Rodriguez was an employee of Westin Philippine Plaza Hotel who was transferred to a new position as a linen room attendant after receiving negative feedback from hotel guests in his previous role. Rodriguez refused to report to his new work station and was dismissed for insubordination. The Labor Arbiter found the dismissal to be legal but the NLRC reversed this decision. The Supreme Court ruled that the dismissal was legal as Rodriguez's refusal to accept the lateral transfer constituted willful disobedience, or insubordination, which is valid grounds for termination under the Labor Code. The transfer was deemed reasonable as it was a lateral move with no change in pay or rank and moved Rodriguez from a guest-contact to non-
Rodriguez was an employee of Westin Philippine Plaza Hotel who was transferred to a new position as a linen room attendant after receiving negative feedback from hotel guests in his previous role. Rodriguez refused to report to his new work station and was dismissed for insubordination. The Labor Arbiter found the dismissal to be legal but the NLRC reversed this decision. The Supreme Court ruled that the dismissal was legal as Rodriguez's refusal to accept the lateral transfer constituted willful disobedience, or insubordination, which is valid grounds for termination under the Labor Code. The transfer was deemed reasonable as it was a lateral move with no change in pay or rank and moved Rodriguez from a guest-contact to non-
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Rodriguez was an employee of Westin Philippine Plaza Hotel who was transferred to a new position as a linen room attendant after receiving negative feedback from hotel guests in his previous role. Rodriguez refused to report to his new work station and was dismissed for insubordination. The Labor Arbiter found the dismissal to be legal but the NLRC reversed this decision. The Supreme Court ruled that the dismissal was legal as Rodriguez's refusal to accept the lateral transfer constituted willful disobedience, or insubordination, which is valid grounds for termination under the Labor Code. The transfer was deemed reasonable as it was a lateral move with no change in pay or rank and moved Rodriguez from a guest-contact to non-
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (THIRD DIVISION) and LEN RODRIGUEZ, respondents. FACTS: Rodriguez was hired as pest controller and was later transferred to various positions until his employment was terminated. On December 28, 1992, he received a memo transferring him from doorman to linen room attendant after negative feedback by hotel guests. The transfer was merely a lateral movement; there was no demotion in rank and pay. Notwithstanding several reminders from the personnel department and even his union, he refused to report to his new work station. When asked to explain in writing why no disciplinary action should be taken against him for insubordination, he merely questioned the validity of his transfer without the required explanation. On February 16, 1993, Rodriguez was dismissed on the ground of insubordination. Upon filing a complaint for illegal dismissal, the Labor Arbiter declared the dismissal as legal. The NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiters decision on appeal, thus this recourse. ISSUE: Whether or not the dismissal on the ground of insubordination was legal. HELD: Yes. Under Article 282 (a) of the Labor Code, as amended, an employer may terminate an employment for serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work. But disobedience to be a just cause of dismissal envisages the concurrence of at least two requisites: (1) the employees assailed conduct must have been willful or intentional, the willfulness being characterized by a wrongful and perverse attitude; (2) the order violated must have been reasonable, lawful, made known to the employee and must pertain to the duties which he has been engaged to discharge. The willfulness of Rodriguezs insubordination was shown by his continued refusal to report to his new work assignment. His transfer was a lateral movement equivalent in rank and compensation. It was a reasonable relocation from a guest contact area to a non-guest contact area. The petition is hereby granted.