GLOBE MACKAY VS IMELDA SALAZAR

FACTS:
 Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation employed Imelda Salazar and Delfin Saldivar
 An investigation was initiated against Saldivar’s activities, when reports showed that company equipment and spare
parts were missing
 Prepared by the internal auditor, the report showed that Saldivar entered into a partnership with Richard Yambao
the owner of a supplier of Globe Mackay
 Imelda Salazar was likewise involved in these transactions
 Evidence show that she was a signatory to the partnership of Yambao and Saldivar
 She was also aware of the loss of the air conditioner but did not inform her employer
 Imelda was then placed under preventive suspension for 1 month, giving her 30 days to explain her side
 However she filed a complaint for illegal suspension amended to include illegal dismissal, vacation and sick leave
benefits and damages after she was considered dismissed.
 After hearing, the Labor Arbiter ordered her reinstatement and pay her full backwages and other benefits she would
have received if no for the illegal dismissal.
 On appeal, the NLRC affirmed its decision
 Hence the petition, assailing that the Labor Arbiter committed grave abuse of discretion in holding that suspension
and dismissal of Salazar were illegal and ordering for her reinstatement

ISSUE:
 Whether or not private respondent is entitled to reinstatement and backwages

HELD:
 Yes, the law sides with the private respondent. The words provided in the Article 279 of the Labor Code are clear
and unambiguous.
 Section 3 provides that an employee who is unjustly dismissed from work shall be entitled to reinstatement without
loss of seniority rights and to backwages.
 If the statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and applied without attempt
of interpretation.
 Verbal egis non est recedendum which means that from the words of the statute, there shall be no departure.
 NLRC Resolution affirmed.