G.R. No. L-64897 February 28, 1985
MANILA DOCTORS HOSPITAL, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (THIRD DIVISION), LABOR ARBITER VIRGINIA SON, GEORGE CANTOR and ANTONIO PEPITO, respondents.

FACTS

Manila Doctors Hospital discovered anomalies involving missing x-ray films. Storeroom clerk Jaime Macatubal admitted guilt and implicated private respondents George Cantor and Antonio Pepito, union officers, along with Virgilio Artificio. The case was referred to the NBI and subsequently to the Manila Fiscal’s Office for qualified theft. The investigating fiscal ordered the suspects’ release, noting the evidence was a mere unsworn certification and that written confessions were disowned. After further investigation, the theft charges against Cantor and Pepito were dropped. However, the hospital had already suspended them and filed an application for clearance to terminate their employment.
The private respondents opposed the application and filed a case for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter decided the case based solely on the submitted position papers, ordering the reinstatement of Cantor, Pepito, and Artificio with full back wages. The NLRC modified this decision, granting clearance to dismiss Artificio due to his sworn admission to the NBI, but upheld the reinstatement of Cantor and Pepito. The hospital petitioned the Supreme Court, challenging the summary procedure and the award of back wages.

ISSUE

Whether the NLRC and Labor Arbiter gravely abused their discretion in rendering judgment based on position papers alone and in awarding back wages to the employees.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding no grave abuse of discretion. The Court upheld the procedural approach, citing Article 221 of the Labor Code, which liberally allows labor officials to ascertain facts speedily without strict adherence to technical rules of evidence, provided due process is observed. The submission of position papers satisfied this requirement.
On the substantive issue, the Court ruled the dismissal was illegal. The hospital failed to prove by substantial evidence that Cantor and Pepito conspired in the theft. Their implication by Macatubal was insufficient, especially since the fiscal’s office had dropped the charges. The preventive suspension was also unjustified, as their continued presence posed no serious threat under Section 4, Rule XIV, Book V of the Labor Code. Consequently, the suspension period should have been paid.
Regarding back wages, the Court applied the prevailing policy of setting a reasonable amount to avoid protracted hearings. It modified the award, ordering the hospital to pay fifty percent (50%) of the back wages from the date of suspension until February 28, 1985. The temporary restraining order was lifted.