Hence, the present petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court with the following assignment of errors:   FIRST ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR   THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED IN RULING THAT PETITIONER ILLEGALLY DISMISSED THE PRIVATE RESPONDENT.   SECOND ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR   THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED SERIOUS ERROR IN AWARDING PRIVATE RESPONDENT BACKWAGES EQUIVALENT TO HIS THREE (3) MONTHS SALARY.[8]             Petitioner’s main contention is that the CA, the NLRC and the Labor Arbiter erred in not giving “full evidentiary value” to the telexed Chief Engineer’s Report dated September 10, 1997, which specified the causes of respondent’s dismissal, quoted as follows:   TO: SKIPPERS MNL CC:  SKIPPERS PIRAEUS FM:  MV NAVAL GENT DT:  SEPT. 10, 1997   DURING SHIP REPAIR AT PERAMA DD. 18/07-31/07/97 OUR ATTENDING SUPT. ENGINEERS CONSTANTLY OBSERVING ALL PERSONNELS ABILITY AND ATTITUDE WITH REGARDS TO OUR TECHNICAL CAPABILITY AND BEHAVIOURS WITH EMPHASY [SIC] ON DISCIPLINE.  IT IS ONLY UNFORTUNATE THAT THEY NOTICED 3/ E G. ROSAROSO AS BEING SLACK AND NOT CARING OF HIS JOB AND DUTIES BEING HIRED AS THIRD ENGR OFFICER, TO THE FULLEST BEYOND THEIR EXPECTATION.  AFTER TOO MUCH OF CONSIDERATION AND DELIBERATION HAVING HIM CONSTANTLY ADVISED BY 2/E F. DIAMOS ASKING FOR HIS COOPERATION TO WORK AND HELP IN THE ONGOING ENORMOUS REPAIRS.  BUT FAILED TO HEED AND REFUSED TO BE MOTIVATED.  WE HAVE SEEKED [SIC] ADVISE FROM YOUR OFFICE VIA PHONE, SKIPPERS PIRAEUS THRU CAPT. KAMPANIS AND THE PORT CAPT OF NICOLAKIS SHIPPING CAPT. PAPASTILIANOS, OF WHAT TO BE DONE.  THE OWNERS RECOMMENDATION WAS TO REPLACED [SIC] HIM ON THE FOLLOWING REASONS: