GR 225586; (July, 2019) (Digest)
G.R. No. 225586 July 29, 2019
THE PENINSULA MANILA and SONJA VODUSEK, Petitioners vs. EDWIN A. JARA, Respondent
FACTS
Respondent Edwin Jara, a captain waiter at The Peninsula Manila, was dismissed in 2011 following a cash-handling incident on July 22. During his closing shift, Jara discovered a ₱6,500.00 cash overage due to a discrepancy between a sales receipt and other transaction records. He informed his supervisor of the imbalance but later falsely reported that he had reconciled the cash count. To make the records appear balanced, he posted the lower erroneous amount of ₱613.00 instead of the correct ₱7,113.08. Jara did not surrender the excess cash immediately; he kept it in his office locker for two days, only reporting it to the internal auditor on July 25, after his birthday and day-off. The hotel issued a Memorandum to Explain, charging him with dishonesty and falsification.
ISSUE
Was Jara illegally dismissed?
RULING
No, the dismissal was valid. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the NLRC decision. The legal logic centers on loss of trust and confidence, a valid ground for dismissal under Article 296 (formerly 282) of the Labor Code for employees occupying positions of trust. As a captain waiter handling cash and responsible for financial reporting, Jara held such a position. His actions constituted a willful breach of that trust. The Court found that Jara’s conduct—falsifying the tape receipt to conceal the discrepancy, misrepresenting to his supervisor that reconciliation was complete, and unjustifiably delaying the turnover of the substantial cash overage for two days—demonstrated dishonesty and a lack of integrity. These were not mere lapses in judgment but intentional acts that eroded the employer’s confidence. While loss of confidence must be based on clear and established facts to prevent abuse, the records here amply supported the finding of breach. His length of service did not excuse the misconduct; as a senior employee, he was expected to exemplify higher standards of honesty. Therefore, the employer lawfully exercised its prerogative to dismiss him.