This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2007-03-01 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| We have long recognized the prerogative of management to transfer an employee from one office to another within the same business establishment, as the exigency of the business may require, provided that the transfer does not result in a demotion in rank or a diminution in salary, benefits and other privileges of the employee; or is not unreasonable, inconvenient or prejudicial to the latter; or is not used as a subterfuge by the employer to rid himself of an undesirable worker.[16] In the case of Philippine Japan Active Carbon Corp. v. NLRC,[17] the Court ruled:It is the employer's prerogative, based on its assessment and perception of its employees' qualifications, aptitudes, and competence, to move them around in the various areas of its business operations in order to ascertain where they will function with maximum benefit to the company. An employee's right to security of tenure does not give him such a vested right in his position as would deprive the company of its prerogative to change his assignment or transfer him where he will be most useful. When his transfer is not unreasonable, nor inconvenient, nor prejudicial to him, and it does not involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, benefits, and other privileges, the employee may not complain that it amounts to a constructive dismissal.[18] | |||||
|
2005-01-17 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Of relevant significance in the case at bar is the right of the employer to transfer employees in their work station. We have previously held that it is the employer's prerogative, based on its assessment and perception of its employees' qualifications, aptitudes and competence, to move them around in the various areas of its business operations in order to ascertain where they will function with maximum benefit of the company.[44] This right flows from ownership and from the established rule that labor (laws) do not authorize the substitution of judgment of the employer in the conduct of his business, unless it is shown to be contrary to law, morals, or public policy.[45] | |||||
|
2004-03-09 |
YNARES-SATIAGO, J. |
||||
| Management's prerogative of transferring and reassigning employees from one area of operation to another in order to meet the requirements of the business[48] is generally not constitutive of constructive dismissal.[49] Thus, in Philippine Japan Active Carbon Corporation v. NLRC,[50] the Court ruled: It is the employer's prerogative, based on its assessment and perception of its employees' qualifications, aptitudes, and competence, to move them around in the various areas of its business operations in order to ascertain where they will function with maximum benefit to the company. An employee's right to security of tenure does not give him such a vested right in his position as would deprive the company of its prerogative to change his assignment or transfer him where he will be most useful. When his transfer is not unreasonable, nor inconvenient, nor prejudicial to him, and it does not involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, benefits, and other privileges, the employee may not complain that it amounts to a constructive dismissal.[51] The employer has the burden of proving that the transfer of an employee is for valid and legitimate grounds.[52] Particularly, for a transfer not to be considered a constructive dismissal, the employer must be able to show that such transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial to the employee; nor does it involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, privileges and other benefits.[53] | |||||