Labor Arbiter junks illegal dismissal complaint versus GMA Network | GMANetwork.com - Corporate - Articles

Labor Arbiter Remedios Tirad-Capinig of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) took the side of GMA Network, Inc. (GMA) in an illegal dismissal complaint filed by its former talent who was dismissed for falsification of company documents.

Labor Arbiter junks illegal dismissal complaint versus GMA Network

November 11 2015



Labor Arbiter Remedios Tirad-Capinig of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) took the side of GMA Network, Inc. (GMA) in an illegal dismissal complaint filed by its former talent who was dismissed for falsification of company documents.
 
In her seven-page decision dated September 28, 2015, the Labor Arbiter ruled that complainant Christine Lovejoy B. Cruz, a former production assistant of the broadcast company, was found guilty of tampering an official document on May 26, 2014 and June 26, 2014.
 
In its position paper, the Network said that the complainant’s failure to comply with the standard operation procedure and her “recklessness and audacity” in violating the prescribed rules is a “blatant violation” of her responsibilities as stated in the general terms of her talent agreement. 
 
“Significantly, respondents admitted having reposed some trust and confidence unto complainant in the discharge of her duties as ‘production assistant’ and that they are not just after the result of her work, as the means and method of the latter’s performance of work is subject to compliance of their existing rules and regulations,” the Labor Arbiter stated.
 
Furthermore, the Network argued that her commission of tampering twice only shows her inability to cope with the demands of her work. 
 
“Hence, as said acts constitute a violation of her ‘responsibilities’, the termination of her talent agreement was lawful and cannot be considered an illegal dismissal. Furthermore, the complainant was accorded the procedural due process, as shown in the respondents’ NOB (Notice of Breach), Clarificatory Hearing and NOD (Notice of Decision),” the Labor Arbiter concluded.
 
The case was dismissed for lack of merit. The complainant’s claims for reinstatement, back wages, moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees were also denied for lack of factual and legal basis, as well as her claims for Service Incentive Leave (SIL) and 13th month pay as these are not provided in her talent agreement, the decision stated.

advertisement

Elsewhere on GMA

advertisement