G.

R.No.L-
58639August12,
1987

CEBUROYALPLANT(SANMI
GUELCORPORATI
ON),
 pet
it
ioner
,
vs.
THEHONORABLEDEPUTYMI
NISTEROFLABORandRAMONPI LONES,
 
respondent
s.

J.
CRUZ,
  :

Thepr i
vaterespondentwasr emov edbythepetit
ionerandcompl ai
nedtot heMini
stryofLabor.His
complaintwasdi smissedbyt heregi
onaldir
ector
, whowas, however,
reversedbythepublic
respondent.Requir
edt orei
nstatetheseparat
edempl oyeeandpayhi m backwages, t
hepet i
ti
oner
hascomet ous,faul
tingtheDeput yMini
sterwit
hgr aveabuseofdiscret
ion.Wehav eissuedinthe
meant i
meat emporaryrest
raini
ngorder.
 1

Thepubli
crespondentheldt
hatRamonPi l
ones,t
hepr ivaterespondent,wasalreadyapermanentempl oyeeatthetimeofhisdismissaland
sowasentit
ledtosecuri
tyoftenur
e.Theall
egedgroundf orhi
sr emoval
, t
owi t
,"pul
monar ytuber
culosisminimal,
"wasnotcer t
if
iedas
2
i
ncurabl
ewithi
nsi xmonthsastojust
if
yhissepar
ation.  Additi
onall
y,t
hepr i
vaterespondentinsi
ststhatthepetit
ionershoul
dhav efi
rst
obt
ainedaclearance,
asrequi
redbytheregul
ati
onst heni nforce,f
ortheterminati
onofhisempl oyment .

Thepet i
ti
onerforit
spartclaimst hattheprivaterespondentwasst il
lonprobati
onatt heti
meofhi s
dismissalandsohadnosecur it
yoft enure.Hisdismissalwasnotonl yi
nconfor
mitywi thcompany
poli
cybutalsonecessaryf ortheprotecti
onoft hepublichealt
h, ashewashandl i
ngingredientsin
theprocessingofsoftdri
nkswhi chwer ebeingsol dtothepublic.Iti
salsoarguedthatthef i
ndings
oftheregionaldi
rector
,whohaddi rectaccesst othefacts,
shoul dnothavebeendisturbedon
appeal.Forthesesamer easons,itcontends, t
heempl oyee'
sreinstatementasorderedbyt hepubli
c
respondentshouldnotbeal l
owed.

Theorigi
nalfi
ndingswerecontai
nedi naone-pageorder  r
ecit
ingsimplythat"compl
3
ainantwas
employedonapr obat
ionaryperi
odofempl oymentforsix(6)mont hs.Aft
ersaidperiod,he
underwentmedicalexaminat
ionforquali
fi
cati
onasr egularemployeebutt heresul
tsshowedt hathe
i
ssuf f
eri
ngfrom PTBmi ni
mal.Consequently
,hewasi nformedoft heterminati
onofhisempl oyment
byrespondent.
"Theorderthenconcludedthatthet
er minati
onwas" just
if
ied."Thatwasal l
.

Ast hereisnoment ionofthebasi soft heaboveorder,wemayassumei twast hetempor arypayrol

l
authority
  submi
4
tt
edbyt hepeti
tionershowi ngthatthepri
vaterespondentwasempl oyedon
probationonFebr uary16,1978.Ev ensupposingthatitisnotself
-serving,wef i
ndnev erthelesst
hat
i
tissel f-
defeat
ing.Thesix-monthper i
odofprobationstar
tedfr
om t hesaiddat eofappoi ntmentand
soendedonAugust17, 1978,butiti snotshownt hatthepri
vaterespondent'sempl oymental so
endedt hen;onthecont r
ary,hecont i
nuedwor ki
ngasusual .UnderAr t
icle282oft heLaborCode, "
an
empl oyeewhoi sallowedtowor kaf teraprobati
onaryperi
odshall beconsideredar egular
empl oyee."Hence,Pil
oneswasal readyonper manentst at
uswhenhewasdi smi ssedonAugust21,
1978, orfourdaysaf t
erheceasedt obeapr obati
oner.

Thepetit
ionerclai
msi tcouldnothavedismissedtheprivaterespondentearli
erbecauset hex-ray
examinati
onwasmadeonl yonAugust17, 1978,andther esult
swer enotimmedi atelyav
ail
able.
Thatexcuseisunt enable.Wenot ethatwhent hepeti
ti
onerhadal lofsixmont hsdur i
ngwhicht o
conductsuchexami nati
on, i
tchosetowaituntil
exactl
ythe  l
ast 
dayoftheprobationper i
od.Inthe
l
ightofsuchdelay, i
tspr otest
ati
onsnowt hatrei
nstat
ementofPi l
oneswoul dprejudicepubli
chealth
cannotbutsoundhol l
owandhy pocri
ti
cal
.Byitsowni mpliedadmi ssi
on,thepetit
ionerhadexposed
i
tscustomer stotheempl oyee'
sdiseasebecauseofitsfailur
et oexaminehim bef oreent
rusti
nghim
wit
hthefuncti
onsofa"syr
upman."I
tsbel
atedconcer
nfort
heconsumi
ngpubl
i
cishar
dly
per
suasi
ve,ifnotcl
ear
lyi
nsi
ncer
eandself
-r
ight
eous.

Thereisproofinfactthattheprivaterespondentwasf i
rsthirednotonFebr uar
y16, 1978, butear
li
er
i
n1977.Thi sisthe1977wi t
hholdingtaxst atement
  i
ssuedf
5
orhim bythepeti
ti
oneritselfwhichi
t
doesnotandcannotdeny .Thepet it
ionerstressest
hatthisist heonlyevi
denceofthepr ivate
respondent'
searli
erservi
ceandnot est hathehasnotpresent edanyco-workertosubst anti
atehi
s
clai
m.Thisisperfectl
yunder st
andabl e.Giventhenatur
al r
eluctanceofmanywor kerst oantagoni
ze
thei
rempl oy
ers,weneednotwonderwhynoneoft hem testi
fiedagainstt
hepetit
ioner.

Wear esati
sfi
edthatwhetherhisemploy
mentbeganonFebruar
y16,1978,
orevenearl
ierashe
cl
aims,thepri
vat
er espondentwasalr
eadyaregul
arempl
oyeewhenhewasdismissedonAugust
21,1978.Assuch,hecouldv al
i
dlycl
aimthesecur
it
yoft
enureguar
anteedt
ohim bytheConsti
tut
ion
andtheLaborCode.

Theappli
cabl
erul
eont hegroundf
ordismissal
invokedagai
nsthi
misSect
ion8,
Rul
eI,
BookVI
,of
theRul
esandRegulat
ionsImplement
ingtheLaborCodereadi
ngasfol
l
ows:

Sec.8.Di
  seaseasagr oundfordismissal.—Wher et heempl oy eesuff ersf r
om a
diseaseandhi scontinuedempl oymenti sprohibi t
edbyl aworpr ejudicial t
ohis
healthortothehealthofhi sco-empl oyees,theempl oyershal lnottermi natehis
empl oymentunlesst hereisacer t
ifi
cati
onbyacompet entpubl ichealthaut hori
ty
thatthediseaseisofsuchnat ur
eoratsuchast aget hati
tcannotbecur edwithi
na
periodofsix(6)mont hsevenwithpr opermedi cal treatment .Ifthediseaseor
ail
mentcanbecur edwi t
hintheperiod,theempl oy ershal lnott erminatet he
empl oyeebutshallaskt heempl oyeetot akeal eav e.Theempl oyershal lrei
nstat
e
suchempl oyeetohi sf ormerpositi
onimmedi at
el yupont her estorati
onofhi snormal
health.

Ther ecorddoesnotcont aint

hecerti
ficationrequiredbytheaboverul
e.Themedi calcert
if
icate
offeredbyt hepeti
tionercamef rom i
tsownphy si
cian,whowasnota" competentpubli
cheal t
h
author i
ty,
"andmer elystatedtheemploy ee'sdisease,wit
houtmore.Wemaysur misethatift
he
requiredcerti
fi
cati
onwasnotpr esented, i
twasbecauset hedi
seasewasnotofsuchanat ureor
seriousnessthatitcouldnotbecur edwi thinaper i
odofsi xmont
hsev enwit
hpr opermedical
treatment.Ifso,di
smi ssalwasunquest i
onabl yasev er
eandunlawfulsanct
ion.

I
tisalsowor t
hnotingthatthepetit
ioner'
sappl icationforclearancetoterminatetheempl oymentof
thepri
vaterespondentwasf i
ledwiththeMi nistryofLaboronl yonAugust28, 1978, orsev endays
aft
erhisdismissal
. 
6
 
AstheNLRChasr epeatedlyandcor rect
lysaid,
thepr i
orclearancerul e(whi
ch
wasinforceatthatti
me)wasnota" tr
ivi
altechni cali
ty.
"Itrequir
ed"notjustthemer efil
ingofa
peti
ti
onort hemereattempttopr ocureaclear ance"butt hat"thesaidclearancebeobt ainedpr i
ort
o
theoperat
iveactofterminati
on. 7

Weagr eet hattherewasher eanattemptt ocir

cumv entthelawbysepar ati
ngt heemployeeafterfi
ve
mont hs'servi
cetopr eventhi
mf r
om becomi ngar egularemployee,andthenr ehir
inghi
m on
probati
on, againwithoutsecur
it
yoft enure.Wecannotper mitthi
ssubt er
fugeifwear etobetrueto
thespiri
tandmandat eofsocialj
ustice.Ontheot herhand, wehav ealsotheheal t
hofthepubli
cand
ofthedismi ssedempl oyeehimsel
ft oconsider.Hence, alt
houghwemustr uleinfavorofhis
rei
nstatement ,t
hismustbecondi t
ionedonhi sf i
tnesst oresumehi swork,ascer t
ifi
edbycompet ent
authori
ty.
Wet aket hisoppor t
uni t
yt oreaff
irm ourconcernforthelowlywor kerwho,oft
enatt hemer cyofhis
employ ers,mustl ookupt othelawf orhisprotect
ion.Fit
ti
ngly,t
hatlawregardshi m wit
ht enderness
andev enf avorandal wayswi thfai
thandhopei nhiscapacit
ytohel pi
nshapingt henation'sfut
ure.It
i
ser r
ort ot akehimf orgr anted.Hedeser vesourabidingrespect.Howsocietytreatshim wi l
l
determinewhet herthekni feinhishandsshal lbeacar i
ngtoolforbeautyandpr ogressoranangr y
weaponofdef i
anceandr evenge.Thechoi ceisobv i
ous,ofcourse.Ifwecherishhim asweshoul d,
wemustr esol
vet olighten"thewei ghtofcenturi
es"ofexploit
ati
onanddi sdai
nt hatbendshi sback
butdoesnotbowhi shead.

WHEREFORE, thepeti
ti
onisDI SMISSEDandthetemporaryrestrai
ningor
derofNov ember18, 1981,
i
sLIFTED.TheOr deroft
hepubl i
crespondentdat
edJuly14, 1981,i
sAFFIRMED, butwiththe
modif
icati
onthatthebackwagesshallbeli
mitedtothr
eey earsonlyandthepri
vaterespondentshall
ber
einstat
edonlyuponcer t
if
icati
onbyacompet entpubl
i
cheal thauthor
ityt
hatheisfittoret
urnto
wor
k.Cost sagai
nstthepeti
ti
oner.

SOORDERED.