BALITAO, MARIEL RATANI C.

FILCRO in Labor II (Labor Relations) under Usec. JBJ

MARIVAL TRADING, INC. (MTI) V. NLRC (SERIOUS MISCONDUCT)

525 SCRA 708, June 26, 2007

FACTS: Petitioner Marival Trading was engaged in veterinary products. Ma. Vianney Abella
worked as a chemist/quality controller at MTI for almost 8 years.

After one staff meeting, Abella went out of the room leaving her belongings. While she was out
of the room, the VP Gen. Manager requested two male employees to move some tables so they
could conduct an officer’s meeting. Abella’s belongings were placed on one of the tables. When
she returned to the room, she attended to her belongings, when her shoulder bag fell badly on
the floor, disputing the officer’s meeting. The VP General Manager approached Abella to ask what
the problem was and the latter expressed her resentment over the fact that the employees were
not informed first before their tables were moved. Three days later, Abella received a memo from
the VP General Manager directing her to explain within 24 hours why no disciplinary action should
be imposed for her disrespectful insubordination & unprofessional conduct.In her response, she
denied the accusation against her and clarified that her shoulder bag accidentally fell to floor and
such should not have caused any offense to the officers present at the meeting. She maintained
that she aired her side regarding the table rearrangement in a tactful & courteous manner.

Abella filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with the Labor Arbiter (LA) alleging that she was
dismissed from work without just cause and without due process.

ISSUE: Is Abella’s dismissal is validly based on serious misconduct?

LAW: PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 442 OF 1974, as amended and renumbered

ART. 297. [282] Termination by Employer. An employer may terminate an

employment for any of the following causes:
(a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful
orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work;
(b) Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties;
(c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his
employer or duly authorized representative;
(d) Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the person of his
employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly authorized
representatives; and
(e) Other causes analogous to the foregoing.

CASE HISTORY:
 Abella filed a complaint with LA praying for reinstatement with full backwages and
without loss of seniority right and other benefits.
 LA held that Marival had grounds to take disciplinary action against Abella but since this
was her first offense, the LA considered the penalty of dismissal too severe & ordered
her reinstatement to former position. No backwages awarded
 On appeal to the NLRC, it affirmed the order of the LA.
 Hence, this petition.
 BALITAO, MARIEL RATANI C.
FILCRO in Labor II (Labor Relations) under Usec. JBJ

RULING: No. Serious misconduct, as a ground for dismissal under Art. 282 of the Labor Code
must be serious, must relate to the performance of the employee’s duties and must show that
the employee has income unfit to continue working for the employer. In this case, the acts
complained of, under the circumstances that were done did not in any way pertain to Abella’s
duties as chemist/quality controller. In previous cases, the SC held that grave & insulting language
as tantamount to gross misconduct but in Abella’s case, the utter back of respect for her
supervisor was not patent.

OPINION: The decision to reinstate Abella and is correct. The circumstances in the case are to
petty to amount to serious misconduct. If the act of raising her concern about the chairs being
moved is misconduct, these were not serious enough to terminate an employee who has worked
with the company for 8 years.