Title
Supreme Court
Bajaro vs. Metro Stonerich Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 227982
Decision Date
Apr 23, 2018
Bajaro, a project employee, claimed illegal dismissal; Court ruled termination valid upon project completion, awarding unpaid benefits and attorney’s fees.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 227982)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of Employment
    • Metro Stonerich Corporation, a domestic construction company owned and operated by Ibrahim M. NuAo, engaged in various construction projects.
    • Mario Diesta Bajaro was hired on June 4, 2008, as a concrete pump operator with a fixed work schedule from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (Monday to Saturday), earning a daily wage of Php 500.00.
    • His engagements were on a project basis – he was hired specifically for different construction projects with predetermined durations.
  • Details of Employment and Project Assignments
    • Bajaro was engaged for five distinct projects:
      • SM Cubao Expansion and Renovation (five months, starting June 3, 2008);
      • Robinson’s Place Ilocos (five months, starting January 24, 2009);
      • Robinson’s Tacloban, Marasbaras (five months, starting December 14, 2010);
      • KCC Mall Marbel Expansion, Koronadal City (12 months, starting October 24, 2011);
      • KCC Mall Zamboanga Project, Zamboanga City (12 months, starting January 11, 2013).
    • For each project, Bajaro signed a contract (Kasunduan Para sa Katungkulang Serbisyo or “Pamproyekto”) that clearly specified:
      • His designation as a project employee;
      • The exact duration corresponding to the project timeline; and
      • The understanding that his employment was coterminous with the project period.
  • The Incident and Resulting Dispute
    • On April 21, 2014, while working at the KCC Mall of Marbel in Koronadal City, Bajaro encountered an accident while cleaning a pipe filled with concrete, resulting in severe pain and an inability to walk properly.
    • He immediately requested assistance from the Secretary and Manager of Metro Stonerich but was instead directed to go home for self-treatment.
    • On April 23, 2014, when seeking financial help for his hospital expenses at the company office, Bajaro was refused assistance.
    • He eventually underwent treatment at East Avenue Medical Center and recovered within two weeks, obtaining a fitness certificate on May 5, 2014.
  • Termination and Filing of Legal Claims
    • On May 7, 2014, despite his recovery, Bajaro was informed that his continued work was not required, and on May 8–9, 2014, he was told not to report to work, but offered money in lieu of his employment.
    • Bajaro refused the monetary offer and filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the Labor Arbiter (LA), asserting:
      • That his continuous employment for six years and the nature of his work made him a regular employee entitled to security of tenure;
      • His entitlement to monetary benefits including overtime pay differential, night shift differential, holiday pay, proportionate 13th month pay, as well as moral and exemplary damages.
    • Metro Stonerich, on the other hand, maintained that Bajaro was hired strictly as a project employee for specific projects with fixed durations.
  • Decisions of Lower Forums
    • The Labor Arbiter (LA) on June 25, 2014:
      • Determined that Bajaro was a project employee based on the contracts specifying project scope and duration.
      • Dismissed the illegal dismissal claim but granted monetary awards for:
        • Overtime pay differential (Php 14,921.10),
        • Proportionate 13th month pay (Php 4,333.30),
        • Service Incentive Leave (SIL) pay (Php 7,500.00), plus
        • Attorney’s fees (10% of the total monetary award).
      • Denied claims for holiday pay, rest day premiums, and moral/exemplary damages.
    • The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) on July 30, 2015:
      • Affirmed the LA’s ruling that Bajaro was a project employee.
      • Rejected the argument that continuous rehiring conferred regular employment.
      • Upheld the awards granted by the LA.
    • The Court of Appeals (CA) on July 22, 2016:
      • Dismissed Bajaro’s Petition for Certiorari.
      • Emphasized that each employment engagement was project-based, as evidenced by the contracts (Kasunduan Para Sa Katungkulang Serbisyo) and the company's report to the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) regarding workforce reduction.
      • Affirmed the correctness of dismissing the illegal dismissal claim and the monetary awards.
  • The Petition for Review on Certiorari
    • Undeterred by previous decisions, Bajaro filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court.
    • The central issues pertained to whether he was a regular employee and if his dismissal was illegal.

Issues:

  • Employment Status
    • Whether Mario Diesta Bajaro, having been rehired repeatedly for various construction projects, could be considered a regular employee of Metro Stonerich or if he remained solely a project employee as per the employment contracts.
  • Legality of Dismissal
    • Whether Bajaro’s termination—stemming from the completion of the projects for which he was hired—amounted to an illegal dismissal.
    • Whether his claims for additional benefits (overtime pay differential, proportionate 13th month pay, SIL pay, and other monetary claims) were valid in the context of project-based employment.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.