Case Digest (G.R. No. 79560)
Facts:
Andres E. Ditan v. Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Administrator, National Labor Relations Commission, Asia‑World Recruitment, Inc., and/or Intraco Sales Corporation, G.R. No. 79560, December 03, 1990, First Division, Cruz, J., writing for the Court.The petitioner, Andres E. Ditan, was recruited by Intraco Sales Corporation through its local agent Asia‑World Recruitment, Inc. under a nine‑month contract to work in Angola as a welding supervisor at US$1,100.00 monthly (or US$275.00 weekly). He arrived in Luanda on November 30, 1984, and worked there as an ordinary welder from December 2 to 25, 1984. By express clause in the employment contract (reproduced in the record), paid vacation leave was conditioned on entering into a subsequent 9‑ or 12‑month contract.
On December 26, 1984, despite his misgivings and after being assured of safety and told he would be sent home if he refused, Ditan was ordered transferred to Kafunfo, a region previously attacked by rebels where Filipino expatriates had been killed and kidnapped. On December 29, 1984, Unita rebels attacked the site and took Ditan and other workers hostage. The captives were marched through jungle and held for over two months; they were released on March 16, 1985, and repatriated to the Philippines six days later.
After repatriation, Intraco reportedly promised priority re‑employment to the released workers; eleven were subsequently taken back but Ditan was not. In June 1985 Ditan filed a complaint against the private respondents for (a) unpaid salary for the unexpired 17 weeks of his contract (US$4,675.00), (b) a war risk bonus (US$25,000.00), (c) value of lost belongings (US$2,196.50), (d) unpaid vacation leave (US$1,100.00), and (e) moral and exemplary damages (US$50,000.00) plus attorney’s fees.
The POEA Administrator dismissed all claims in a decision dated January 27, 1987. The ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is the petitioner entitled to the unpaid salary for the 17 unserved weeks of his contract?
- Is the petitioner entitled to the claimed war risk bonus under POEA Memorandum Circular No. 4 and Section 2, Rule VI of the POEA Rules and Regulations?
- Is the petitioner entitled to recovery for the alleged loss of personal belongings?
- Is the petitioner entitled to paid vacation leave under Clause 5 of the employment contract?
- Is the petition...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)