Oasay v. Palacio Del Gobernador Condominium Corp.
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Sebastian F. Oasay, Jr. was appointed Building Administrator by respondent Palacio Del Gobernador Condominium Corporation (PDGCC). PDGCC President Omar T. Cruz required Oasay to report on additional compensation received from government offices housed in the condominium. Oasay admitted receiving compensation from the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) for services rendered after regular hours and on holidays, related to the rehabilitation of the 8th floor, without prior permission from PDGCC. Procedural History: Atty. Alberto A. Bernardo recommended filing charges against Oasay for violations of R.A. No. 3019 and R.A. No. 6713. Bernardo opined that Oasay acted with evident bad faith in rendering services to COMELEC without PDGCC's permission and that Oasay maneuvered the bidding process to favor EGB Security Investigation and General Services, Inc., an unlicensed agency. Oasay requested early retirement. PDGCC found his explanations unsatisfactory and appointed the Bureau of Treasury as the new Building Administrator. Oasay filed a complaint for constructive dismissal. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, finding substantial evidence of breach of trust. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) upheld the dismissal but awarded separation pay. Both parties appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA dismissed Oasay's petition and granted PDGCC's prayer, reversing the award of separation pay and affirming the validity of the dismissal. The Petition: Oasay filed a petition for review on certiorari, arguing that he did not violate trust and confidence, his right to procedural due process was violated, and he was illegally dismissed.
Issue(s)
Whether the dismissal of the petitioner was for a just cause. Whether the petitioner was accorded procedural due process.
Ruling
The petition is denied. The assailed Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals are affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of just cause for dismissal: The Court affirmed the CA's finding that Oasay's dismissal was for a just cause, specifically loss of trust and confidence, as provided under Article 282(c) of the Labor Code. The position of Building Administrator is one of trust and confidence. PDGCC established by clear and convincing evidence that Oasay breached this trust. His admission of receiving remuneration from COMELEC for services related to his duties as Building Administrator, without PDGCC's authorization or knowledge, constituted a willful breach of trust. Furthermore, his alleged manipulation of the bidding process to favor an unlicensed security agency, despite his duty to report such matters, further justified the loss of trust. The Court emphasized that Oasay was an employee of PDGCC, not COMELEC, and his unauthorized services to COMELEC were detrimental to PDGCC's interests. On the issue of procedural due process: The Court found that PDGCC complied with the two-notice rule required for lawful termination. The first notice was satisfied by the Memorandum dated September 27, 2005, requiring Oasay to explain his receipt of additional compensation, and the letter dated December 9, 2005, requiring him to explain his actions regarding the security agency. The second notice was complied with through the Memorandum dated October 28, 2006, informing him of the decision to appoint a new Building Administrator due to the unsatisfactory explanation of his infractions. This provided Oasay with the opportunity to be heard and defend himself.
Main Doctrine
An employee occupying a position of trust and confidence may be dismissed for loss of trust and confidence, provided that the dismissal is based on a willful breach of trust founded on clearly established facts and that procedural due process, specifically the two-notice rule, is observed.