G.R. No. 186614 ; February 23, 2011
NATIONWIDE SECURITY AND ALLIED SERVICES, INC., Petitioner, vs. RONALD P. VALDERAMA, Respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Ronald P. Valderama was hired by petitioner Nationwide Security and Allied Services, Inc. as a security guard on April 18, 2002, and was assigned to the Philippine Heart Center (PHC) in Quezon City. He was relieved from his post at PHC on January 30, 2006, and was not given any assignment thereafter. On August 2, 2006, Valderama filed a complaint for constructive dismissal and nonpayment of 13th month pay against the petitioner. The petitioner alleged that Valderama was not dismissed but had voluntarily resigned, citing various infractions and a confrontation with a superior. The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of Valderama, finding constructive dismissal and ordering reinstatement with backwages. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) modified the LA’s decision, declaring that Valderama was neither dismissed nor had he resigned, and thus remained an employee; it ordered him to report back to work and deleted the award of backwages and reinstatement. The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the NLRC and reinstated the LA’s decision, sustaining the finding of constructive dismissal. The CA noted that Valderama was on floating status for more than six months without a new assignment and found the claim of voluntary resignation unsupported, especially since Valderama attended a re-training course after his alleged resignation date. Petitioner appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether or not respondent Ronald P. Valderama was constructively dismissed.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA’s decision, holding that Valderama was constructively dismissed. The Court reiterated that for security guards, a temporary “off-detail” or floating status does not constitute constructive dismissal if it does not exceed six months. However, the employer bears the burden of proving that no posts were available for assignment. In this case, Valderama was not given any assignment for over six months after being relieved, and the petitioner failed to substantiate its claim that he voluntarily resigned or that it had offered him a new post. The Court found the claim of resignation inconsistent with Valderama’s attendance at a re-training course after the alleged resignation date and with his filing of the complaint. The petitioner’s failure to provide a valid reason for the prolonged floating status and to prove available assignments constituted constructive dismissal. The LA’s award of reinstatement and backwages was reinstated.