G.R. No. 123810 - CONSOLIDATED RURAL BANK (CAGAYAN VALLEY), INC., VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND ANTONIA L. SANCHEZ.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, be it: RESOLVED, as it is hereby RESOLVED, that Mrs. Antonia L Sanchez be dismissed for cause effective August 07, 1993 x x x x On 10 January 1994 private respondnet sued CONSOLBANK for illegal dismissal with prayer for reinstatement, backwages and other benefits as well as P500,000.00 in damages. In his decision dated 22 July 1994 the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of private respondent thus- WHEREFORE x x x we find complainant illegally and unjustly dismissed and she should be reinstated to her former or substantially equivalent position without loss of seniority rights with full backwages and other benefits which she could have enjoyed had she not been illegally dismissed, computed as of July 30, 1994 as follows: P69,700.00 Basic Pay including 13th month pay (August 1992 to July 31, 1994) P4, 380.00 COLA for one year (365 days x 12 mos) P18,000.00 Gasoline allowance (P1,500 x 12 mos) P14,400.00 Car allowance (P1,200 x 12 mos) P12,000.00 Additional representation allowance (P1,000.00 x 12 mos) and P2,500.00 Clothing allowance for one year __________________ P120,980.00 Total Respondent is likewise ordered to pay complainant P500,000.00 as moral damages plus ten percent attorneys fees of the total monetary award. In case reinstatement is no longer feasible, complainant is given the option to be paid separation pay in the total amount of P148,830.00 (P6,765.00 x 22) for her twenty years of service in addition to her backwages or a total amount of P269,810.00, in lieu of reinstatement x x x x The Labor Arbiter found that private respondent could not be considered guilty of lack of diligence, gross negligence or of having violated bank policies because she merely referred the USTWs to her superiors at the Head Office who were the ones who accepted the checks and deposited them. The alleged warning not to accept the checks given by the Head Offices General Manager Ramon T. Cocson to private respondent was not given credence because his subsequent actions revealed his knowledge of the acceptance and deposit of the USTWs by the Treasury Department of the Head Office itself. In addition to finding private respondents dismissal as tainted with bad faith because she was deliberately made a sacrificial lamb or scapegoat of the Head Offices General manager and Treasurer who were meted relatively light penalties, the Labor Arbiter ruled that private respondent was denied due process as she was neither informed of petitioners intention to dismiss her nor given the opportunity to defend herself. CONSOLBANK appealed to the NLRC which affirmed the conclusions of the Labor Arbiter that no valid cause existed for private respondents dismissal and that she was denied due process. [5] A subsequent motion for reconsideration by CONSOLBANK was similarly denied in the second questioned resolution dated 30 January 1996; [6] hence, this petition. Petitioner assails the questioned resolutions of the NLRC on both procedura