Scribd
Upload
79 views2 pages

Jumuad vs. Hi Flyer

Hi-Flyer Food, Inc. dismissed their area manager Pamela Florentina P. Jumuad due to sanitation violations and irregularities discovered during audits of several KFC branches under her supervision. Jumuad filed a complaint arguing her dismissal was illegal. The court ruled that as a managerial employee, Jumuad was responsible for ensuring proper maintenance and operations at the branches to prevent issues. Repeated anomalies at the branches under her watch provided reasonable basis for Hi-Flyer to lose trust in her performance and justify her dismissal.

Uploaded by

Jiathron Manalastas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
79 views2 pages

Jumuad vs. Hi Flyer

Hi-Flyer Food, Inc. dismissed their area manager Pamela Florentina P. Jumuad due to sanitation violations and irregularities discovered during audits of several KFC branches under her supervision. Jumuad filed a complaint arguing her dismissal was illegal. The court ruled that as a managerial employee, Jumuad was responsible for ensuring proper maintenance and operations at the branches to prevent issues. Repeated anomalies at the branches under her watch provided reasonable basis for Hi-Flyer to lose trust in her performance and justify her dismissal.

Uploaded by

Jiathron Manalastas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

G.R. No.

187887 September 7, 2011


Pamela Florentina P. Jumuad, Vs. Hi-Flyer Food, Inc.
FACTS:

Petitioner Pamela Florentina P. Jumuad (Jumuad) began her employment with respondent Hi-


Flyer Food, Inc. (Hi-Flyer), as management trainee. Based on her performance through the years,
Jumuad received several promotions until she became the area manager for the entire Visayas-
Mindanao 1 region, comprising the provinces of Cebu, Bacolod, Iloilo and Bohol.

Sometime after, Hi Flyer conducted a food safety, service and sanitation audit at KFC-Gaisano.
The audit revealed several sanitation violations, such as the presence of rodents and the use of a
defective chiller for the storage of food. Jumuad was asked to explain which she did, however,
Hi-Flyer ordered the KFC-Gaisano branch closed.

Subsequently, Hi-Flyer also audited the accounts of KFC-Bohol amid reports that certain
employees were covering up cash shortages. Some irregularities were indeed discovered, and
again, when asked, Jumuad disclaimed any fault in the incident by pointing out that she was the
one responsible for the discovery of this irregularity.

Hi-Flyer conducted another CER, this time at its KFC-Cocomall branch. Grout and leaks at the
branch’s kitchen wall, dried up spills from the marinator, as well as a live rat under postmix, and
signs of rodent gnawing/infestation were found. This time, Jumuad explained to management
that she had been busy conducting management team meetings at the other KFC branches and
that, at the date the CER was conducted, she had no scheduled visit at the KFC-Cocomall
branch.

Seeking to hold Jumuad accountable for the irregularities uncovered in the branches under her
supervision, Hi-Flyer served her a Notice of Dismissal effecting her termination.

This prompted Jumuad to file a complaint against Hi-Flyer and/or Jesus R. Montemayor for
illegal dismissal before the NLRC, praying for reinstatement and other monetary claims. The LA
gave due course to said complaint, but since it found that Jumuad was not completely blameless
for the anomalies discovered, it did not awarding backwages and damages.

Both Jumuad and Hi-Flyer appealed to the NLRC. NLRC affirmed in toto the appealed decision.
CA, however, exculpated Montemayor from any liability since it considered Jumuad’s dismissal
with a just cause and it found no evidence that he acted with malice and bad faith.
ISSUE:
WON Jumuad’s termination was valid;
HELD:

It cannot be denied that Jumuad willfully breached her duties as to be unworthy of the trust and
confidence of Hi-Flyer. First, there is no denying that Jumuad was a managerial employee. As
correctly noted by the appellate court, Jumuad executed management policies and had the power
to discipline the employees of KFC branches in her area. She recommended actions on
employees to the head office. Pertinent is Article 212 (m) of the Labor Code defining a
managerial employee as one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute
management policies and/or hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline
employees.

Based on established facts, the mere existence of the grounds for the loss of trust and confidence
justifies petitioner’s dismissal. Pursuant to the Court’s ruling in Lima Land, Inc. v. Cuevas, as
long as there is some basis for such loss of confidence, such as when the employer has
reasonable ground to believe that the employee concerned is responsible for the purported
misconduct, and the nature of his participation therein renders him unworthy of the trust and
confidence demanded of his position, a managerial employee may be dismissed.

In the present case, the CER’s reports of Hi-Flyer show that there were anomalies committed in
the branches managed by Jumuad. On the principle of respondeat superior or command
responsibility alone, Jumuad may be held liable for negligence in the performance of her
managerial duties. She may not have been directly involved in causing the cash shortages in
KFC-Bohol, but her involvement in not performing her duty monitoring and supporting the day
to day operations of the branches and ensure that all the facilities and equipment at the restaurant
were properly maintained and serviced, could have truly prevented the whole debacle from ever
occurring.

Moreover, it is observed that rather than taking proactive steps to prevent the anomalies at her
branches, Jumuad merely effected remedial measures. In the restaurant business where the health
and well-being of the consuming public is at stake, this does not suffice. Thus, there is
reasonable basis for Hi-Flyer to withdraw its trust in her and dismissing her from its service.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy