Thursday, January 26, 2012

Caltex vs Agad (GR No. 162017) April 23, 2010

Facts: Petitioner Caltex employed the services of Respondent Agad as Depot Superintendent-A on a probationary basis for six months. For the next eleven years, Agad obtained various promotions and held the positions of Depot Superintendent-A, Field Engineer, Senior Superintendent, and Bulk Depot Superintendent. During his latter’s position, he committed certain acts against the company, to wit: (1) Falsification of crating expenses which was later been asked for reimbursement and (2) Withdrawal and sale of 190 pieces of LPG cylinders. And by these acts, it led the Petitioner company to dismiss him based on justifiable causes laid down by law.

Issue: Whether the Petitioner legally terminated Respondent’s employment based just causes, to wit: (1) acts tantamount to serious misconduct and willful violation of company rules and regulations; and (2) willful breach of trust and confidence as Depot Superintendent.

Held: The Supreme Court answered in the affirmative.

Respondent committed a serious infraction amounting to theft of company property. This act is tantamount to a serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer in connection with his work, a just cause for termination of employment recognized under Article 282(a) of the Labor Code. Additionally, Respondent’s act constitutes willful breach of the trust reposed in him, another just cause for termination of employment recognized under Article 282(c) of the Labor Code. Loss of trust and confidence, as a just cause for termination of employment, is premised on the fact that the employee concerned holds a position of responsibility, trust and confidence. The employee must be invested with confidence on delicate matters, such as the custody, handling, care and protection of the employer’s property and funds.

Even if Respondent did not commit the alleged charge of fictitious reimbursement of crating expense, he was found to have acted without authority, a serious infraction amounting to theft of company property, in the withdrawal and sale of the 190 pieces of LPG cylinders owned by the company

Digg Google Bookmarks reddit Mixx StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Buzz DesignFloat Delicious BlinkList Furl

0 comments: on "Caltex vs Agad (GR No. 162017) April 23, 2010"

Post a Comment