Reinstatement as Hazard in Employee Dismissal (Final Part)Atty Elvin
The post below is based on the book Guide to Valid Dismissal of Employees (pp. 9-10). Next post, probably tomorrow, will be on damages such as moral, exemplary, that are usually awarded in a labor case won by the complainant.
As held by the Supreme Court in one case, a final judgment is one that finally disposes of a case, leaving nothing to be done by the court in respect thereto, e.g., an adjudication on the merits which, on the basis of the evidence presented at the trial, declares categorically what the rights and obligations of the parties are and which party is in the right; or a judgment or order that dismisses an action.
Simply stated, a final judgment or order either operates to vest some right or terminates the action itself.
In either case of reinstatement, the employer will have to painfully welcome back an employee charged with an offense and dismissed for that matter.
Not only that, it has to do so under the same terms and conditions laid down in Article 223 [now Article 229 based on re-numbered Labor Code pursuant to R.A. 10151 and DOLE Department Advisory 01, Series of 2015] and without loss of seniority rights as found in Article 279 [now Article 294], as the case may be.
Get a copy of re-numbered Labor Code Here
The concrete difference between the two forms of reinstatement is that in reinstatement pending appeal, the case is not yet over. While in reinstatement after final judgment, the case has reached finality.
Whichever way, the employer will be forced to embrace back into the fold an employee whom it considers a violator of its policy.
Unfortunately for the employer, the courts did not agree with him.
It is a bitter loss to swallow but it is the legal consequence of an illegal dismissal.