G.R. No. L-29283. March 31, 1976.
General Electric Co. (P.I.) Employees Association and Enrique Soriano, petitioners, vs. Court of Industrial Relations, W. A. Powers, Rodolfo Reyes, Alicio Alvarez and General Electric Co. (P.I.) Inc., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Enrique Soriano was employed by respondent General Electric Co. (P.I.) Inc. from 1938 until his dismissal in July 1960, having risen to the position of supervisor for General Accounting. The petitioners filed an unfair labor practice complaint before the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR), alleging that Soriano’s dismissal was discriminatory and motivated by his active union membership and militant activities, particularly as chairman of the union’s Committee on Implementation. They contended the stated grounds of dishonesty and inefficiency were mere pretexts.
The respondent company defended the dismissal as being for just cause. It cited specific alleged acts of dishonesty and inefficiency by Soriano, including entering fictitious figures in a reconciliation statement to cover up a three-centavo error, improperly transferring accounts against written instructions, and making mistakes in conversion rates and in the aging of accounts in financial statements dating back to 1955-1957.

ISSUE

The dominant issue is whether the dismissal of Enrique Soriano was for a just and valid cause or whether it constituted unfair labor practice, being in retaliation for his union activities.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, finding that Soriano’s dismissal constituted unfair labor practice. The Court’s legal logic centered on the insufficiency and pretextual nature of the company’s charges when weighed against Soriano’s long and previously commended service and his evident union activism.
The Court scrutinized the evidence and found the charges of dishonesty and inefficiency to be flimsy and unsubstantiated. It noted that Soriano had received merit awards throughout his 22-year career, and the alleged serious accounting mistakes from 1955-1957 were not acted upon by the company until 1960, coinciding with his heightened union role. This timing belied the company’s claim that the dismissal was solely for cause. The Court gave credence to the trial judge’s findings, which were based on direct observation of witnesses, and found conclusive proof of Soriano’s militant union activities in the record, including a 1958 letter identifying him as the head of the union’s Committee on Implementation.
Therefore, the company failed to discharge its burden of proving a just cause for dismissal. The real reason was Soriano’s union activities, which is prohibited under the Industrial Peace Act. The CIR en banc resolution was set aside, and the trial judge’s decision was reinstated. Since Soriano had died during the pendency of the case, reinstatement was impossible. Following precedent, the Court awarded his heirs back wages equivalent to five years’ pay based on his last salary rate, without deduction.