Page 151 - MPTSOUTH NEWSLETTER - JAN to JUN 2019 ISSUE

refute the charges against her for the submission of said fraudulent items of expense. All she
did was to deny any personal knowledge in the commission of the alterations in the subject
receipts and to point fingers at other people who may have done the alterations. The beverage
company terminates the services of Ms. A.

The Supreme Court ruled that the dismissal of Ms. A due to loss of trust and confidence is valid.
It is well-settled in our jurisprudence that loss of trust and confidence constitutes a just and
valid cause for an employee’s termination.

“As Senior Financial Accountant, Ms. A had duties which clearly qualify her as one occupying a
position of trust and responsibility. She had access to and was responsible for confidential, deli-
cate, and sensitive matters, particularly relating to its operations and finances. Moreover, she
was also privy to the strategic and operational decision-making of the company, a sensitive and
delicate position requiring the company’s utmost trust and confidence. As such, she was con-
sidered as holding a position of responsibility or of trust and confidence.

The beverage company maintained that Ms. A’s act of falsifying or altering receipts in order to
The Supreme Court has always reminded that while the Constitution is committed to the policy secure unwarranted reimbursements, not only once, but on three separate occasions, were
of social justice and the protection of the working class, it should not be expected that every clearly established by the evidence on record and unambiguously displayed her wrongful
labor dispute will be automatically decided in favor of labor. Management also has its own intents. Although the amounts involved in the subject receipts were relatively small, or only the
rights to dismiss employees by reason of loss of trust and confidence. More so, in the case of dates and/or items ordered were altered or tampered with, Ms. A’s act of submitting fraudulent
supervisors or personnel occupying positions of responsibility, loss of trust justifies termination. items of expense adversely reflected on her integrity and honesty, which is ample basis for the
beverage company to lose its trust and confidence in her.” (G.R. No. 149433, promulgated on
Here is a story of a Senior Financial Accountant who, had been in nine years of service in a bever- June 22, 2011)
age company, had shown exceptional performance with her work, but unfortunately loss the
trust and confidence of the management through her fraudulent acts by means of alterations LESSON LEARNED
in the receipts of her meal reimbursement. Yes friends you read it correctly, simple alterations
in the receipts of her meal reimbursements. And this resulted to her termination with just cause It may be interesting to note in the story above that the terminated employee’s integrity and
from service. reputation were tarnished by her fraudulent acts, despite her exceptional performance and of
being in service with the company for nine long years.
One of the benefits enjoyed by the employees of a beverage company was the reimbursement
of meal and transportation expenses incurred while rendering overtime work. Ms. A, a Senior Let this ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Moya vs. First Solid Rubber Industries, Inc. GR
Financial Accountant, committed fraudulent acts by altering the following to support her claim 184011, be every employee’s guiding principle when it held that, “Length of service is not a bar-
for meal reimbursements: gaining chip that can simply be stacked against the employer. After all, an employer-employee
relationship is symbiotic where both parties benefit from mutual loyalty and dedicated service.
The McDonalds Receipt No. 875493 for P 111.00. She presented the receipt for reimbursement If an employer has treated his employee well, has accorded him fairness and adequate compen-
and altered its date to be October 1, 1994. A certification from Mc Donalds was secured and it sation as determined by law, it is only fair to expect a long-time employee to return such fairness
certified that the receipt was actually issued on October 2, 1994, which is a Sunday. with at least some respect and honesty. Thus, it may be said that betrayal by a long-time em-
The Shakeys Pizza Parlor Receipt No. 122658 dated November 20, 1994 for P174.06 which ployee is more insulting and odious for a fair employer.”
showed a single order of Buddy Pack with Extra Mojos was altered. The affidavit of the delivery Sources:
personnel of Shakeys Pasong Tamo attested to the fact that the receipt was actually for three (3)
orders of Bunch of Lunch. The delivery personnel further recounted that the call for delivery on Supreme Court of the Philippines Jurisprudence/G.R. No. 149433
that particular day was made by a person who turned out to be Ms. A’s daughter, who was with
her in the office as evidenced by the logbook entry of the security guard in Ms. A’s office. Supreme Court of the Philippines Jurisprudence/G.R. No. 184011
The Shakeys Pizza Parlor Receipt No. 41274 dated July 19, 1994 for P130.50 was found to be
actually issued on July 17, 1994 which is also a Sunday. Philippine Labor Code

In line with its company policy, the beverage company sent Ms. A several memoranda requiring This article first appeared and was published in The Counselor Issue No. 11-2015, a trimestral
her to explain why her claims for reimbursement should not be considered fraudulent since e-newsletter of Tollways Management Corporation Legal and Risk Management Departments.
there were alterations, i.e., the dates of issuance of the receipts and the food items purchased.
It then conducted hearings and formal investigations on the matter to give Ms. A an ample Grace P. Santos, a writing enthusiast, works as paralegal of NLEX Corporation.
opportunity to explain the issues against her and to present her side. Ms. A failed to sufficiently