Allied bank vs CA

Facts:

Private respondent Potenciano Galanida was hired by petitioner Allied Banking wherein it is agreed that the bank reserves the right to transfer or assign respondent to other departments or branches of the bank as the need arises and in the interest of maintaining smooth and uninterrupted service to the public.”Private respondent was promoted several times and was transferred to several branches.

Petitioner listed respondent as second in the order of priority of assistant managers to be assigned outside of Cebu City having been stationed in Cebu for seven years already. Private respondent manifested his refusal to be transferred toBacolod. He then filed a complaint before the Labor Arbiter for constructive dismissal.Subsequently, petitioner bank informed private respondent that he was to report to the Tagbilaran City Branch but the respondent refused.

On 5 October 1994, Galanida received a memo that Allied Bank had terminated his services effective 1 September 1994. The reasons given for the dismissal were: (1) Galanida’s continued refusal to be transferred from the Jakosalem, Cebu City branch; and (2) his refusal to report for work despite the denial of his application for additional vacation leave.

Labor Arbiter- Galanida’s transfer was inconvenient

NLRC- Allied Bank terminated Galanida without just cause.

CA- Affirmed NLRC ruling.

Issue:

w/n Galanida’s continued refusal to obey the transfer orders constituted willful disobedience or insubordination, which is a just cause for termination under the Labor Code.

Held:

The memorandum prepared by Atty. Durano and the assailed Decision of the Labor Arbiter, both misquoted the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dosch v. NLRC.The phrase refusal to obey a transfer order cannot be considered insubordination where employee cited reason for said refusal, such as that of being away from the family” does not appear anywhere in the Dosch decision. (misleading the court. Gawa gawa)

GR: The employer exercises the prerogative to transfer an employee for valid reasons and according to the requirement of its business, provided the transfer does not result in demotion in rank or diminution of the employee’s salary, benefits and other privileges.[24] In illegal dismissal cases, the employer has the burden of showing that the transfer is not unnecessary, inconvenient and prejudicial to the displaced employee.Dosch case not applicable to the present case. The transfer of an employee to an overseas post cannot be likened to a transfer from one city to another within the country. Willful refusal to be transferred within the Philippines based on personal grounds was considered willful disobedience.