GLOBE-MACKAY CABLE AND RADIO CORPORATION, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and IMELDA SALAZAR.
- G.R. Number: G.R. No. 82511
- Promulgated: 1992-03-03
- Ponente: Romero, J.
Doctrine
## Facts of the Case Imelda Salazar was employed by Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation (GMCR) as a general systems analyst. GMCR initiated an investigation into missing company equipment and spare parts, focusing on Delfin Saldivar, a manager with whom Salazar was allegedly close. The internal auditor's report indicated Saldivar's involvement in a partnership with a company supplying GMCR, and unauthorized use of company property. The investigation also implicated Salazar, stating she violated company regulations by signing as a witness to the partnership agreement between Saldivar and a supplier, and allegedly having knowledge of the missing Fedders air-conditioning unit but failing to inform GMCR. Consequently, GMCR preventively suspended Salazar for one month and requested her explanation. Instead of explaining, Salazar filed a complaint for illegal suspension, later amended to include illegal dismissal, after GMCR terminated her for her "inability to refute and disprove these findings." The Labor Arbiter ordered Salazar's reinstatement with full backwages and moral damages. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the reinstatement but limited backwages to two years and deleted the moral damages. GMCR filed this petition, arguing that the NLRC gravely abused its discretion. ## Issues 1. Was the preventive suspension of Imelda Salazar proper? 2. Was the dismissal of Imelda Salazar for just cause? 3. Is Imelda Salazar entitled to reinstatement and full backwages? ## Decision / Rationale **Issue 1:** The Court ruled that the **preventive suspension** of Imelda Salazar was proper. The investigative findings concerning Saldivar's activities, coupled with Salazar's close association with him and the discovery of missing company property in their shared apartment, justified the preventive suspension. The Court held that preventive suspension is a proper remedial recourse available to the company pending investigation of alleged malfeasance or misfeasance and does not automatically signify guilt or a violation of due process. **Issue 2:** The Court ruled that the **dismissal of Imelda Salazar was not for just cause**. The Court found no evidence to show a legal cause for Salazar's dismissal. While GMCR predicated the dismissal on loss of confidence, it failed to convincingly establish a basis for it. Salazar's position as a systems analyst was not one of trust and confidence concerning the procurement of supplies, and her signing as a witness to a partnership agreement between Saldivar and a supplier did not create a conflict of interest. The Court also held that the loss of confidence must rest on something more than mere presumptions and suppositions. The Maramara report primarily focused on Saldivar, and direct evidence implicating Salazar was lacking. The Court emphasized that an employee cannot be dismissed based on suspicion derived from speculative inferences, especially when the main evidence focused on a person (Saldivar) who had already resigned and thus did not have the opportunity to refute the findings. **Issue 3:** The Court ruled that Imelda Salazar is entitled to reinstatement and **backwages equivalent to her salary for a period of two years**. The **Labor Code, Article 279**, as amended by **Republic Act No. 6715**, explicitly states that an employee unjustly dismissed from work shall be entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other privileges, and to full backwages. The Court applied the plain-meaning rule (**verba legis**) to this provision. While acknowledging exceptions to reinstatement due to strained relations, the Court found that GMCR failed to prove that Salazar's position as a systems analyst was a position of trust and confidence that would lead to irreconcilable animosity if she were reinstated. Therefore, the principle of "strained relations" could not be applied indiscriminately in this case. The Court affirmed the NLRC's decision regarding reinstatement…