[ G.R. No. L-1706. March 10, 1949 ] 83 Phil. 108
[ G.R. No. L-1706. March 10, 1949 ]
BATANGAS TRANSPORATION COMPANY AND LAGUNA TAYABAS BUS COMPANY, PETITIONERS, VS. BAGONG PAGKAKAISA OF THE EMPLOYEES AND LABORERS OF THE BATANGAS TRANSPORTATION COMPANY AND THE LAGUNA TAYABAS BUS COMPANY, JUDGES ARSENIO ROLDAN, JUAN LANTING, AND VICENTE JIMENEZ YANSON, RESPONDENTS. D E C I S I O N
MORAN, C.J.:
This is a petition for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to set aside an order of the Court of Industrial Relations.
On May 21, 1946, petitioners asked the Court of Industrial Relations to mediate in an industrial dispute existing between them and respondent labor union.
After hearing, the court rendered decision on June 16, 1946, ruling on the numerous allegations and mutual demands of the litigants. In its decision, among other findings, the industrial court sustained the dismissal by petitioners of four of its employees, one of them being Ramon Honorico. Respondent labor union filed a motion for reconsideration which was granted.
In its original decision, the industrial court found that the dismissal of Ramon Honorico was for just cause and not because of union activities. In its order of reconsideration, the industrial court found the dismissal to be too severe a penalty, considering the long and faithful record of service rendered by said Honorico who has not been given an opportunity to defend himself before his final dismissal. Thus, the industrial court authorized a penalty of suspension for Honorico, to be counted from the time he was dismissed by petitioners up to the time the court rendered its decision.
Discipline is, indeed, essential to the smooth running of a public service such as that of the petitioners. But the stern rules of discipline must be applied with fairness and justice. This means that a laborer should not be dismissed for unimportant infractions and that before he is deprived of his job he should be given a fair hearing.
Under the circumstances of this case, we find no ground for disturbing the order of the court of industrial relations which acted within the ample bounds given it by law. There is no srhowing that said court has committed an error of law in the selection of a specific measure for the solution of the particular conflict submitted to it. It merely modified the penalty imposed in its original decision in view of a circumstance it had previously failed to consider.
In view of all the foregoing, the petition is dismissed with costs against petitioners. It is so ordered.
Paras, Feria, Pablo, Bengzon, Briones, Montemayor, and Reyes, JJ., concur.