REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

COURT OF APPEALS
MANILA

XYZ CORPORATION
PRESIDENT DINA PAZ WELDO
Petitioner,

--VERSUS- C.A.-G.R. No. __________

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

JUAN DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.
Respondents.

x----------------------------------------------------------x

PETITION

PETITIONER, petitioner XYZ Corporation, thru the undersigned counsel, respectfully states and alleges
that:

I. NATURE OF THE PETITION

1. This is a petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure assailing the
resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC for brevity) Second Division dated
February 13, 2014 (which is referred as Annex A hereof) pertaining to the denied Motion for
Reconsideration of its previous decision;

2. That petitioner was unable to timely file the Motion for Reconsideration of such resolution of the
National Labor Relations Commission. Unfortunately, the NLRC denied said motion on its
resolution dated February 20, 2014;

3. That petitioner is now assailing the propriety of the NLRC decision in dismissing the motion and
hereby raise pure questions of law, considering that there is no plain, speedy and adequate
remedy available in the ordinary course of law- hence, this petition;

II. TIMELINESS OF THE FILING OF THE PETITION

1. That petitioner through its president had received via his secretary the assailed NLRC decision
denying the motion for reconsideration on February 27, 2014. This petition is timely filed because
it is still within the time frame allowed by law.

III. ATTACHMENTS

1. Annex A - Decision of NLRC dated February 13, 2014.

2. Annex B - Denied Motion for Reconsideration by NLRC dated February 20, 2014.
 IV. THE PARTIES

1. That petitioner is a corporation duly organized and registered under the laws of the Philippines,
represented by its President, DINA PAZ WELDO, of legal age, Filipino, single, with an office
address at #34, 5th St. Bonifacio Global City Taguig Metro Manila, where She may be served the
summons and other processes of this Honorable Court;

2. That respondent NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (NLRC) is a quasi-judicial body

tasked to promote and maintain industrial peace by resolving labor and management disputes
involving both local and overseas workers through compulsory arbitration and alternative modes
of dispute resolution. It is attached to the Department of Labor and Employment for program and
policy coordination with duties and responsibilities pursuant to law duly represented by its
CHAIRMAN MARK EMPLOY, of legal age, Filipino with postal address at NLRC OFFICE,
Quezon City, where he may be served the summons and other processes of this Honorable
Court.

V. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND CASE

1. In 2013, the Defendant, Juan De La Cruz, joined the rally of the workers against the
management. Due to this charge, they were summarily dismissed by the company. Juan De La
Cruz filed a complaint for illegal dismissal to the Labor Arbiter. He alleged that he was not
afforded due process because he was not given any notice in violation of the two-notice rule by
the Labor Code and management should pay him amount equivalent to the number of years that
he worked for the company which is ten years;

2. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the Juan de La Cruz, et al. The dispositive portion of which
reads as follows:

WHEREFORE, judgment is rendered in favor of Juan De la Cruz. XYZ Corporation is hereby

ordered to reinstate Juan De la Cruz with full back wages. Costs ordered against the respondent
XYZ Corporation

3. That XYZ Corporation appealed to NLRC but the latter sustained the decision of the Labor
Arbiter. The dispositive portion of which reads as follows:

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Labor Arbiter is affirmed without modifications.

4. That a timely Motion for Reconsideration was filed before the NLRC but was denied.

VI. ERRORS ASSIGNED

1. The NLRC erred and gravely abused its discretion in a capricious, whimsical arbitrary or despotic
manner in the exercise of their jurisdiction equivalent to lack of jurisdiction for XYZ Corporation
validly carried out its retrenchment program, which effectively severed the concerned employees
employment with the company. For lack of factual and legal basis, the NLRC struck down its
decision against the Corporation.

VII. DISCUSSION

1. The NLRC gravely abused its discretion in a capricious, whimsical arbitrary or despotic manner in
the exercise of its jurisdiction when it ruled that the severance of the employment of the
employees were not valid. Article 283 of the Labor Code provides that an employer may
terminate the employment of any employee due to retrenchment to prevent losses. This ground
 was well provided in the petition as well as the Motion for Reconsideration timely filed which the
NLRC failed to give credence.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, petitioner respectfully prays that an order be issued reversing the
NLRC decision denying the Motion for Reconsideration of XYZ Co., and deciding on the merits of the
case, finding that the retrenchment of the employees was valid.

Respectfully submitted this 13th day of March, 2014 at Manila City, Philippines.

ATTY. WIN ACASE

Counsel for Petitioner
PTR no. 1532749-1-5-09
IBP No. 04796 (lifetime)
ROA No. 46753
MCLE Compliance No.II-0006141
Ortigas, Pasig City
Republic of the Philippines)
City of Taguig ) S.S.
X-----------------------------X

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, DINA PAZ WELDO, of legal age, Filipino citizen, single, with office address at #34, 5th St. Bonifacio
Global City Taguig, MM, Philippines after having been duly sworn to an oath in accordance with law,
hereby depose and say:

1. That I am the petitioner in the above-stated case;

2. That I caused the preparation of the foregoing petition;

3. That I have read the contents thereof and the facts stated therein are true and correct of my
personal knowledge and/or on the basis of copies of documents and records in my possession;

4. That I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency;

5. To the best of my knowledge and belief, no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency;

DINA PAZ WELDO

Affiant

Republic of the Philippines)

City of Pasig ) S.S.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 13th day of March 2014 at 13/F Global Tower, BGC,
Taguig City, affiant exhibiting to me her Drivers License with number N12-3456789 issued on September
1, 2013 at Pasig City.

NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No.______;
Page No.______;
Book No.______;
Series of 2014.