This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2015-12-02 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| In their Comment,[34] the respondents contend that the Bank Certification which they submitted before the NLRC substantially complied with the appeal bond requirement under Article 223 of the Labor Code.[35] Moreover, Quirante's argument that dismissal is too harsh a penalty for her infraction was initially presented before the CA. Her change of theory violates due process.[36] Further, bad faith cannot be attributed to the respondents in dismissing Quirante.[37] Citing Integrated Microelectronics, Inc. v. Pionilla;[38] the respondents point out that as an exception to the general rule, employees can be reinstated sans an award of backwages in cases where the dismissal would be too harsh a penalty and the employer was not motivated by bad faith in ordering the dismissal.[39] Anent the substantial issue of the alleged illegality of the dismissal, the respondents reiterate that as found in the proceedings below, Quirante took two trays of eggs. Regardless of their actual monetary value, Quirante committed a dishonest act, which justified her dismissal from service.[40] | |||||