FACTS: Respondent, a receptionist of petitioner, went on sick leave for 3 days. When she received her salary for that month she received overtime pay for one of the sick days without rendering overtime work. For this, respondent was dismissed from the service for alleged dishonestly. She filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, she argues that she signed the list, subsequently attached to the overtime authorization form, before she went ton sick leave and that she did not know then that her salary included the overtime pay for work supposedly rendered. The LA didn’t agree but the NLRC did, ruling that she could not be held guilty of dishonestly precisely because she didn’t know that the blank form she signed was an overtime authorization form and she also had no knowledge that her salary included the overtime pay. The hotel was ordered to reinstate her and pay backwages. The CA upheld the NLRC.
ISSUE: W/N respondent was illegally dismissed
HELD: The SC ruled that the respondent didn’t commit any act of dishonestly. She did not deliberately make petitioner believe that she rendered overtime work. She only affixed her name and signature on a blank piece of paper which was not the official overtime authorization from used by petitioner. There is no basis therefore for the conclusion of that respondent knows that the blank piece of paper she signed served as the overtime authorization form. It was just a case of an ordinary employee expecting to earn more by rendering overtime work but who got sick during the designated time. The policy of the company was to require the preparation of the overtime authorization form before the designated date the overtime work was supposed to be rendered. The overtime work must first be authorized before it could be rendered.
0 comments:
Post a Comment