Del Monte Phil vs Lolita Velasco GR. No. 153477 March 6, 2007

Del Monte Phil vs Lolita Velasco

GR. No. 153477

March 6, 2007

Facts:

Lolita Velasco, respondent herein was dismissed by the petitioner Del Monte Philippines due to excessive absences without permission. The respondent alleged that her absences was due to urinary tract infection, pregnancy-borne and that she filed an application for leave to her supervisor. She also went to see the company doctor for check-up and was advised to rest for four days.

Issue:

Whether or not the petitioner as illegally dismissed

Rulings:

Yes.  The respondent’s sickness was pregnancy-related and, therefore, the petitioner cannot terminate respondent’s services because in doing so, petitioner will, in effect, be violating the Labor Code which prohibits an employer to discharge an employee on account of the latter’s pregnancy.

The undeniable fact is that during her complained absences in 1994, respondent was pregnant and suffered related illnesses. Again, it must be stressed that respondent’s discharge by reason of absences caused by her pregnancy is covered by the prohibition under the Labor Code. Since her last string of absences is justifiable and had been subsequently explained, the petitioner had no legal basis in considering these absences together with her prior infractions as gross and habitual neglect.