REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
SUB-ARBITRATION BRANCH NO. 1
DAGUPAN CITY

FERDINAND T. EVANGELISTA,
Complainant,

-versus- NLRC CASE NO. SUB-RAB-I-7-11-0253-2004 UC

REX BOOK STORE- Urdaneta and/or

ATTY. DOMINADOR BUHAIN- Owner
Represented by CHECHE BONITA- Supervisor,
Respondents.
x---------------------------------------------------x

POSITION PAPER

Respondent Rex Book Store represented by Cheche Bonita respectfully submits this position
paper and states:
THE PARTIES

1. Complainant FERDINAND T. EVANGELISTA is employed as Driver with one (1) year

contract for Rex Book Store Urdaneta Branch Offices starting March 3, 2004. He may be
served with summons and other court orders and notices at his given address.

2. Respondent Rex Book Store is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the
Philippines with business address at Pinmaludpod, Urdaneta City. It may be served with
summons and other court notices and orders at its given address.

THE RELEVANT FACTS

3. Complainant was employed as temporary driver and custodian of Rex Book Store (RBS)
company vehicle March 3, 2004 with a daily wage rate of One Hundred Ninety Pesos (Php
190.00);

4. On October 14, 2004, complainant reported to work at 8:34 in the morning for him to sign
out at 12:45 in the afternoon as shown in the attached copy of time record duly entered by
RBS Security Guard on-duty Rey Abrique marked as Annex-1;

5. Complainant returned to work late at 2:43 that afternoon of October 14, 2004 as reflected
in the same logbook, prompting respondent Cheche Bonita to calmly confront him about
such inefficiency and tardiness but complainant just flared up and left herein respondent
abruptly;

6. Respondent never saw complainant again and she only learned that complainant claimed
his salary the following day (October 15, 2004) from RBS Salesclerk then unequivocably
returned the RBS vehicle key from his position;

7. Respondent made all earnest and diligent efforts to locate herein complainant but his
whereabouts became unknown until the former obtained latter’s address from the Honorable
Commission;

11. On November 11, 2004, respondent wrote complainant a letter informing said
complainant to continue his employment as well as to explain his failure to report for work
from October 15, 2004 when he went absent without any leave. Copy of the said letter and
Registry Return Card as hereto attached as Annexes 2 and 3;

THE ISSUES

It is respectfully submitted that the issues for resolution are:

1. Whether or not the absence of complainant from work was caused by his illegal
suspension/termination; and

2. Whether or not complainant is entitled to his prayer for backwages.

DISCUSSION

It is respectfully submitted that complainant reported for work on October 14, 2004 and,
after receiving his salary on October 15, 2004 when he returned the RBS vehicle key to a co-
worker, he never again showed up. For their part, respondents never received any notice that
complainant will go on leave for any reason. Complainant merely disappeared and diligent
efforts respondents expended to locate said complainant were of no avail.

Respondents likewise never committed any positive act or omission by any means,
manner or form which could be construed as tantamount to suspension or dismissal. The
usual form of inquiry which respondent Cheche Bonita employed to merely verify
complainant’s work deficiencies and tardiness does not imply any intent to sever
employment. Complainant could have courteously addressed his immediate supervisor and
 satisfactorily gave his side. Sadly however, complainant immediately went out his way
ranting invectives while moving towards the nearest exit for him to disappear quite sometime
until respondents obtained his address from the Honorable Office after lodging his baseless
complaint.

The foregoing clearly demonstrates that complainant took it upon himself to abandon his
work after surrendering the vehicle key to his co-worker. He deliberately went absent without
any information, order or approval of his employer. In short, he has failed to report for work
and such absences were wanting any valid or justifiable ground.

The Supreme Court, ruled that:

“Abadonment as just and valid ground for dismissal requires the
deliberate and unjustified refusal of the employee to resume his
employment. (Columbus Philippines Bus Corporation vs NLRC, 364
SCRA 606)”

Complainant’s actuations and outward manifestations would squarely fit into such
concept of abandonment. The unexplained, unjustified and deliberate refusal of herein
complainant to report for work must have embolden him with personal reasons prevailing over
exigency of service, thus he has no other choice but to voluntarily disassociate himself from
employment. As respondents never caused nor aggravated such deliberate and unjustifiable
absences of herein complainant, they cannot be made liable to pay backwages for those days
unworked.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this case be dismissed for utter lack of merit
considering that complainant was not illegally suspended nor dismissed as he deliberately
abandoned his employment.

Other just and equitable reliefs are respectfully prayed for.

Dagupan City, Philippines this 10TH day of January 2005.

CHECHE BONITA
Respondent
VERIFICATION: S.S.

I, CHECHE BONITA, under oath, depose and state: That I am the respondent in the
above-entitled case, that I caused the preparation of this Position Paper consisting of four (4)
pages including this verification and I have read and understood all the contents and matters
asserted therein, and that all factual matters and allegations therein are true and correct of my
own knowledge and belief.

CHECHE BONITA
Respondent/Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 10 TH day of January 2005 at Dagupan

City, Philippines.

Copy Furnished:

FERDINAND T. EVANGELISTA
Guiling, Rosales, Pangasinan