Case Summary (G.R. No. 220935)
Petitioners
Ariel Espina, Analyn Dolojan, Daria Donor, Roel Donor, Edwin Adona, Daryle Montevirgen, Ederlina Esteban, Randy Dolojan, and others filed separate complaints in 2011 for illegal dismissal, non-payment of overtime and holiday pay, 13th month pay, moral and exemplary damages, and related reliefs after they were not rehired for the 2011 season.
Respondents
Highlands Camp/Rawlings Foundation, Inc., a non-profit religious organization providing camping facilities for training, spiritual growth, and evangelization, and its Administrator, Jayvelyn Pascal. Respondents maintained that the camp’s operations were seasonal and petitioners were hired only for specific seasons.
Key Dates
• March 24, 2011 – Complaints filed.
• January 16, 2013 – Labor Arbiter decision declaring illegal dismissal.
• July 31, 2013 – NLRC Decision affirming with modification.
• October 30, 2013 – NLRC denial of reconsideration.
• May 15, 2015 – Court of Appeals Decision classifying petitioners as seasonal employees and dismissing their complaints.
• July 29, 2015 – CA denial of motion for reconsideration.
• July 28, 2020 – Supreme Court decision reversing the CA.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Constitution, Article XIII, Section 3(1) – Security of tenure.
• Labor Code (as amended):
– Article 295 – Definitions of regular, project, and seasonal employment.
– Article 294 – Security of tenure, remedies for illegal dismissal.
Antecedents
From 2000 to 2010, petitioners were rehired annually and worked regularly from January to June, were on call from July to September, reported daily in October, and were on call again in November and December. In early 2011 respondents informed them they would be called when campers arrived but instead hired new employees. Petitioners contended that their repeated and continuous service conferred regular-employee status and that their non-rehiring in 2011 without cause constituted illegal dismissal.
Labor Arbiter Ruling
January 16, 2013 – Labor Arbiter Reynaldo Abdon found petitioners to be regular employees because Highlands Camp remained open year-round and petitioners were not separated during off-peak months. Their termination without valid cause amounted to illegal dismissal. Respondents were ordered to pay separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, backwages, 13th month pay, and attorney’s fees; claims for holiday and overtime pay were denied for lack of proof, and moral/exemplary damages were denied for absence of bad faith.
NLRC Ruling
July 31, 2013 – The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s finding of illegal dismissal but modified the award to include holiday pay and remanded for recomputation of all benefits. October 30, 2013 – The NLRC denied respondents’ motion for reconsideration.
Court of Appeals Ruling
May 15, 2015 – The CA reversed, holding that petitioners were seasonal employees because they worked on average less than three months per year and were rehired under different positions. It ruled that their separation at the end of each season did not constitute illegal dismissal, and dismissed their complaints. July 29, 2015 – The CA denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration.
Core Issues
- Whether petitioners were seasonal or regular employees under Article 295 of the Labor Code.
- Whether their dismissal in 2011 was valid or amounted to illegal dismissal under Article 294 of the Labor Code and the 1987 Constitution.
Employment Status: Seasonal vs. Regular
• Article 295 defines regular employment as work “usually necessary or desirable in the usual business or trade of the employer” unless fixed for a specific project or seasonal in nature.
• Jurisprudence (Abasolo v. NLRC; Universal Robina Sugar Milling Corp. v. Acibo) requires that to qualify as seasonal employment, (a) the work must be seasonal in nature, and (b) the employment must last only for the duration of the season.
• Respondents failed to prove that Highlands Camp closed during any part of the year; booking records showed continuous, year-round operations.
• Petitioners performed the same essential services regardless of peak or lean periods, and repeated hiring over ten years demonstrated the necessity and desirability of their roles.
• Respondents did not present employment contracts or documentary proof of a fixed or seasonal term, giving rise to the presumption against their claim.
Conclusion: Petitioners were regular employees.
Illegal Dismissal
• As regular employees, petitioners enjoyed the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure (Art. XIII, Sec. 3(1), 1987 Constitution) and could not be dismissed without just or autho
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 220935)
Procedural History
- Two consolidated petitions filed before the Supreme Court, assailing the Court of Appeals Decision dated May 15, 2015 (CA-G.R. SP No. 133460) and Resolution dated July 29, 2015.
- The petitions originated from separate illegal dismissal complaints filed on March 24, 2011 by two groups of employees before the NLRC.
- Labor Arbiter issued a Decision on January 16, 2013; NLRC affirmed with modification on July 31, 2013 and denied reconsideration on October 30, 2013.
- Court of Appeals reversed the NLRC on May 15, 2015 and denied reconsideration on July 29, 2015.
- Petitioners invoked the Supreme Court’s discretionary appellate jurisdiction to reverse and set aside the CA dispositions.
Antecedents and Facts
- Since 2000, petitioners were hired as cooks, cook helpers, utility workers, and service crew at Highlands Camp’s Iba, Zambales site.
- They worked regularly from January to June, were on call from July to September, reported daily in October, and on call again in November–December.
- Highlands Camp remained open and offered facilities year-round despite “peak” and “lean” periods.
- Each year petitioners submitted biodata, medical clearances, health cards, and SS numbers for rehiring.
- In 2011, after compliance with requirements, petitioners were informed they would be recalled; instead, new workers were hired.
- Petitioners claimed regular employee status by virtue of repeated, continuous hiring and performed services necessary or desirable to Highlands’ business.
- Respondents characterized the camp as a non-profit religious venue with seasonal operations, argued petitioners worked less than six months annually, and presented a summary of days worked (2000–2010) averaging under three months per year.
- Respondents contended petitioners’ rehiring was application-based, not automatic, and their tasks were not directly tied to the main purpose of evangelization.
Issues
- Whether petitioners were seasonal or regular employees.
- Whether petitioners’ termination without recall in 2011 constituted illegal dismissal.
Labor Arbiter’s Ruling (Jan. 16, 2013)
- Petitioners found to be regular employees; Highlands’ operations were continuous, not seasonal.
- Termination without valid cause amounted to illegal dismissal.
- Ordered respondents jointly and severally to pay:
• Separation pay in lieu of reinstatement (one month per year