Case Digest (G.R. No. 222219)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 222219)
Facts:
Reynaldo S. Geraldo v. The Bill Sender Corporation/Ms. Lourdes Ner Cando, G.R. No. 222219, October 03, 2018, Supreme Court Third Division, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.On June 20, 1997, The Bill Sender Corporation engaged Reynaldo S. Geraldo as a delivery/messenger man to deliver bills for PLDT; he was paid on a per-piece basis. On August 7, 2011, the company’s operations manager allegedly informed Geraldo that his employment was terminated for failure to deliver certain bills. Geraldo contended he was not the messenger assigned those deliveries and that the termination was effected without due process; he filed a complaint for illegal dismissal on February 6, 2012 seeking separation pay, backwages, 13th month pay, service incentive leave pay, and attorney’s fees.
The company answered that Geraldo was a piece-rate worker, not a regular employee, that messengers commonly moved among messengerial firms, and that Geraldo abandoned his job by not reporting for work. The Labor Arbiter (LA), in a decision dated November 29, 2012, found Geraldo to be a regular employee, ruled that the employer failed to prove just cause or compliance with due process, and awarded monetary relief totaling P352,214.13 plus attorney’s fees.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), in a Decision dated May 9, 2013, affirmed the LA but clarified that backwages run until finality of the NLRC decision; it likewise found lack of proof of abandonment and failure to observe the twin-notice requirement. The Court of Appeals (CA), however, by Decision dated August 7, 2014 (and denying reconsideration on September 28, 2015), set aside the NLRC ruling, holding that because Geraldo was paid per piece he was hired on a per-result basis and therefore was not an employee, thus denying labor benefits and monetary awards.
Geraldo filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 on November 26, 2015 seeking reversal of the CA decisions; the Supreme Court Third Division resolved the case in this decision authored by Justice Peralta.
Issues:
- Was petitioner Reynaldo S. Geraldo an employee of The Bill Sender Corporation entitled to security of tenure (i.e., was there an employer-employee relationship / was he a regular employee)?
- If he was an employee, was his termination illegal for lack of just cause and/or failure to observe due process?
- Can respondent Lourdes Ner Cando, as corporate president, be held personally and solidarily liable for the monetary awards?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)