G.R. NO. 157202 - PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE AND TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC., VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, all the foregoing premises being considered, judgment is hereby rendered ordering the respondent Philippine Long Distance [and] Telephone Co. to reinstate the complainant to her former position as telephone operator with all the rights, privileges and benefits appertaining thereto, including seniority, plus backwages equivalent to one (1) year salary in the sum of P78,000.00 (P6,500.00/mo. x 12 mos.). SO ORDRED. [8] The Labor Arbiter held that private respondent's first incident of absence from March 19 to 29, 1989 were unauthorized but not as to the other succeeding absences. It found that private respondent, on her first day of absence, called in sick and when she reported for work, she went to petitioner's clinic for check-up and submitted her medical certificates, thus she complied with the standard requirements on matters of sick leave; that petitioner's doctors did not confirm some portions of private respondent's leave of absence based merely on their medical opinions; that such justification was not warranted under Department Order No. ADM-79-02 wherein absences due to illness were considered unauthorized and without pay when the attending doctor's signature is forged, there is alteration as to the date and contents of the medical certificate, the certificate is false as to the facts alleged therein, the doctor issuing the medical certificate is not qualified to attend to the illness, there are falsities and misrepresentations, and when there is patent abuse of sick leave privileges; and that these circumstances were not proven in this case. The Labor Arbiter gave more credence to the doctor who actually attended to private respondent rather than to the medical opinion of petitioner's doctors. It concluded that petitioner's doctors should have coordinated with private respondent's attending physicians to settle any doubts as to the medical certificates. Petitioner filed its appeal with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). [9] On January 19, 1996, the NLRC issued a Resolution [10] affirming the decision of the Labor Arbiter. The NLRC found that company practice allows leave of absence due to sickness if supported by a medical certificate issued by the attending physician; that a difference in opinion by the Medical Director from that of the attending physician should not prejudice private respondent since the Medical Director can consider absences unauthorized only in cases of forgery and patent abuse of sick leave privileges which were not proven in this case; that if the Medical Director entertained doubts as to the medical certificate, he should have asked the attending physician to submit himself for cross-examination and then present an independent physician for an expert opinion on the matter. Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration was denied in a Resolution [11] dated March 14, 1996. Undaunted, petitioner filed with us a Petition for Certiorari with prayer for the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO