Case Digest (G.R. No. 193756)
Facts:
Venancio S. Reyes, et al. v. RP Guardians Security Agency, Inc., G.R. No. 193756, April 10, 2013, Supreme Court Third Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners — Venancio S. Reyes, Edgardo C. Dabbay, Walter A. Vigilia, Nemecio M. Calanno, Rogelio A. Supe, Jr., Roland R. Trinidad, and Aurelio A. Duldulao — were security guards employed by respondent RP Guardians Security Agency, Inc. and were deployed to various client sites, the last being branches of Banco Filipino. In September 2006 respondent’s security contract with Banco Filipino was terminated; petitioners were placed on “floating status” by memoranda dated September 21 and 29, 2006 and were asked to turn over duties to the incoming agency while awaiting reassignment, but no new posts were provided for several months.On April 10, 2007 petitioners filed complaints for constructive dismissal before the Labor Arbiter (LA). Respondent maintained there was no dismissal, asserting that employment was coterminous with the expired service contract. On August 20, 2007 the LA (Labor Arbiter Teresita D. Castillon-Lora) ruled for petitioners, awarding separation pay, backwages, refund of trust fund contributions, moral and exemplary damages, and attorneys’ fees; moral and exemplary damages were later deleted by the NLRC.
Respondent appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). On April 9, 2008 the NLRC sustained the LA’s finding of constructive dismissal and the attendant monetary awards, deleting only moral and exemplary damages. After denial of reconsideration, respondent filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA). On February 26, 2010 the CA dismissed the petition and affirmed the NLRC decision; on reconsideration the CA issued an Amended Decision dated May 18, 2010 modifying the awards by deleting backwages and attorneys’ fees, reducing separation pay from one month per year to one-half month per year under DOLE D.O. No. 14, Sec. 6.5(4), and reducing the trust fund refund from ₱60 to ₱30.
Petitioners sought relief from the Supreme Court via a petition for review under Rule 45, assailing the CA’s May 18, 2010 Amended Decision and its September 13, 2010 Resolution i...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals gravely abuse its discretion in modifying the NLRC decision by deleting backwages and attorneys’ fees and reducing separation pay and trust fund refunds?
- Were petitioners constructively dismissed when placed on floating status beyond a reasonable period following termination of the service contract?
- Are petitioners entitled to backwages and separation pay, and if so, should separation pay be computed at one month per year of service or one-half month per year under DOLE D.O. No. 14, Sec. 6.5(4)?
- Are petitioners entitled to attorneys’ fees, and if so, in what amount?
- How should the refund of trust...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)