G.R. No. 185058 , November 09, 2015
JOVITA S. MANALO, PETITIONER, VS. ATENEO DE NAGA UNIVERSITY, FR. JOEL TABORA AND MR. EDWIN BERNAL, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Jovita S. Manalo was a regular full-time faculty member of the Accountancy Department of Ateneo de Naga University’s College of Commerce, employed since June 3, 1993. She also served as a part-time Manager of the Ateneo de Naga Multi-Purpose Cooperative. During her stint as Cooperative Manager, she came into conflict with respondent Edwin Bernal, Dean of the College of Commerce. Bernal charged Manalo with various offenses related to the Cooperative’s management before its Board of Directors, which initially dismissed her. The dismissal was later recalled by the Cooperative’s General Assembly. Subsequently, Bernal recommended Manalo’s termination from the University to respondent Fr. Joel Tabora, the University President, on grounds of serious business malpractice, dishonesty, and questionable integrity. A Grievance Committee constituted by Fr. Tabora found Manalo guilty and recommended her dismissal. However, Fr. Tabora, exercising his final authority, opted to transfer Manalo to teach Economics in the Department of Social Sciences of the College of Arts and Science instead of dismissing her. Alleging that this transfer constituted constructive dismissal, Manalo filed a Complaint on April 3, 2000. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Manalo, finding constructive dismissal and ordering her reinstatement to the Accountancy Department with backwages and attorney’s fees. The National Labor Relations Commission affirmed this decision. The Court of Appeals reversed the rulings, dismissing Manalo’s Complaint, and later denied her Motion for Reconsideration.

ISSUE

1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in entertaining alternative findings to those made by the Labor Arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission.
2. Whether the transfer of petitioner Jovita S. Manalo from teaching Accountancy subjects to Economics subjects constituted constructive dismissal.

RULING

1. The Court of Appeals did not err. Judicial review of National Labor Relations Commission decisions is through a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, confined to issues of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion. The Court of Appeals has the authority to examine whether the National Labor Relations Commission acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion. In this case, the Court of Appeals found that the National Labor Relations Commission and the Labor Arbiter committed grave abuse of discretion by disregarding evidence and misapplying the concept of constructive dismissal.
2. The transfer did not constitute constructive dismissal. Constructive dismissal exists when an act of clear discrimination, insensibility, or disdain by an employer renders the employee’s continued work intolerable, forcing resignation. The employer’s actions must be unjustified and lack a valid ground. In this case, Manalo’s transfer was a valid exercise of management prerogative, warranted by her violation of ethical standards as a Certified Public Accountant and faculty member. The charges against her—including fraud in issuing official receipts, unauthorized cash advances, and issuance of bouncing checks—related to dishonesty and integrity, which are fundamental ethical requirements for an accountancy professional and educator. Her transfer to the Economics Department, where she had previously taught subjects, was a reasonable precautionary measure to protect the University’s integrity and its students. It did not involve a demotion in rank or a diminution in pay, benefits, or privileges. Therefore, no constructive dismissal occurred. The Petition was denied, and the Court of Appeals’ Decision and Resolution were affirmed.