MABEZA vs.

NLRC

271 SCRA 670 Labor Law Labor Standards Abandonment of Work Loss of Confidence
Norma Mabeza was an employee hired by Hotel Supreme in Baguio City. In 1991, an inspection was
made by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) at Hotel Supreme and the
DOLE inspectors discovered several violations by the hotel management. Immediately, the owner of the
hotel, Peter Ng, directed his employees to execute an affidavit which would purport that they have no
complaints whatsoever against Hotel Supreme. Mabeza signed the affidavit but she refused to certify it
with the prosecutors office. Later, when she reported to work, she was not allowed to take her shift.
She then asked for a leave but was not granted yet shes not being allowed to work. In May 1991, she
then sued Peter Ng for illegal dismissal. Peter Ng, in his defense, said that Mabeza abandoned her work.
In July 1991, Peter Ng also filed a criminal complaint against Mabeza as he alleged that she had stolen a
blanket and some other stuff from the hotel. Peter Ng went on to amend his reply in the labor case to
make it appear that the reason why he dismissed Mabeza was because of his loss of confidence by
reason of the theft allegedly committed by Mabeza. The labor arbiter who handled the case, a certain
Felipe Pati, ruled in favor of Peter Ng.
ISSUE: Whether or not there is abandonment in the case at bar. Whether or not loss of confidence as
ground for dismissal applies in the case at bar.
HELD: No. The side of Peter Ng is bereft of merit so is the decision of the Labor Arbiter which was
unfortunately affirmed by the NLRC.
Abandonment
Abandonment is not present. Mabeza returned several times to inquire about the status of her work or
her employment status. She even asked for a leave but was not granted. Her asking for leave is a clear
indication that she has no intention to abandon her work with the hotel. Even the employer knows that
his purported reason of dismissing her due to abandonment will not fly so he amended his reply to
indicate that it is actually loss of confidence that led to Mabezas dismissal.
Loss of Confidence
It is true that loss of confidence is a valid ground to dismiss an employee. But this is ideally only applied
to workers whose positions require a certain level or degree of trust particularly those who are
members of the managerial staff. Evidently, an ordinary chambermaid who has to sign out for linen and
other hotel property from the property custodian each day and who has to account for each and every
towel or bedsheet utilized by the hotels guests at the end of her shift would not fall under any of these
two classes of employees for which loss of confidence, if ably supported by evidence, would normally
apply. Further, the suspicious filing by Peter Ng of a criminal case against Mabeza long after she initiated

her labor complaint against him hardly warrants serious consideration of loss of confidence as a ground
of Mabezas dismissal.