Case Summary (G.R. No. 238859)
Applicable Law and Constitutional Basis
The 1987 Constitution’s protection of labor (Art. XIII, Sec. 3) and the Labor Code provisions on contracting relationships (Arts. 106 on labor-only contracting and 109 on joint liability; Art. 279 on backwages) govern. Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Department Order No. 18-A (2011) sets forth registration requirements and criteria distinguishing permissible job contracting from prohibited labor-only schemes. Jurisprudential standards on grave abuse of discretion, project versus regular employment (GMA Network, Inc. v. Pabriga; Brent School, Inc. v. Zamora), and entitlement to moral, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees also apply.
Procedural History
Caballero filed a Complaint for illegal dismissal and related money claims before the NLRC in April 2016. The Labor Arbiter dismissed her complaint for lack of merit (August 31, 2016). On appeal, the NLRC First Division modified that decision, awarding separation pay but denying illegal dismissal. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and deleted the separation-pay award (November 28, 2017), prompting Caballero’s petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court.
Facts and Employment Timeline
Caballero began work January 15, 2015 as a packer and, after three-month contracts through Hardworkers, was trained and reassigned as a dim sum maker at Viking’s Rockefeller Office. Her successive fixed-term agreements covered January–April 2015, May–September 2015, October 2015–February 2016, and March–July 2016, all executed with Hardworkers. She received no direct payslips from Vikings and was not given copies of her contracts.
Analysis of Contractual Relationship
Although Hardworkers held a DOLE registration, it failed to demonstrate substantial capital investment in equipment or independent operations. Vikings recruited, trained, provided tools, directed work methods, and recommended hiring and dismissal. The absence of a service agreement, plus Caballero’s uncontroverted testimony that Vikings initiated her engagement, underscores that Hardworkers merely supplied labor.
Labor-Only Contracting Determination
Applying Labor Code Art. 106 and DOLE Order No. 18-A, the totality of circumstances—lack of contractor control, reliance on principal’s equipment and instructions, and performance of work essential to Vikings’ business—constitutes prohibited labor-only contracting. The disputable presumption of legitimacy created by Hardworkers’ registration was overcome by evidence of the actual relationship.
Employment Status: Regular versus Project
Repeated renewals of short-term contracts for identical work over more than one year establish Caballero’s status as a regular employee. Her role as dim sum maker was integral and indistinguishable from Viking’s ordinary business, failing the requirement of a distinct project. Fixed-term labels cannot circumvent security of tenure under established jurisprudence.
Illegal Dismissal Finding
On April 5, 2016, Chef Law’s verbal instruction to “go home” and Taburnal’s statement that Caballero was already terminated, without notice to explain or opportunity to be heard, constitute an effective dismissal. Viki
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 238859)
Background Facts
- Elba J. Caballero applied for work at Vikings Commissary, a luxury buffet restaurant, and was told she would be hired as a packer starting January 15, 2015 at a daily rate of ₱466.00 plus ₱15.00 ECOLA.
- She did not receive payslip for her first month (January 15–February 15, 2015).
- Vikings’ HR Manager informed her that she would sign an employment contract through Hardworkers Manpower Services, Inc.
- Caballero signed a three-month contract (expiring April 15, 2015) with Hardworkers, was refused a copy but received an ID card valid until March 2016, and payslips indicating assignment under Hardworkers/Pacific Apex Food Venture Inc.
Employment Timeline
- February 9, 2015: Trained as a dim sum maker at Vikings’ Rockefeller Office and transferred to the kitchen.
- May–September 2015: Rehired on a five-month contract as dim sum maker.
- October 2015–February 2016 and March–July 2016: Successive five-month and four-month fixed-term contracts with Hardworkers for assignment at Vikings.
- Total continuous service exceeded one year from January 2015 to April 2016.
Dismissal Incident
- April 5, 2016: Vikings Executive Chef informed Caballero she was terminated; she continued to work until approached at noon by staff informing her she was “effective today” dismissed and should go home.
- Caballero sought explanation but was given none.
- April 7, 2016: She inquired at Hardworkers’ office, was told to wait, and received no job reassignment.
- Two weeks later she filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and unpaid benefits before the NLRC.
Procedural History
- Labor Arbiter (August 31, 2016): Complaint dismissed for lack of merit, finding Caballero a fixed-term employee of Hardworkers and not illegally dismissed due to failure to report back.
- NLRC First Division (December 27, 2016): Modified to award separation pay (₱12,766.00) after deeming Caballero a regular employee of Hardworkers but found no illegal dismissal.
- CA Decision (November 28, 2017): Affirmed lack of merit, deleted separation pay award, denied overtime, moral/exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees.
- CA Resolution (March 27, 2018): Denial of reconsideration.
- Supreme Court: Petition for review filed; Vikings waived comment; fines imposed for non-appearance.
Issues Presented
- Whether Caballero is a regular employee of Hardworkers or of Vikings.
- Whether Caballero was illegally dismissed.
- Whether Caballero is entitled to backwages, attorney’s fees, separation pay, moral and exemplary damages, and other monetary claims.
Standard of Review in Labor Cases
- Supreme Court reviews only questions of law unless exceptional circumstances (e.g., grave abuse of discretion)