This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-02-06 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Cavite Apparel disputes the CA's conclusion that Michelle's four absences without official leave were not habitual since she was able to submit a medical certificate for her May 8, 2000 absence. It asserts that, on the contrary, no evidence exists on record to support this conclusion. It maintains that it was in the exercise of its management prerogative that it dismissed Michelle; thus, it is not barred from dismissing her for her fourth offense, although it may have previously punished her for the first three offenses. Citing the Court's ruling in Mendoza v. NLRC,[21] it contends that the totality of Michelle's infractions justifies her dismissal. | |||||