View full case

PHILIPPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEP COMPANY v. ALFREDO S. PAGUIO

FACTS:

The petitioner, Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, Inc. (PLDT), has 27 Exchanges in its Greater Metro Manila (GMM) Network, with Alfredo S. Paguio as the Head of the Garnet Exchange. In 1994, PLDT assessed the performance of the 27 Exchanges and Paguio criticized the PLDT criteria for performance rating as unfair and suggested that the criteria failed to consider relevant factors. Paguio reiterated his criticism when Garnet Exchange obtained the top rating in the GMM. In June 1996, PLDT rebalanced the manpower of the East Center and Paguio objected to the manpower rebalancing. He then requested Ferido, the First Vice-President-GMM Network Services, for a formal hearing of the charges against him. Ignored by Ferido, Paguio filed a complaint against Santos, his immediate supervisor, for grave abuse of authority and manipulation of performance. Paguio was later reassigned and believed it to be a disciplinary action, prompting him to request a hearing of the charges against him. No action was taken, and Paguio appealed to the NLRC. The Labor Arbiter initially upheld the validity of the transfer, but the NLRC reversed the decision and found the transfer unlawful. The Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling of the NLRC, but deleted the monetary award representing the 16% monthly salary increase. Both Paguio and PLDT sought reconsideration, and the Court consolidated the cases. PLDT argued that the transfer of Paguio was lawful, while Paguio sought to affirm the previous decision on damages and attorney's fees.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether Paguio's transfer or reassignment was unlawful and illegal.

  2. Whether the appellate court erred in affirming the NLRC's decision.

RULING:

  1. The transfer or reassignment of Paguio was deemed unlawful and illegal. The NLRC found that Paguio's comments were done in good faith to help his team improve, showing that he was a team player. It was also noted that Paguio's transfer involved a diminution of his salary, benefits, and privileges.

  2. The appellate court did not err in affirming the NLRC's decision. However, the appellate court deleted the monetary award representing the 16% monthly salary increase for Paguio.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Good faith actions to improve a team's performance may be protected in cases of alleged illegal transfer or reassignment.

  • Diminution of salary, benefits, and privileges may render a transfer or reassignment unlawful and illegal.