This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2011-07-27 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| petitioner refused to collect fares from passengers. In fact, this is already the third instance that he failed to collect fares from the riding public. Although petitioner already suffered the corresponding penalties for his past misconduct, those infractions are still relevant and may be considered in assessing his liability for his present infraction. [25] We thus held in Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission [26]that: Nor can it be plausibly argued that because the offenses were already given the appropriate sanctions, they cannot be taken against him. They are relevant in assessing private respondent's liability for the present violation for the purpose of determining the appropriate penalty. To sustain private respondent's argument that the past violation should not be considered is to disregard the warnings previously issued to him. | |||||