Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1983 > May 1983 Decisions > G.R. No. L-59724 May 30, 1983 - PHIL. LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE CO. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

207 Phil. 544:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-59724. May 30, 1983.]

PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and REYNALDO TEODORO, Respondents.

Jesus Villaroya for Petitioner.

The Solicitor General for respondent NLRC.

Beltran & Associates for Private Respondent.


SYLLABUS


1. LABOR AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONS; LABOR CODE; SECURITY OF TENURE; FORFEITURE THEREOF; GROUNDS; GROSS MISCONDUCT AND BREACH OF TRUST; CASE AT BAR. — Dismissal is justified where, as in the instant case, respondent employee repeatedly failed to observe the company’s standard operating procedure in the manner of blockmapping for the assignment of facilities, to the prejudice of the customers and the embarrassment of the company, and to carry out lawful instructions of his supervisors in the performance of his job. This is a clear case where the erring employee forfeited his right to security of tenure.


D E C I S I O N


AQUINO, J.:


This case is about the dismissal of an employee. Reynaldo P. Teodoro was employed by the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company as a blackdamp clerk since September, 1970. The blackdamp contains the data on telephone cable facilities to be used to meet the telephone needs of applicants.

As blackdamp clerk, Teodoro used to sort out applications for telephone service, to indicate by consulting the blackcaps the telephone or cable facility through which an application can be served without exceeding the required maximum length of telephone wires to be used, and to update the blackcaps regularly (p. 6, Rollo).chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

Teodoro committed the following alleged irregularities as blackdamp clerk, according to the PLDT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. On November 5, 1973, Teodoro attended to and allowed the request for transfer of telephone No. 60-81-05 which exceeded the maximum allowable length of wires by seven (7) spans. For that violation of established procedures, he was given a verbal warning and a reprimand.

2. On October 16, 1974, without complying with established procedures, Teodoro made a cable assignment on the request to transfer telephone No. 20-30-21 to 25 from its original address to an adjoining place. He did not observe the procedure that in the processing of any request for telephone service, the request must first be block mapped before indicating the nearest cable, terminal number and spans. For the infraction, he was again reprimanded and warned by the PLDT.

3. Teodoro was suspended for 15 days on December 3, 1975 for repeated violation of the procedure on block mapping, to wit: (a) for the transfer of tel. No. 26-89-01 from No. 922 Constancia, Sampaloc, Manila to No. 235-R Mac Arthur Highway, Karuhatan, Valenzuela, Bulacan wherein a change of cable assignment was made notwithstanding the fact that there were several pending requests for transfer ahead of this particular service request which must be attended to or served first; (b) telephone No. 25-08-50 was transferred to No. 231-E Mac Arthur Highway in gross violation of the priority listing which caused the bypassing of all earlier requests for transfer; (c) on October 2, 1975, Teodoro caused the transfer of tel. No. 23-20-26 by assigning to the said number a telephone cable which had not yet been approved for assignment. Regrettably, notwithstanding the disciplinary actions imposed on Teodoro for repeated violation of company procedure on cable assignment and block mapping, he made no efforts to mend his ways.

The straw which broke the camel’s back came on March 1, 1979. On the said date, a request to transfer telephone No. 35-97-02 from 181 A. del Mundo Street, Caloocan City to 77-B A. Pablo, Karuhatan, Valenzuela was made by the telephone subscriber. Notwithstanding the fact that there were two (2) pending requests for transfer in the same area which pertain to the same cable facility, and therefore should be attended to and served first, Teodoro ignored and bypassed the two pending requests for transfer by some scheming way of re blocking the assignment of the cable facility.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

As a consequence of this unjustified preference given to telephone No. 35-97-02, the telephone subscriber of bypassed telephone No. 35-03-55 complained that a telephone (referring to telephone No. 35-97-02) was installed in their area contrary to his earlier information regarding non availability of cable facilities.

Teodoro explained that he bypassed two pending requests in favor of a new one because there was nobody working on the new request and he had time to attend to it. He said that the bypassed telephone No. 35-03-55 could not be accommodated because its transfer required spans of from seven to eight posts.

As noted by the Solicitor General, the explanation is unacceptable because the transfer of bypassed telephone No. 35-03-55 involved the same area, the same distance and the same cable facility as telephone No. 35-97-02. The explanation also contradicts Teodoro’s earlier claim that telephone No. 35-03-55 was bypassed not because of the distance involved but because said telephone number was assigned on high count terminal 26-31. Actually, Teodoro made the assignment on the basis of a special study he himself conducted in gross disregard of his supervisor’s instructions not to make unauthorized special study on service orders.

The PLDT filed on July 3, 1979 with the Ministry of Labor an application for clearance to terminate the services of Teodoro. He was placed under preventive suspension on July 6, 1979. He did not oppose the application to terminate his service.

The proceedings in the Ministry were suspended when pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Agreement Teodoro’s case was brought to the Grievance Committee. But the Committee failed to arrive at a decision. Therefore, the penalty of preventive suspension leading to the dismissal of Teodoro from the service was maintained without prejudice to the other remedies available to him under the Collective Bargaining Agreement (p. 22, Rollo).

We hold that the National Labor Relations Commission and the Labor Arbiter committed a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in ordering Teodoro’s reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and with back wages for one year notwithstanding the repeated acts of misconduct and willful breach of trust committed by him.

Even the Labor Arbiter admits that Teodoro failed to observe the company’s standard operating procedure in the matter of block mapping for the assignment of facilities, to the prejudice of the customer and the embarrassment of the company, and to carry out lawful instructions of his supervisors in the performance of his job (p. 30, Rollo).chanrobles.com : virtual law library

This is a clear case where the erring employee forfeited his right to security of tenure. His dismissal is justified.

WHEREFORE, the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission is reversed and set aside. The company’s dismissal of Reynaldo Teodoro as blockmap clerk is confirmed. No costs.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar (Chairman), Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, Abad Santos, De Castro and Escolin, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






May-1983 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-58113 May 2, 1983 - ADELINA B. GABATAN v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

    207 Phil. 1

  • G.R. No. L-30612 May 3, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BONIFACIO ALISON

    207 Phil. 8

  • G.R. No. L-32074 May 3, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO S. MAGNAYON

    207 Phil. 22

  • G.R. No. L-34249 May 3, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN D. BARROS

    207 Phil. 32

  • G.R. No. L-35099 May 3, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANUEL DIMATULAC

    207 Phil. 43

  • G.R. No. L-37080 May 3, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO SALCEDO

    207 Phil. 49

  • G.R. No. L-57625 May 3, 1983 - AVELINO PULIDO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    207 Phil. 58

  • A.C. No. 1216 May 10, 1983 - MARCELINA C. MANIKAD v. NARCISO V. CRUZ, JR.

    207 Phil. 69

  • G.R. No. L-51282 May 10, 1983 - FELIX V. TENORIO v. THE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON AUDIT

    207 Phil. 72

  • A.M. No. P-2316 May 16, 1983 - ALEJANDRO C. SILAPAN v. BERNARDO ALCALA

    207 Phil. 76

  • G.R. No. L-25084 May 16, 1983 - ELENITA V. UNSON v. COURT OF APPEALS

    207 Phil. 89

  • G.R. No. L-28046 May 16, 1983 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. INDEPENDENT PLANTERS ASSOCIATION

    207 Phil. 98

  • G.R. No. L-28809 May 16, 1983 - JULIO LLAMADO v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

    207 Phil. 102

  • G.R. Nos. L-31327-29 May 16, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NONCETO GRAVINO

    207 Phil. 107

  • G.R. No. L-32265 May 16, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO A. RAMOS

    207 Phil. 122

  • G.R. No. L-33606 May 16, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARCADIO L. DE LA ROSA

    207 Phil. 129

  • G.R. No. L-35648 May 16, 1983 - PERSHING TAN QUETO v. COURT OF APPEALS

    207 Phil. 186

  • G.R. No. L-38139 May 16, 1983 - TEODORO DOMANICO v. COURT OF APPEALS

    207 Phil. 195

  • G.R. No. L-46397 May 16, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO DELA CRUZ

    207 Phil. 211

  • G.R. No. L-51797 May 16, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE VERDAD

    207 Phil. 204

  • G.R. No. L-52772 May 16, 1983 - ESCAÑO HERMANOS INCORPORADO v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-53973 May 16, 1983 - ANANIAS S. LAZAGA v. CANDIDO C. AGUINALDO

    207 Phil. 224

  • G.R. No. L-57636 May 16, 1983 - REYNALDO TIANGCO v. VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR.

    207 Phil. 235

  • G.R. No. L-58286 May 16, 1983 - AGAPITO B. DUCUSIN v. COURT OF APPEALS

    207 Phil. 248

  • G.R. No. L-58469 May 16, 1983 - MAKATI LEASING and FINANCE CORP. v. WEAREVER TEXTILE MILLS, INC.

    207 Phil. 262

  • G.R. No. L-59318 May 16, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGELIO G. RAMOS

    207 Phil. 269

  • A.C. No. 1341 May 17, 1983 - ANTONIA MARANAN v. MAGNO T. BUESER

    207 Phil. 278

  • A.M. No. P-1714 May 17, 1983 - LUCIA PEDRASTA v. ELIAS MARFIL

    207 Phil. 280

  • G.R. No. L-35595 May 17, 1983 - LEONARDO AMPER v. PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH III, CFI-MISAMIS ORIENTA

  • G.R. No. L-29141 May 19, 1983 - MANUEL L. LIMSICO v. JOSE G. BAUTISTA

    207 Phil. 290

  • G.R. No. L-35664 May 19, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GREGORIO L. DE LA CRUZ

    207 Phil. 324

  • G.R. No. L-44302 May 20, 1983 - MARVEL BUILDING CORPORATION v. BLAS F. OPLE

    207 Phil. 351

  • G.R. No. L-34051 May 26, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TONY MONTES

    207 Phil. 354

  • G.R. No. L-35491 May 27, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EMERITO MENDEZ

    207 Phil. 359

  • G.R. No. L-53460 May 27, 1983 - PROVINCIAL CHAPTER of LAGUNA, NACIONALISTA PARTY v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

    207 Phil. 366

  • G.R. No. L-57093 May 27, 1983 - MONTE DE PIEDAD AND SAVINGS BANK v. MINISTER OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT

    207 Phil. 387

  • A.C. No. 2112 May 30, 1983 - REMEDIOS MUNAR v. ERNESTO B. FLORES

    207 Phil. 390

  • G.R. No. L-27328 May 30, 1983 - ISIDRO M. ONGSIP v. PRUDENTIAL BANK & TRUST CO.

    207 Phil. 396

  • G.R. No. L-30685 May 30, 1983 - NG GAN ZEE v. ASIAN CRUSADER LIFE ASSURANCE CORP.

    207 Phil. 401

  • G.R. No. L-30837 May 30, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FULGENCIO ORNOPIA

    207 Phil. 408

  • G.R. No. L-31763 May 30, 1983 - RAMON SIA REYES v. DEPORTATION BOARD

    207 Phil. 415

  • G.R. No. L-33131 May 30, 1983 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. DAVID P. AVILA

    207 Phil. 419

  • G.R. No. L-33320 May 30, 1983 - RAMON A. GONZALES v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK

    207 Phil. 425

  • G.R. No. L-33422 May 30, 1983 - ROSENDO BALUCANAG v. ALBERTO J. FRANCISCO

    207 Phil. 433

  • G.R. No. L-34199 May 30, 1983 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SANTIAGO O. TAÑADA

    207 Phil. 440

  • G.R. No. L-41992 May 30, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LODRIGO IJURCADAS

    207 Phil. 449

  • G.R. No. L-43905 May 30, 1983 - SERAFIA G. TOLENTINO v. EDGARDO L. PARAS

    207 Phil. 458

  • G.R. No. L-45071 May 30, 1983 - MIGUEL SANTOS v. COURT OF APPEALS

    207 Phil. 463

  • G.R. No. L-45674 May 30, 1983 - EMILIANO A. FRANCISCO v. COURT OF APPEALS

    207 Phil. 471

  • G.R. No. L-48131 May 30, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERONCIO MENDEZ

    207 Phil. 483

  • G.R. No. L-51002 May 30, 1983 - SPECIAL EVENTS & CENTRAL SHIPPING OFFICE WORKERS UNION v. SAN MIGUEL CORP.

    207 Phil. 487

  • G.R. No. L-52358 May 30, 1983 - INHELDER CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS

    207 Phil. 507

  • G.R. No. L-55831 May 30, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GILBERT MEDRANO, ET AL.

    207 Phil. 516

  • G.R. No. L-57555 May 30, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TERESA JALANDONI

    207 Phil. 517

  • G.R. No. L-58004 May 30, 1983 - PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE CO. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

    207 Phil. 529

  • G.R. No. L-58407 May 30, 1983 - FLORENTINA LUNA GONZALES v. MARCELINO N. SAYO

    207 Phil. 537

  • G.R. No. L-58482 May 30, 1983 - MOTOROLA PHILIPPINES, INC. v. PEDRO JL. BAUTISTA

    207 Phil. 535

  • G.R. No. L-59724 May 30, 1983 - PHIL. LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE CO. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

    207 Phil. 544

  • G.R. No. L-61586 May 30, 1983 - ISIDRO MILLARE v. LEOPOLDO B. GIRONELLA

    207 Phil. 548

  • G.R. No. L-62878 May 30, 1983 - MARGOT B. DE LOS REYES v. IGNACIO M. CAPULONG

    207 Phil. 556

  • G.R. No. L-64023 May 30, 1983 - PEDRO TURINGAN v. BONIFACIO CACDAC

    207 Phil. 559

  • G.R. No. L-54718 May 31, 1983 - CRISOLOGO P. VILLANUEVA v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

    207 Phil. 560