GR 201396; (September, 2019) (Digest)
G.R. No. 201396, September 11, 2019
Yushi Kondo, Petitioner, vs. Toyota Boshoku (Phils.) Corporation, Mamoru Matsunaga, Kazuki Miura, and Joselito Ledesma, Respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Yushi Kondo, a Japanese citizen, was hired by respondent Toyota Boshoku Philippines Corporation (Toyota) on September 26, 2007, as Assistant General Manager for Marketing, Procurement and Accounting, with a net monthly salary of P90,000.00 and benefits including a service car and driver. After a change in company presidency, petitioner was transferred to the Production Control, Technical Development and Special Project department as Assistant Manager on July 1, 2008. Subsequently, on September 1, 2008, he was notified of the withdrawal of his service car and driver, and the driver’s services were terminated on October 13, 2008. Petitioner, unable to report for work, considered himself constructively dismissed and filed a complaint for constructive dismissal, illegal diminution of benefits, illegal transfer, harassment, and discrimination. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of petitioner, finding constructive dismissal and ordering reinstatement with backwages and damages. The NLRC reversed this decision, dismissing the complaint, and the Court of Appeals denied petitioner’s petition for certiorari, upholding the NLRC’s findings.
ISSUE
Whether or not petitioner Yushi Kondo was constructively dismissed from his employment.
RULING
No, the Supreme Court ruled that petitioner was not constructively dismissed. The Court reiterated that the employee bears the burden of proving dismissal by substantial evidence. Petitioner failed to establish that respondents committed an overt or positive act of dismissal or made his working conditions so intolerable that he was forced to resign. The withdrawal of the service car and driver was justified by Toyota’s claim that these were temporary benefits for one year, and the driver’s employment contract had expired. The transfer to another department was a valid exercise of management prerogative, as his rank and salary remained the same. Petitioner’s claim of constructive dismissal was based on unsubstantiated allegations and his own perception, which is insufficient to prove illegal dismissal. The Court affirmed the decisions of the NLRC and the Court of Appeals dismissing the complaint.