Upload File

036. management prerogative.docx

5
036. Management Prerogative G.R. No. 168654 March 25, 2009 ZAYBER JOHN B. PROTACIO, Petitioner, vs. LAYA MANANGHAYA & CO. and/or MARIO T. MANANGHAYA, Respondents. D E C I S I O N TINGA, J.: Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari 1 under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, assailing the decision 2 and resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 85038. The Court of Appeals’ decision reduced the monetary award granted to petitioner by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) while the resolution denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration for lack of merit. The following factual antecedents are matters of record. Respondent KPMG Laya Mananghaya & Co. (respondent firm) is a general professional partnership duly organized under the laws of the Philippines. Respondent firm hired petitioner Zayber John B. Protacio as Tax Manager on 01 April 1996. He was subsequently promoted to the position of Senior Tax Manager. On 01 October 1997, petitioner was again promoted to the position of Tax Principal. 4 However, on 30 August 1999, petitioner tendered his resignation effective 30 September 1999. Then, on 01 December 1999, petitioner sent a letter to respondent firm demanding the immediate payment of his 13th month pay, the cash commutation of his leave credits and the issuance of his 1999 Certificate of Income Tax Withheld on Compensation. Petitioner sent to respondent firm two more demand letters for the payment of his reimbursement claims under pain of the legal action. 5 Respondent firm failed to act upon the demand letters. Thus, on 15 December 1999, petitioner filed before the NLRC a complaint for the non-issuance of petitioner’s W-2 tax form for 1999 and the non-payment of the following benefits: (1) cash equivalent of petitioner’s leave credits in the amount of P 55,467.60; (2) proportionate 13th month pay for the year 1999; (3) reimbursement claims in the amount of P 19,012.00; and (4) lump sum pay for the fiscal year 1999 in the amount of P 674,756.70. Petitioner also sought moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees. Respondent Mario T. Managhaya was also impleaded in his official capacity as respondent firm’s managing partner. 6 In his complaint, 7 petitioner averred, inter alia, that when he was promoted to the position of Tax Principal in October 1997, his compensation package had consisted of a monthly gross compensation of P 60,000.00, a 13th month pay and a lump sum payment for the year 1997 in the amount of P 240,000.00 that was paid to him on 08 February 1998. According to petitioner, beginning 01 October 1998, his compensation package was revised as follows: (a) monthly gross compensation of P 95,000.00, inclusive of nontaxable allowance; (b) 13th month pay; and (c) a lump sum amount in addition to the aggregate monthly gross compensation. On 12 April 1999, petitioner received the lump sum amount of P 573,000.00 for the fiscal year ending 1998. 8 Respondent firm denied it had intentionally delayed the processing of petitioner’s claims but alleged that the abrupt departure of petitioner and three other members of the firm’s Tax Division had created problems in the determination of petitioner’s various accountabilities, which could be finished only by going over voluminous documents. Respondents further averred that they had been taken aback upon learning about the labor case filed by petitioner when all along they had done their best to facilitate the processing of his claims. 9 During the pendency of the case before the Labor Arbiter, respondent firm on three occasions sent check payments to petitioner in the following amounts: (1) P 71,250.00, representing petitioner’s 13th month pay; (2) P 54,824.18, as payments for the cash equivalent of petitioner’s leave credits and reimbursement claims; and (3) P 10,762.57, for the refund of petitioner’s taxes withheld on his vacation leave credits. Petitioner’s copies of his withholding tax certificates were sent to him along with the check payments. 10 Petitioner acknowledged the receipt of the 13th month pay but disputed the computation of the cash value of his vacation leave credits and reimbursement claims. 11 On 07 June 2002, Labor Arbiter Eduardo J. Carpio rendered a decision, 12 the dispositive portion of which reads: WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered ordering respondents to jointly and solidarily pay complainant the following: P 12,681.00 - representing the reimbursement claims of complainant;

Upload: del-dimanahan

Post on 17-Aug-2015

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

Report

TRANSCRIPT

036. Management PrerogativeG.R. No. 168654 March 25, 2009ZAYBER JOHN B. PROTA!O,Petitioner,vs."AYA MANANGHAYA # O. a$%&or MAR!O T. MANANGHAYA, Respondents.D E C I S I O NT!NGA, J.:Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari1under Rule ! of the 1""# Rules of CivilProcedure, assailin$ the decision%and resolution&of the Court of 'ppeals in C'().R. SP No.*!+&*. ,he Court of 'ppeals- decision reduced the .onetar/ award $ranted to petitioner 0/ theNational 1a0or Relations Co..ission 2N1RC3 while the resolution denied petitioner-s .otion forreconsideration for lac4 of .erit.,he followin$ factual antecedents are .atters of record.Respondent 5P6)1a/a 6anan$ha/a 7Co. 2respondent fir.3 is a $eneral professionalpartnership dul/ or$ani8ed under the laws of the Philippines. Respondent fir. hired petitioner9a/0er :ohn B. Protacio as ,a; 6ana$er on +1 'pril 1""uentl/ pro.oted tothe position of Senior ,a; 6ana$er. On +1 Octo0er 1""#, petitioner was a$ain pro.oted to theposition of ,a; Principal.

=owever, on &+ 'u$ust 1""", petitioner tendered his resi$nation effective &+ Septe.0er 1""".,hen, on +1 Dece.0er 1""", petitioner sent a letter to respondent fir.de.andin$ thei..ediate pa/.ent of his 1&th .onth pa/, the cash co..utation of his leave credits and theissuance of his 1""" Certificate of Inco.e ,a; ?ithheld on Co.pensation.Petitioner sent torespondent fir. two .ore de.and letters for the pa/.ent of his rei.0urse.ent clai.s underpain of the le$al action.!Respondent fir. failed to act upon the de.and letters. ,hus, on 1! Dece.0er 1""", petitionerfiled 0efore the N1RC a co.plaint for the non(issuance of petitioner-s ?(% ta; for. for 1""" andthe non(pa/.ent of the followin$ 0enefits@ 213 cash e>uivalent of petitioner-s leave credits in thea.ount ofP!!,uivalent ofprivate respondent-s unused leave creditsA2&3 P1+,+++.++ attorne/-s fees.*O OR)ERE).%&Petitioner sou$ht reconsideration. In the assailed Resolution dated %# :une %++!, the Court of'ppeals denied petitioner-s .otion for reconsideration for lac4 of .erit.=ence, the instant petition, raisin$ the followin$ issues@I.?=E,=ER PEB1IC RESPONDEN, COER, OB 'PPE'1S- SE66'RF DENI'1 OBPE,I,IONER-S 6O,ION BOR RECONSIDER',ION GIO1',ES ,=E CONS,I,E,ION'1REHEIRE6EN, ,=', COER, DECISIONS 6ES, S,',E ,=E 1E)'1 'ND B'C,E'1 B'SISI,=EREOBJ.II?=E,=ER PEB1IC RESPONDEN, COER, OB 'PPE'1S CO66I,,ED )R'GE 'BESE OBDISCRE,ION 'ND 'C,ED IN ?'N,ON EKCESS OB :ERISDIC,ION IN ,'5IN)CO)NI9'NCE OB IRESPONDEN,SJ PE,I,ION BOR CER,IOR'RI ?=EN ,=ERESO1E,ION ,=EREOB =IN)ES ON 6ERE EG'1E',ION OB EGIDENCE.III.?=E,=ER PEB1IC RESPONDEN, COER, OB 'PPE'1S ?'N,ON1F 'BESED I,SDISCRE,IONINE6P1OFIN)'1'R)ERDIGISOR,OCO6PE,EPE,I,IONER-SD'I1FS'1'RFR',E,=EREBFDI6INIS=IN)=ISBENEBI,S, INIGIO1',IONJ OB,=E1'BORCODE.IG.?=E,=ERPEB1ICRESPONDEN,COER,OB'PPE'1SC'PRICIOES1F'BESEDI,SDISCRE,ION IN REGERSIN) ,=E ICONCERRIN)J BINDIN)S OB BO,= 1'BOR 'RBI,ER'ND N1RC ON ,=E CO6PENS'B1E N',ERE OB PE,I,IONER-S FE'R END I1E6PJ SE6P1'F IsicJ C1'I6.%Beforedelvin$intothe.eritsof thepetition, theissuesraised0/petitioneradvertin$totheConstitution .ust 0e addressed. Petitioner contends that the Court of 'ppeals- resolution whichdenied his .otion for reconsideration violated 'rticle GIII, Section 1 of the Constitution, whichstates@Section 1. No decision shall 0e rendered 0/ an/ court without e;pressin$ therein clearl/ anddistinctl/ the facts and the law on which it is 0ased.No petition for review or .otion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall 0e refuseddue course or denied without statin$ the le$al 0asis therefor.O0viousl/, the assailedresolution isnotaLdecisionLwithin the .eanin$of theConstitutionalre>uire.ent. ,his .andate is applica0le onl/ in cases Lsu0.itted for decision,Li.e., $iven duecourse and after filin$ of 0riefs or .e.oranda andMor other pleadin$s, as the case .a/ 0e.%! ,here>uire.ent isnot applica0leto aresolution den/in$a.otionfor reconsiderationof thedecision. ?hat is applica0le is the second para$raph of the a0ove(>uoted Constitutionalprovisionreferrin$toL.otionfor reconsiderationof adecisionof thecourt.L ,heassailedresolution co.plied with the re>uire.ent therein that a resolution den/in$ a .otion forreconsiderationshouldstatethele$al 0asisof thedenial. It sufficientl/e;plainedthat afterreadin$ the pleadin$s filed 0/ the parties, the appellate court did not find an/ co$ent reason toreverse itself.Ne;t, petitioner ar$ues that the Court of 'ppeals erred in $ivin$ due course to the petition forcertiorari when the resolution thereof hin$ed on .ere evaluation of evidence. Petitioner opinesthat respondents failed to .a4e its case in showin$ that the 1a0or 'r0iter and the N1RC hade;ercised their discretion in an ar0itrar/ and despotic .anner.'s a $eneral rule, in certiorari proceedin$s under Rule uivalent of petitioner-s leave creditsin the a.ount of P&",*!!.*+.SO ORDERED.


Rev (7-13) STATE GAME LANDS #: 036 SALE: 036-2019-01

Report No. DODIG-2016-036 Management of Items in the ...Dec 22, 2015  · DODIG-2016-036 (Project No. D2015-D000RD-0087.000)│ i. Results in Brief. Management of Items in the Defense

TL0813 036 792996409:TL0813 036 792996409

Boletín 036

SEPA DNS 18-036 Green Dot Road Management of the Green ... · SEPA DNS 18-036 Green Dot Road Management of the Green Gate Area Quilomene Wildlife Area Comments received during the

036.Kota Dumai

036 sofonias

Evidencia 036

036 Obadiah

036. Beatles

edición 036

Mampato #036

Pagina 036

Acuerdo 036

Noticias 036

VistaLIBRE 036

Aditamento Pm 036

Construction 036

Batgirl 036

Futura 036

REVISTA 036

Mission 036

English 036

TOPCINEMA 036

036.ple.liz diamondppt

5º MODELO 036

ED 388 644 SP 036 290 AUTHOR Stensmo, Christer TITLE … · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 388 644 SP 036 290 AUTHOR Stensmo, Christer TITLE Classroom Management Styles in Context: Two Case

Dredge Management Plan - Flinders Ports€¦ · Doc. No: 036-10315-02-003 Title: Dredge Management Plan Rev. B7 08-May-2019 1 / 84 Dredge Management Plan DOCUMENT NUMBER: 036-10315-02-003

036 Tacito

DATE: May 17, 2016 REPORT NO. PW2016-036 TO: Chair … PW2016-036 City of Brantford Water... · Committee of the Whole – Operations And Administration FROM: ... Management Review

Kommersv 036 290212_

DOCUMENT RESUME CE 036 075 Brower, Michael Starting Labor … · 2014-03-30 · DOCUMENT RESUME. CE 036 075. Brower, Michael. Starting Labor-Management Quality of Work Life Programs,

MCSL-036 : LABORATORY COURSE (FOR GOAD, … papers June... · MCSL-036 : LABORATORY COURSE (FOR GOAD, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AND ACCOUNTANCY AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT) Time …

Informe 036

WE-Wohnw.nde€¦ · 5.243,— 6.181— 6.030,— 6.030,— Modell Artikel-Nr. S 039 - S 039 - S 039 - S 039 - S 036 - S 036 - S 036 - S 036 S 036 - S 046- S046- S 046- S 046- S 043-