Case Digest (G.R. No. 254596-97)
Facts:
Lesther S. Barretto, Ronn Vincent H. Arevalo, Richard Irish O. Tominez, Andy L. Valdemor, Roland Quezon, Ryan Raph B. Victoria, and Joey A. Hernandez v. Amber Golden Pot Restaurant, Rhoda Fernandez, and Ablebodies Manpower Services, Inc., G.R. Nos. 254596-97, November 24, 2021, Supreme Court Third Division, Carandang, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners are seven motorcycle riders who allege they were hired to work for Amber Golden Pot Restaurant Corporation on dates between 2010 and 2014 and who were dismissed on May 19, 2017 without just cause and due process.On April 30, 2016 Amber and respondent Ablebodies Manpower Services, Inc. (AMSI) entered into a Project Agreement under which AMSI would supply workers (including riders) to Amber. Petitioners claimed they were dismissed without cause, forced to sign resignations (which some refused), and were denied overtime pay, 13th month pay and other benefits; they also alleged illegal deductions for meals. They filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, unpaid wages/benefits, refund of illegal deductions, regularization, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees against Amber, AMSI, and Amber’s corporate officer Rhoda Fernandez.
Respondents maintained that AMSI was a legitimate labor contractor and the actual employer; Amber argued delivering food was not its core function and that the Project Agreement made AMSI responsible for wages and benefits. AMSI submitted a DOLE Certificate of Registration and a General Information Sheet showing paid-up capital; it also claimed it exercised supervisory control, conducted evaluations, and paid remittances and wages.
The Labor Arbiter (LA) (Decision dated April 16, 2018) found AMSI to be engaged in labor-only contracting, declared petitioners illegally dismissed, ordered reinstatement without loss of seniority and computation of backwages, and directed refund of illegal meal deductions; one complainant’s claim was dismissed. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) (Decision dated September 10, 2018) affirmed the LA in toto, emphasizing that AMSI did not carry a distinct and independent business, that Amber exercised control, that petitioners were hired before the Project Agreement, and that the expiration of the Agreement did not justify the dismissals. Amber and AMSI filed petitions for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA).
The CA (Decision dated February 13, 2020) granted the petitions in part, holding AMSI to be a legitimate labor contractor and the petitioners AMSI’s employees; it reversed and set aside the NLRC decision except for the order to refund meal deductions (w...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in holding that AMSI is a legitimate labor contractor and not a labor-only contractor, making AMSI (not Amber) the employer of the petitioners?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in ruling that petitioners were not illegally dismissed?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the refund of deductions for meals and i...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)