Western Shipping vs. NLRC, 253 SCRA
405, G.R. No. 109717, February 9, 1996
Subject: Transportation Law
FACTS
Petitioner Western Shipping Agency, Inc. and
its principal Yeh Shipping Co., Ltd., owners of M/V Sea Wealth, faced a legal
challenge initiated by the private respondent, the vessel's master. Discharged
on January 14, 1989, the master was accused of misconduct, particularly failing
to notify the company about the vessel's arrival in Manila and allowing
unauthorized passengers on board. The dismissal led to a complaint filed on
March 1, 1989, alleging illegal termination, underpayment of salary, fixed
overtime pay, and non-payment of wages.
Western Shipping justified the dismissal
citing the master's failure to communicate and alleged safety violations. The
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) found in favor of the
master, declaring his dismissal illegal. The POEA ordered petitioners to pay a
total of US$45,643.00 representing salary for the unexpired contract, salary
differentials, underpayment of family allotment, and conversion differences,
plus attorney's fees.
Petitioners appealed to the National Labor
Relations Commission (NLRC), which modified the POEA decision on March 20,
1992. The NLRC set aside the award for alleged salary differentials but affirmed
the US$5,643.00 for the unexpired portion of the contract. It held Western
Shipping and Yeh Shipping jointly and severally liable, with the bonding
company, Philippine British Assurance Company, Inc., also held accountable.
ISSUE
Whether or not, Alexander Bao was rightfully
dismissed for his failure to notify the petitioner of the vessel’s arrival in
Manila and to provide life-saving equipment for the passengers he had allowed
to board, as required by Section 1019 of the Philippine Merchant Marine Rules
and Regulation.
RULING
No, Alexander Bao was illegally dismissed.
Under the law, Loss of confidence is a valid
ground for the dismissal of managerial employees like petitioner herein, who
was the master of a vessel. The loss of confidence
must be substantiated by evidence. The burden of proof is on the employer to
show grounds justifying the loss of confidence.
In this case, petitioners
failed to discharge this burden, as the POEA and the NLRC found that: (1) the
private respondent had taken on board the vessel the fifteen passengers with
the knowledge of Noimi Zabala, the president of Western Shipping; (2) the
clearance to sail issued by the Coast Guard, an agency of the government
charged with the seaworthiness of vessels, establishes approval of the
application for the boarding of the additional passengers and the safety of the
vessel was not endangered by the presence of the additional passengers; (3) the
vessel had adequate life-saving equipment; and (4) additional passengers were
not ordinary passengers but the wives and children of the vessel’s complement,
including private respondent’s wife. The private respondent, who had 15 years
of maritime experience behind him, would unlikely allow unsafe passage.
Therefore, the dismissal was illegal.
No comments:
Post a Comment