Title
Cuadra vs. San Miguel Corporation
Case
G.R. No. 194467
Decision Date
Jul 13, 2020
Workers illegally dismissed in 1990-91, reinstated in 2003, contested service reckoning; Supreme Court ruled service dates back to initial hiring (1985/1988).

Case Summary (G.R. No. 194467)

Chronology of Events

The petition follows a series of decisions beginning with a Labor Arbiter's ruling on December 15, 1994, which recognized the petitioners as regular employees of San Miguel Corporation, having been previously employed through a labor-only contractor, Lippercon Services, Inc. The decision ordered their reinstatement and awarded backwages. An appeal by San Miguel Corporation was made, resulting in modifications regarding backwages and separation pay until a subsequent compromise was reached.

Labor Arbitration and Compromise

During the execution of the reinstatement order, the petitioners entered into a compromise agreement, settling their claims for P550,000 each, which included their money claims related to illegal dismissal. The compromise was finalized on June 25, 2003, and reinstatement was scheduled for July 1, 2003. However, upon reinstatement, San Miguel reckoned their length of service from the date of reinstatement rather than their initial dates of employment.

Dispute Over Service Length Reckoning

The core issue is the reckoning date for the petitioners’ length of service—whether it should be the date they were reinstated or the date they initially commenced their roles in 1985 and 1988, respectively. The petitioners argued that reinstatement should not reset their service length while San Miguel contended that their previous employment was terminated, thus making them new hires.

Voluntary Arbitration Decision

Voluntary Arbitrator Angel A. Ancheta ruled in favor of the petitioners, determining that their length of service should indeed be counted from their original hiring dates based on the interpretation of reinstatement, which indicates returning to a state of employment that had been interrupted through illegal dismissal.

Court of Appeals' Ruling

The Court of Appeals later modified the voluntary arbitrator's decision, maintaining that the length of service should be reckoned from the declaration as regular employees on December 15, 1994. They justified this by stating the petitioners began employment under a contractor arrangement and needed formal declaration as regular employees before claiming any additional length of service rights.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court emphasized that reinstated employees are not considered new hires and that their service is continuous if the prior employment was ended through illegal dismissal. As such, they ruled that the length of service for Melchor should be reckoned from 1985 and for Melencio and Serafin from 1988. The execution of the quitclaims did not negate their previous employment histo

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.