NLRC sides with GMA Network in illegal suspension complaint | GMANetwork.com - Corporate - Articles

Labor Arbiter Albert B. Dolosa of the National Labor Relations Commission took the side of GMA Network, Inc. in an illegal suspension case lodged against the broadcast company by its former talents.

NLRC sides with GMA Network in illegal suspension complaint

February 01 2017

Labor Arbiter Albert B. Dolosa of the National Labor Relations Commission took the side of GMA Network, Inc. in an illegal suspension case lodged against the broadcast company by its former talents.

The case filers, Edmalynne A. Remillano, Carmela E. Pamiloza, Winchele V. Ochoa, Nyorly Gail S. Montero, Maria Evrheene J. Balbuena, and Vianca Legarce Vega, were creative talents of the Network engaged under a series of talent agreements.

One of the complainants, Remillano, joined on June 5, 2015 a protest rally initiated by the Talents Association of GMA (TAG), of which she is a member, and absented herself from work without any prior advice or authorization for which reason she was suspended from work.

The other complainants, meanwhile, were in the midst of a break in their engagement with GMA brought about by the expiration and subsequent non-renewal of their talent agreements.

In the decision promulgated on December 15, 2016, Labor Arbiter Dolosa found that there was no illegal suspension in the case at hand, and that regardless of the status of the complainants’ employment, the respondent had the prerogative to discipline its employees according to law and the contract entered into by the parties.

The same was true in the case of Remillano who took “wilful unauthorized absences for six airing dates of her program” to express her protest as a member of TAG. The Labor Arbiter noted that she was notified to explain before she was suspended by GMA.

The Labor Arbiter ruled that due to the “sufficient basis shown” and “due process observed” the suspension of Remillano “must be upheld both under the terms of the talent agreement as well as by way of valid exercise of management prerogative in good faith by respondent GMA.”

As for the other complainants, the Labor Arbiter ruled that the break from their services with GMA cannot be deemed “an overt act of suspension” imposed by GMA as said complainants sought employment elsewhere or declined the offer of GMA to renew their talent agreement.

GMA Chairman and CEO Felipe L. Gozon, who was included as a party-respondent, was dropped from the case due to the complainants’ failure to show cogent basis to “digress from the general rule that a corporation, like respondent GMA, has a personality separate and distinct from the persons composing or managing it.”

The case was therefore dismissed for lack of merit, as well as other claims for moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees.

advertisement

Elsewhere on GMA

advertisement