G.R. No. L-51578. May 29, 1984.
NEW FRONTIER MINES, INC., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and CRISANTO H. BRIONES, respondents.

FACTS

Crisanto H. Briones was employed by New Frontier Mines, Inc., eventually promoted to accountant and assigned as chief accountant and administrative officer at its isolated chromite project in Lagonoy, Camarines Sur. His multifarious duties, including acting as cashier, paymaster, and operations manager in the incumbent’s absence, classified him as a managerial employee. From June to December 1976, his performance became controversial. The company charged him with cash accountabilities, including a shortage initially found to be P3,386.87 from an on-the-spot check, and alleged illicit relations and misconduct. On January 5, 1977, company officials directed him to revise his cash reports. Briones submitted revised accounts on January 15, 1977, and thereafter did not report for work until June 15, 1977, claiming he wanted to give an external auditor a free hand and had to attend to his sick wife.
The company disputed Briones’ claim of having filed a formal leave of absence. No documentary evidence, such as a leave application or approval, was presented. The general manager stated Briones had failed to report without the company’s knowledge or consent. After Briones wrote in September 1977 inquiring about his status, the vice-president replied in October, informing him of a net shortage in his accounts and that he was considered resigned due to his failure to report for work since January 15 without permission. Briones filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.

ISSUE

Whether the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in affirming the Labor Arbiter’s decision ordering the reinstatement with backwages of Crisanto H. Briones.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the NLRC decision. The Court held that the Labor Arbiter and the affirming Commissioners acted with grave abuse of discretion. The Labor Arbiter’s finding that Briones filed a leave of absence was based merely on a “strong feeling” and assumptions, unsupported by evidence. The conduct and circumstances demonstrated no such leave was filed. As a managerial employee, Briones’ dismissal was justified on two grounds under applicable policy instructions: loss of confidence and abandonment of work. His prolonged absence without official leave constituted abandonment. Furthermore, his cash accountability issues provided a basis for loss of confidence. Therefore, the order for reinstatement with backwages was devoid of legal justification. However, as a matter of compassionate justice, the Court ordered the petitioner to pay Briones three months’ separation pay, computed at his last salary rate of P1,200 per month for his years of service (1974-1976). The company’s petition was not dismissed for delay, as the Court’s heavy caseload affected deliberation schedules.