Abs-cbn Employees Union v. National Labor Relations Commission
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: Petitioner Jose Entradicho, employed as a cameraman by ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation (ABS-CBN), was dismissed on August 4, 1989. The dismissal stemmed from his alleged absence on July 15, 1989, for which he provided an explanation of taking his sick daughter to the hospital. However, ABS-CBN discovered his name in the closing credits of a program aired on a rival station, PTV 4, on the same date. ABS-CBN alleged this constituted disloyalty, serious misconduct, and willful breach of trust. 2. Procedural History: Petitioner filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against ABS-CBN. Labor Arbiter Oswald B. Lorenzo ruled in favor of the petitioner, declaring the dismissal illegal and ordering reinstatement with back wages and other benefits. Upon appeal by ABS-CBN, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the Labor Arbiter's decision, dismissing the case on its merits but ordering ABS-CBN to pay petitioner P1,000.00 as indemnity for non-observance of due process. 3. The Petition: The petitioners, ABS-CBN Employees Union and Jose Entradicho, filed a special civil action for certiorari with the Supreme Court, assailing the NLRC's decision. They argued that the NLRC erred in reversing the Labor Arbiter's findings. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, primarily on procedural grounds, noting the failure to file a motion for reconsideration with the NLRC before filing the certiorari petition. The Court also affirmed the NLRC's findings on the merits, acknowledging that while the dismissal was for a valid cause (disloyalty), ABS-CBN failed to observe due process, thus warranting the indemnity awarded by the NLRC.
Issue(s)
Whether the petition for certiorari is procedurally defective for failure to file a motion for reconsideration with the NLRC. Whether the dismissal of petitioner Jose Entradicho was for a valid cause, and whether due process was observed in the dismissal.
Ruling
The petition is dismissed. The decision of the National Labor Relations Commission dated July 12, 1993, is affirmed in toto.
Ratio Decidendi
On the procedural defect: The Supreme Court held that the petition for certiorari was procedurally defective because the petitioner failed to file a motion for reconsideration with the NLRC prior to filing the special civil action. The Court reiterated the "unquestioned rule" that certiorari will lie only if there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. A motion for reconsideration is considered the plain and adequate remedy expressly provided by law, intended to give the NLRC an opportunity to correct any perceived errors. Failure to avail of this remedy renders the NLRC's decision final and executory, making the subsequent certiorari petition premature and fatal. The Court cited several cases, including Building Care Corporation v. NLRC, to emphasize the jurisdictional nature of filing a motion for reconsideration within the ten-day reglementary period. On the merits of the dismissal and due process: The Supreme Court found no persuasive reason to depart from the NLRC's decision on the merits. The Court noted that Article XIII, Section 1, paragraph 10 of the ABS-CBN collective bargaining agreement explicitly lists "acts of disloyalty" as grounds for dismissal. By rendering services to a business rival, the petitioner was found guilty of acts of disloyalty, serious misconduct, and willful breach of trust, which are valid grounds for termination under the Labor Code. However, the Court also affirmed the NLRC's finding that ABS-CBN failed to observe procedural due process in dismissing the petitioner. The memorandum requiring Entradicho to report did not explicitly state the circumstances surrounding the allegations, thus violating Rule XIV, Section 2 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Labor Code, which requires a written notice stating the particular acts or omissions constituting the grounds for dismissal. Consequently, while the dismissal was for a valid cause, the non-observance of due process warranted a sanction, which the NLRC correctly imposed as an indemnity of P1,000.00, consistent with jurisprudence awarding such indemnity for procedural lapses.
Main Doctrine
A petition for certiorari will not prosper if the petitioner failed to file a motion for reconsideration with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) before resorting to the special civil action, as this procedural defect is considered fatal. While a dismissal may be for a valid cause, the employer must still observe procedural due process, including providing the employee with a written notice stating the particular acts or omissions constituting the grounds for dismissal and affording the employee an opportunity to be heard. Failure to observe due process, even with a valid ground for dismissal, warrants the imposition of a sanction, typically an indemnity, upon the employer.