G.R. No. 204620 - ROWENA A. SANTOS. VS. INTEGRATED PHARMACEUTICAL, INC. AND KATHERYN TANTIANSU.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding respondent [sic] liable for illegal dismissal and nonpayment of salary and 13 th month pay. Respondent Integrated Pharmaceutical Inc., is ordered to pay complainant Rowena A. Santos the aggregate amount of Two Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Eight Pesos and 23/100 (P225,698.23) representing separation pay, backwages, salary for April 11-21, 2010 and 13 th month pay for three (3) years, plus ten percent (10%) thereof as and for attorney's fees in the amount of P22,569.82. All other claims are dismissed for lack of merit. [13] Not satisfied, respondents appealed to the NLRC. They insisted that petitioner was validly dismissed for cause and with due process of law. Ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission In its Resolution [14] dated July 14, 2011, the NLRC sustained the ruling of the Labor Arbiter that the additional infractions mentioned in the April 21, 2010 memorandum cannot be used against petitioner for lack of prior notice. The NLRC likewise affirmed the ruling of the Labor Arbiter anent the charge of padding of transportation expenses. Respondents filed a Motion for Reconsideration. In a Resolution [15] dated August 23, 2011, however, the NLRC likewise denied said motion. Still unfazed by the adverse rulings of the labor tribunals, respondents filed before the CA a Petition for Certiorari [16] ascribing grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the NLRC in rendering its July 14, 2011 Resolution. Ruling of the Court of Appeals On August 31, 2012, the CA rendered its Decision [17] modifying the NLRC's Resolution. It held that petitioner was not illegally dismissed and, therefore, not entitled to separation pay, backwages, attorney's fees, damages, and 13 th month pay. It opined that there are just causes to terminate petitioner's employment because she was always late in district meetings and in the submission of periodical reports, had committed acts of insubordination and dishonesty, and her sales performance was far from satisfactory. The CA nonetheless agreed with the NLRC that respondents failed to comply with the two-notice requirement. The fallo of the assailed CA Decision reads: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is PARTLY GRANTED. The assailed Decision dated 14 July 2011 of [the] National Labor Relations Commission is MODIFIED in that private respondent was not illegally dismissed and, therefore, the awards of separation pay, backwages, attorney's fees, other damages and 13 th month pay are deleted. For failure to comply with the twin notice requirements of due process in effecting the just dismissal of private respondent, petitioner is ordered to pay private respondent the amount of P30,000.00 as nominal damages. SO ORDERED.