Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines v. National Labor Relations Commission

MENDOZA, J.:

This is a petition for certiorari to set aside the decision of the NLRC dated October 29, 1990 and the resolution dated February 28, 1991, holding petitioner Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. liable to private respondent Reynato B. Aguinaldo for one year backwages and for reinstatement. The facts of the case are as follows: Private respondent was a bus conductor of the Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. His duty, among other things, was to issue freight and passenger tickets and to collect the corresponding payment. On September 18, 1988, private respondent and bus driver Conrado Collado were scheduled to make a trip from Baguio City to Manila on Bus No. 575 at 10 p.m.

Private respondent arrived at the terminal thirty (30) minutes before the start of the trip. He saw bundles of flowers already loaded on the bus. He inquired from the freight clerk whether the freight fare for the flowers had been paid and was told that it had been paid.

Private respondent was handed a bill of lading indicating payment of the amount of P800.00. Based on the bill of lading, he issued a freight ticket. As the bus was already full, it left Baguio City fifteen minutes ahead of schedule.

When it was nearing Camp 6 at Tuba, Benguet, inspectors Jessie C. Sy and Silverio Mendoza boarded the bus and found that two passengers, one bound for Camp 5 and the other bound for Manila, had not been issued tickets. Upon the inspectors' instruction, private respondent issued tickets to the two passengers. At the Tarlac terminal, the inspectors counted the number of bundles of flowers on the bus and found that eight bundles had not been accounted for in the bill of lading.

Hence, private respondent Aguinaldo issued an additional freight ticket for the extra baggage and paid the freight fare from his own money. Because of these incidents, private respondent was told that he was being placed under preventive suspension on that day. On September 21, 1988, a memorandum was issued to him by the company, confirming his suspension and stating the grounds for his suspension and requiring him to report for investigation within three days.

On September 26, 1988, Ricardo J. Castañeda, Jr., operations manager, conducted an investigation during which private respondent admitted the violations alleged in the memorandum. After the lapse of 30 days, Aguinaldo reported for work, but he was refused admission into the company compound. Hence on April 26, 1989, he filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.

On May 3, 1989, a notice of termination dated April 11, 1989 was served on him by petitioner.1 On December 20, 1989, the Labor Arbiter rendered a decision, finding petitioner guilty of dismissing private respondent without just cause and denying his right to due process. The dispositive portion of the decision states:2

WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered ordering the respondent to reinstate the complainant to his former position as bus conductor and to pay his backwages from September 18, 1988 up to his actual reinstatement. In case reinstatement is no longer possible, respondent is ordered to pay his separation pay computed at one month salary including other benefits/commissions, for every year of service. Thus, respondent should pay the complainant the following: BACKWAGES Period covered: September 18, 1988 up to November 30, 1989 or an equivalent of 382 working days. I. Working Days Covered 382 days II. Multiplied by the basic rate of x P77.35 III Equals backwages due