Case Summary (G.R. No. 70705)
Factual Background
Moises de Leon was employed by La Tondena, Inc. on December 11, 1981, at the Maintenance Section of its Engineering Department in Tondo, Manila. His duties included painting company buildings and equipment, along with various maintenance tasks. Payment for his services was made through petty cash vouchers rather than the payroll. After more than a year of service, de Leon requested to be regularized and included on the payroll; however, he was dismissed on January 16, 1983, shortly after making this request. Following his dismissal, he filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and demanded reinstatement and back wages, claiming that his termination was a direct response to his request to be recognized as a regular employee.
Labor Arbiter's Decision
On April 6, 1984, Labor Arbiter Bienvenido S. Hernandez ruled in favor of de Leon, declaring his dismissal illegal and ordering La Tondena to reinstate him with full back pay and benefits. The Arbiter determined that de Leon was a regular employee, as his work was necessary and desirable for the company's operations. He concluded that the attempt by La Tondena to classify de Leon as a casual employee was an effort to circumvent labor laws protecting employee rights.
NLRC's Reversal
However, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) later reversed this decision, concluding that de Leon was merely a casual worker hired to complete specific tasks, particularly painting a building. The NLRC's majority, guided by votes from two members, disregarded the Arbiter’s findings about de Leon's ongoing maintenance tasks and the necessity of his role within La Tondena's regular business activities.
Petitioner’s Position
De Leon contended that the NLRC erred and abused its discretion by negating the Labor Arbiter's findings, emphasizing that his work included essential maintenance activities beyond just painting. He asserted that his dismissal immediately following his request for regularization was a clear attempt by La Tondena to evade its responsibilities under labor law.
Respondent's Defense
La Tondena maintained that de Leon was not a regular employee but rather a casual worker engaged for the specific, finite task of painting. They argued that his employment ended upon completion of that task and that the nature of his hiring was explicitly casual—supporting their claim with the fact that de Leon did not fill out an employment application or adhere to typical hiring protocols.
Solicitor General's Recommendation
The Solicitor General sided with de Leon, supporting the notion that the dismissal constituted a violation of labor laws meant to protect workers' rights. He recommended annulling the NLRC's decision and reinstating the Labor Arbiter's order.
Court's Analysis and Conclusion
Upon reviewing the case, the court found merit in de Leon’s petition. It reaffirmed that according to Article 281 of the Labor Code, an employee who performs tasks that are usually necessary to the business should be considered a regular employee, especially if employed for at least one year regardless of whether the employment was continuous or not. The court highlighted that de Leon did not only perform painting tasks but was also involved in othe
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 70705)
Case Background
- This case involves a petition for certiorari filed by Moises De Leon against the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and La Tondena, Inc., seeking to annul the majority decision dated January 28, 1985, which reversed the Labor Arbiter's order for his reinstatement after being dismissed.
- The Labor Arbiter had ordered reinstatement with back wages, stating that De Leon was a regular employee, while the NLRC claimed he was a casual worker.
- Petitioner was employed by La Tondena, Inc. on December 11, 1981, primarily doing painting and maintenance work.
Employment Details
- De Leon was paid daily through petty cash vouchers and worked in the Maintenance Section of the Engineering Department.
- After over a year of service, he requested to be placed on the payroll of regular workers; his request led to his dismissal on January 16, 1983.
- He subsequently filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, reinstatement, and back wages.
Claims and Evidence
- De Leon alleged that his dismissal was retaliatory, prompted by his request for regularization. He performed various maintenance tasks alongside painting, as corroborated by his co-worker, Emiliano Tanque, Jr.
- La Tondena, Inc. countered that De Leon was merely a casual worker hired for a specific painting job, clai