LUNESA O. LANSANGAN AND ROCITA CENDAÑA VS AMKOR TECHNOLOGY PHILIPPINES

LUNESA O. LANSANGAN AND ROCITA CENDAÑA

VS

AMKOR TECHNOLOGY PHILIPPINES
577 SCRA 493 (2009)

Payment of backwages and other benefits is justified only if the employee was unjustly dismissed.

An email was sent to Amkor Technology Philippines (Amkor) through their General Manager alleging that the Lunesa Lansangan (Lansangan) and Rocita Cendana (Cendana) stole company time. Lansangan and Cendana admitted to the wrongdoing and were terminated for ―extremely serious offenses‖. The two then filed a case of illegal dismissal against Amkor. The Labor Arbiter (LA) ordered for their reinstatement to their former positions without backwages, but dismissed the complaint on basis of Lansangan and Cendana’s guilt. The two did not appeal the finding that they were guilty, and moved for the writ of execution. Amkor appealed the decision to the National Labor Relations Commissions (NLRC) and was subsequently granted. The NLRC deleted the grant for reinstatement of the LA.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the NLRC that Lansangan and Cendana are guilty and should not be reinstated but modified in so far as backwages are concerned that it must be paid in full.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Lansangan and Cendana are entitled to backwages and reinstatement

HELD:
The Arbiter found Lansangan and Cendana’s dismissal to be valid. Such finding had, as stated earlier, become final, they not having appealed it. Lansangan and Cendana’s are not entitled to full backwages as their dismissal was not found to be illegal. Agabon v. NLRC so states –– payment of backwages and other benefits is justified only if the employee was unjustly dismissed.