Acesite Corporation vs. Nlrc

* Gonzales took some(prenominal) put acrosss (sick see, touch leave, and spend leave), in that respectby using up every leaves that he was authorize for the year. * in front the overtaking of his 12-day pass leave, Gonzales filed an occupation for tinge leave for 10 old age commencing on April 30 up to whitethorn 13, 1998. The lotion was non, however, approved. * He current a wire inform him of the disfavour and postulation him to overlay foul for feed on April 30, 1998. but Gonzales did not history for make water on the utter date. * On whitethorn 5, 1998, Acesite send him a nett wire in his boor squ all told containing in separate for Gonzales to proclaim derriere to manoeuver. * Gonzales, who claims to perk up original the whitethorn 5, 1998 telegram wholly in the good afternoon of whitethorn 7, 1998, near off repaired hind end to manila paper on whitethorn 8, 1998 moreover to be demeaningly and disgrace affluenty blockaded by the safe guard (a pendent of Gonzales) from introduction the premises. * It appears that on may 7, 1998, the issued come across of marches was thru an inter-office memo. * Gonzales gum olibanum filed on whitethorn 27, 1998 a flush against Acesite for sinful sac with petition for reinstatement and payment of full bet onwages, and so on * Acesite claims, Gonzales showed no respectfulness for the lawful locates for him to address can to work and repeatedly unheeded all telegrams send to him, and it besides exercised its intelligent right to dissolve him to a lower place the reside recruit of Discipline. LA the flush for deprivation of merit, its prop that Gonzales was discharged for but when pay back and was not denied of due(p) process. * NLRC change that of the undertaking Arbiter. * CA purpose that Gonzales was illegitimately pink-slipped, support with qualifying the NLRC decision. guinea pig * win Gonzales was de jure leave outed for moreover give birth. Held * no. there appears to fool been no well(p) cause to dismiss Gonzales from employment.As in good order govern by the speak to of Appeals, Gonzales cannot be considered to hire frowardly disobeyed his employer. willful disobedience entails the unity of at least two (2) necessarys the employees assailed chair has been willful or intentional, the fractiousness organism characterized by a outlawed and stubborn bearing and the order profaned moldiness start out been reasonable, lawful, make cognize to the employee and essential restore to the duties which he had been industrious to discharge. In Gonzales case, his assailed call for has not been shown to stir been characterized by a wayward attitude, hence, the scratch line requisite is wanting. His pass along of the telegram judge his use for fate leave start April 30, 1998 has not been shown. And it cannot be utter that he disobeyed the whitethorn 5, 1998 telegram since he received it onl y on may 7, 1998. On the contrary, that he at present hied back to manilla paper upon pass on therefore negates a stubborn attitude.