THERE WAS NO REDUNDANCY
IN RE :
A.C. NUMBER 10084
ATTY. RAUL QUIROZ
DISBARMENT CASE
DECEITFUL ACT NUMBER 12
(in view of the requirements of the business)
TRANSLATED
4.1.12 DECEITFUL ACT NUMBER 12
BY ATTY. RAUL QUIROZ:
IT IS NOT TRUE THAT "REDUNDANCY"
EXISTS WHEN I WAS REMOVED FROM
EMPLOYMENT AS ATTY. RAUL QUIROZ
ASSERTED AND PROMOTED.
Your Honor, Atty. Raul Quiroz lied that
when I was removed from
employment "redundancy" exists
as Atty. Raul Quiroz asserted and
promoted. The truth is there was none.
I am sure.
These are the documentary evidence
supporting my assertion:
Your Honor, please, look at the letter
addressed to me from Mr. Rico Bersamin
addressed to me from Mr. Rico Bersamin
dated 28th November 2002, where he wrote:
XXX
"Dear Mr. Buensuceso,
As already discussed with you, with the
restructuring of the Tabangao Refinery,
we have exhausted best endeavors to
find a suitable position for you but we
have been unsuccessful. Hence, to
conforme to normal legal requirements,
we would like to serve notice that we will
be constrained to terminate your
employment effective close of business
31st December 2002 with the redundancy
package described in the following
paragraph."xxx
PACKET 12 : LABEL 5.12.1 Complainant Position
Paper,
Annex "E"
28th November 2002
R. Bersamin letter 1st letter
Here Mr. Rico Bersamin informed me
that due to restructuring of the Tabangao
Refinery,though they have exhausted
best endeavors to find a suitable position
for me, they have been unsuccessful and to
conforme to normal legal requirements,
they would like to serve notice that will be
constrained to terminate my employment
effective close of business 31st December
2002 with the redundancy package described
in the following paragraph.
We can notice 4 matters:
1. Restructuring ng Tabangao Refinery
was already completed.
2. They have exhausted best endeavors
to find a suitable position for me but they
have been unsuccessful.
to find a suitable position for me but they
have been unsuccessful.
3. They would terminate my employment
close business 31st December 2002.
4. They would give me redundancy package.
Your Honor, please, If we would like to believe
what Mr. Rico Bersamin has written in one
sentence, "Now that the restructuring of the
Tabangao refinery, they have exhausted best
endeavors to find position for me but
unsuccessful. In otherwords, I was already in
excess of what was actually needed operators
in the plant and he had to terminate my
employment on close of business
31 December 2002."
Correct?
But, Your Honor,
what Mr. Rico Bersamin has written in one
sentence, "Now that the restructuring of the
Tabangao refinery, they have exhausted best
endeavors to find position for me but
unsuccessful. In otherwords, I was already in
excess of what was actually needed operators
in the plant and he had to terminate my
employment on close of business
31 December 2002."
Correct?
But, Your Honor,
Would you not cast doubts the truthfulness
on his statements and determine he was lying
telling there was redundancy when he terminated
my employment ?
May I present to you a follow up letter from
him, Mr. Bersamin dated !7th December 2002.
XXX
Dear Mr. Buensuceso,
on his statements and determine he was lying
telling there was redundancy when he terminated
my employment ?
May I present to you a follow up letter from
him, Mr. Bersamin dated !7th December 2002.
XXX
Dear Mr. Buensuceso,
Further to our letter dated 28th November 2002,
please be advised in view of the requirements
of the business, the effectivity of the cessation
of your employment for reasons of redundancy
shall be deferred from
31st December 2002 to 15th February 2003. xxx
PACKET 12 : LABEL 5.12.2 Complainant Position Paper,
Annex "F",
17th December 2012 R. Bersamin 2nd letter
Mr. Rico Bersamin,wrote as an amendment
to his letter dated 28th November 2002;
"please be advised, in view of the
requirements of the business, the effectivity
of the cessation of your employment due to
redundancy shall be deferred from
31st December 2002 to 15th February 2003.
Is it not correct to think that Mr. Rico Bersamin
lied in telling me that redundancy exists and I am
in excess of what was needed to operate
the plant? Is it not correct that if it is true that I am
already in excess of what was needed, he could
let me go anytime, at once?
The fact is, though Mr. Rico Bersamin, had already
30 days from 28th November 2002 to
31st December 2002 to look for my replacement
yet he had failed and admittedly on his own
words he himself wrote,
XXX
"please be advised in view of the requirements
of the business the effectivity of the cessation
of your employment shall be deferred from
31st December 2002 to 15th February 2003.
to his letter dated 28th November 2002;
"please be advised, in view of the
requirements of the business, the effectivity
of the cessation of your employment due to
redundancy shall be deferred from
31st December 2002 to 15th February 2003.
Is it not correct to think that Mr. Rico Bersamin
lied in telling me that redundancy exists and I am
in excess of what was needed to operate
the plant? Is it not correct that if it is true that I am
already in excess of what was needed, he could
let me go anytime, at once?
The fact is, though Mr. Rico Bersamin, had already
30 days from 28th November 2002 to
31st December 2002 to look for my replacement
yet he had failed and admittedly on his own
words he himself wrote,
XXX
"please be advised in view of the requirements
of the business the effectivity of the cessation
of your employment shall be deferred from
31st December 2002 to 15th February 2003.
Would you not think that Mr. Rico Bersamin
bought out time to hire a replacement for me?
If it is true that redundancy exists during those
times and I am in excess of what was actually
needed, why bother advise me to stay until
15th February 2003?
Your Honor, please, if it is true that there was in
excess of operator running the plant, I should
have been terminated right away after serving
the 30 day notice to DOLE. Why advise
me, " in view of the requirements of the business" I have to stay
until 15th of February 2003?
Hence, Your Honor, it is doubtlessly presented
that Mr. Rico Bersamin lied with respect to
redundancy and Atty. Raul Quiroz promoted
and having had supported the same lies he
should be disbarred.
FROM THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT IN PILIPINO
4.1.12 PANG LABINDALAWANG PANDARAYA:
HINDI PO TOTOO NA NOONG MGA
PANAHON NA TANGGALIN AKO AY
MAY "REDUNDANCY" NA
ITINAGUYOD NI ATTY. RAUL QUIROZ
Your Honor, nagsinungaling si
Atty. Raul Quiroz na noong panahon
na tanggalin ako sa trabaho ay may
"redundancy" na itinaguyod ni
Atty. Raul Quiroz . Sa totoo lang po,
wala pong "redundancy", siguradong
sigurado po ako noong panahong iyon.
Bakit ko nasabi yun? Ganire po yun :
Your Honor, please, masdan po natin
ang sulat sa akin ni G. Rico Bersamin
ang sulat sa akin ni G. Rico Bersamin
na may petsa 28th November 2002,
sinasabi po rito:
XXX
"Dear Mr. Buensuceso,
As already discussed with you, with the
restructuring of the Tabangao Refinery,
we have exhausted best endeavors to
find a suitable position for you but we
have been unsuccessful. Hence, to
conforme to normal legal requirements,
we would like to serve notice that we will
be constrained to terminate your
employment effective close of business
31st December 2002 with the redundancy
package described in the following
paragraph."xxx
PACKET 12 : LABEL 5.12.1 Complainant Position
Paper,
Annex "E"
28th November 2002
R. Bersamin letter 1st letter
Dito po ay pinabatid sa akin ni G. Rico
Bersamin na dahil sa restructuring ng
Tabangao Refinery ay nagawa na nilang
lahat para makakita ng "suitable position
"sa akin pero sila ay nabigo.Kaya, upang
makasunod sa panuntunan ng batas ay
ipinagbibigay alam nila sa akin na ang
aking pagtatrabaho sa SHELL ay hanggang
31st December 2002 na lang, na may
redundancy package na nakasaad sa
sunod na talata.
Mapapansin po natin ang apat na bagay :
1. Restructuring ng Tabangao Refinery
ay tapos na
2. Nagawa na nila ang lahat ngunit
nag-resulta sa walang suitable position,
di umano, para sa akin
3. At sinabing hanggang
31st December 2002 ang trabaho ko
4. At may redundancy package
na ibibigay sa akin
Your Honor, please, ibig pong sabihin ni
G. Rico Bersamin sa isang pangungusap
ay, na noong gawin niya ang sulat na ito
sa akin, kung papaniwalaan natin siya,
matapos ang Restructuring ng Tabangao
Refinery ay kalabisan na ako sa
kinakailangang operator sa planta,
kaya kailangan na niya akong tanggalin
epektibo sa 31st December 2002.
Tama po ba?
Ngunit, Your Honor, hindi kaya ninyo
pagdudahan ang kadalisayan ng mga
sinulat niya sa akin, hindi kaya ninyo siyang
sabihing nagsisinungaling kapag nabasa
ninyo ang pangalawang liham niya sa akin ,
na may petsang 17th December 2002?
Tunghayan po natin :
XXX
Dear Mr. Buensuceso,
Further to our letter dated 28th November 2002,
please be advised in view of the requirements
of the business, the effectivity of the cessation
of your employment for reasons of redundancy
shall be deferred from
31st December 2002 to 15th February 2003. xxx
PACKET 12 : LABEL 5.12.2 Complainant Position Paper,
Annex "F",
17th December 2012 R. Bersamin 2nd letter
Sinulat po sa akin ni G. Rico Bersamin, na
susog doon sa kanilang sulat sa akin na may
petsang 28th November 2002, Sabi niya ay
ganito : "please be advised in view of the
requirement of the business", ibig sabihin po ,
Sana ay unawain mo na dahilan sa
pangangailangan ng negosyo, ang
"effectivity" ng pagtanggal sa iyo sa trabaho
dahil sa "redundancy" ay ipinagpapaliban
mula sa 31st December 2002 patungo sa
15th February 2003.
Hindi po ba tamang isipin na nagsisinungaling
si G. Rico Bersamin sa pagsasabing may
redundancy, na ako ay kalabisan na sa
kinakailangan sa planta? Hindi po ba kung
tunay na ako ay kalabisan na sa kinakailangan,
sa totoo lang , eh kahit po ora mismo, ngayon din,
ay maaari na niya akong pakawalan? Sa
pangyayaring nagkaroon na sila ng plaso mula
28th November 2002 to 31st December 2002
ay humirit pa sila ng panahon hanggang
15 February 2003 bago ako tanggalin ,
kaya maliwanag na may pangangailangan
sa akin noong panahong iyon ; na si G. Rico
Bersamin mismo ang nagsabing kailangan
niya ako na manatili Siya po mismo ang nagsabi ..
Sa Ingles po ang sabi niya:XXX please be
advised in view of the requirements of
the business the effectivity of the cessation
of your employment for reasons of
redundancy shall be deferred from
31st December 2002 to February 15, 2003.xxx
Hindi po ba ninyo kaya naiisip na naghanap
muna si G. Rico Bersamin ng tao upang
ipanghalili sa akin at hindi tunay na may
"redundancy" na tulad ng sinasabi niya noong
panahong iyon ? Kung totoo pong kalabisan
na ako eh bakit hiniling pa niyang manatili ako
hanggang 15th February 2003?
Your Honor, please, kung totoong labis
kaming mga operator , eh tsugi na agad
sana ako sa buwan ng Disyembre pa lang,
tutal nasunod na naman ni G. Rico Bersamin
ang sinasabi niyang one month requirement
na "notice" di po ba? Bakit humingi pa sila sa
akin ng extension hanggang
15 February 2003?
Kaya po, Your Honor, wala pong kaduda
duda hindi maaring magsinungaling
ang dalawang sulat na ebidensya. Wala pong
"redundancy," maliwanag pong walang
kalabisan sa tao noong panahong iyon.
Si G. Rico Bersamin ay buking o bistado na
nagsisinungaling at ang pagsisinungaling
naman niya ay buong lakas at talino at husay
na itinaguyod ni Atty. Raul Quiroz. Kaya,
Your Honor, please, nararapat lamang at
dapat tiyakin ng lubusan na si
Atty. Raul Quiroz ay ma-disbar upang wala
nang mangahas pang siya ay pamarisan.
With all due respect, Your Honor, DISBARMENT
po ang karapat dapat sa isang abogadong
katulad ni Atty. Raul Quiroz.
The following Justices of
the Supreme Court of the
Philippines are DEEMED
provided with copy of this
"THERE WAS NO REDUNDANCY
_DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 1"
_DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 1"
through Atty. Theodore
Te's PIO e-mail
address on February 17, 2016
to the present and prayers
for corrective and/or
and/or investigative
and/or administrative
and/or judicial and/or
disciplinary actions
be instituted in due time.
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
RETIRED FEBRUARY 2016
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
IMAGE CREDIT:http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa
E-MAIL DEEMED SENT THROUGH
PIO CHIEF E-MAIL ADDRESS
STARTING MARCH 1, 2016
E-MAIL DEEMED SENT THROUGH
PIO CHIEF E-MAIL ADDRESS
STARTING MARCH 1, 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment