G.R. No. L-4904 January 30, 1953
CEBU PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY, petitioner, vs. PHILIPPINE LAND-AIR-SEA LABOR UNION, respondent.

FACTS

The petitioner is a government-owned corporation operating a cement factory. The respondent is a registered labor union with members in the company. In 1948, the union had a case (No. 241-V) before the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) against the company. An incidental petition (No. 241-V (2)) was filed on June 2, 1949, seeking the reinstatement of Carlos Flores and other employees allegedly dismissed or suspended without cause. The petition was later limited to Flores. A CIR Commissioner received evidence. On April 27, 1951, the CIR rendered a decision on the entire case, including Flores’s reinstatement. The CIR found that Flores was suspended indefinitely by a division chief after an incident on May 22, 1949, where Flores became drunk during a fiesta, arrived late at work, had a verbal tussle, and was later assaulted by co-employee Porfirio Resaba, who was convicted in a justice of the peace court. The CIR noted Resaba was not penalized by the company, attributing this to union rivalry (Flores was in PLASLU, Resaba in the Cement Workers Union), and concluded injustice was done to Flores. The CIR ordered the company to pay Flores his entire salary from the time of suspension until his reinstatement on July 1, 1950. The company moved for reconsideration, which was denied, prompting this certiorari review.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Industrial Relations erred in ordering the Cebu Portland Cement Company to pay Carlos Flores his back salary for the period of his indefinite suspension.

RULING

The Supreme Court set aside the CIR decision insofar as it ordered payment of back salary to Carlos Flores. The Court found that the CIR’s conclusion of injustice was erroneous. Upon examination of the record, the suspension was justified because Flores arrived late and very drunk at his post, refused orders from co-workers and superiors due to his drunken state (posing a risk to valuable equipment), created trouble, manhandled co-employees, provoked Resaba, and insulted superiors. His indefinite suspension was fully warranted. The company reinstated him on July 1, 1950, without back pay, after Flores apologized and promised not to repeat his actions, and based on the Commissioner’s indication that pay during suspension depended on the company. The company had consistently maintained it would not pay for the suspension period, treating it as punishment. No costs were awarded.