GR 72779; (March, 1990) (Digest)
G.R. No. 72779 March 21, 1990
RUBBERWORLD (PHILS.), INC., and K.P. YAO, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, and NELSON E. ESCOTO, respondents.
FACTS
Nelson Escoto worked for Rubberworld from 1973 to 1979, after which he voluntarily resigned. He was re-hired on January 10, 1983, under a six-month probationary contract stipulating automatic termination upon expiry and allowing earlier dismissal for failure to meet standards or for just causes. Five days before the contract’s expiration, Rubberworld sent him a notice, which he refused to accept, stating his services would end due to failure to meet required work performance standards. Escoto filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, finding the dismissal justified under the contract and due to Escoto’s commission of several offenses, including absenteeism and tampering with machinery. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed this decision, ruling Escoto should be considered a regular employee given his prior six-year service and that his dismissal was illegal for lack of due process and insufficient proof of failure to qualify. Rubberworld filed this petition for certiorari.
ISSUE
Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that Escoto was illegally dismissed.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reinstating the Labor Arbiter’s decision but with modification. The Court held that the existence of a just cause for dismissal, established by substantial evidence during the proceedings, validates the termination even if the employer failed to provide prior notice and hearing. The Labor Arbiter correctly found that Escoto committed offenses constituting just cause under the Labor Code. The NLRC’s focus solely on the procedural lapse was erroneous.
Applying the Wenphil doctrine, the Court ruled that while the dismissal for just cause is sustained, the employer must be sanctioned for its failure to observe due process prior to termination. Consequently, the termination is upheld, but Rubberworld is ordered to pay Escoto indemnity in the amount of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) for its procedural omission. The decision emphasizes that just cause, once proven, is not vitiated by a lack of pre-termination procedure, though the employer remains liable for indemnity for such lapse.