PLAI

Decision

Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company v. Raut

G.R. No. 174209 · 2009-08-25 · NACHURA, J. · LawPhil

PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY, Petitioner, vs. RIZALINA RAUT, LEILA EMNACE and GINA CAPISTRANO, Respondents.

NACHURA, J.:

This is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court assailing the Court of Appeals (CA) Decision1 in CA-GR SP. No. 85829 which affirmed the National Labor Relations Commission's (NLRC's) dismissal2 of petitioner Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company's Memorandum of Appeal for failure to attach thereto the requisite Certificate of Non-Forum Shopping. The facts, as summarized by the CA, are as follows: This case was originally filed on December 17, 1996 by Rizalina Raut and [Leila] Emnace against Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company (PLDT for brevity) for illegal dismissal and non-payment of salaries, overtime pay, night shift differential, 13th month pay, service incentive leave, backwages with moral damages and attorney's fees.

Gina Capistrano followed suit by filing a similar case on January 18, 1997. These cases were consolidated by the Labor Arbiter on February 25, 1997 due to similarity of facts and issues involved. In the complaint, signed and verified by the respondents, they alleged that they were illegally dismissed on November 30, 1996 and December 16, 1996 respectively.

In the decision of the Labor Arbiter promulgated on July 30, 1997, it reinstated the respondents x x x to their former position as telephone operators or if not feasible anymore to another equal position without loss of seniority rights and benefits and to pay the following backwages which are subject to recomputation up to the date of the finality of the decision as follows: 1. Rizalina Raut - ₱32,505.00 2. [Leila] Emnace - ₱32,505.00 3.

Gina Capistrano - ₱34,320.00