This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2009-12-04 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| In Villarama v. National Labor Relations Commission,[37] wherein a managerial employee committed sexual harassment against his subordinate, the Court held that sexual harassment is a valid cause for separation from service. | |||||
|
2008-02-18 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| As a managerial employee, petitioner is bound by more exacting work ethics. He failed to live up to his higher standard of responsibility when he succumbed to his moral perversity. And when such moral perversity is perpetrated against his subordinate, he provides a justifiable ground for his dismissal for lack of trust and confidence. It is the right, nay, the duty of every employer to protect its employees from oversexed superiors.[60] | |||||
|
2006-11-02 |
VELASCO, JR., J. |
||||
| At the outset, we tackle the three (3) procedural issues raised by respondent Uy in his September 6, 2000 Comment[20] to bolster his position that the petition should be dismissed. Respondent contends that the petition ought to be dismissed outright as petitioners did not file a motion for reconsideration from the assailed CA Decision, an alleged pre-requisite before this Court can entertain petitions under Rule 45. Respondent cites Ybañez v. Court of Appeals,[21] Tan v. Court of Appeals,[22] Villarama v. NLRC,[23] Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. Court of Appeals,[24] and Sunshine Transportation, Inc. v. NLRC[25] as authorities. Moreover, respondent Uy maintains that the verification and certification of non-forum shopping was defective as only one of the petitioners affixed his signature, (Ramon P. Ereneta) and such sole signatory cannot represent petitioner BCDA as no Board Resolution was presented conferring such authority. Lastly, said respondent asserts that there is no proper joinder of parties considering that the major issue raised by petitioner BCDA is its invocation of RA 7227. | |||||