FACTS: Peter Mejila was a barber employed by a barbershop. The owners of the shop attempted to mediate in the incessant squabbling between Mejila and a fellow employee. Mejila then unilaterally demanded his separation pay and other benefits, despite his employers’ assurance that he was not being dismissed. He then turned over the duplicate keys of the shop (which he held as caretaker) to the cashier and took all his personal belongings from his workplace, and found similar employment in another shop. He then filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.
ISSUE: Was Mejila dismissed, or did he abandon his employment?
HELD: He abandoned his work. This was manifested by: His having bragged to fellow workers his intention to quit his work in the shop; his surrender of the shop’s keys and his taking all of his personal belongings from the said place; his failure to report fro work and not giving any valid reason for such; he acquired employment in another shop immediately, despite reassurances that he could stay in his old place of work; and finally, his complaint for illegal dismissal did not include a prayer for reinstatement. All of these show concurrence of the intent to abandon his work and over acts that show his lack of interest in continuing his work.
ISSUE: Was Mejila dismissed, or did he abandon his employment?
HELD: He abandoned his work. This was manifested by: His having bragged to fellow workers his intention to quit his work in the shop; his surrender of the shop’s keys and his taking all of his personal belongings from the said place; his failure to report fro work and not giving any valid reason for such; he acquired employment in another shop immediately, despite reassurances that he could stay in his old place of work; and finally, his complaint for illegal dismissal did not include a prayer for reinstatement. All of these show concurrence of the intent to abandon his work and over acts that show his lack of interest in continuing his work.
0 comments:
Post a Comment