GR 69816; (April, 1990) (Digest)
G.R. No. 69816; April 17, 1990
POLICARPIO Y. FAUSTO, petitioner, vs. VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR., as Deputy Minister, Ministry of Labor and Employment and McDERMOTT DUBAI/OCEANIC CONTRACTORS INC., respondents.
FACTS
Policarpio Y. Fausto was employed by McDermott Dubai/Oceanic Contractors, Inc. as a clerk-typist in Saudi Arabia under a contract dated October 23, 1979. Barely two months into his employment, he received an inter-office communication dated December 17, 1979, enclosing an addendum to his employment contract effective January 1, 1980. The addendum, which clarified overtime payment calculations and provided for a roughly 2% salary increase, was presented as a mandatory condition. The communication advised that if Fausto refused to sign, he would be given early contract completion, serving as an official 15-day notice of separation. Fausto refused to sign, believing it prejudicial, and his services were terminated on January 1, 1980.
Fausto filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Regional Director ruled in his favor, ordering reinstatement with full back wages. McDermott appealed, contending the Regional Director lacked jurisdiction and that the termination was justified due to Fausto’s refusal to sign the OEDB-approved addendum. The Deputy Minister of Labor upheld the Regional Director’s jurisdiction but reversed the merits, dismissing Fausto’s complaint. The Deputy Minister found that by refusing the addendum, Fausto had opted for early contract completion, and the termination was for a valid cause.
ISSUE
Whether the Deputy Minister of Labor committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing Fausto’s complaint for illegal dismissal.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the Deputy Minister’s Order. The Court emphasized that its review in certiorari proceedings is limited to determining whether the administrative tribunal acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion. The Deputy Minister’s factual and legal conclusions were found to be without such defect.
On the jurisdictional issue, the Court noted that McDermott had actively participated in the proceedings before the Regional Director without raising the issue, thereby estopping itself from later challenging jurisdiction. On the substantive issue of dismissal, the Court upheld the Deputy Minister’s finding that the termination was for a just cause. The addendum to the contract had been officially approved by the Overseas Employment Development Board (OEDB), the agency tasked with securing the best terms for overseas workers. The Court agreed with the Solicitor General’s observation that the addendum secured a 2% salary increase for Fausto and thus did not impair his contractual obligations unreasonably but enhanced his employment. Consequently, Fausto had no valid reason to refuse the terms, and his refusal justified the termination of his employment.