Title
Almeda vs. Asahi Glass Philippines, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 177785
Decision Date
Sep 3, 2008
Workers employed through a contractor for 3-11 years were deemed regular employees of the principal company, Asahi, as the contractor was found to be labor-only. Their dismissal was ruled illegal due to lack of cause and due process, requiring reinstatement and backwages.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 177785)

Facts:

Background of the Case: Petitioners Randy Almeda, Edwin Audencial, Nolie Ramirez, Ernesto Calicagan, and Reynaldo Calicagan filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against respondent Asahi Glass Philippines, Inc. (a glass manufacturing company) and San Sebastian Allied Services, Inc. (SSASI), a labor contractor. Petitioners worked for Asahi through SSASI for periods ranging from 3 to 11 years as glass cutters and quality controllers. On December 1, 2002, Asahi terminated its contract with SSASI, leading to the dismissal of petitioners.

Petitioners’ Allegations: Petitioners argued that SSASI was a labor-only contractor, and since their roles were directly related to Asahi’s main business, they should be considered regular employees of Asahi. They claimed their dismissal lacked due process and was unlawful.

Respondent’s Defense: Asahi denied being the employer of petitioners, asserting that they were employees of SSASI, a legitimate job contractor licensed by the DOLE. Asahi claimed that petitioners were hired for intermittent services unrelated to its main business and that SSASI exercised control over petitioners.

Labor Arbiter’s Decision: The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack of merit but ordered SSASI to pay separation benefits to petitioners.

NLRC’s Decision: On appeal, the NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision, finding SSASI to be a labor-only contractor and declaring petitioners as regular employees of Asahi. The NLRC ordered their reinstatement and payment of backwages.

Court of Appeals’ Decision: The CA reversed the NLRC’s decision, reinstating the Labor Arbiter’s ruling, and held that SSASI was a legitimate job contractor.

Petition to the Supreme Court: Petitioners sought to reverse the CA’s decision, asserting that SSASI was a labor-only contractor and that their dismissal was illegal.

Issue:

  1. Whether petitioners were employees of Asahi or SSASI.
  2. Whether SSASI was a labor-only contractor or a legitimate job contractor.
  3. Whether petitioners were illegally dismissed.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.