Facts:
E. Ganzon, Inc. (EGI) and Eulalio Ganzon, petitioners, vs. Fortunato B. Ando, Jr., respondent, G.R. No. 214183, February 20, 2017, Supreme Court Second Division, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.
Respondent
Fortunato B. Ando, Jr. filed on May 16, 2011 a complaint for illegal dismissal and money claims against
E. Ganzon, Inc. (EGI) and its President
Eulalio Ganzon, alleging he was a regular finishing carpenter employed repeatedly from January 21, 2010 until April 30, 2011 and was terminated without notice; he also claimed underpaid salary, overtime, 13th month pay, holiday pay, service incentive leave, unlawful deductions and attorneys’ fees.
EGI maintained that Ando was a project worker (Formworker-2) engaged under three project employment contracts for the Bahay Pamulinawen Project (Laoag) and the West Insula Project (Quezon City) with specified start and projected end dates, that he was paid according to applicable Wage Orders, had received 13th month pay for 2010, and had voluntarily agreed to a P500 monthly deduction for lodging and utilities.
The Labor Arbiter (Decision dated December 29, 2011) held that Ando was a project employee, dismissed the illegal dismissal claim for lack of merit, but awarded certain money claims (underpayment of salary for 2/22/11–4/30/11; holiday pay, service incentive leave pay, and proportionate 13th month pay for specified periods). The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s Decision in Resolutions dated May 25, 2012 and July 17, 2012; Ando’s motion for reconsideration before the NLRC was denied.
Ando filed a Rule 65 petition before the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA G.R. SP No. 126624. The CA granted the petition, annulled the NLRC Resolutions insofar as illegal dismissal was concerned, declared Ando illegally dismissed, ordered EGI to pay full backwages from April 30, 2011 until finality and separation pay of one month’s salary, while sustaining the Labor Arbiter’s and NLRC’s awards on money claims. EGI’s motion for reconsideration before the CA was denied.
EGI filed a petition for...
(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals correctly determine that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in sustaining the Labor Arbiter’s finding that Ando was a project employee?
- On the merits, was Ando a project employee (and therefore not a regular employee) under Article 280 of the Labor Code given the contracts, repeated rehiring and extensions?
- Did EGI violate procedural due process by failing to giv...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
Ratio:
Doctrine: