BACOLOD-TALISAY REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS ROMEO DELA CRUZ

BACOLOD-TALISAY REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

VS

ROMEO DELA CRUZ
587 SCRA 304 (2009)

The twin notice requirement provided by law should be observed in order for a dismissal to be valid.

Romeo dela Cruz (respondent) is an employee of Bacolod-Talisay Realty Development Corporation (Bacolod-Talisay) as an overseer. He was suspended for 30 days for payroll paddling, selling canepoints without the knowledge and consent of management and misappropriating the proceeds thereof, and renting out tractor for use in another farm. After 30 days, he received a letter informing him that he was dismissed from his work.
Respondent dela Cruz and Bacolod-Talisay had a confrontation before the barangay council but they did not reach any settlement. A case for illegal dismissal was filed by dela Cruz, and it was dismissed by the Labor Arbiter as well as the NLRC. On the other hand, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the NLRC finding that the Bacolor-Dalisay did not comply with the guidelines for the dismissal of an employee.

ISSUE:
Whether or not petitioner, Bacolod-Talisay observed due process in dismissing Romeo dela Cruz

HELD:
The Court of Appeals correctly held though that Bacolod-Talisay did not comply with the proper procedure in dismissing respondent. In other words, Bacolod-Talisay failed to afford dela Cruz due process by failing to comply with the twin notice requirement in dismissing him, viz: 1) a first notice to apprise him of his fault, and 2) a second notice to him that his employment is being terminated.

The letter dated June 3, 1997 sent to dela Cruz was a letter of suspension. It did not comply with the required first notice, the purpose of which is to apprise the employee of the cause for termination and to give him reasonable opportunity to explain his side.
In fine, while the dismissal of dela Cruz was for a just cause, the procedure in effecting the same was not observed.