CA: NO VIOLATION IN DISMISSAL OF ILOCOS NORTE ELECTRIC CO-OP WORKER
BAGUIO CITY—The Court of Appeals (CA) has ruled that the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) did not violate any law or an employee’s right to security of tenure when it affirmed the decision of the Ilocos Norte Electric Cooperative (Inec) to dismiss a maintenance worker.
The CA Fifth Division, in a decision dated Nov. 11, said NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion when it affirmed a decision of a Labor Arbiter that the former employee, who would not be identified to protect his privacy, was validly dismissed from his employment under a “redundancy program.”
The appellate court also said that Inec was even “upfront” with its employees about its plan then to retrench redundant employees in line with its plant automation program.
“[Inec] has no legal obligation to keep more employees than are necessary for the operation of its plant,” the CA said, adding that its redundancy program was not “unfair or unreasonable” for being within the “ambit of management prerogative.”
Illegal dismissal
The former employee, who was first hired by the electric cooperative in 2009 as a driver, filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Inec after he was terminated in 2013.
The NLRC ruled in the employee’s favor in a 2014 decision, and ordered his reinstatement as driver, with the payment of back wages.
As he was reinstated, the former employee was reassigned as pole farm maintenance helper in the pole farm department at Inec’s mini hydroelectric power plant (MHPP) in Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte province.
Inec said it complied with the reinstatement order of NLRC, although he was assigned another role instead of being a driver without affecting his salary. The employee, Inec said, was “incapable of performing the duties and responsibilities of a driver” due to a leg injury caused by an accident.
No bad faith
His new role as a maintenance helper was later “deemed redundant” when MHPP restructured and transitioned to automation.
The ex-employee then questioned the validity of his retrenchment from the position, but the CA found that NLRC was right to uphold his dismissal as there was “no substantial evidence to support that [Inec] implemented the redundancy, retrenchment or caused the restructure of MHPP’s staffing pattern in bad faith.”