This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-11-11 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Thus, it was settled that in assumption of jurisdiction cases, the Secretary should impose actual reinstatement in accordance with the intent and spirit of Art. 263(g) of the Labor Code. As with most rules, however, this one is subject to exceptions. We held in Manila Diamond Hotel Employees' Union v. Court of Appeals that payroll reinstatement is a departure from the rule, and special circumstances which make actual reinstatement impracticable must be shown.[14] In one case, payroll reinstatement was allowed where the employees previously occupied confidential positions, because their actual reinstatement, the Court said, would be impracticable and would only serve to exacerbate the situation.[15] In another case, this Court held that the NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion when it allowed payroll reinstatement as an option in lieu of actual reinstatement for teachers who were to be reinstated in the middle of the first term.[16] We held that the NLRC was merely trying its best to work out a satisfactory ad hoc solution to a festering and serious problem.[17] | |||||