Facts – Petitioners were hired for the same job on various periods – broken employment or services were not continuous – but the services rendered when added together comprise over a year of service in total. Respondent company and petitioner signed a 6-month contract but petitioners were fired earlier than what was stipulated in the contract on the grounds of poor performance due to old age.
Petitioner filed a complaint before the Regional Arbitration Branch of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in Davao City.
First Decision of NLRC: In favour of petitioner; their dismissal by respondent company was declared illegal; ordering respondent company to reinstate the petitioner employees and pay for their 6 months backwages. If reinstatement is not possible, an additional compensation equivalent to 1 month salary must be given to the petitioners. Petitioners’ claim for underpayment was dismissed for lack of merit.
Appeal of Respondent: the respondent Evergreen Farms Inc. made an appeal but was dismissed by NRLC. It again filed a motion for reconsideration and this time the decision of NLRC was favourable to the respondent company, “public respondent issued a second resolution on 3 May 1993 affirming its earlier resolution on illegal dismissal but deleting the award of backwages on the ground that the termination of petitioners' employments "was the result of the latter's (private respondent) mistaken interpretation of the law and that the same was therefore not necessarily attended by bad faith, nor arbitrariness”
Action (case at bar before the Supreme Court) – petition for certiorari, from the decision of NLRC –after appeal from respondent company—setting aside its previous decision to provide petitioners backwages.
Issue - whether or not petitioners (employees of the banana plantation) are entitled to backwages after a finding by the NLRC itself that they had become regular employees after serving for more than one (1) year of broken or non-continuous service as probationary employees.
Ruling – In favour of petitioner, upholding their illegal dismissal invoking Article 280 of the Labor Code which draws a line between regular and casual employment. The regular employees consist of the following:
1) those engaged to perform activities which are usually necessary or desirable in the usual business or trade of the employer; and
2) those who have rendered at least one year of service whether such service is continuous or broken.
In the case at bar, petitioners were employed at various periods from 1985 to 1989 for the same kind of work they were hired to perform in September 1989. Some of the petitioners were hired as far back as 1985, although the hiring was not continuous. They were hired and re-hired in a span of from two to four years to do the same type of work which conclusively shows the necessity of petitioners' service to the respondent company's business.
Bases of Court decision:
WHEREFORE, the Resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission dated 3 May 1993 is modified in that its deletion of the award for backwages in favor of petitioners, is SET ASIDE. The decision of the Labor Arbiter dated 26 April 1991 is AFFIRMED with the modification that backwages shall be paid to petitioners from the time of their illegal dismissal on 25 June 1990 up to the date of their reinstatement. If reinstatement is no longer feasible, a one-month salary shall be paid the petitioners as ordered in the labor arbiter's decision; in addition to the adjudged backwages.
Petitioner filed a complaint before the Regional Arbitration Branch of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in Davao City.
First Decision of NLRC: In favour of petitioner; their dismissal by respondent company was declared illegal; ordering respondent company to reinstate the petitioner employees and pay for their 6 months backwages. If reinstatement is not possible, an additional compensation equivalent to 1 month salary must be given to the petitioners. Petitioners’ claim for underpayment was dismissed for lack of merit.
Appeal of Respondent: the respondent Evergreen Farms Inc. made an appeal but was dismissed by NRLC. It again filed a motion for reconsideration and this time the decision of NLRC was favourable to the respondent company, “public respondent issued a second resolution on 3 May 1993 affirming its earlier resolution on illegal dismissal but deleting the award of backwages on the ground that the termination of petitioners' employments "was the result of the latter's (private respondent) mistaken interpretation of the law and that the same was therefore not necessarily attended by bad faith, nor arbitrariness”
Action (case at bar before the Supreme Court) – petition for certiorari, from the decision of NLRC –after appeal from respondent company—setting aside its previous decision to provide petitioners backwages.
Issue - whether or not petitioners (employees of the banana plantation) are entitled to backwages after a finding by the NLRC itself that they had become regular employees after serving for more than one (1) year of broken or non-continuous service as probationary employees.
Ruling – In favour of petitioner, upholding their illegal dismissal invoking Article 280 of the Labor Code which draws a line between regular and casual employment. The regular employees consist of the following:
1) those engaged to perform activities which are usually necessary or desirable in the usual business or trade of the employer; and
2) those who have rendered at least one year of service whether such service is continuous or broken.
In the case at bar, petitioners were employed at various periods from 1985 to 1989 for the same kind of work they were hired to perform in September 1989. Some of the petitioners were hired as far back as 1985, although the hiring was not continuous. They were hired and re-hired in a span of from two to four years to do the same type of work which conclusively shows the necessity of petitioners' service to the respondent company's business.
Bases of Court decision:
- Petitioners have, therefore, become regular employees after performing activities which are necessary in the usual business of their employer. But, even assuming that the activities of petitioners in respondent company's plantation were not necessary or desirable to its business, we affirm the public respondent's finding that all of the complainants (petitioners) have rendered non-continuous or broken service for more than one (1) year and are consequently considered regular employees.
- The act of hiring and re-hiring the petitioners over a period of time without considering them as regular employees evidences bad faith on the part of private respondent.
WHEREFORE, the Resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission dated 3 May 1993 is modified in that its deletion of the award for backwages in favor of petitioners, is SET ASIDE. The decision of the Labor Arbiter dated 26 April 1991 is AFFIRMED with the modification that backwages shall be paid to petitioners from the time of their illegal dismissal on 25 June 1990 up to the date of their reinstatement. If reinstatement is no longer feasible, a one-month salary shall be paid the petitioners as ordered in the labor arbiter's decision; in addition to the adjudged backwages.
No comments:
Post a Comment