G.R. No. 78997 August 31, 1989
VERONICA B. REYES, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and KONG HUA SCHOOL, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Veronica B. Reyes, a teacher at Kong Hua School since 1972, went on maternity leave in August 1982. Due to post-delivery complications, she requested an indefinite leave extension, which the school disapproved. On September 13, 1983, she submitted a letter tendering her resignation, explicitly stating it was “as advised and wished by the administration” on the condition that she would be given priority for re-employment when ready to return to service. She also urgently requested her accrued vacation pay, noting she needed it badly. Two weeks later, her husband, claiming she was incapacitated, signed another resignation letter on her behalf, backdated to October 15, 1982, and collected her vacation pay.
In June 1985, having regained her health, Reyes applied for reinstatement per the school’s alleged promise, but the school refused. She filed a complaint for reinstatement, backwages, and benefits. The Labor Arbiter and the NLRC dismissed her claim, ruling her resignation was voluntary and thus severed the employer-employee relationship, making her ineligible for separation pay or reinstatement.

ISSUE

Whether the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that Reyes voluntarily resigned and was not entitled to separation pay or reinstatement.

RULING

Yes, the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion. The Supreme Court found the resignation was involuntary, procured by the school under coercive circumstances. Reyes’s initial letter clearly indicated the resignation was submitted as advised by the administration, contingent upon a promise of re-employment and driven by the immediate need to collect her vacation pay while ill. This negates voluntariness. The school, unable to legally dismiss her under Article 284 of the Labor Code for an illness not proven prejudicial, effectively inveigled her resignation to avoid paying separation pay for her ten years of service.
The subsequent letter signed by her husband was not binding, as there was no proof she authorized him to waive her re-employment rights or claim to separation pay. The school’s bad faith refusal to re-hire her, despite its promise, constituted illegal dismissal. Consequently, Reyes is entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority and three years’ backwages from her 1985 re-application. If reinstatement is no longer feasible, the school must pay backwages plus separation pay equivalent to one month’s salary per year of service. The resolutions of the NLRC and Labor Arbiter were reversed and set aside.