G.R. No. 80600 March 21, 1990
PHILIPPINE TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and BOBBY TORIBIANO, respondents.

FACTS

Private respondent Bobby Toribiano was employed by petitioner PT&T as a collector, counter-clerk, and long distance operator at its General Santos City branch. On August 24, 1985, he was terminated for allegedly tampering with a vodex receipt. The audit revealed a discrepancy where the original receipt issued to a customer on July 26, 1985, showed an amount of P113.25, while the duplicate copy reflected only P41.15, creating a difference of P72.10. PT&T contended this act constituted willful defalcation and a breach of trust, justifying dismissal.
Toribiano defended himself by explaining that on the day in question, he was alone in the office, simultaneously attending to multiple customers for telegram filings and long-distance calls. In the haste and pressure of his manifold duties, he forgot to use a carbon paper for the duplicate receipt. When he later summarized the day’s receipts and found the duplicate blank, he could not recall the exact amount and estimated P41.15. He asserted the error was due to inadvertence, not malicious intent, and that he had previously brought his excessive workload to management’s attention without corrective action.

ISSUE

Whether the dismissal of Bobby Toribiano was valid and for a just cause.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the dismissal was not valid. It affirmed the NLRC’s decision ordering reinstatement without backwages but modified it by deleting the monetary awards for holiday pay, rest day pay, and incentive leave pay. The Court upheld the Labor Arbiter’s factual findings, which are accorded respect and finality when supported by evidence, as they are in a better position to assess credibility. The labor arbiter found Toribiano’s explanation credible, noting he was performing dual functions under stressful conditions, and the mistake was a result of simple negligence.
The Court emphasized that even assuming a valid ground existed, the penalty of dismissal was too harsh and disproportionate to the minor infraction. This was Toribiano’s first offense in seven years of satisfactory service, and the amount involved was only P72.10, which bolstered his claim of lack of fraudulent intent. The loss of trust and confidence must be founded on willful breach, not mere error or negligence. On the ancillary monetary claims, the Court accepted evidence presented on appeal by PT&T proving these benefits had already been paid or were not due, holding that technical rules of evidence should not strictly apply in labor proceedings to serve the interests of due process and fairness.