National Labor Relations Commission
National Labor Relations Commission
MR. E
Complainant,
ABC CORPORATION,
MR. A-President, and MR.
C- HR Head
Respondents.
x---------------------------------------------x
D E C I S I O N
On September 1, 2020, herein complainant Mr. E, aggrieved by his
termination filed a complaint against his employer ABC Corporation
(Company), its President A, Manager B and HR Head C, herein
respondents, for illegal dismissal, non-payment of 13th month pay, non-
payment of separation pay, and moral and exemplary damages, non-
payment of holiday and rest pay, full back wages, money claims and
attorney’s fees.
The complainant alleged that he was illegally dismissed. On the other
hand, respondents countered that the complainant voluntarily resigned
from the Company.
There being no settlement arrived at between the parties during the
conciliation meetings, they were directed to submit their respective
Position Papers. The parties went further to submit their respective
Replies and Rejoinders. The case was set for hearing/conference on
September 9, 2020 at 9:00 in the morning. On said date, the respondents
were represented by Atty. Ernesto Adriano and Atty. Chloe Galita while
complainant was represented by Atty. Kristienne Bernabe and Atty.
Bayani Ramos. This Office encouraged the parties to arrive at a
settlement. The complainant stood firm on his proposal for settlement
which is reinstatement with full backwages and damages for his mental
anguish, sleepless night and besmirched reputation. The respondents
requested for a reset of the conference to give them time to evaluate the
proposal of the complainant.
The subsequent hearing/conference was set on Sept. 16, 2020. On
said date, the respondents offered a counter-proposal to which the
complainant rejected. Being the case, both parties manifested to this
Office to submit the case for resolution.
This Office goes now to the allegations of the parties.
The complainant, in his Position Paper, alleged among others, that:
On April 15, 2000, he started his work at ABC Corporation as helper then
as shop man at the time of filing of complaint with a monthly salary of
P10,000.00. He argued that he refused to report for work due to great fear
on his health from COVID and took his leave of absence for a month.
Complainant further alleged that he was illegally dismissed. Being a
regular employee as defined by law (Labor Code, as amended), he being
hired and engaged to perform works (Helper and was then a Shop man)
which are clearly and indisputably necessary or desirable in the usual
business or trade of respondent ABC, a company engaged in retreading or
recapping of tire services, he cannot be dismissed except for ground/s or
cause/s as provided for by the Labor Code, as amended. Definitely, he
cannot be dismissed without any ground or cause at all, as in this case.
Furthermore, complainant was also not paid his 13th month pay,
separation pay and holiday pay and rest day pay, and full backwages.
On the other hand, respondents, in their position paper, alleged that,
contrary also to the allegations of herein complainant, he was not dismissed by
ABC Corporation. Instead, he voluntarily resigned from his work. Respondents
further alleged that the company has the handwritten resignation letter of
complainant dated June 11, 2020 in Tagalog dialect which states that his
resignation was prompted by his desire to return to the province with his family
upon request by his sick mother, apart from the need to attend to their farm and
his intention to take a much needed rest. Since the submission of his resignation
letter, complainant never reported for work and could no longer be located.
Furthermore, the demand of the complainant to claim his separation pay is an
indication that he totally resigned from his work. Respondents added that
complainant is not entitled to separation pay, moral and exemplary damages and
attorney’s fees because of complainant’s voluntary resignation from the
company. Respondents posited that they are willing to pay the rest day pay,
holiday pay and 13th month pay provided that complainant must present proof
of non-payment of such.
The Supreme Court also in the case of BANI RURAL BANK INC.
ENOC THEATER I AND II and/or RAFAEL DE GUZMAN vs TERESA
DE GUZMAN, EDGAR C. TAN and TERESA G. TAN held that:
The claim for rest day pay, holiday pay, and 13 th month pay of the
complainant shall be denied for lack of proof that it was unpaid. The
complainant did not present evidence to support that the respondents failed to
pay his rest day pay, holiday pay and 13th month pay.
SO ORDERED.
Labor Arbiter