REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

COURT OF APPEALS
MANILA
XYZ CORPORATION
PRESIDENT DINA PAZ WELDO
Petitioner
,--VERSUS- C.A.-G.R. No. __________
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
JUAN DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.
Respondents.
x----------------------------------------------------------X
PETITION
PETITIONER, petitioner XYZ Corporation, thru the undersigned counsel, respectfully states and
alleges that:
I. NATURE OF THE PETITION
1. This is a petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
assailing the resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC for brevity)
Second Division dated February 13, 2014 (which is referred to as Annex “A” hereof)
pertaining to the denied Motion for Reconsideration of its previous decision;

2. That petitioner was unable to timely file the Motion for Reconsideration of such
resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission. Unfortunately, the NLRC denied
said motion in its resolution dated February 20, 2014;

3. That petitioner is now assailing the propriety of the NLRC decision in dismissing
the motion and hereby raises pure questions of law, considering that there is no plain,
speedy, and adequate remedy available in the ordinary course of law- hence, this
petition;

II. TIMELINESS OF THE FILING OF THE PETITION

1. That petitioner through its president had received via his secretary the assailed NLRC
decision denying the motion for reconsideration on February 27, 2014. This petition is
timely filed because it is still within the time frame allowed by law.

III. ATTACHMENTS
Annex “A”- Decision of NLRC dated February 13, 2014.2.
Annex “B”
- Denied Motion for Reconsideration by NLRC dated February 20, 2014.

00:1203:56
Close

IV. THE PARTIES1. That petitioner is a corporation duly organized and registered under the
laws of the Philippines,represented by its President, DINA PAZ WELDO, of legal age, Filipino,
single, with an officeaddress at #34, 5th St. Bonifacio Global City Taguig Metro Manila, where
She may be served thesummons and other processes of this Honorable Court;2. That
respondent NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (NLRC) is a quasi-judicial bodytasked to
promote and maintain industrial peace by resolving labor and management disputesinvolving
both local and overseas workers through compulsory arbitration and alternative modesof
dispute resolution. It is attached to the Department of Labor and Employment for program
andpolicy coordination with duties and responsibilities pursuant to law duly represented by
itsCHAIRMAN MARK EMPLOY, of legal age, Filipino with postal address at NLRC OFFICE,Quezon
City, where he may be served the summons and other processes of this HonorableCourt.V.
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND CASE1. In 2013, the Defendant, Juan De La Cruz, joined the rally of
the workers against themanagement. Due to this charge, they were summarily dismissed by the
company. Juan De LaCruz filed a complaint for illegal dismissal to the Labor Arbiter. He alleged
that he was notafforded due process because he was not given any notice in violation of the
two-notice rule bythe Labor Code and management should pay him amount equivalent to the
number of years thathe worked for the company which is ten years;2. The Labor Arbiter ruled in
favor of the Juan de La Cruz, et al. The dispositive portion of whichreads as
follows:WHEREFORE, judgment is rendered in favor of Juan De la Cruz. XYZ Corporation is
herebyordered to reinstate Juan De la Cruz with full back wages. Costs ordered against the
respondentXYZ Corporation3. That XYZ Corporation appealed to NLRC but the latter
sustained the decision of the Labor Arbiter. The dispositive portion of which reads as
follows:WHEREFORE, the decision of the Labor Arbiter is affirmed without modifications.4. That
a timely Motion for Reconsideration was filed before the NLRC but was denied.VI. ERRORS
ASSIGNED1. The NLRC erred and gravely abused its discretion in a capricious, whimsical
arbitrary or despoticmanner in the exercise of their jurisdiction equivalent to lack of jurisdiction
for XYZ Corporationvalidly carried out its
retrenchment program, which effectively severed the concerned employees’
employment with the company. For lack of factual and legal basis, the NLRC struck down
itsdecision against the Corporation.VII. DISCUSSION1. The NLRC gravely abused its discretion in
a capricious, whimsical arbitrary or despotic manner inthe exercise of its jurisdiction when it
ruled that the severance of the employment of theemployees were not valid. Article 283 of the
Labor Code provides that an employer mayterminate the employment of any employee due to
retrenchment to prevent losses. This ground was well provided in the petition as well as the
Motion for Reconsideration timely filed which theNLRC failed to give
credence.PRAYERWHEREFORE, premises considered, petitioner respectfully prays that an order
be issued reversing theNLRC decision denying the Motion for Reconsideration of XYZ Co., and
deciding on the merits of thecase, finding that the retrenchment of the employees was
valid.Respectfully submitted this 13th day of March, 2014 at Manila City, Philippines. ATTY. WIN
ACASECounsel for PetitionerPTR no. 1532749-1-5-09IBP No. 04796 (lifetime)ROA No.
46753MCLE Compliance No.II-0006141Ortigas, Pasig City
Republic of the Philippines)City of Taguig ) S.S.X-----------------------------XVERIFICATION AND
CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPINGI, DINA PAZ WELDO, of legal age, Filipino citizen,
single, with office address at #34, 5th St. BonifacioGlobal City Taguig, MM, Philippines after
having been duly sworn to an oath in accordance with law,hereby depose and say:1. That I am
the petitioner in the above-stated case;2. That I caused the preparation of the foregoing
petition;3. That I have read the contents thereof and the facts stated therein are true
and correct of mypersonal knowledge and/or on the basis of copies of documents and records
in my possession;4. That I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving
the same issues in theSupreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or
agency;5. To the best of my knowledge and belief, no such action or proceeding is pending
in the SupremeCourt, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency;DINA PAZ
WELDO AffiantRepublic of the Philippines)City of Pasig ) S.S.SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before
me this 13th day of March 2014 at 13/F Global Tower, BGC,Taguig City, affiant exhibiting to me
her
Driver’s License with number N12
-3456789 issued on September1, 2013 at Pasig City.NOTARY PUBLIC
Doc. No.______;
Page No.______;
Book No.______;
Series of 2014.