. Zanoria, but the petitioner failed to present proof that she was authorized to sign and file the appeal on behalf of the corporation. The belated submission of a secretary’s certificate and a special power of attorney did not cure this fatal defect. The requirement of verification is not a mere technicality but is essential to secure an assurance that the allegations in the pleading are true and correct. The NLRC correctly applied the rules of procedure.
2. On the substantive issue of illegal dismissal: The NLRC correctly found that Villa was illegally dismissed. The facts established that after serving her suspension, Villa was prevented from returning to work. The advice for her to resign and request financial assistance, coupled with the confiscation of her gate pass, her replacement, and the prevention of her entry into the company premises, constituted a constructive dismissal. Dismissal requires just or authorized cause and due process. The petitioner failed to prove a valid cause for termination. Villa’s act of applying for retirement, which was subject to management approval, did not indicate a voluntary intent to sever employment. The employer’s actions unequivocally showed a dismissal without cause.
3. On the awards: The awards of backwages, service incentive leave pay, and attorney’s fees were proper consequences of the illegal dismissal. However, the award of overtime pay was deleted. The Labor Arbiter originally denied the overtime pay claim due to Villa’s failure to adduce evidence of actual overtime work performed. The NLRC’s award thereof was a reversible error, as the burden of proof for overtime pay lies with the employee, and Villa did not substantiate her claim. The Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the deletion of this award. The reinstatement order stands, and the monetary awards are affirmed except for the overtime pay.
DISPOSITIVE:
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated September 27, 2006, is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION that the award of overtime pay is DELETED. Petitioner Robina Farms Cebu/Universal Robina Corporation is ordered to reinstate respondent Elizabeth Villa to her former position without loss of seniority rights and to pay her backwages, service incentive leave pay, and attorney’s fees as computed by the NLRC, minus the overtime pay.