Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

MA. LIZA DE GUZMAN v. NLRC

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 193756 2013-04-10	VENANCIO S. REYES v. RP GUARDIANS SECURITY AGENCY MENDOZA, J.
Backwages and reinstatement are separate and distinct reliefs given to an illegally dismissed employee in order to alleviate the economic damage brought about by the employee's dismissal.[21] "Reinstatement is a restoration to a state from which one has been removed or separated" while "the payment of backwages is a form of relief that restores the income that was lost by reason of the unlawful dismissal." Therefore, the award of one does not bar the other.[22]
	GR No. 172044 2013-02-06	CAVITE APPAREL v. MICHELLE MARQUEZ BRION, J.
While previous infractions may be used to support an employee's dismissal from work in connection with a subsequent similar offense,[26] we cautioned employers in an earlier case that although they enjoy a wide latitude of discretion in the formulation of work-related policies, rules and regulations, their directives and the implemtation of their policies must be fair and reasonable; at the very least, penalties must be commensurate to the offense involved and to the degree of the infraction.[27]
	GR No. 172199 2009-02-27	ELIZABETH D. PALTENG v. UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS BANK QUISUMBING, J.
Notably, reinstatement and payment of backwages are distinct and separate reliefs given to alleviate the economic setback brought about by the employee's dismissal. The award of one does not bar the other. Backwages may be awarded without reinstatement, and reinstatement may be ordered without awarding backwages.[15]
	GR NO. 169600 2007-06-26	MARIVAL TRADING v. NLRC CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
This Court agrees with the Court of Appeals' conclusion that, under the attendant factual antecedents, the dismissal meted out on Abella for misconduct appears to be too harsh a penalty. It must be noted that Abella is being held liable for a first-time offense, despite eight years of unblemished service. Even when an employee is found to have transgressed the employer's rules, in the actual imposition of penalties upon the erring employees, consideration must still be given to his length of service and the number of violations committed during his employment.[29]
	GR No. 148848 2003-08-05	JACINTO RETUYA v. SALIC B. DUMARPA PANGANIBAN, J.
Moreover, petitioners are entitled to separation pay. As provided by Article 279 of the Labor Code, an illegally dismissed employee is entitled to the twin reliefs of 1) either reinstatement or separation pay, if reinstatement is no longer feasible; and 2) back wages. These are distinct and separate reliefs given to alleviate the economic setback brought about by the employee's dismissal.[20] The award of one does not bar the other. Back wages may be awarded without reinstatement, and reinstatement may be ordered without awarding back wages.[21]