PABLO, Warly G.

MYLENE CARVAJAL v. LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK

G.R. No. 186169

FACTS:
Mylene Carvajal was employed as a trainee-teller by Luzon Development
Bank (Bank) under a six-month probationary employment contract.  Ramirez
is the President and CEO of Luzon Development Bank.  A month into her
employment, she was send a Memorandum directing her to explain in
writing why she should not be subjected to disciplinary action for her eight
(8) tardiness on November 2003.  A second Memorandum was sent to her on
January for her again thirteen days (13) chronic tardiness on December
2003.  She submitted her written explanations for both events and
manifested her acceptance of the consequences of her actions.  She was
terminated for three days effective 21 January 2004.  However, on 22
January, her services were terminated.  Mylene then filed a complaint for
Illgeal Dismissal.

The LA decision held that Luzon Development Bank is liable for payment of
money claims because Mylene was illegally dismissed because she was not
afforded the notice in writing informing her of what the Bank would like to
bring out to her for the latter to answer in writing and the Bank’s
contention that she performed unsatisfactorily is not a ground to shorten the
6 month period contract. Mylene assailed to NLRC for partial modification
which also affirmed the decision of the LA.

Luzon Development Bank then after filed a Petition for Certiorari to the Court
of Appeals (CA). The CA found that the petitioner was not entitled to back
wages because she was rightfully dismissed for failure to meet the
employment standards. Petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court
via Petition for Review on Certiorari.

ISSUE:
Whether Mylene Carvajal can be considered as a regular employee at the
time of her dismissal.

HELD:
No, Mylene knew, at the time of her engagement, that she must comply with
the standards set forth by respondent and perform satisfactorily in order to
attain regular status. She was apprised of her functions and duties as a
trainee-teller. Respondent released to petitioner its evaluation of her
PABLO, Warly G.

performance. Petitioner was found wanting. Even the NLRC upheld

petitioner s probationary status, thus, during the time that the complainant
was dismissed by respondents, she was holding the position of a trainee-
teller on probationary status.

Although probationary employees also enjoy security of tenure, she may still
be terminated because of just and authorized causes of termination and the
additional ground under Article 281 of the Labor Code, i.e. the probationary
employee may also be terminated for failure to qualify as a regular employee
in accordance to the reasonable standards set by the employer and does not
require notice and hearing.  Punctuality is a reasonable standard imposed on
every employee, whether in government or private sector.  This, together
with absenteeism, underperformance and mistake in clearing a check are
infractions that cannot be tantamount to satisfactory standards.

In view of the foregoing, the Supreme Court found no reason to disturb the
findings and conclusions of the Court of Appeals.

WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED.