G.R. No. 108444 - JESUS B. FERNANDEZ, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND MANILA ELECTRICAL COMPANY.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the respondent is hereby declared guilty of illegal dismissal and is hereby ordered to: 1. Reinstate the complainant to his former position and to pay him full backwages and other benefits without loss of seniority right. 2. Pay the complainant moral damages in the amount of P100,000.00. 3. Pay the complainant exemplary damages in the amount of P50,000.00; and 4. Pay the complainant attorney's fee equivalent to 25% of the judgment award. [4] MERALCO appealed to the NLRC. On December 28, 1992, the NLRC ruled otherwise and found just cause for Fernandez's dismissal. Thus: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the assailed decision of 15 April 1991 in this case is hereby Vacated and Set Aside and a new judgment entered, ordering respondent Manila Electric Company, to pay complainant Jesus (B.) Fernandez, the grand total sum (of) One Hundred Twenty Thousand, Five Hundred Fifty-Two and 80/100 (P120,552.80) Pesos, Philippine Currency broken down as follows: 1. separation pay P 96,060.80; 2. emergency cost of living allowance while on payroll reinstatement pending appeal 5,490.00; 3. One (1) month pay mid-year bonus 7,601.00; 4. Proportionate 13th month pay for the period corresponding to his payroll reinstatement pending appeal 11,401.00 Grand Total P120,552.80 The rest of complainant's claim for want of merit are hereby Dismissed. [5] Unsatisfied, both Fernandez and MERALCO appealed the decision of the NLRC, docketed as G.R. Nos. 108444 and 108769, respectively. On May 5, 1993, this Court consolidated the two petitions. [6] It is the rule that judicial review of labor cases does not go so far as to evaluating the sufficiency of evidence on which labor officials' findings rest. [7] But when the findings of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC are contradictory to each other, then we are constrained to examine the evidence presented. In the case at bar, we are more in accord with the findings of the Labor Arbiter. Fernandez was dismissed by MERALCO for an alleged wilful breach of trust and confidence based on two (2) grounds: 1) Soliciting or receiving money from any person, personally or through the mediation of another to perform an act prejudicial to the Company (Sec. 7, Par. 8, Company Code on Employee Discipline). 2) Load Splitting which is tantamount to failure to comply with official orders and/or to perform regular assigned duties or specific instructions related to duty (Sec. 5, Par. B(6) Code on Employee Discipline). (Letter of Termination dated August 6, 1987 Exhibit "P" for petitioner). [8] Breach of trust has been recognized as a valid cause for dismissal of employees holding positions of trust and confidence and it is the breach of this trust that results in the petitioner's loss of confidence. [9] While this ground has been used by employers, the Court must once again remind that such ground must not be availed of as a subterfuge for causes which are unjustified because what is at stake is the means of livelihood and t