Cases: Prescriptive Period for Monetary Claims

These are the related Labor Law Cases or Jurisprudence.

1. 3 years from accrual of cause of action

Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company (PLDT) v. PingolG.R. No. 182622, 08 September 2010[BACKGROUND]In 1979, [the employee] [R. [the employee]] was hired by petitioner PLDT as a maintenance technician.On April 13, 1999, while still under the employ of PLDT, [the employee] was admitted at The Medical City, Mandaluyong City, for “paranoid personality disorder” due to financial and marital problems. On May 14, 1999, he was discharged from the hospital. Thereafter, he reported for work but frequently absented himself due to his poor mental condition.From September 16, 1999 to December 31, 1999, [the employee] was absent from work without official leave. According to PLDT, notices were sent to him with a stern warning that he would be dismissed from employment if he continued to be absent without official leave “pursuant to PLDT Systems Practice A-007 which provides that ‘Absence without authorized leaves for seven (7) consecutive days is subject to termination from the service.’” Despite the warning, he failed to show up for work. On January 1, 2000, PLDT terminated his services on the grounds of unauthorized absences and abandonment of office.On March 29, 2004, four years later, [the employee] filed a Complaint for Constructive Dismissal and Monetary Claims against PLDT. In his complaint, he alleged that he was hastily dismissed from his employment on January 1, 2000. I...

Already a subscriber? Log in below. Not yet a member? Subscribe.

Similar Posts