TIRAZONA v. PHILIPPINE EDS TECHNO-SERVICE INC.
RULING: Motion for leave to file a second Motion for Reconsideration
(PET, Inc.)
January 20, 2009 | Chico-Nazario, J. | When to/not to tilt the scales of
justice as a measure of equity and compassionate social justice
Digester: Arreza, Jose Augusto
SUMMARY: Petitioner Tirazona was dismissed from service by
Respondent PET, Inc. for her willful breach of trust reposed upon her by
her employer. The NLRC, CA, and SC all found her dismissal as justified.
In her 2nd Motion for Reconsideration, she prayed for the invalidation of
her dismissal and for the award of separation pay for just causes on the
basis of equity. The SC denied her petition for lack of merit.
DOCTRINE: Separation pay shall be allowed as a measure of social
justice only in those instances where the employee is validly dismissed for
causes other than serious misconduct or those reflecting on his moral
character.
FACTS:
 Because of her improper handling of a situation involving a rank-and-
file employee, officers/directors of respondent PET, Inc. called the
attention of petitioner Ma. Wenelita Tirazona, the Administrative
Manager of respondent company. Claiming she was denied due
process, she demanded Php 2M indemnity from PET and its
officers/directors. She also admitted to reading a confidential letter
addressed to PET officers/directors containing the legal opinion of
the counsel of PET regarding her case. Because of all this, she was
validly terminated on the ground that she willfully breached the trust
and confidence reposed in her by her employed. The SC denied her
original petition.
 Apr. 29, 2008: Petitioner moved for reconsideration praying that her
dismissal be declared illegal and that she be awarded separation pay
and retirement benefits out of humanitarian considerations. But the
SC denied MR.
 Aug. 21, 2008: Petitioner filed a Motion for Leave to File a Second
Motion for Reconsideration for the reconsideration of the SC
resolution raising essentially the same arguments and prayers.
is DENIED for lack of merit.
W/N her dismissal was justified – YES
W/N she may be awarded separation pay out of humanitarian
considerations – NO
 First of all, a 2nd MR is prohibited, except for extraordinarily
persuasive reasons [Sec. 2, Rule 52, ROC]. Here, no extraordinary
persuasive reasons are present to allow the 2nd MR.
 Next, as re petitioner’s dismissal, the general rule is that an employee
who has been dismissed for any of the just causes enumerated under
Art. 282 of the Labor Code is not entitled to separation pay. Only
unjustly dismissed employees are entitled to retirement benefits and
other privileges including reinstatement and backwages.
 An exception, however, is that separation pay or other financial
assistance may be allowed to an employee dismissed for just causes
on the basis of equity. This shall be allowed as a measure of social
justice only in those instances where the employee is validly dismissed
for causes other than serious misconduct or those reflecting on his
moral character.
 Given the above, petitioner is not entitled to the award of separation
pay for violating the trust and confidence reposed in her by her
employer when she arrogantly demanded from respondent the
exorbitant amount of Php 2M in damages with a threat of a lawsuit if
the money was not paid within five days. She also continually refused
to cooperate with PET’s investigation of her case.
 Lastly, petitioner tried to persuade the Court to consider in her favor
the length of her service to PET, but in the end, failed. She claimed
that she was employed by PET for 26 years. However, it was later on
found out that she had only been there for 2 years and 9 months.
 The cases she cited to support her case were misleading as the
circumstances were totally different from hers.