G.R. No. 226244 - ANNIEBEL B. YONZON, VS. COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILIPPINES, INC..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, Yonzon is not entitled to her money claims and for damages. Carranza and Villa cannot also be held liable as corporate employees absent any proof that they acted maliciously or in bad faith. [23] Ruling of the Labor Arbiter In her Decision [24] dated December 29, 2014, the LA dismissed the complaint for lack of merit as well as the claim for underpayment of salary for lack of basis. [25] The LA ruled that while no company trade secret was divulged by Yonzon, she, nonetheless, had no authority to disclose confidential information such as the salary of her co-employees. At the very least, she should have sought the consent of her co-employee before using the information for personal use. That she submitted the information to the NLRC to buttress her stance in her first labor case, was unacceptable. Her act of securing the information of her co-employees and using it without authorization, not only violated the company rules but also the right of her co-employees. [26] The LA held that proof beyond reasonable doubt of an employee's misconduct is not required when loss of confidence is the ground for dismissal. It is sufficient if the employer has some basis to lose confidence or that the employer has reasonable ground to believe or to entertain the moral conviction that the employee concerned is responsible for the misconduct and that the nature of his/her participation therein rendered him/her unworthy of the trust and confidence demanded by his position. Here, Coca-Cola had a basis to lose trust and confidence with Yonzon. [27] With respect to the claim of underpayment of salary, the LA noted that during the hearing held on September 16, 2014, Yonzon admitted that her claim refers to her compensation not being commensurate with her work. However, the LA has no basis to evaluate such allegation. [28] Yonzon appealed to the NLRC. Ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission In its Decision [29] dated May 20, 2015, the NLRC reversed the LA and declared Yonzon illegally suspended/dismissed from her job. It ordered Coca-Cola to reinstate Yonzon to her post and pay her backwages and other benefits to be computed from the time she was preventively suspended on March 21, 2014 until her actual reinstatement and attorney's fees equivalent to 10% of the total judgment award. All the other claims of Yonzon were denied for lack of legal and factual bases. Per computation of the NLRC as of May 13, 2015, the total monetary award of Yonzon is P313,152.52. [30] The NLRC held that Yonzon's disclosure of her co-employees' salary in her Motion to Resolve did not violate Rule 3, Section 31 of Coca-Cola's Red Book. It noted that the only criterion to guide the exercise of the employer's management prerogative to discipline or to dismiss its erring employees is that the policies, rules and regulations or work-related activities of the employees must always be fair and reasonable and the corresponding penalties, when prescribed, should be commensurate t