6/8/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly G.R. No. 124766 FIRST DIVISION [ G.R. No. 124766, January 30, 1997 ] ORIENT EXPRESS PLACEMENT PHILIPPINES AND DOMINADOR BATENGA, JR., PETITIONERS, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (NLRC), HON. LABOR ARBITER ERNESTO DINOPOL, AND MA. LUISA P. COLLINS, RESPONDENTS. RESOLUTION HERMOSISIMA, JR., J.: With the filing of Comment on the instant petition by both private respondent Ma. Luisa Collins[1] and the Office of the Solicitor General[2] in behalf of public respondent National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), issues are now joined, and the instant petition is proper for adjudication. We rule to dismiss the petition. Petitioner Orient Express Placement Phils. (hereafter, Orient), before it dismissed private respondent on suspicion of charging excessive placement fees from applicants seeking overseas employment, had private respondent on its employ as liaison officer tasked with dealing with the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA). On November 9, 1993, private respondent was called to the office of petitioner Dominador Batenga, Jr., who is the President and General Manager of petitioner Orient. During that meeting, private respondent was confronted with the charge of exaction of excessive placement fees and was there and then dismissed shortly after explaining herself. Petitioners make no qualms about having terminated private respondent on the same day that the she was accused of demanding and accepting excessive placement fees. On November 17, 1993 or eight (8) days after her termination, private respondent filed with the Arbitration Branch of the NLRC a complaint[3] for illegal dismissal, various monetary claims, damages and attorney’s fees. On both issues of their illegality of the private respondent's dismissal and her entitlement to various monetary claims, damages and attorney's fees, the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of respondent.[4] Analyzing the documentary and testimonial evidence, the Labor Arbiter pointed out that it was petitioner Dominador Batenga, Jr.’s cousin, Jose Batenga, who acted as officerin-charge of the ground floor office of petitioner Orient, directed private respondent to charge excessive placement fees and signed receipts therefor. Thus, the Labor Arbiter ruled that the no substantial evidence was proffered to prove the charge leveled against private respondent and accordingly ordered her reinstatement and payment of her backwages. Neither did it escape the Labor Arbiter’s keen perception of the undisputed facts that in dismissing private respondent, petitioner Orient failed to comply with the twin requirements of notice and hearing. Therefore, since there was a elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/34440 1/3