G.R. No. 211522 , September 04, 2019
J’ MARKETING CORPORATION, ROGELIO U. SOYAO, EVP-GENERAL MANAGER, PEPITO P. ESTRELLAN, KALIBO BRANCH MANAGER, PETITIONERS, VS. FERNANDO S. IGUIZ, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Respondent Fernando S. Iguiz was hired as a driver in September 1995 by petitioner J’ Marketing Corporation (JMC) and was later promoted to collector/credit investigator. On December 11, 2006, JMC found Iguiz short in his remittance by P5,811. Iguiz explained the shortage was due to the amount being lost in a flood from typhoon “Siniang” and tendered payment. JMC suspended him. Subsequently, JMC conducted an audit and discovered, per a February 5, 2007 memorandum from credit supervisor Marlon Sonio, that Iguiz had unremitted collections totaling P15,300 and $29 from 14 customers from April 2005 to December 2006, without issuing corresponding official receipts. JMC later obtained notarized affidavits from these customers dated February 28, 2007. On February 8, 2007, JMC issued a memorandum directing Iguiz to explain the alleged unremitted collections. An administrative investigation was conducted on the same day, resulting in a report signed by Branch Manager Pepito Estrellan and a witness, but not acknowledged by Iguiz. Iguiz received the February 8 memorandum on February 9, 2007. On February 12, 2007, before Iguiz could submit his explanation, he received another memorandum dated February 9, 2007 asking him to sign the investigation report. Iguiz submitted a reply on February 12, 2007, denying the allegations. On the same date, JMC demanded remittance of the amounts. On March 7, 2007, JMC terminated Iguiz’s employment on grounds of dishonesty and breach of trust under Article 282(c) of the Labor Code. Iguiz filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, but the NLRC reversed the decision, finding illegal dismissal and awarding backwages, separation pay, damages, and attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC decision.

ISSUE

Whether or not the appellate court committed reversible error in upholding the finding of the NLRC that Iguiz was illegally dismissed from his employment and is entitled to backwages, separation pay, damages and attorney’s fees.

RULING

The petition lacks merit. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals decision. The dismissal was invalid for failure to comply with procedural due process. JMC did not provide Iguiz a real opportunity to be heard. The notice of charge (February 8, 2007 memorandum) and the notice of termination (March 7, 2007 memorandum) were given, but the requisite hearing or conference was not properly afforded. The administrative investigation on February 8, 2007 was conducted without Iguiz’s participation, and the subsequent memorandum of February 9, 2007 demanding he sign the report was not a substitute for a hearing. Furthermore, the basis for termination was not substantiated by clear and convincing evidence. The audit report and customer affidavits, which were central to the charge, were prepared unilaterally by JMC without giving Iguiz a chance to confront the affidavits or examine the audit findings. The affidavits were notarized on February 28, 2007, after the investigation and the notice to explain, indicating they were not part of the initial evidence presented to Iguiz. Consequently, the dismissal was illegal. Iguiz is entitled to backwages, separation pay in lieu of reinstatement due to strained relations, moral and exemplary damages for the bad faith dismissal and violation of his security of tenure, and attorney’s fees.