7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

1/16

FVR Skills and Services (SKILLEX )v. Jovert Seva, et.al. (28 in total)

October 22, 2014| Brion, J. | Rights of Contractual Emploees!igester" #erca$o, Carlo Robert

SU!R"#% group of 2& 'anitorial an$ maintenance emploees (ereterminate$ b their emploer, an in$epen$ent contractor, after its contract(ith Robinsons e)pire$. *hese emploees are regular emploees (ho areentitle$ to +arious benefits, inclu$ing the right against securit of tenure, asthe ma onl be $ismisse$ (ith the proper substantial an$ proce$uralreuirements.

$%&'RIE# !O 1&-02 grants contractual emploees all the rights an$pri+ileges $ue a regular emploee, inclu$ing the follo(ing"

a/ safe an$ healthful (oring con$itions

b/ labor stan$ar$s such as ser+ice incenti+e lea+e, rest $as, o+ertime pa,holi$a pa, 1th month pa an$ separation pa

c/ social securit an$ (elfare benefits

$/ self-organi3ation, collecti+e bargaining an$ peaceful concerte$ actionan$

e/ securit of tenure

F!&'S#

*he t(ent-eight 2&/ respon$ents (ere emploees of petitioner 5R

6ills an$ 6er+ices 7nc., an in$epen$ent contractor engage$ in thebusiness of pro+i$ing 'anitorial an$ other manpo(er ser+ices. %s earl as188&, some of the respon$ents ha+e alrea$ been emploe$ b thecompan

%pril 200&" 697::E; entere$ into contract (ith Robinsons to suppl

'anitorial an$ manpo(er ser+ices to Robinsons O? an emploee

is regular or pro'ect emploee

*here are t(o in$s of regular emploees" 1/ those (ho (ere engage$

to perform acti+ities (hich are usuall necessar or $esirable in the usualbusiness or tra$e of the emploer an$ 2/ those casual emploees (ho

became regular after one ear of ser+ice, (hether continuous or broen,but onl (ith respect to the acti+it for (hich the ha+e been hire$

o *hese t(o are $ifferent from a pro'ect emploee, or one

(hose emploment (as fi)e$ for a specific pro'ect orun$ertaing, (hose completion or termination ha$ been$etermine$ at the time of engagement.

@irst in$ of regularA *est of $etermining >? regular emploee1"

reasonable connection bet(een the particular acti+it performe$ b theemploee an$ the emploers business or tra$e b consi$ering the natureof the (or performe$ an$ its relation to the scheme of the particular

business, or the tra$e in its entiret.o 7n the case at han$, the respon$ents (or as 'anitors, ser+ice

cre(s an$ sanitation ai$es, are necessar or $esirable to thepetitioners business

@6econ$ in$ of regularA %lso, the respon$ents, e+en before the contract

(ith Robinsons, (ere alrea$ un$er the petitioners emplo. *he ha$been $oing the same tpe of (or an$ occuping the same positionsfrom the time the (ere hire$ an$ until the (ere $ismisse$ in Januar2008.

1 For the frst kind o regular employee, as the court

ailed to emphasize

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

2/16

%lthough the respon$ents (ere assigne$ as contractual emploees to the

petitioners +arious clients, un$er the la(, the remain to be thepetitioners regular emploees, (ho are entitle$ to all the rights an$benefits of regular emploment inclu$ing ser+ice incenti+e lea+e, rest$as, o+ertime pa, holi$a pa, 1th month pa an$ separation pa, an$securit of tenure

o Dn$er !epartment Or$er 1&-02, the contractor or

subcontractor is consi$ere$ as the emploer of thecontractual emploee for purposes of enforcing thepro+isions of the :abor Co$e an$ other social legislationhence 697::E; an$ not Robinsons/

Other rights of contractuals are in ?otes an$

!octrine

*+ t3e contracts individall0 si-ned 0 resondents, are valid 1 %,

t3e0 are voidale de to inti/idation

*he timing of the e)ecution of the respon$ents respecti+e emploment

contracts (hen it (as no(n that the contract (ith Robinsons (ill not

be rene(e$/ to be in$icati+e of the petitioner s calculate$ plan to e+a$ethe respon$ents right to securit of tenure, to ensure their eas $ismissal.

Dn$er CC %rt 180, contracts (herein consent of one of the parties (as

+itiate$ b intimi$ation are +oi$ableo *he petitioners threat of nonpament of the respon$ents

salaries clearl amounte$ to intimi$ation.

*+ t3e e/lo0ees 5ere validl0 dis/issed 1 %. Ille-al dis/issal

*o be +ali$, an emploees $ismissal must compl (ith the substanti+e

an$ proce$ural reuirements of $ue process.o 6ubstanti+el, a $ismissal shoul$ be supporte$ b a 'ust or

authori3e$ cause.o

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

3/16

R%IE !6I v. LR&, !LLIE$ 6!KI &%R=., et al.

6eptember 20, 2014 | Rees, J. | :egitimate Contracting or 6ubcontracting!igester" Roa, %nnamhel #oniue C.

SU!R"#

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

4/16

employer-employee relationship is created between the principal and

the contractual worker, who is actually the employee of the

contractor.On the other han$, %rt. 10 of the :C $efines labor-onlcontracting as occurring (hen an of the ff. circumstance occurs" 1/ thecontractor $oes not ha+e substantial capital or in+estment (hich relatesto the 'ob, (or or ser+ice to be performe$ an$ the emploees recruite$,supplie$ or place$ b the contractor are performing acti+ities (hich are$irectl relate$ to the principal business of the emploer, or 2/ thecontractor $oes not e)ercise the right to control the performance of the(or of the emploee. *his arrangement is prohibite$ an$

conseuentl, the la( $eems the principal as the emploer of thecontractual emploee.

G67 ha$ been $oing business as a personnel an$ manpo(er agenc for

20 ears before it entere$ into a ser+ice contract (ith %llie$ Ban. 7tsser+ice contract e)pressl pro+i$e$ that it shall pro+i$e %llie$ Bansmain office (ith 'anitorial an$ maintenance personnel (ho shall remainas G67s emploees. *he ser+e other companies an$ ha+e their o(ntools an$ euipment use$ to pro+i$e 'anitorial ser+ices. %ppling thefour-fol$ test use$ in $etermining the e)istence of an emploer-emploeerelationship selection, (ages, $ismissal, control/, G67 possesses allthese po(ers" G67 hire$ %bing, pai$ an$ ga+e benefits to %bing, (asacno(le$ge$ b %bing as his emploer (hen he signe$ his uitclaim,an$ regularl controlle$ an$ super+ise$ %bing in his (or in %llie$ Banthrough its personnel officer.

inall, #arilag an$ G67 ha+e been for $eca$es in business as

'anitorialmessengerial ser+ice an$or manpo(er recruitment companies.7n his petition, %bing $escribe$ his tass in %llie$ Ban as those ofmessenger or runner (ith clerical functions assigne$ to him from time totime, such as Ksip tracer, checer an$ +erifier of properties, an$

recei+ing cler+ault eeper.L >o a clear an$ full $escription of hisactual tass as (ell as allege$ KpromotionsL, 6C cant $etermine if histass are Kusuall necessar an$ $esirableL in the bans business. =iscomplaint for illegal $ismissal has no merit.

FUJI 'ELEVISI% E'*%RK v. !RLEE S. ES=IRI'U

!ec. , 2014 | :eonen, J. | :egitimate contracting or subcontracting" 4Con$itions i)e$-term emploees + 7n$epen$ent Contractors +. Regular

emploees!igester" 6antiago, 6enan$o %ngelo

SU!R"#u'i *ele+ision ?et(or hire$ %rlene Espiritu as a ne(scorrespon$entpro$ucer to report o to second isse. a?a/ 5ants to 4ocs on t3at.)#

200I"

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

5/16

2008, #a I" Both %rlene an$ u'i sign a non7rene5al contract, (hich

stipulates that her contract (ill no longer be rene(e$ after its e)pirationon #a 1, 2008. 7t also pro+i$e$ that the parties release each other fromliabilities an$ responsibilities un$er the contract.

o 7n consi$eration of the contract, she acno(le$ges recei+ing

M1&,0I0" =er monthl salar from #arch-#a 2008,

Near-en$ bonus, mi$-ear bonus, an$

separation pa.

o 7n her signature, ho(e+er, she affi)es KD.

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

6/16

reporte$ for (or for a total of 8 $as.

RULI#

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

7/16

Emploer-emploee relationship e)istent onl

bet(een C,E.

But (here an in$epen$ent C is an individal 5it3

niAe skills and talents t3at set t3e/ aart 4ro/

ordinar0 E, the contractor himherself performs the(or for the hene+er an emploer enters into

a contract (ith another person for the performance of the formers (or,the emploees of the contractor an$ of the latters subcontractor, if an,shall be pai$ in accor$ance (ith the pro+isions of this Co$e. ; ) )

*he 6ecretar of :abor an$ Emploment ma, b appropriateregulations, restrict or prohibit the contracting-out of labor to protect therights of (orers establishe$ un$er this Co$e. 7n so prohibiting orrestricting, he ma mae appropriate $istinctions bet(een labor-onlcontracting an$ 'ob contracting as (ell as $ifferentiations (ithin thesetpes of contracting an$ $etermine (ho among the parties in+ol+e$ shall

be consi$ere$ the emploer for purposes of this Co$e, to pre+ent an+iolation or circum+ention of an pro+ision of this Co$e.

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

8/16

*here is Klabor-onlL contracting (here the person suppling (orers toan emploer $oes not ha+e substantial capital or in+estment in the formof tools, euipment, machineries, (or premises, among others, an$ the(orers recruite$ an$ place$ b such person are performing acti+ities(hich are $irectl relate$ to the principal business of such emploer. 7nsuch cases, the person or interme$iar shall be consi$ere$ merel as anagent of the emploer (ho shall be responsible to the (orers in the

same manner an$ e)tent as if the latter (ere $irectl emploe$ b him.

=%L"F%!7R& I'L. v. &%&E=&I%

June 1, 2012 |

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

9/16

e+i$ence to pro+e that it (as Grama'e (ho pai$ the (ages an$ benefits666/.

?:RC" no illegal $ismissal since respon$ent (as not notifie$ that he ha$

been $ismisse$ nor (as he pre+ente$ from returning to his (or.Reinstatement coul$ not be gi+en because of straine$ relations bet(eenthe parties.

C%" agree$ (ith :%s conclusion that Grama'e is not a legitimate 'ob

contractor but onl a labor onl contracter because"o Grama'e faile$ to present its %u$ite$ inancial 6tatement (oul$

sho( financial stan$ing an$ o(nership euipment/o Grama'e faile$ to present a single cop of the purporte$ contract

(ith

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

10/16

in$epen$ent business (hcih (ors accor$ing to its o(n manner an$metho$, free from the control an$ super+ision of

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

11/16

12. *he C%, acting on the petition for certiorari, re+erse$ the $ecision of the?:RC an$ or$ere$ the reinstatement of the respon$ents, or pa theirbac(agses. 7t consi$ere$ the fin$ing of !O:E that hether or not the C% erre$ in $isregar$ing the factual fin$ings of the :%an$ the ?:RC -- ?OEL$1. *he court rule$ that factual fin$ings of labor officials ma be e)amine$(hen there is a sho(ing that the (ere arri+e$ at arbitraril or in $isregar$ ofe+i$enceon recor$. %lthough the factual fin$ings of labor officials, (ho are$eeme$ to ha+e acuire$ e)pertise, are generall accor$e$ respect an$finalit, these fin$ings are not infallible2. 7t is (ithin the e)pan$e$ 'uris$iction of the C% to re+ie( the fin$ings of

?:RC. 7t has been hel$ that the C% can tae cogni3ance of a petition forcertiorari if it fin$s that the ?:RC committe$ gra+e abuse of $iscretion b

capriciousl, (himsicall, or arbitraril $isregar$ing e+i$ence (hich arematerial to or $ecisi+e of the contro+ers 'ocoman%as otel Beach /esortv. 0isca/

ISSUE 2

>hether or not

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

12/16

other 'u$icial tribunal of concurrent 'uris$iction on the points an$ matters inissue in the first suit.4. Res Ju$icata has to aspects" bar b prior 'u$gment an$ conclusi+eness of

'u$gment. 7n the case at bar, the concept of conclusi+eness of 'u$gment hasset in. *his rule preclu$es the Court from re-opening the issues that (erealrea$ settle$ (ith finalit. 7n this case, it (as th ruling that hether or not the respon$ents (ere ilegall $ismisse$ F NE6EL$

1. *he respon$ents (ere actuall $ismisse$, (hich is contrar to the rulingof the C% that the (ere constructi+el $ismisse$.2. >here an entit has been $eclare$ to be a labor-onl contractor, theemploees supplie$ b the sai$ contractor to the principal emploer becomeregular emploees of the latter. *hus, ha+ing regaine$ regular status, theemploees are entitle$ to securit of tenure an$ can onl be $ismisse$ for

'ust or authori3e$ causes an$ after the ha$ been affor$e$ $ue process.. 7n the case at bar, ?oris argues that the transfer to

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

13/16

$.

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

14/16

the emploer (ho shall be responsible to the (orers in the samemanner an$ e)tent as if the latter (ere $irectl emploe$ b him.

4. 6ection 18 of !.O 1&-02 interprets %rticle 10a. *he principal shall be $eeme$ as the $irect emploer of the

contracting emploees an$ therefore soli$aril liable (iththe contractor or subcontractor for (hate+er monetar claimsthe contractual emploees ma ha+e against the former inthe case of +iolations as pro+i$e$ for in 6ections I :abor-

Onl contracting/I. *his is strengthene$ b the issuance of !.O 1&-% (hich is the latest

set of rules implementing %rticles 10-108a. 6ection 2H" % fin$ing b competent authorit of labor onl

contacting shall ren$er the principal 'ointl an$ se+erallliable (ith the contractor to the latters emploees.

. *hese rules an$ legislations $esigne$ to implement a primarlegislation ha+e the force an$ effect of la(. % rule is bin$ing on thecourts so long as the proce$ure fi)e$ for its promulgation is follo(e$an$ (ithin the scope of the statutor authorit grante$ b thelegislature.

H. Jurispru$ence also supports that there is soli$ar liabilita. Philippine Bank of 'ommunications vs 5#/'"*he la( in

effect hol$s both the emploer an$ the Klabor-onlLcontractor responsible to the latters emploees for the moreeffecti+e safeguar$ing of the emploees rights un$er the:abor Co$e.

$. San Mi%uel 'orporation v . M(6/' Inte%rated Services,

Inc" Court $ifferentiate$ the soli$ar liabilit of a legitimate'ob contracting +ersus a labor-onl contracting. 7n legitimate,liable onl for pament of emploees (ages (hene+er thecontractor fails to pa the same. 7f labor-onl, e becomes

soli$aril liable to all rightful claims of the emploee.c. 7 'orporation vs 5#/'"

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

15/16

@C%A affirme$ 6ecretar of !O:Es or$ers, (ith mo$ification in that :u3

(as absol+e$ of an personal liabilit un$er a(ar$.

@ 1 %' RES%LVE$ 6E&!USE 'IS ISSUE IS

R!ISE$ F%R 'E FIRS' 'IE

6uperiors arguments"

U !O:E erre$ in $oubling respon$ents un$erpament of (ages an$regular holi$a pa inasmuch as the soli$ar liabilit of a principal$oes not e)ten$ to a puniti+e a(ar$ against a contractor.

U ?o e+i$ence sho(ing that the respon$ents ren$ere$ o+ertime (oran$ that the actuall (ore$ on their rest $as for them to beentitle$ to such pa.

Court" 6uperior ne+er uestione$ nor $iscusse$ such issue from !O:E to

C%. *o consi$er allege$ facts an$ argument raise$ belate$l (oul$amount to trampling on the basic principles of fair pla, 'ustice, an$ $ue

process. >ith regar$ to contention on e+i$ence, the Court is not a trier offacts an$ this applies (ith greater force in labor cases. actual fin$ings oflabor tribunals or agencies, an$ are affirme$ b C%, are accor$e$ respectan$ finalit, an$ are bin$ing upon this Court.

*3et3er or not $%LE 3as t3e at3orit0 to /ake a 4indin- o4 an

e/lo0er7e/lo0ee relations3i (conco/itant to its visitorial and

en4orce/ent o5er)> 1 "ES

*his issue (as also belate$l raise$. %t an rate, the argument lacs

merit. !O:E acte$ (ithin its authorit (hen it $etermine$ the e)istenceof an emploer-emploee relationship bet(een 6uperior an$ therespon$ents as it falls (ithin the pur+ie( of its +isitorial an$ enforcement

po(er un$er %rticle 12&b/ of the :abor Co$e"

6ecretar of :abor an$ Emploment or his $ul authori3e$representati+esU shall ha+e the po(er to issue compliance or$ers to gi+e effect to the

labor stan$ar$s pro+isions of this Co$e an$ other labor legislationU shall issue (rite of e)ecution to the appropriate authorit for the

enforcement of their or$ers

7n Bombo Ra$o

7/23/2019 8-25 Labor

16/16

6uch $etermination is merel preliminar, inci$ental an$ collateral tothe !O:Es primar function of enforcing labor stan$ar$ pro+isions.

U !O:E must not be preclu$e$ from being able to reach its o(nconclusions.

Ear5a v. Liceo de &a-a0an

G.R. ?o" 1I0402