Case Digest (G.R. No. 82973)
Facts:
- Petitioners: Mario Cartagenas, Jesus N. Miraballes, Victor C. Monsod, Vicente Barroa.
- Respondents: Romago Electric Company, Inc. and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).
- Employment: Petitioners worked for Romago Electric Company, a general contractor, from 1976 to 1986 on various construction projects.
- Layoff: On July 12, 1986, petitioners were temporarily laid off due to a company memorandum about a meeting on July 16, 1986, regarding operations resumption.
- Complaint: On July 28, 1986, petitioners filed a complaint for illegal dismissal but reapplied and were reassigned to a new project in August 1986 before the company received the complaint.
- Employment Terms: Petitioners signed application forms indicating fixed-term employment tied to specific projects and received assignment slips stating employment would end upon project completion.
- Labor Arbiter's Ruling: Initially ruled petitioners as regular employees.
- NLRC's Finding: Later determined petitioners were project employees, with employment co-terminus with their assigned projects.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioners are project employees of Romago Electric Company, Inc.
- The NLRC's decision was upheld, and th...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The ruling was based on Article 280 of the Labor Code, which defines regular and casual employment.
- The Court highlighted that the petitioners' employment was linked to specific projects, with contracts ending upon project completion.
- Petitioners acknowledged their fixed-term employment through signed agreements.
- The Court n...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 82973)
Facts:
The case involves Mario Cartagenas, Jesus N. Miraballes, Victor C. Monsod, and Vicente Barroa as petitioners against Romago Electric Company, Inc. and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) as respondents. The events leading to this case began when the petitioners were employed by Romago Electric Company, a general contractor engaged in various construction projects, including electrical, mechanical, and civil engineering works. The petitioners were assigned to specific projects over several years, with employment periods ranging from 1976 to 1986.
On July 12, 1986, the petitioners were temporarily laid off due to a memorandum issued by the company, which indicated that a meeting would be held on July 16, 1986, regarding the resumption of operations. Subsequently, on July 28, 1986, the petitioners filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. However, before the company received the complaint, the petitioners reapplied and were reassigned to a new project at Robinson - EDSA in August 1986.
The petitioners had signed employment application forms that specified their employment was for a fixed period and tied to specific projects. They were also issued assignment slips indicating that their employment would termin...