Case Digest (G.R. No. 100333)
Facts:
Hilario Magcalas et al. v. National Labor Relations Commission and Koppel, Inc., G.R. No. 100333, March 13, 1997, Supreme Court Third Division, Panganiban, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners are eighteen employees (leadmen, tinsmiths, tradeshelpers, general clerk) who worked for Koppel, Inc. on various air‑conditioning and refrigeration installation projects; respondent public body is the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). The labor arbiter, Dominador M. Cruz, found that petitioners were regular employees, held their August 30, 1988 layoffs to be illegal dismissals, and ordered reinstatement, backwages from dismissal to actual reinstatement, and attorney’s fees (labor arbiter Decision). The NLRC Second Division (Commissioner Rustico L. Diokno, ponente; Presiding Commissioner Edna Bonto‑Perez and Commissioner Domingo H. Zapanta, concurring) reversed the labor arbiter, concluding petitioners were project/contract employees and ordering separation pay; its Decision (April 5, 1991) and Resolution denying reconsideration (May 13, 1991) were assailed.
Facts developed at the hearing: petitioners had continuous service ranging from 1½ to 8 years and had been assigned to multiple jobsites (Asian Development Bank, Interbank, PNB, NAIA, PICC, San Miguel Complex, and Koppel’s plant). Koppel, Inc. relied on written employment contracts showing an expected completion date (August 31, 1988) for the ADB and Interbank assignments and on a CBA provision recognizing “contract employees.” The NLRC also cited Policy Instruction No. 20 (1977) governing construction‑industry project...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Were petitioners regular employees under Article 280 of the Labor Code?
- If regular, was their termination upon completion of the projects a valid dismissal under the Labor Code (and related juri...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)