Skyway O & M Corporation v. Reinante
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Skyway O & M Corporation (Skyway) hired respondent Wilfredo M. Reinante (Wilfredo) as Intelligence Officer for a fixed term from June 26, 2008, to November 25, 2008. His services were renewed, and he was appointed as a probationary employee effective November 26, 2008. In May 2009, Wilfredo applied for vacation and sick leave due to hypertension, but Skyway disapproved his vacation leave and directed him to report for work to discuss his performance and absence. On May 21, 2009, Wilfredo received a pre-termination notice citing failure to meet pre-performance standards based on a Performance Appraisal Report by his supervisor, Augusto Alcantara. He was dismissed on May 25, 2009, his last day as a probationary employee, with the termination letter stating his performance was below average. Subsequently, Wilfredo secured a clearance certificate and claimed terminal pay. He also filed administrative complaints against Alcantara and Skyway for alleged unqualified security officer appointments. The parties entered into a compromise agreement where Wilfredo agreed not to file cases against Skyway and to withdraw administrative cases, in exchange for certain terms. However, Skyway allegedly failed to comply with the agreement, prompting Wilfredo to file a complaint for constructive dismissal, non-payment of service incentive leave, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. Procedural History: The Labor Arbiter (LA) found Wilfredo illegally dismissed and ordered Skyway to pay backwages, separation pay, pro-rated 13th month pay, moral damages, and exemplary damages. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the LA's decision with modification, deleting the award for 13th month pay, and finding Wilfredo's dismissal illegal due to the unsubstantiated and biased appraisal report. Skyway's motion for reconsideration was denied. The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed Skyway's petition for certiorari, holding that Wilfredo's rehiring as a probationary employee indicated management's satisfaction with his performance and competence. Skyway's motion for reconsideration was also denied. The Petition: Skyway filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45, assailing the CA's decision and resolution, arguing that the CA erred in ruling that Wilfredo was illegally dismissed and entitled to monetary claims.
Issue(s)
Whether the CA gravely erred in ruling that Wilfredo was illegally dismissed. Whether the CA gravely erred in ruling that Wilfredo was entitled to his monetary claims.
Ruling
The petition is bereft of merit. The Court affirmed the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals with modification, ordering Petitioner Skyway O & M Corporation to pay respondent Wilfredo M. Reinante full backwages, separation pay, moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. The case was remanded to the Labor Arbiter for computation of the monetary award.
Ratio Decidendi
On the Issue of Illegal Dismissal: The determination of whether Wilfredo was illegally dismissed is a factual question, and the Court generally defers to the findings of quasi-judicial bodies like the NLRC, especially when affirmed by the CA. The LA, NLRC, and CA uniformly found Wilfredo's dismissal illegal. A probationary employee has security of tenure and can only be dismissed for just or authorized cause, or for failure to meet employer standards. In this case, the supervisor, Augusto Alcantara, admitted in an affidavit that he rendered an unmeritorious rating against Wilfredo due to his own volition, which led to Wilfredo's termination. Alcantara further admitted that Wilfredo should not have been dismissed and that he himself was unqualified as a security officer. This admission, corroborated by another employee, Domingo T. Hernandez, established that the performance rating was fabricated and unsubstantiated, making the dismissal illegal. The CA correctly observed that the termination was a subterfuge after Wilfredo discovered Skyway's hiring of unqualified security officers. On the Issue of Monetary Claims and Waiver: The Court found that the previous settlement agreement between the parties did not constitute a valid waiver or quitclaim that would prevent Wilfredo from claiming his entitled benefits. Waivers and quitclaims are disfavored and considered contrary to public policy unless proven to be voluntarily executed with full understanding and reasonable consideration. Skyway failed to discharge the burden of proving the voluntariness and validity of the waiver. The NLRC noted the lack of reasonable consideration in the settlement agreement, as it failed to specify the terms of fulfillment. Furthermore, there was no meeting of the minds between the parties regarding the considerations for the settlement, with Wilfredo citing payment of P100,000.00, suspension of certain employees, and a security officer position, while Skyway only acknowledged the P100,000.00 payment. Consequently, Wilfredo is entitled to full backwages from the time of his illegal dismissal until the finality of the decision. Due to strained relations, separation pay equivalent to one month's salary for every year of service is awarded in lieu of reinstatement. The award of P20,000.00 for moral damages and P10,000.00 for exemplary damages is deemed reasonable, as the dismissal was found to be retaliatory. Attorney's fees are also awarded because Wilfredo was compelled to litigate due to Skyway's unjustified actions.
Main Doctrine
A probationary employee enjoys security of tenure and may only be dismissed for a just or authorized cause, or for failure to qualify as a regular employee in accordance with reasonable employer standards. A dismissal based on a fabricated or unmeritorious performance rating, especially when discovered to be a subterfuge to prevent regularization or to retaliate for uncovering illegal acts by the employer, constitutes illegal dismissal. Waivers or quitclaims are disfavored and will not prevent an employee from claiming entitled benefits unless proven to be voluntarily executed with full understanding and reasonable consideration.