Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 181 views

    Labor - Tirazona Vs Philippine Eds Techno Service

    Uploaded by

    Myra Mae J. Duglas
    1) Tirazona was the Administrative Manager of Philippine EDS Techno-Service, Inc. (PET) and was considered a managerial employee who held a position of trust and confidence. 2) After PET officers called attention to her improper handling of a situation involving a rank-and-file employee, Tirazona claimed she was denied due process and demanded monetary compensation, which PET denied. 3) The Court affirmed Tirazona's termination, finding she was validly terminated for breaching the trust of her employer. The Court also denied Tirazona's request for separation pay and benefits.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Labor - Tirazona Vs Philippine Eds Techno Service

    Uploaded by

    Myra Mae J. Duglas
    181 views2 pages
    1) Tirazona was the Administrative Manager of Philippine EDS Techno-Service, Inc. (PET) and was considered a managerial employee who held a position of trust and confidence. 2) After PET officers called attention to her improper handling of a situation involving a rank-and-file employee, Tirazona claimed she was denied due process and demanded monetary compensation, which PET denied. 3) The Court affirmed Tirazona's termination, finding she was validly terminated for breaching the trust of her employer. The Court also denied Tirazona's request for separation pay and benefits.

    Original Description:

    case digest in labor law 1

    Original Title

    Labor_tirazona vs Philippine Eds Techno Service

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Tirazona was the Administrative Manager of Philippine EDS Techno-Service, Inc. (PET) and was considered a managerial employee who held a position of trust and confidence. 2) After PET officers called attention to her improper handling of a situation involving a rank-and-file employee, Tirazona claimed she was denied due process and demanded monetary compensation, which PET denied. 3) The Court affirmed Tirazona's termination, finding she was validly terminated for breaching the trust of her employer. The Court also denied Tirazona's request for separation pay and benefits.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    181 views2 pages

    Labor - Tirazona Vs Philippine Eds Techno Service

    Uploaded by

    Myra Mae J. Duglas
    1) Tirazona was the Administrative Manager of Philippine EDS Techno-Service, Inc. (PET) and was considered a managerial employee who held a position of trust and confidence. 2) After PET officers called attention to her improper handling of a situation involving a rank-and-file employee, Tirazona claimed she was denied due process and demanded monetary compensation, which PET denied. 3) The Court affirmed Tirazona's termination, finding she was validly terminated for breaching the trust of her employer. The Court also denied Tirazona's request for separation pay and benefits.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    MA. WENELITA S.

    TIRAZONA,
    Petitioner,

    - versus -

    PHILIPPINE EDS TECHNO- SERVICE INC. (PET INC.) AND/OR KEN KUBOTA, MAMORU
    ONO and JUNICHI HIROSE,

    FACTS:
    we subscribed to the factual findings of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and
    the Court of Appeals that Tirazona, being the Administrative Manager of Philippine EDS Techno-
    Service, Inc. (PET), was a managerial employee who held a position of trust and confidence; that
    after PET officers/directors called her attention to her improper handling of a situation involving a
    rank-and-file employee, she claimed that she was denied due process for which she demanded
    P2,000,000.00 indemnity from PET and its officers/directors; that she admitted to reading a
    confidential letter addressed to PET officers/directors containing the legal opinion of the counsel
    of PET regarding her case; and that she was validly terminated from her employment on the
    ground that she willfully breached the trust and confidence reposed in her by her employer.
    the Court cannot fault the actions of PET in dismissing petitioner.
    She argued therein that the Court failed to consider the length of her service to PET in affirming
    her termination from employment. She prayed that her dismissal be declared illegal. Alternatively,
    should the Court uphold the legality of her dismissal, Tirazona pleaded that she be awarded
    separation pay and retirement benefits, out of humanitarian considerations.
    the Court resolves to DENY the motion for reconsideration with FINALITY for lack of
    merit.Tirazona filed the instant Motion for Leave to File [a] Second Motion for Reconsideration,
    with the Second Motion for Reconsideration

    ISSUE:
    whether or not tirazona is entitled to separation pay and other benefits

    RULINGS:
    Although by way of exception, the grant of separation pay or some other financial assistance may
    be allowed to an employee dismissed for just causes on the basis of equity,[15] in Philippine Long
    Distance Telephone Company v. National Labor Relations Commission,[16] we set the limits for
    such a grant and gave the following ratio for the same:

    [S]eparation pay shall be allowed as a measure of social justice only in those instances where the
    employee is validly dismissed for causes other than serious misconduct or those reflecting on his
    moral character. x x x.
    The policy of social justice is not intended to countenance wrongdoing simply because it is
    committed by the underprivileged. At best it may mitigate the penalty but it certainly will not
    condone the offense. Compassion for the poor is an imperative of every humane society but only
    when the recipient is not a rascal claiming an undeserved privilege. Social justice cannot be
    permitted to be [a] refuge of scoundrels any more than can equity be an impediment to the
    punishment of the guilty. Those who invoke social justice may do so only if their hands are clean
    and their motives blameless and not simply because they happen to be poor. This great policy of
    our Constitution is not meant for the protection of those who have proved they are not worthy of
    it, like the workers who have tainted the cause of labor with the blemishes of their own character.
    (Emphasis ours.)

    In accordance with the above pronouncements, Tirazona is not entitled to the award of separation
    pay.

    You might also like