GR 92742; (May, 1991) (Digest)
G.R. No. 92742 ; May 6, 1991
Philippine Commercial International Bank, petitioner, vs. Nilda S. Jacinto and National Labor Relations Commission, respondents.
FACTS
Private respondent Nilda S. Jacinto, a customer relation assistant (CRA) at PCI Bank’s NAIA Branch, was verbally requested by the branch OIC to assume the duties of the absent FX Clerk on April 30, 1984. The following day, a loss of travelers checks amounting to P25,325.00, which were under her custody that day, was discovered. After an investigation, the bank found Jacinto guilty of gross negligence. She was meted a ten-day suspension without pay and was required to reimburse the full amount of the loss through salary and bonus deductions. She was also transferred to another branch.
Jacinto filed a complaint with the NLRC challenging the penalties. The Labor Arbiter ruled in her favor, ordering the bank to erase the suspension from her record, refund all deductions, and reinstate her to her former assignment. The NLRC affirmed the decision but upheld the transfer as a management prerogative. The bank elevated the case to the Supreme Court via certiorari.
ISSUE
Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in absolving Jacinto of gross negligence and in disallowing the penalties imposed by the bank.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the NLRC. The Court held that Jacinto was grossly negligent in the performance of her duties as FX Clerk. The lack of a formal written designation did not excuse her from the responsibilities she voluntarily assumed. The evidence showed she failed to perform standard procedures: the proof sheet she claimed to have prepared was missing, she did not microfilm the checks, and she did not formally endorse the FX cash box to the next shift, despite knowing its lock was defective. An employee entrusted with responsibility must perform with due care; failure renders them liable for resulting losses.
Consequently, the ten-day suspension was deemed proper. However, the Court modified the penalty of full reimbursement, finding it too harsh. The bank contributed to the loss by failing to repair the defective lock and provide adequate security. Thus, applying the principle of contributory negligence, Jacinto was ordered to reimburse only one-half (½) of the lost amount through payroll deductions. The complaint was dismissed subject to this modified indemnity.