Republic of the Philippines

Department of Labor and Employment

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
Manila

A
Complainant,
-versus-

NLRC NCR CASE NO. 00-XXXXX-XX

COMPANY B
Respondents

COMPLAINANTS REPLY
POSITION PAPER

Complainant by counsel, to the Honorable Labor Arbiter, respectfully states as

follows:

1.

In his position paper, Respondent Company B has mentioned the duties and
responsibilities of Complainant A, which it is notable that it doesnt include
remittance of SSS, PAGIBIG and PHILHEALTH and deduction of which to the
employees. Such duty is bound by the HR Department which A doesnt head.

2.

Moreover, the contention of Company B on As misrepresentation of the Audited

Financial Statements from 2010 to 2012 in fact brought them huge income. Their
2013 audit showing loss and as their evidence against A, was only released after A
was illegally dismissed.

3.

Thus, it could be constituted that the 2013 audit as evidence shows a violation of
fair play by Company B.

4.

Likewise, the C Corporation organized by A was made with the consent of the
Chairman of the Board of Directors. Nonetheless, the oversupply of material was
not As fault because the orders were made upon the recommendation of
Construction Department.

5.

Upon As request for early retirement by September 2014, the Chairman of the
Board of Directors initially approved it, but suddenly states that it is provisional. A
objected and received a notice from Company B.

6.

A asked for extension of time to answer the notice; the first one was granted, while
the second one was denied and she was illegally dismissed from her service.

7.

The records show that she was only given one notice which is non-compliance to
the twin notice rule of the Labor Code.

8.

Therefore, where Company B was given all the reasonable opportunities to justify
that A was not illegally dismissed, Company B failed to support and justify their
claim. Under any circumstances, it is just to conclude that A, whos engaged to
perform activities necessary to the usual trade or business of Company B and an
employee who has rendered service for more than one year, was illegally
dismissed by Company B. Furthermore, with her illegal dismissal from service, A
has suffered damages, also her right as an employee was violated.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully reiterated for the

Honorable Labor Arbiter to:
1. Declare the dismissal of Complainant A to be illegal;
2. Order the Respondent Company B to pay A backwages from the time of her
illegal dismissal to the time of her actual reinstatement;

3. Order the Company B to pay A damages in the amount of P20,000.00 by way of

moral damages and P10,000.00 by ay of exemplary damages.

By:
ATTY. CHARMAINE D.V. ESCORPISO
Counsel for Complainant
IBP LRN NO. 06394/Marikina
ROLL NO. 60394