Mapua Professor Mortera is INNOCENT afterall....

[dariosbualan]

Decision of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in the case filed by Prof. Rudy A. Mortera, Jr. against the Mapua Institute of Technology (MIT)…….
From these conflicting factual considerations, the main issues to be resolved in this controversy are:

a) whether or not complainant was dismissed for cause and
due process; and,

b) whether or not complainant is entitled to moral and
exemplary damages and attorney’s fees.

Hence this decision.

There can be no dispute that the three (3) main persons directly involved in this controversy, namely: the complainant, De Matta and Contreras have developed a close relationship between them as “kabarkadas”. However, things turn sour when the complainant, as a professor, flanked De Matta and Contreras in Basic Electronics. Obviously, this caught the ire and fury of De Matta and Contreras until they formally filed complaints before the NBI and subsequently, the respondent’s Faculty Grievance Committee for extortion-robbery, threats, and inflicting injuries upon the two (2) students.

On these charges, We find that complainant never committed any act of such magnitude that would furnish the respondent with any of the aforestated grounds in order to warrant the unceremonious dismissal of the complainant from service under the just cause of the Labor Code or in the Manual of Regulations to Private Schools.

We agree with the complainant that he never inflicted physical injuries upon the students and that the acts imputed upon him could not be construed as corporal punishment. Being close friends and “kabarkadas”, it can be reasonably seen that the acts complained for were mere playful gestures or innocent “pitik” done without an intent to do harm or inflict physical injury or corporal punishment upon the two (2) complaining students. What made this act as physical injury or corporal punishment lingers only in the minds of De Matta and Contreras who have an axe to grind against the complainant who gave them both failing grades in his subject. Of first impression, this is the devious hidden agenda of De Matta and Contreras to file trump-up charges to destroy the good name of the complainant as professor of Mapua. This we cannot allow for good reason.

For there is no malum in doing some playful gestures in a joking manner, like a simple “pitik” upon complainant’s close friends at that time, De Matta and Contreras, who subsequently filed the trump-up charges because of the revengeful fury they unleash to even the odds against the complainant who flanked them in Basic Electronics. Obviously, this is the entire gamut of this controversy with some burning flares of revenge and emotional disillusions displayed by De Matta and Contreras at the heat of their undeserving anger in the complainant.

There is no inkling that complainant indeed received gifts or money from his two (2) students nor food or cellphone loads as they were fully paid for by the complainant. Apparently, the driving services by the two students can only be viewed as acts of closely-knitted friendship and camaraderie and totally out of the context of a teacher-student spectrum. Finally, the solicitations made by De Matta was purely of his own doing and without the knowledge and consent of the complainant. These acts or omission of the complainant are well-established and corroborated by independent witnesses. If at all, complainant’s act of allowing himself to maintain a close but impersonal relationship with his students is a mere lapse of judgment and do not constitute serious misconduct within the spirit of the Labor Code nor in the Manual of Regulations to Private Schools.

We likewise negate the status of the complainant as one who holds a position of trust and confidence simply because, as teacher, complainant is not invested with confidence on delicate matter, such as custody handling, or care and protection of the property or assets of the employer. (Sulpicio Lines vs. Guide G.R. No. 149930, Feb. 22, 2002) Thus, the justifying cause of loss of trust and confidence is inapplicable if not totally misplaced.

Granting for the sake of argument that the acts imputed were committed by the complainant as they were contrary to Mapua’s existing rules yet the actual imposition of the penalty of dismissal is so harsh or too severe considering the complainant’s exemplary service with Mapua for more than eleven (11) years of loyal and dedicated service.

The words of the Supreme Court are more enlightening, to quote:

“Even when an employee is found to have transgressed
the employer’s rules, in the actual imposition of penal-
ties upon the erring employee, due considerations
must still be given to his length of service and the
number of violations committed during his employ-
ment. Where a penalty less punitive would suffice,
whatever missteps may have been committed by the
employee, ought not to be visited with a consequence
so severe such as dismissal from employment.” (St.
Michael’s Institute vs. Santos, G.R. No. 145280,
December 4, 2001)

In fine, We hold that complainant’s dismissal is unjustified, hence, illegal in the absence of a just cause.

One last parting note: whenever doubts exist or precipitate in a labor controversy, the same should ultimately be resolved in favor of labor in strict adherence to the security tenure and the social justice philosophy as enshrined and mandated by the fundamental law.

And so it is written in this case.

WHEREFORE, finding the dismissal as illegal for want of just cause, respondent Mapua Institute of Technology is hereby ordered to immediately reinstate the complainant to his former position without loss of senority rights and other benefits and to pay his full backwages from the date of his illegal dismissal up to his reinstatement, actual or in payroll….

[dariosbualan]

FROM MY POST IN MAPUAOWNAGE NDI NA PO KO GAWA LINK PARA DERETSO BASA NA PO KAYO...

Ako po ay nagtatanong lang dahil gusto ko rin po malaman ang katotohanan ngayon sa mga taong sarado na ang isip kagaya ni dontomas1925 eh wala na po akong magagawa dun pero para sa ating nagiisip it’s high time that we know the truth… Gusto ko lang po malaman ang inyong opinyon kaya po ginawa ko itong thread na to…

Kilala ko po si Rudy bale classmate ko siya sa maraming subjects non.. Dati ndi ko makapagsalita at sabihin ung kuro-kuro ko kasi nga ang tindi nong biased reporting ng ABS-CBN di ba? Napaniwala din kagad akong guilty siya pero I know deep inside me I can’t believe and I was not convinced that he could do all those things that they said he did.. Why? We were together in College like 4 ½ years (wala pa pong KWARTAERM non masipag lang po kaming mag SUMMER) wherein 90% of the time magkaklase kami.. Magka-block po kasi kame since freshman years.. Pati sa majoring subjects halos lahat we were classmates and sometimes groupmates pa sa design subjects.. Nagtataka lang ako kasi naunder kami non sa BROADCASTING lec and lab kay Engr. MELVIN ACOSTA of ABS-CBN Egineering eh Mapuan din siya, dati lam ko Eng’g Manager na sya dun eh siguro ngayon baka VP na eh andun sya ndi man lang niya naadvisan ung reporter na mag dig deeper dun sa story kahit papano kasi alam na alam naman sa ABS na MAPUAN halos lahat ng Managers at VP’s sa Engineering Department nila… kasi nga kilala ni Sir si Rudy kasi naging President din si Rudy ng ECE Grad Class namin kaya siya nakikipagcoordinate kay Sir Melvin. Nong nagplant-visit nga kami sa ABS eh si Rudy nagfacilitate with the help of Sir Melvin eh.. Anyways, habol lang naman kasi ng ABS ratings eh wala naman silang pakialam kung ung pagrereport nila makakasira ng buhay ng tao at ng isang buong pamilya eh.. RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM baga kaya ako sa GMA-7 nalang talaga ko nakikinig ng news eh.. WALANG PINOPROTEKTAHANG INTERES di ba??? Balik tayo kay Rudy.. I know him personally to be a very nice guy medyo kalog at very friendly lahat non nakakasundo niya pati nga mga faculty non eh siya nakikipagusap kahit sa mga terror kagaya nina Sir Sugay, Sir NBL, at iba pa na I don’t want to mention their names kasi baka nasa Mapua pa hanggang ngayon.. He talks to them in behalf of the three (3) ECE Grad Class non.. Nagtataka lang din ako bakit ABS lang ang nagcover ng balitang ito? Ndi ba kayo nagtataka? Ndi kaya may Uncle din si Contreras dun??? O dili kaya Auntie? Hehehe.. Nagtatanong lang po??? Sabi entrapment daw? Di ba po pag-entrapment may video to capture the entrapped eh bakit po walang video na nagpapakita na may inabot at may tinanggap di ba??? Napakadali po kasing sabihin ENTRAPMENT tapos ipupunas lang sa kamay mo ung pera na may pang kulay o pang trace ng mark pagnaexpose na sa ultraviolet rays di ba??? Nangyayari po un sa Pilipinas at may kakilala ko na mas malala pa ang ginawa sa kanya tinaniman sya ng HALAMAN dati tapos nong pumalag sya sa pulis eh un binugbog at kinulong. Ndi pa sila nakuntento pati sa loob ng kulungan eh pinabugbog pa rin… Only in the Philippines ika nga… Ang isa lang talaga na masasabi ko na totoo ay TALAGANG MAYABANG yang si Rudy kasi non feeling niyan kaya niyang lahat pagdating nga non sa defense dati kagaya sa Industrial Managemant subject ba un ung may mga case studies magkagroup kami non under kami kay Dr. Sugay isang henyong prof dati sa Mapua nag iisang Ph.D dati sa EE-ECE-COE eh kilala si Sir sa pagiging batikan sa mga case studies sa sobrang galing niya ung TAMA last semester the next sem kaya niyang gawing mali pero itong si Rudy na natutulog lang naman habang tinatapos namin ung case study nong nagovernight kami sa naging future wife ko eh ndi nagpatalo kay Dr. Sugay dahil sa kayabangan nakipagdebate kay Sir kaya ung buong group namin kinabahan na kasi kay Sir Sugay non tatlo lang talaga magiging grade mo.. 3 , 5 o 7 lang ganon siya katindi kaya sabi namin patay yari tayo pagnapag-initan ni Sir group natin sigurado bagsak kami pero something happened akalain niyong nanalo si Rudy sa debate hayun siya lang excempted sa Finals kami lahat nag final exam.. Bihira po maexcempt kay Sir Sugay kaya iniexpect ni Rudy non mataas grade niya pero lam niyo anong grade binigay sa kanya ni Sir kahit nagalingaan na siya kay Rudy?? 2.50 Hehehe!!!! Ganon po katindi dati ang MIT putik 3.0 sampung balde na ng dugo at pawis ang katumbas kaya kayo na nandiyan pa sana maappreciate niyo ung pangalan na MAPUA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY kasi sobrang dami na ang mga naging products ng Alma Mater natin na matitindi kagaya ko.. hehehe. Actually, sige aaminin ko na mas matindi si Rudy bakit? He’s the epitomy of a TRUE-BLOODED MAPUAN.. Why? Mapua Pre-Enginnering High School Graduate, B.S. ECE Graduate MIT (4 ½ years kagaya ko.. hehehe..) and Master of Eng’g Grad (major in Electronics and Communications) at Mapua Graduate School also.. Ph. D nalang kulang kaso wala pa ata Ph. D ng ECE sa Mapua kasi last time I looked sa web site natin wala pa eh… Che-Chm lang ata meron… Haba na nito guys and gels kaya kayo naman ok…. VIVA MAPUA! NO TO MALAYAN!!!

P.S. Pahabol po a copy of the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) dun sa case na file ni Rudy against MIT…

Decision of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in the case filed by Prof. Rudy A. Mortera, Jr. against the Mapua Institute of Technology (MIT)…….

From these conflicting factual considerations, the main issues to be resolved in this controversy are:

a) whether or not complainant was dismissed for cause and
due process; and,

b) whether or not complainant is entitled to moral and
exemplary damages and attorney’s fees.

Hence this decision.

There can be no dispute that the three (3) main persons directly involved in this controversy, namely: the complainant, De Matta and Contreras have developed a close relationship between them as “kabarkadas”. However, things turn sour when the complainant, as a professor, flanked De Matta and Contreras in Basic Electronics. Obviously, this caught the ire and fury of De Matta and Contreras until they formally filed complaints before the NBI and subsequently, the respondent’s Faculty Grievance Committee for extortion-robbery, threats, and inflicting injuries upon the two (2) students.

On these charges, We find that complainant never committed any act of such magnitude that would furnish the respondent with any of the aforestated grounds in order to warrant the unceremonious dismissal of the complainant from service under the just cause of the Labor Code or in the Manual of Regulations to Private Schools.

We agree with the complainant that he never inflicted physical injuries upon the students and that the acts imputed upon him could not be construed as corporal punishment. Being close friends and “kabarkadas”, it can be reasonably seen that the acts complained for were mere playful gestures or innocent “pitik” done without an intent to do harm or inflict physical injury or corporal punishment upon the two (2) complaining students. What made this act as physical injury or corporal punishment lingers only in the minds of De Matta and Contreras who have an axe to grind against the complainant who gave them both failing grades in his subject. Of first impression, this is the devious hidden agenda of De Matta and Contreras to file trump-up charges to destroy the good name of the complainant as professor of Mapua. This we cannot allow for good reason.

For there is no malum in doing some playful gestures in a joking manner, like a simple “pitik” upon complainant’s close friends at that time, De Matta and Contreras, who subsequently filed the trump-up charges because of the revengeful fury they unleash to even the odds against the complainant who flanked them in Basic Electronics. Obviously, this is the entire gamut of this controversy with some burning flares of revenge and emotional disillusions displayed by De Matta and Contreras at the heat of their undeserving anger in the complainant.

There is no inkling that complainant indeed received gifts or money from his two (2) students nor food or cellphone loads as they were fully paid for by the complainant. Apparently, the driving services by the two students can only be viewed as acts of closely-knitted friendship and camaraderie and totally out of the context of a teacher-student spectrum. Finally, the solicitations made by De Matta was purely of his own doing and without the knowledge and consent of the complainant. These acts or omission of the complainant are well-established and corroborated by independent witnesses. If at all, complainant’s act of allowing himself to maintain a close but impersonal relationship with his students is a mere lapse of judgment and do not constitute serious misconduct within the spirit of the Labor Code nor in the Manual of Regulations to Private Schools.

We likewise negate the status of the complainant as one who holds a position of trust and confidence simply because, as teacher, complainant is not invested with confidence on delicate matter, such as custody handling, or care and protection of the property or assets of the employer. (Sulpicio Lines vs. Guide G.R. No. 149930, Feb. 22, 2002) Thus, the justifying cause of loss of trust and confidence is inapplicable if not totally misplaced.

Granting for the sake of argument that the acts imputed were committed by the complainant as they were contrary to Mapua’s existing rules yet the actual imposition of the penalty of dismissal is so harsh or too severe considering the complainant’s exemplary service with Mapua for more than eleven (11) years of loyal and dedicated service.

The words of the Supreme Court are more enlightening, to quote:

“Even when an employee is found to have transgressed
the employer’s rules, in the actual imposition of penal-
ties upon the erring employee, due considerations
must still be given to his length of service and the
number of violations committed during his employ-
ment. Where a penalty less punitive would suffice,
whatever missteps may have been committed by the
employee, ought not to be visited with a consequence
so severe such as dismissal from employment.” (St.
Michael’s Institute vs. Santos, G.R. No. 145280,
December 4, 2001)

In fine, We hold that complainant’s dismissal is unjustified, hence, illegal in the absence of a just cause.

One last parting note: whenever doubts exist or precipitate in a labor controversy, the same should ultimately be resolved in favor of labor in strict adherence to the security tenure and the social justice philosophy as enshrined and mandated by the fundamental law.

And so it is written in this case.

WHEREFORE, finding the dismissal as illegal for want of just cause, respondent Mapua Institute of Technology is hereby ordered to immediately reinstate the complainant to his former position without loss of senority rights and other benefits and to pay his full backwages from the date of his illegal dismissal up to his reinstatement, actual or in payroll….

[xrisxernan]

sir darius wlang personalan ha. kasi nging prof ko si RUDY MORTERA e. tlgang nagpapabayad po sya pag sabit ka sa subjects nya. ibang tao lng nangongolekta ng mga nirerequire nya kng ano man un. may pera, may books etc.......sya kasi ung tipong hindi nagtuturo tapos ang mga ipapasa e kng dika masyado kilala o kilala ka.pag nalaman k nman na kalaban ka ng org nila sa basketbol malamang pahirapan ka nun. maka-age kyo bro kaya lng iba ang sitwasyon ng mgaing Prof na sya. hindi nman sya tlga huhulihin kng wala tlga sya ginagawa e. pinagyayabang pa nya na nagwowork sya sa GMA7. opinion ko lng yn sir.

[dariosbualan]

Now ko lang nalaman to ah... Anong sinasabi mong org ung founder niyo eh kickout ng org nila Rudy? ung tipong ung isang alumni niyo
eh nakikipag "exchange deal" kay Rudy para pumasa??? Alam ba pinag gagawa mo ng kapwa mo ka org na si Engr. Christopher Dela Rosa na dating boss ng DOIT ng Mapua? Siya ung nakikipag exchange deal non kay Rudy para may mga pumasa sa EIR tapos for Rudy naman sa MLO na under din kay Tupe...Kala niyo hindi namin alam mga baho ng mga orgs niyo?! Pare pareho lang kayo bakit si Tupe feeling mo malinis??? Si Bading Desear feeling mo malinis din noon??? Sabihin mo lang at pareho kung papaalam mga baho niyo!!! Peace!!! Walang Personalan! Katotohanan lang!!!! Malamang bumaksak ka rin non kay Rudy ay nga pala nagpalakad ka kay Tupe so malamang pumasa ka!!!!! Nga pala baka mag away ang magkumpare... Wakakekek! Peace ulit bro! Ulet! Katotohanan lang....

[batch96]

Now ko lang nalaman to ah... Anong sinasabi mong org ung founder niyo eh kickout ng org nila Rudy? ung tipong ung isang alumni niyo
eh nakikipag "exchange deal" kay Rudy para pumasa??? Alam ba pinag gagawa mo ng kapwa mo ka org na si Engr. Christopher Dela Rosa na dating boss ng DOIT ng Mapua? Siya ung nakikipag exchange deal non kay Rudy para may mga pumasa sa EIR tapos for Rudy naman sa MLO na under din kay Tupe...Kala niyo hindi namin alam mga baho ng mga orgs niyo?! Pare pareho lang kayo bakit si Tupe feeling mo malinis??? Si Bading Desear feeling mo malinis din noon??? Sabihin mo lang at pareho kung papaalam mga baho niyo!!! Peace!!! Walang Personalan! Katotohanan lang!!!! Malamang bumaksak ka rin non kay Rudy ay nga pala nagpalakad ka kay Tupe so malamang pumasa ka!!!!! Nga pala baka mag away ang magkumpare... Wakakekek! Peace ulit bro! Ulet! Katotohanan lang....

Syota mo ba si Mortera? Ang lupet mo sa pagdepensa at paglinis ng pangalan nya a.....
Saka ang tanda-tanda mo na, kung magsalita ka para kang baklang nagwawala..

[dariosbualan]

The TRUTH hurts... Yan lang ang masasabi ko!! Pano mo nalaman na bading ako???
sinabi ba sayo ni Prof. Alan Desear na parehong BERDE ang dugo namin!!!! Hehehe!
I'm not gay!!! I'm a girl!!!! LOL!!!

[pulandit]

Judging by the way you respond to the posts, I do believe that you and Mortera are close friends.
Grabe! Being a senior, I was expecting a mature response from you. You could have delivered your message in a better way, but instead you responded or reacted unprofessionally regarding this issue.

I've seen how Mortera behaves as an instructor in our Alma Mater, and I'm so ashamed that such a person would be reinstated to his former position (if I read your first post correctly). I strongly believe that those students who filed a case against him had their reasons other than revenge. And with regards to the lack of evidence, hello! 'Pag hinihingian ka ba ng suhol, may pinapapirma ka bang receipt? Let's talk some sense here.

By the time that you've read this reply, I'm sure you would be raving mad at me and post your reaction on my post (the same way you did with the other users). I just wanna let you know that this is the last time that I'll be reading this topic, and I won't bother replying again.

P.S. Don't bother sending me a PM coz I would immediately delete it as well.

Good evening, dariosbualan

[rovirick]

mga skulmyts easy lang, were not here to argue, huwag po tayo mag talo2, ke totoo o hindi ang isang ppangyayari, hayaan nyo nalang ang korte ang mag desisyon, kung ayaw nyong magpa awat, cge kalimutan nyo ung ethics ng isang engineer.

[princessleia012]

tama po si rovirick, we're not here to argue,

(we're here to give solutions.... that's why we're engineers).

[Ramy]

maybe we should go back to the 70s na kapag may kupal na prof binbugbog na lang aga >_<