Perez v. Medical City General Hospital
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioners Dominador S. Perez and Celine Campos, orderlies at respondent Medical City General Hospital (the Hospital), were dismissed for allegedly pilfering hospital property. The Hospital, acting on reports of missing items, searched employee lockers and found hospital property in the lockers of Perez and Campos. Perez had four rolls of micropore, an ovum forcep adson forceps, a laryngoscope ear piece, and a monkey wrench. Campos had two berodual and two ventolin nebules. Procedural History: Petitioners filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter found the Hospital guilty of illegal dismissal and ordered reinstatement with backwages. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed this decision, dismissing the complaint. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the NLRC's decision. Petitioners then filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court. The Petition: Petitioners sought to reinstate the Labor Arbiter's decision, arguing they had sufficiently accounted for the items and that dismissal was too harsh a penalty given their long years of service.
Issue(s)
Whether the petitioners were guilty of misappropriating hospital property. Whether the penalty of dismissal was proportionate to the offense committed.
Ruling
The petition is partially granted. The Court set aside the Court of Appeals' decision and ordered the reinstatement of petitioners Dominador Perez and Celine Campos without backwages but without loss of seniority.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether the petitioners were guilty of misappropriating hospital property: The Court found sufficient basis to hold that petitioners misappropriated hospital property. While Perez claimed the monkey wrench was found and kept for safekeeping, and the forceps were taken for condemnation, the Court noted that the forceps remained in his locker for over a week without endorsement. His responsibility was limited to checking and recommending defective equipment, not keeping them. The Court also questioned his possession of micropore (a supply charged to patients) and a laryngoscope ear piece (a doctor's instrument). For Campos, her practice of keeping nebules in her pocket for convenience did not explain why two were found in her locker, nor did it account for other items like berodual and tongue depressors. The Court found that petitioners admitted placing hospital items in their lockers against company rules, and their explanations were not satisfactory. On whether the penalty of dismissal was proportionate to the offense committed: The Court agreed with the Labor Arbiter that dismissal was not proportionate. Perez had 19 years of service and Campos had 7 years, with unblemished records and no prior disciplinary sanctions. They were also not managerial or confidential employees, implying less trust and fidelity expected. The Court cited previous cases where employees were reinstated after dismissal was found disproportionate to the offense, such as pilfering items of lesser value. Considering their non-employment since January 2000, the Court deemed this period as having served their suspension. Therefore, while the wrongful act of pilferage was not countenanced, the extreme penalty of dismissal was deemed unjustified, and a lesser penalty like suspension would suffice.
Main Doctrine
While the Court found that the petitioners misappropriated hospital property, dismissal was deemed too harsh a penalty given their long years of service and unblemished records. Reinstatement without backwages was ordered, considering they had already been out of employment since January 2000, deeming this period as their suspension.