Judgment As Labor Arbiters

Republic of the Philippines
Department of Labor and Employment

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
Regional Arbitration, Legazpi City Branch
Legazpi City, Albay
MARIO M. MAURER,
Complainant,
-versus- NLRC-RAB V Case No.

V-03-42020-01
Labor Arbiter:
HON. ERIKA ALIDIO
HON. MARLON SEVILLA
HON. JOSHUA TRINANES
PLATONIC CULINARY SCHOOL,

MR. TONY C. STARK,
MS. PEPPER P. POTTS, Promulgated:
Respondents. March 14, 2020
x---------------------------------------------x
DECISION
“The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers,
recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the
right of enterprises to reasonable returns on investments, and to expansion and
growth.”
The issue in this complaint is whether there has been an illegal dismissal of
an employee due to the latter’s failure to procure a government license which is a
requirement for employment.
The Parties
Complainant Mario M. Maurer prior to the constructive dismissal from

employment worked as a Chef and Culinary Instructor at Platonic’s Culinary
School.
On the other hand, Respondent Platonic Culinary School is a corporation
duly organized and existing under the laws of the Republic of the Philippines. Co-
respondents Mr. Tony A. Stark (Mr. Stark) and Pepper P. Potts (Ms. Potts) are the
Chief Executive Officer and President of PLATONIC, respectively.
The Facts
On June 12, 2017, respondent, Platonic Culinary School was established as a

new culinary arts school in Malibog, Albay. Mario M. Maurer, complainant, was
hired by Platonic Culinary School CEO, Tony C. Stark in August 2017, as a chef
and instructor.
The complainant was bound by a contract, to which both the complainant and
the respondents are parties. Said contract had a clause stipulated that complainant
would only acquire regularization and permanency in the position once he has
already complied with and completed all requirements for regularization, and that
until such time, his employment will be on probationary status.
One of the requirements for regularization and permanency enumerated in the

contract, was to secure the necessary government license to establish his credibility
and legitimacy, and ensure his tenure in the company.
According to respondent, the complainant was the chief architect of the

culinary school’s curriculum, and subsequently, the school earned reputation as one
of the best culinary schools in Albay.
Then, respondent sought the accreditation of the Philippine Culinary

Foundation – Education Foundation Accrediting Commission (PCFEF) on January
2019.
One of the essential requirements for the instructors of the school is the
attainment of government license. However, upon their preparation of the
documents to be presented to PCFEF, it was noted that the complainant lacks the
said prerequisite.
On May 3, 2019, the respondent issued a Memorandum ordering the
complainant to take an indefinite leave without any compensation.
Consequently, the complainant submitted a written reply to the respondent
contesting such order, alleging that the disputed government license was not
required of him as a prerequisite document during his tenure in the respondent
school until the accreditation of PCFEF.
However, the respondent informed him verbally that he was not allowed
anymore to report to work.
On March 3, 2020, the complainant filed this present action for illegal
dismissal before this Honorable Office.
Mandatory Conciliation And Mediation Conference
Pursuant to the provisions of Article 218 (now 225) of Presidential Decree

No. 442, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines, as amended, the
Revised Rules of Procedure governing arbitration proceedings before the Labor
Arbiters and the Commission are adopted and promulgated. Section 8 therein
provides that:
(a) The mandatory conciliation and mediation conference shall be called for
the purpose of: (1) amicably settling the case upon a fair compromise; (2)
determining the real parties in interest; (3) determining the necessity of amending
the complaint and including all causes of action; (4) defining and simplifying the
issues in the case; (5) entering into admissions or stipulations of facts; and (6)
threshing out all other preliminary matters. The Labor Arbiter shall personally
preside over and take full control of the proceedings and may be assisted by the
Labor Arbitration Associate in the conduct thereof. Provided that, in areas where
there is no Labor Arbiter assigned, conciliation and mediation may be conducted
by a Labor Arbitration Associate, any other NLRC personnel with sufficient
training and knowledge on conciliation and mediation, authorized by the Chairman
or a duly authorized personnel of the Department of Labor and Employment
(DOLE) pursuant to any Memorandum of Agreement executed for this purpose.
(As amended by En Banc Resolution No. 05-14, Series of 2014)
Pursuant to the aforementioned, the Labor Arbiters herein exerted
conciliation and mediation efforts throughout the mandatory conference held on
March 2, 2020. However, no compromise agreement was made. With the failure to
settle cordially, both parties were then directed to file their respective Position
Paper. Hence, this decision.
The Issue
Complainant’s arguments are centered upon the assertion that he was illegally
dismissed by the respondent and his claim that he has been denied of his right to due
process. Hence, stripped to the essentials, the issue before us is: whether or not
complainant was illegally dismissed and corollarily, whether he is entitled to
payment of back wages, moral, and exemplary damages.
The Ruling
The complaint is impressed with merit.

Judgment As Labor Arbiters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Judgment As Labor Arbiters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Judgment As Labor Arbiters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Labor and Employment

-versus- NLRC-RAB V Case No.

PLATONIC CULINARY SCHOOL,

Complainant Mario M. Maurer prior to the constructive dismissal from

On June 12, 2017, respondent, Platonic Culinary School was established as a

One of the requirements for regularization and permanency enumerated in the

According to respondent, the complainant was the chief architect of the

Then, respondent sought the accreditation of the Philippine Culinary

Mandatory Conciliation And Mediation Conference

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 218 (now 225) of Presidential Decree

The complaint is impressed with merit.

You might also like