Hyatt Taxi Services, Inc VS Catinoy respondent was not taken back by petitioner Hyatt after the

30- day suspension period. Clearly, constructive dismissal

FACTS: had already set in when the suspension went
2 union officers, Catinoy and Saturnino, had a fight inside beyond the maximum period allowed by law.
the union office, an act that violates company rules and
union by-laws. The union executive board decided to place
them on indefinite suspension and requested thecompany,
Hyatt Taxi Services Inc., to implement it. The company
place the 2 on preventive suspension for 30 days Catinoy,
aggrieved by the preventive suspension since he was not
the aggressor, filed a complaint for illegal suspension. After
the lapse of 30 days, he reported to work but was not
allowed to resume his duties. He amended his complaint to
include constructive dismissal
LA: found the Hyatt taxi to be guilty of illegal preventive
suspension and illegal constructive dismissal Hyatt and the
union appealed to the NLRC. NLRC: affirmed LA..
HOWEVER, upon MFR, the NLRC deleted the award of
backwages because there was no concrete showing that the
complainant was constructively dismissed CA: reinstated
the LA’s decision.

Issue:
Whether the private respondent was constructively
dismissed 

HELD:
YES.
CA affirmed. Preventive suspension beyond 30 days
amounts to constructive dismissal. It shows that