(Art 285) 9. BMG Records V Aparecio

BMG RECORDS (PHILS.), INC. and JOSE YAP, JR.
vs.
AIDA C. APARECIO and NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
FACTS:
Petitioner BMG Records (Phils.), Inc. (BMG) is engaged in the business of selling various audio records
nationwide. It hired private respondent Aparecio as one of the promo girls in its Cebu branch, working
from Monday to Sunday.
The version of the petitioners follows:
They narrate that Aparecio was initially performing well as an employee but as years passed by she
seemed to be complacent in the performance of her job and had been comparing the salaries of promo
girls in other companies. It appeared that she was no longer interested in her job. She and two other
promo girls, Jovelina V. Soco and Veronica P. Mutya, intimated to their supervisor that they were
intending to resign and were requesting for some financial assistance. BMG made it clear that, as a
company policy, an employee who resigns from service is not entitled to financial assistance, but
considering the length of their service and due to humanitarian consideration it would accede to the
request after they secure their respective clearances. Forthwith, the three employees tendered their
resignations, which were accepted. When they processed the required individual clearance, it was found
out that they had incurred some shortages after inventory. Per agreement, said shortages were
deducted from the amounts due them. Thus, Soco and Mutya received their last salary, a proportion of
the 13th month pay, tax refund and financial assistance less the deductions, and they executed their
releases and quitclaims. Except for the financial assistance, Aparecio also obtained the same yet refused
to sign the release and quitclaim, protesting the amount deducted from the financial assistance. She was
adamant but BMG stood by the previous agreement.
The story of the defense is:
Aparecio filed a complaint against BMG and its Branch Manager, Jose Yap, Jr., co-petitioner herein, for
illegal dismissal and non-payment of overtime pay, holiday pay, etc. She alleged that she was illegally
dismissed or terminated from employment; however, she was asked by respondent to resign and will be
paid all her benefits due like a one-month pay for every year of service, payment of services rendered,
overtime and holiday pay, rest day, 13th month, service incentive leave and separation pay and to
execute a letter of resignation. She further alleged that she was under respondent's employ for seven
(7) years, seven (7) months and twenty-eight (28) days when illegally terminated from her employment
LA: The labor arbiter dismissed Aparecio's complaint.
NLRC: The NLRC found that Aparecio was illegally dismissed from service
CA: On appeal, the CA affirmed in toto the judgment of the NLRC.
ISSUE:
WON respondents resignation was valid and no vitiation of consent took place.
RULING:
YES. Reading through the records would ineluctably reveal that the evidence upon which both the NLRC
and the CA based their conclusion rests on rather shaky foundation. After careful analysis, this Court
finds and so holds that the submissions of Aparecio in all her pleadings failed to substantiate the
allegation that her consent was vitiated at the time she tendered her resignation and that petitioners
are guilty of illegal dismissal.
The Court agrees with petitioners' contention that the circumstances surrounding Aparecio's resignation
should be given due weight in determining whether she had intended to resign. In this case, such intent
is very evident:
First, Aparecio already communicated to other people that she was about to resign to look for a better
paying job since she had been complaining that employees like her in other companies were earning
much more;
Second, prior to the submission of her resignation letter, Aparecio and two other promo girls, Soco and
Mutya, approached their supervisor, intimated their desire to resign, and requested that they be given
financial assistance, which petitioners granted on the condition that deductions would be made in case
of shortage after inventory;
Third, Aparecio, Soco, and Mutya submitted their duly signed resignation letters, which were accepted
by petitioners; and
Fourth, Aparecio already initiated the processing of her clearance; thus, she was able to receive her last
salary, 13thmonth pay, and tax refund but refused to receive the financial assistance less the deductions
made.

(Art 285) 9. BMG Records V Aparecio

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Art 285) 9. BMG Records V Aparecio

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Art 285) 9. BMG Records V Aparecio

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BMG RECORDS (PHILS.), INC. and JOSE YAP, JR.

The version of the petitioners follows:

The story of the defense is:

LA: The labor arbiter dismissed Aparecio's complaint.

CA: On appeal, the CA affirmed in toto the judgment of the NLRC.

You might also like