CASE STUDY PAPER

THC 8-Legal Aspects in Tourism and Hospitality

Submitted by:

Maria Fe Rowena Magcale

Year and Section

2nd Semester, AY 2022-2023

Submitted to:

Maria Fe Rowena Magcale

 CASE 1: MELVA NATH vs. SHANGRI-LA HOTEL MANILA

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Summary of the Case
Melva Nath a Director of Rooms in Shangri-La Hotel Manila on a probationary period
of not more than six (6) months. On September 4, 1992, Friday, Resident Manager
Gerard Sintes met with Nath for their regular weekly meeting. Since Nonperformance
was due for evaluation on September 11, Sintes apprised Nath of her poor work
performance and non-compliance of company rules. Nath neither disputed Sintes'
findings nor justified her alleged acts and omissions.

On September 7, Monday, Nath called up the hotel and left word that she was ill and
could not report for work. That afternoon, Personnel Manager Teresa Lalinreturned
Nath's call to remind the latter that a medical certificate ought to be
submitted by her. Nath informed Lalin she would report for work on September
9,Wednesday

Nath did not report on September 9. Lalin and Sales Director Gami Holazo visited
Nath at her residence. They relayed General Manager Al Wymann's message
requiring Nath to report for work and reminded Nath of her scheduled evaluation on
September 11

On September 10, 1992, Nath sent a letter to Lalin dated September 9, to quote”
“Thank you for taking the trouble to discuss things with me. I appreciate your
concern and admire your efforts at trying to work things out in this rather difficult
situation. “I would be happy to consider returning to work. You will
understand,however, that this would depend upon my performance evaluation - I feel
that the whole exercise becomes academic if my output is evaluated as anything
less than satisfactory. Thus, I would very much appreciate a copy of my official
performance evaluation prior to my return. “Enclosed are copies of most
of the work I have accomplished in what effectively amounts to 2 ½ months on
the job. I hope you will appreciate that what I have produced is quite substantial
especially in light of the fact that I was without a secretary for one month and without
a computer for about two."

On Sept. 14, 1992, the Shang-rila Hotel, dismissed Nath

immediately.Wherein in the content of the letter stated that Nath has been absent
from work for 1-week (7) days. Which leads to his immediate dismissal.
After Nath knew of his immediate dismissal, he immediately filed a complaint for
his illegal dismissal in the Shang-rila Hotel. Without the loss of his seniority rights
and other privileges and further to pay the complaint. Also reinstating her again in
her position with full back wages counted from Sept. 14, 1992

In her petition stating that there was no due process and the
petitioners alleged substandard work, performance and was never cited a
ground for her immediate termination and was never raised as an issue until
further. There was also no clear, independent, and satisfactory evidence to prove
that the petitioner’s work performance was ever substandard.

Because of this case wherein no due process has been given, Batas
Pambansa Blg.130 provided.Sec. 2 Notice of Dismissal Any employer who seeks to
dismiss a worker shall furnish him a written notice stating the acts or omission
constituting the grounds for-his dismissal. In cases of abandonment of work, the
notice shall be served at the worker's last known address.

Sec. 6. Decision to dismiss. — The employer shall immediately notify a

worker in writing of a decision to dismiss him clearly stating the reasons therefor.
Throughout the process of this case Nath has been accused of not doing her job.
Her work ethics and not meeting up her designated deadlines. None of her
manuals has finished and the checklist that covered the things complained needed
to accomplish remained outstanding. The quality of her work has never been up to
the standards of the hotel. Throughout the meeting she was urged to respond, to
give feedback on the points raised. But she chose to remain silent. In Nath’s
petition paper she stated that she “was never remiss with her duties and
responsibilities as Director of Rooms of the Shangri-La Hotel”. She was a
managerial employee and not an ordinary employee. Her job involved the exercise of
a lot of discretion. More was expected from her. Unfortunately, her work ethics and
performance fell short of the reasonable standards set by her employer.

Throughout the process in this case, her dismissal being for just and
authorized cause but without due process, Nath is not entitled to
reinstatement,back wages, damages and attorney's fees. In the end Melva Nath won
the case but was never reinstated again as the Director of Rooms. In view whereof,
the decision of public respondent NLRC is hereby affirmed. No costs

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to determine_________________
 CHAPTER 2: DISCUSSION

a. Lessons learned in the case

The case of Melva Nath against the Shangrila Manila Hotel is an absurd
dismissal of the rights of an employee. Whereas the public respondent
National Labor Relations Commission (Second Division) reinstated that the
Shangrila Hotel committed grave abuse of discretion in upholding the legality of
petitioner’s dismissal despite the fact that: (a) there was no due process
and petitioner’s alleged substandard work performance was never cited as a
ground for terminations nor as an issue; and (b) there was no clear,
independent, and satisfactory evidence to-prove that petitioner’s work
performance was substandard. Hence, the petitioner was dismissed without due
process of Law

With the statements above, lessons in this case are upheaval. Firstly, it is learned in
this case that each employee should know their rights, more so, to not be afraid to
exercise it most especially if the employee is right. It is affirmed in the rules
implemented by Batas Pambansa Bldg, 130 that it requires for the
employer to provide two written notices before the termination of the
worker can legally be affected. To expound, it is mentioned that the termination
of employment can be legally affected when (1) notice which apprises the employee
of the particular acts or omissions for which his dismissal is sought; and (2) the
subsequent notice which informs the employee of the employer's decision to dismiss
him. In this regard, it is evident that the legal rights of the employee specifically
Melva Nath was not properly given by the Shangrila Hotel. Secondly, the lessons
learned in this case is honesty. It can be seen in the case that Shangrila Hotel had
altered some of the small details to exaggerate that Melva Nath had committed
omission on being the Director of Rooms-in Shangrila Hotel. To prove, the letter
provided by the private respondent which is Shangrila Hotel had omitted alteration
on exact dates, for instance they said that their records shows that she has been
absent from work since September 8, well in fact it should be September 7.
Another instance is when the letter of dismissal reiterates that the complaint
has not been reported for work since September 11,well in fact it should be
September 10
b. Does the company observe due to process in this case?

In the instance provided in the case, due process was not observed by the Shangrila
Hotel. They immediately dismiss Nath without any due process, which Nath found
very unpleasant. Moreover, the company really did a number on Nath,which is
unprofessional. The company also accused Nath of not doing her job
efficiently, and the quality of her work did not meet the hotel’s standard. Hence, she
was immediately dismissed without prior notice.

As mentioned above, it is clear and evident that due process was not
observed in the dismissal of Melva Nath as the Director of Rooms in Shangrila
Hotel.Consequently, clear, independent, and satisfactory evidence was not
provided to prove that the petitioner’s work performance was substandard. Hence,
it was not cited as an issue for termination nor raised as an issue.
To prove the point stated above, it is mentioned in Section 2, Notice
of Dismissal that any employer who seeks to dismiss a worker shall furnish
him a written notice stating the particular acts or omission constituting the grounds
for his dismissal. In cases of abandonment of work, the notice shall be
served at the worker's last known address. More so, it is also stated in Section 6,
Decision of Dismiss that the employer shall immediately notify a worker in writing of
a decision to dismiss him clearly stating the reasons therefor. However, these legal
actions were not practiced by the private respondent - Shangrila Hotel.

c. Do you agree with the decision of the court? & Why do you agree or why
don’t you agree?
The decision of the court with regards to the case of Melva Nath against
Shangri La Hotel is indeed agreeable due to various reasons. Firstly, the decision
manifested the conventional actions required in addressing the case.
Furthermore,the court taking the side of Melva Nath was exemplar because as
discussed above and proven above, the company did not observe the due process
before dismissing the complaint. With this, based on my judgments, the actions
taken by the company is inappropriate. It is evident that they did not even notify
Nath’s immediate dismissa

in the hotel that led to Nath’s complaint against Shangri-La hotel being raised to the
court. In regards to the immediate dismissal of the hotel to the complaint, it is raised
in the court that such actions is not in line to the certification grounds
that states“respondent National Labor Relations Commision grave abuse
of discretion in upholding the legality of petitioner’s dismissal despite the fact that:
(a) there was no due process and petitioner’s alleged substandard work performance
was never cited as a ground for termination nor raised as an issue; and (b)
there was no clear,independent, and satisfactory evidence to prove that
petitioner’s work was substandard”. Consequently, the final decision of the court
stated that “Her dismissal being for just and authorized cause but without due
process, Nath is not entitled to reinstatement, back wages, damages and
attorney's fees. As we have ruled in Wenphil Corporation vs. NLRC, the fact
that the employee was not afforded due process does not operate to eradicate
the just causes for which he could be dismissed. A contrary policy may
encourage the employee to do even worse and will render a mockery of the rules of
discipline that employees are required to observe.Under the circumstances, the
dismissal of the employee for just cause must be maintained”. The
judgment proffers that Nath could not be reinstated to his late position as the
Director of Rooms in Shangri-La Hotel, more so, she will not also have back wages
and attorney’s fees. Despite this, the final decision of the court is still commendable
and that it is manifested in this incident that each one of us needs to observe
proper dismissal of employees, in which we must be righteous and
orderly in decision making

d. Why do you think tourism-related establishments are more prone to labour

cases than other industries?
Tourism is one of the world’s largest and rapidly growing industries. It is also one of
the main economic engines for nations; in the 21st century, the global
economy is driven by three major industries including
technology,telecommunication, and tourism. Moreover, the 21st century
world economy is service-based, and services require people. The
tourism-related establishment operates around the clock wherein extended
operation hours, intensive job demands, and daily or seasonal fluctuations is a
normal thing. In tourism-related establishments people tend to be more involved
since in this industry, they serve the people and the mass in which many cases in
labours are piling up and more prone to it. While other industries, people are not that
involved
There are a lot of unequal treatments for all types of employees, which lead to major
labour cases wherein sometimes affect the company itself. Some which are unfair
treatment among men and women employees; untrained workforce, poor
working condition, seasonality of the sectors, sexual harassment and stress; high
working hours without overtime payment, the sector is low paid salary payer another
sociocultural related factors are some to be noted as challenges for
employment conditions in tourism and hospitality business.
CHAPTER 3: RECOMMENDATIONS

Before you terminate employee’s or other staff in a company, make sure to follow a
due process in order not to be tangled with other problems that will come by.It is also
important to notify the employee ahead of time prior to the termination or dismissal of
an employee. As a good employer you must create well-thought-out policies and
guidelines describing the grounds for termination and how the process will be
handled, when it becomes necessary. You will also need to communicate effectively
with your other employees, so the firing will not negatively impact morale.This
requires transparency – yet you do not want to infringe on the fired person's privacy
unless necessary. All in all, firing is a painful and, sometimes, risky business.If you
cannot avoid it, then it is important to keep it from getting emotional

You will not win a lawsuit by simply striding into the courthouse and
demanding money from your opponent. Each type of legal claim has
several"elements" that you will need to prove to win. It is an all or nothing
proposition. If you fail to prove an element, you will lose. For example, in a contract
dispute, you must prove that a contract existed, that you held up your end of the
bargain, that your opponent failed to meet his or her contractual obligations, and that
you were harmed as a result. You'll want to plan carefully making sure
that you can prove every element of your case—or, if you are defending
yourself against a lawsuit, making sure that you can disprove at least one element of
your opponent's case. One of the easiest ways to find the elements is by reviewing
jury instructions. Jury instructions are simple statements of the law that the judge will
read to the jury so the jury knows the elements that you must prove, too. Each state
has a set of civil and criminal jury instructions. Look through the table of contents to
find your cause of action

Despite your best attempts to right the ship, there’s a certain employee on your team
who just can’t seem to meet expectations—and, it’s left you scrambling to figure out
exactly how to fire an employee nicely. However, when you are in the driver's seat,
it’s also up to you to ensure that you maintain a high-performing team.So, if an
employee is repeatedly breaking rules or ignoring expectations—regardless of how
many attempts you have made to correct the behaviour—it is time to cut them loose

.Give them time to change, rather than immediately jumping on the

firing bandwagon, it’s worth sitting that employee down, pointing out the behaviour
that need to change, and then identifying some action steps that employees can take
to improve. Find the right time and place, you need to find an atmosphere
somewhere private, quiet, and free from constant distractions where you both can
devote your full attention to that conversation. Always stand firm in your
decision, your final decision must not be immovable at all cost even if the
employees are to beg and cry.

Legal Basis
Article III of 1987 Philippine Constitution Bill of Rights