Case Digest (G.R. No. 52824)
Facts:
Reynaldo Bautista v. Hon. Amado C. Inciong, G.R. No. 52824, March 16, 1988, Supreme Court Third Division, Gutierrez, Jr., J., concerns a claim for illegal dismissal filed by petitioner Reynaldo Bautista against respondent Associated Labor Unions (ALU) and the respondent Deputy Minister of Labor, Amado C. Inciong (in his administrative capacity for labor appeals).Petitioner alleged he was employed by ALU as an "Organizer" beginning in 1972 with a starting salary of P250.00 per month, was listed on the union payroll, and had SSS membership with ALU credited as employer for remittances. The Regional Director of the then Ministry of Labor (Region IV, National Capital Region) found these facts: petitioner was left in the office on March 15, 1979 while other organizers attended a certification election; he took a ten-day sick leave beginning March 16, 1979 with an SSS sickness benefit form signed by ALU's physician; upon reporting back after his leave he was informed by ALU's Area Vice-President for Luzon that his termination was effective March 15, 1979; he filed his complaint on March 28, 1979; ALU later filed a clearance application on April 18, 1979 to terminate him effective March 16, 1979 for abandonment.
The Regional Director ruled for Bautista, ordering reinstatement with full backwages and payment of emergency allowance, 13th-month pay, and refund of a P370 Mutual Aid Fund deposit. ALU appealed to the Ministry of Labor. On October 23, 1979, Deputy Minister Amado C. Inciong set aside the Director's order and dismissed the complaint for lack of merit, holding that no employer-employee relationship existed between Bautista and ALU — reasoning that ALU merely accommodated former employees, that ALU's payment of the employer share of SSS premiums was a favor to full-time union activists, and that a non-profit union organized to represent units cannot be treated as ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the respondent Deputy Minister commit grave abuse of discretion in holding that no employer-employee relationship existed between petitioner Bautista and respondent ALU?
- If an employer-employee relationship is found, is reinstatement appropriate or should the remedy be a monetary award (backwages/s...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)