Respondents are further directed to pay the complainants their 13th month benefits for 1990, the claim for salary differential must be set aside because the respondents' application for exemption is still pending action before the Regional Tripartite Wage and Productivity Board. The rest of the complaints are dismissed for lack of merit. On 29 November 1993, the NLRC issued a resolution affirming the Labor Arbiter's decision and dismissing petitioner's appeal for lack of merit. Hence the present recourse. It is elementary that a special civil action for certiorari is limited to correcting errors of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion.
Petitioner admits that it is quite aware of the foregoing doctrines.
Jurisprudence has established able judicial yardsticks to determine whether or not an employee has abandoned his work. Mere absence is not sufficient. It is the employer who has the burden of proof to show a deliberate and unjustified refusal of the employee to resume his employment without any intention of returning. Gold City failed to discharge this burden. It did not adduce any proof of some overt act of the petitioners that clearly and unequivocally show their intention to abandon their posts.