Saturday, March 17, 2007 Serious misconduct and gross negligence By Dominador A. Almirante Labor case digest
RESPONDENT, an accounting clerk of petitioner Premier Development Bank, following an earlier instruction of branch manager Rosario Detalla answered in the affirmative an inquiry whether GIA Fuel and Lubricant Dealer has a credit line or maintains an account with the bank and if the bank guarantee signed by Detalla was in order. Later, upon verification, the bank guarantee was found spurious.
Respondent was dismissed from the service for serious misconduct and gross negligence. Was the dismissal justified?
Ruling: No.
In the case at bar, respondent cannot be held liable for serious misconduct or gross negligence. No independent evidence was presented to prove her “willful conspiracy” with Detalla. Petitioner even admitted that there is no direct evidence that respondent benefited from the falsified bank guarantee. Liability for the incident lay solely with Detalla, who patently breached the trust and confidence of petitioner.
Respondent merely followed the orders of the bank manager which appeared to be regular. Furthermore, the nature of respondent’s job does not include processing of bank loans and guarantees.
Her work as accounting clerk refers only to the opening of deposits and processing of withdrawals. The alleged infraction was not within the scope of her job function. Petitioner did not contest this fact. (Premier Development Bank vs. Elsie Escudero Mantal, G.R. No. 167716, March 23, 2006).
