G.R. No. 219059, February 12, 2020
Gaudioso Iso, Jr. and Joel Tolentino, Petitioners, vs. Salcon Power Corporation (now SPC Power Corporation) and Dennis Villareal, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners Gaudioso Iso, Jr. and Joel Tolentino were union officers of the Salcon Power Independent Union (SPIU). After SPIU won a certification election, respondents refused to bargain and filed a petition to cancel SPIU’s union registration. On May 27, 2009, petitioners called a press conference with Dr. Giovanni Tapang. A news article was published in Sun Star Cebu on May 29, 2009, quoting petitioners as alleging that respondent SPC Power Corporation profited roughly P738 million over 15 years from excess payments from the National Power Corporation, which should be refunded to consumers, and that this “silent profit” could reach billions. Respondents filed criminal and civil cases for libel against petitioners and Dr. Tapang. Respondents also issued show-cause notices to petitioners, charging them with serious misconduct, dishonesty, breach of trust, and serious disobedience. After hearings, petitioners were found guilty and dismissed on April 5, 2010. Petitioners filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter found the dismissal valid, ruling petitioners committed serious misconduct by making malicious imputations unrelated to collective bargaining. The NLRC affirmed the decision. The Court of Appeals, in consolidated petitions, denied petitioners’ certiorari petition and affirmed the NLRC, holding that libel constitutes serious misconduct warranting dismissal and that Iso’s separate monetary claims were moot due to his valid termination.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the validity of petitioners’ dismissal from employment.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision. The Court held that the dismissal was for a just cause under Article 297 (formerly Article 282) of the Labor Code. The elements for a valid dismissal—just or authorized cause and observance of procedural due process—were present. Substantially, petitioners committed serious misconduct. The libelous statements, published in a newspaper, were false, malicious, and unrelated to their duties as union officers or to legitimate union activities. These statements constituted a willful breach of the trust reposed in them by their employer. Procedurally, petitioners were accorded due process: they were given written notices specifying the charges, a reasonable opportunity to answer and defend themselves with the assistance of counsel, and a written notice of termination stating the grounds. The penalty of dismissal was commensurate to the offense, as libel is a serious act of misconduct that erodes trust. The Court found no grave abuse of discretion in the NLRC’s ruling, which was supported by substantial evidence, including the finding of probable cause for libel by the prosecutor and the trial court. Consequently, Iso’s monetary claims contingent upon continued employment were correctly deemed moot.