Title
Toyo Seat Philippines Corp. vs. Velasco
Case
G.R. No. 240774
Decision Date
Mar 3, 2021
Employees of Toyo Seat Philippines Corporation (TSPC) file a complaint for regularization, claiming they had attained regular employee status, but the Supreme Court rules in favor of TSPC, stating that the employees were validly hired as project employees and their employment ended as specified in their contracts.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 240774)

Facts:

  • Toyo Seat Philippines Corporation (TSPC) and its president, Yoshihiro Takahama, are the petitioners.
  • Respondents are Annabelle C. Velasco, Renato Natividad, Florante Bilasa, and Mary Ann Benigla.
  • TSPC is engaged in manufacturing car seats and other automotive components.
  • Respondents were hired as sewers for specific projects.
  • Initially employed for Project J68C (Export Trim for 2008 Mazda 3 vehicle) starting in August 2008, estimated to be completed by September 2012.
  • Due to a decline in demand, Project J68C ended early.
  • Respondents were then employed for Project J68N (Export Trim for 2011 Mazda 3 vehicle) from June 8, 2011, to December 20, 2012.
  • Due to low order volumes, respondents were also assigned to Project GS41 (Export Trim/Seats for Mitsubishi Lancer).
  • Project J68N was extended until June 30, 2013, and further to July 12, 2013.
  • Respondents declined the final extension, leading to their termination effective July 1, 2013.
  • Respondents filed a complaint for regularization, which evolved into a complaint for illegal dismissal and non-payment of 13th month pay.
  • The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint but ordered TSPC to pay the 13th month pay.
  • The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter's decision.
  • The Court of Appeals reversed the NLRC's decision, ruling in favor of the respondents and ordering their reinstatement with backwages, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney's fees.
  • TSPC filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  1. The Supreme Court ruled that the respondents were validly hired as project employees.
  2. The Court found that TSPC's project-based employment scheme did not circumvent the respondents' right to security of tenure.
  3. The absence of terminat...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court emphasized that the determination of whether an employee is a project employee depends on whether they were hired for a specific project or undertaking, the completion or termination of which was determined at the time of their engagement.
  • The Court found that the respondents' employment contracts clearly stated that their employment was coterminous with the actual duration of the projects.
  • Respondents were not forced or coerced into signing these contracts.
  • TSPC issued notices of extension for the J68N project, indicating that the projects had discrete and determinable start and end dates, adjusted based on economic factors such as consumer demand and the arrival of raw materials.
  • The simultaneous engagement of respondents in the ...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.