G.R. No. 159730 - NORKIS TRADING CO., INC. and/or MANUEL GASPAR E. ALBOS, JR.,vs. MELVIN GNILO.**D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, complainant's appeal is partly GRANTED. The Labor Arbiter's decision in the above-entitled case is REVERSED. It is hereby declared that complainant was constructively dismissed from his employment. Respondent Norkis Trading Co., Inc is ordered to pay complainant the amount of P411,796.00 as backwages and separation pay, plus ten percent (10%) thereof as attorney's fees. [8] In so ruling, the NLRC found that the 15-day suspension cannot be considered harsh and unconscionable as petitioners validly exercised their management prerogative to impose discipline on an erring employee for negligence by submitting unreliable and inaccurate reports for six consecutive months to the top management who used the reports in their planning and decision-making activities, and thus caused damage or injury one way or another to petitioners. It however held that the transfer of respondent from the position of Credit and Collection Manager to Marketing Assistant resulted in his demotion in rank from Manager to a mere rank and file employee, which was tantamount to constructive dismissal and therefore illegal. The NLRC ruled that respondent was constructively dismissed and therefore he was entitled to reinstatement and payment of full backwages from the time he quit working on October 19, 2000 due to his demotion up to the time of his actual reinstatement. However, it found that the parties' relationship was already strained on account of this case; thus, it ordered the payment of respondents separation pay equivalent to his one-month salary for every year of service. It upheld the LA's dismissal of respondent's prayer for damages for failure to submit substantial evidence to support the same, but awarded attorney's fees. Petitioners filed their Motion for Reconsideration while respondent filed his Motion for Reconsideration/Clarification. On June 24, 2002, the NLRC issued another Resolution, [9] the dispositive portion of which reads: WHEREFORE, premises considered, respondents' [petitioners] motion for reconsideration is DENIED for lack of merit while complainant's [respondent] motion for reconsideration is GRANTED. This Commission's January 29, 2002 Resolution in the above-entitled case is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that respondent Norkis Trading Company, Inc. is ordered to pay complainant the adjusted amount of P444,739.38 as backwages, separation pay, 13th month pay and refund of provident fund contribution. [10] In granting respondent's motion for reconsideration, the NLRC found that petitioners admitted in their Rejoinder that they had not paid respondent his 13 th -month pay and that respondent had yet to make a written request for the refund of his provident fund contribution; thus, respondent was entitled thereto and the provident fund contribution must also be returned to him. Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari with the CA. Subsequently, they also filed a Motion for the Issuance of a Temporary Restrainin