This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-10-19 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| Significantly, the respondent is not wholly deprived of his separation benefits. As the Labor Arbiter stressed in his decision, "the separation benefits due the complainant (the respondent herein) were merely withheld."[38] The NLRC made the same conclusion and was even more explicit as it opined that the respondent "is entitled to the benefits he claimed in pursuance to the Collective Bargaining Agreement but, in the meantime, such benefits shall be deposited with the bank by way of pledge."[39] Even the petitioner Bank itself gives "the assurance that as soon as the Bank has satisfied a judgment in Civil Case No. 97174, the earmarked portion of his benefits will be released without delay."[40] | |||||