GR 85490; (July, 1992) (Digest)
G.R. No. 85490 July 23, 1992
Club Filipino, Inc., petitioner, vs. Voluntary Arbitrator Jesus C. Sebastian, Club Filipino Employees Association (CLUFEA), Fortunato Gupa, Jr. and Ernesto Lorenzo, respondents.
FACTS
The petitioner, Club Filipino, Inc., terminated the employment of respondents Fortunato Gupa, Jr. and Ernesto Lorenzo. Gupa, Jr., a pin boy, was terminated after an incident on May 20, 1988, where, while under the influence of liquor, he went berserk, broke a mirror and drinking glasses at the employee’s canteen, and assaulted the house officer, Maximo Mercado, who tried to pacify him. The termination notice cited violations of company rules regarding destruction of property, drinking alcoholic beverages on premises, working under the influence of liquor, and assaulting a club official. Ernesto Lorenzo, a waiter, was terminated for habitual absenteeism, tardiness, and compelling a list of missing and unsigned chits, having been suspended several times previously. The respondent union, CLUFEA, filed a notice of strike. The parties agreed to submit the dismissal cases to voluntary arbitrator Jesus Sebastian, who rendered a decision suspending Gupa, Jr. for four months and Lorenzo for two months, instead of upholding their dismissal. Club Filipino filed this petition for certiorari to annul the arbitrator’s award.
ISSUE
Whether the Voluntary Arbitrator committed grave abuse of discretion in merely suspending, rather than dismissing, the employees Fortunato Gupa, Jr. and Ernesto Lorenzo, whose acts constituted valid grounds for dismissal under the Labor Code and the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulled the decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator, and ruled that the dismissal of both employees was for a just cause. The Court found that Gupa, Jr.’s acts of serious misconduct, drunkenness, disorderly and violent behavior, and assaulting a superior constituted just causes for dismissal under Article 282 of the Labor Code. The Court noted petitioner had been lenient with Gupa, Jr. in a previous violation. For Lorenzo, his habitual neglect of duty, absenteeism, and violations of company rules justified termination. The Court held that rewarding such misconduct with re-employment would wreck disciplinary rules. Their dismissal was sustained without payment of separation pay.