Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 189457, April 07 : 2011]

SUNRISE HOLIDAY CONCEPTS, INC., Petitioner, vs. TERESA A. ARUGAY, Respondent.

D E C I S I O N


NACHURA, J.:

Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari, assailing the Amended Decision1 dated April 7, 2009 and the Resolution2 dated September 2, 2009 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 100227.
The Facts

Version of the Employee

On February 16, 2004, respondent was engaged by petitioner as Collection Manager under a six (6)-month probationary period. She was promised a compensation of Sixteen Thousand Pesos (P16,000.00) plus Two Thousand Pesos (P2,000.00), which shall be adjusted to Twenty-Five Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) at the end of the 6-month probationary period. After six (6) months, respondent continued to work for petitioner company but it made no salary adjustment.3

As part of her functions, respondent coordinated largely with her four (4) collectors and with clients, numbering more than two thousand (2,000), from whom she was collecting existing accounts for petitioner company. In the exercise of her functions, respondent made use of the company's old mobile phone. Extensive coordination with company employees and with clients compelled respondent to bring the cellular phone out of the company premises. No one told respondent that she had to get permission from higher management to bring out the said cellular phone. Respondent's job as a Collection Manager required her to be persistent with those whom she dealt with to collect badly needed funds for the company.4

In the course of her functions, respondent sent a memorandum chiding her Assistant Collection Manager for the latter's lack of dedication and her act of cheating on her timecard. Unfortunately, the Assistant Collection Manager made an issue out of this and complained to the Executive Assistant of petitioner company. The Executive Assistant favored the Assistant Collection Manager, who is his goddaughter, and ignored respondent's report.5

On September 20, 2004, respondent received a show-cause Memorandum for: (A) Act of Dishonesty”unauthorized bringing into or taking out any article from company premises. From April 2004 to present, you have been bringing home the Company's mobile phone during weekends without prior approval and consent from higher authority/ies and allegedly using the same for your personal use; (B) Tardiness. For incurring excessive and habitual tardiness of more than five (5) times in a month without just and valid reasons.

Top of Page