LABADAN V.

FOREST HILLS

This case concerns an alleged illegal dismissal of Lilian Labadan (petitioner) by

respondent Forest Hills Mission Academy (respondent). From 1990 to 2002, she was
hired to work as a school registrar and a school teacher by the latter.

The petitioner also alleged in the same complaint that she was not afforded due
benefits throughout her employment and that as a matter of fact, Forest Hills had been
regularly and illegally deducting tithes from her wages equivalent to 10% thereof.

Viewing that strained relations between her ad Forest Hills have rendered
reinstatement no longer feasible, Labadan prayed for separation pay in lieu of
reinstatement.

Forest Hills, however, claimed that Labadan was not illegally dismissed and that it was
the petitioner who did not return for work after the expiration of her approved leave. In
support of this claim, the respondent presented a list of faculty members for the school
year 2001-2002 which still included the petitioner’s name.

In response to the charge of illegal deduction, the respondent reiterated that the
Seventh Day Adventist Church requires its members to pay tithes equivalent to 10% of
their salaries. Petitioner was hired on account of her being a member thereof, and
petitioner never questioned the deduction of the tithe from her salary.

Forest Hills noted that the petitioner failed to provide evidence to support the violation
of overtime, holiday, and allowance pay.

The Labor Arbiter found the respondent guilty of illegal dismissal and ordered it to pay
the petitioner monetary award and damages. However, the order was reversed and set
aside by NLRC.

When the petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the CA, the same was dismissed
for nonpayment of appropriate docket fees and non-attachment of service affidavit.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the employee was illegally dismissed?

HOLDING:

No.

As to the illegal dismissal, the records do not show that the petitioner was
dismissed from the service.

Petitioner's affidavit and that of her former colleagues, which she attached to her
Position Paper, merely stated that she was dismissed without cause, but did not specify
when and how. Hence, there being no substantial proof that the petitioner was
dismissed, she is not entitled to separation pay or backwages.

As to the failure of the petitioner to pay the appropriate docket fees, settled is
the rule that non-payment of docket fee at the time of the filing of a petition does not
automatically call for its dismissal as long as the fee is paid within the applicable
prescriptive or reglementary period
In response to the charge of illegal deductions:

Rule VIII, Section 10 of the Rules Implementing Book III of the Labor Code provides:

SEC. 10. Deductions from the wages of the employees may be made by the
employer in any of the following cases:

(a) When the deductions are authorized by law, including deductions for the insurance
premiums advanced by the employer in behalf of the employee as well as union dues
where the right to check-off has been recognized by the employer or authorized in
writing by the individual employee himself;

(b) When the deductions are with the written authorization of the employees  for
payment to a third person and the employer agrees to do so, provided that the latter
does not receive any pecuniary benefit, directly or indirectly, from the transaction.

In the absence then of the petitioner's written conformity to the deduction of the 10%
tithe from her salary, the deduction made by Forest Hills was illegal. It bears to note
that in the present case, there is no written conformity of Labadan to the same hence
the respondent is hereby ordered to refund such illegally deducted amounts from her
salaries.

As for the claim of non-payment of benefits, the petitioner is eligible to receive

them except for the claim for overtime pay which must be denied, for other than the
uncorroborated affidavits of her colleagues, there is no proof of her entitlement to
overtime pay or for allowances, as there is no proof of her entitlement to either of
those benefits.

All in all, the petition is GRANTED insofar as the petitioner's claims for illegal
deductions, holiday pay, service incentive leave pay, 13 th-month pay, and non-
remittance of SSS contributions are concerned.