Memo of Appealfinal

 

Republic of the Philippines Department of Labor and Employment

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION National Capital Region Region Quezon City ARVIN A. PASCUAL, Complainant-Appellant

-

!E !ER" R"#" #" %&%'(-(&   SITEL PHILIPPINES and)or MICHAEL LEE, ASWIN SUKUMAR, PHOEBE MONICA ARGANA REMIL CANDA, and AMOR REYES,   Respondents-Appellees$

NL NLR RC NC NCR R Ca Case se No$ No$ NC NCR R-%&-%&-

*-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*

MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL COMES NOW complainant-appellant by the undersigned counsel unto this +onorable Commission most respectfully a,ers

 JURISDICTIONAL FACTS FACTS ( .n (% "epte "eptember mber /% /%(& (& com complai plainant nant-app -appella ellant0s nt0s cou counsel nsel rrecei ecei,ed ,ed a copy of the Decision of the +on$ Labor Arbiter 1arcial 2alahad 3$ 1a4asiar in NLRC-NCR Case No$ %&-%&%'(-(& entitled Ar,in A$ Pascual 5Complainant6 ,s$ "itel Philippines et$ al$ 5Respondents67 / 3hu 3hus s compl complain ainantant-appe appellan llantt has until /% "e "eptem ptember ber /%( /%(& & 8ithi 8ithin n 8hich to 9le his Appe Appeal al and 1emo 1emorand randum um of App Appeal eal 8hi 8hich ch fall falls s o on n a "un "unday day$$ Complainant-appell ant has therefor Complainant-appellant therefore e until /( "eptember /%(&7 : Comp Complain lainant-a ant-appel ppellant lant mo most st resp respectf ectfully ully ap appeal peals s the Decisi Decision on of the +on$ Labo La borr Ar Arbi bite terr to the the +o +ono nora rabl ble e Co Comm mmis issi sion on an and d su subm bmit it the the inst instan antt 1emorandum of Appeal7 ; of the )abor 8ode”  8ode” 5emphasis supplied6  “s correctl pointed out b the L, absent a showing that the withholding of complainant+s wages falls under the e-ceptions  proided in rticle ==>, the withhold withholding ing thereof is thus unlawful%&  Jurther in the same case the "upreme Court citing their decision in the earlier case of Duldulao ,s$ Court of Appeals 2$R$ No$ (@;?: ( 1arch /%%' reiterated that O  “5hat made it impossible, unreaso unreasonable nable or unlik unlikely ely for  res espo pon nde dent nt to co cont ntin inue ue wo worrki king ng for +H+ wa was s th the e unlawful withholding of his salary. $or said reason, he was forced to resign”  resign” 5emphasis supplied6$  supplied6$   “8hatt is si “8ha sign gni ica cant nt is that that the the re resp spon onde dent nt pr prep epar ared ed an and d sered his resignation letter right after he was informed that  his salar was being withheld% 0t would be absurd to reuire respondent to tolerate the unlawful withholding of his salar  for a longer period before his emploment can be considered as so im impo possi ssible ble,, un unre reaso asona nable ble or un unli li.el .el  as to co const nstitu itute te constructie construct ie dismissal%&   “0t is worth to note that in his resignation letter, respondent  cited petitioners+ ?illegal and unfair labor practice? as his cause for resignation% As resignation% As correctly noted by tthe he 8A, respondent  lost lost no ti time me in su subm bmitt ittin ing g his his re resi sign gnat atio ion n le lett tter er an and  d  eventually ;ling a complaint for illegal dismissal :ust a few days after his salary was withheld. (hese circums msttances are in inco con nsis isttent with volu lun ntary  resi re sign gnat atio ion n an and d bo bols lster ter th the e ;n ;ndi ding ng of con const stru ructi ctive ve dismissal %&  %&  5emphasis   5emphasis supplied6 THE CASE OF VERDADERO VS. BARNEY AUTOLINES, G.R. NO. 1>@:'