Title
Supreme Court
Intel Technology Phils., Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 200575
Decision Date
Feb 5, 2014
Cabiles resigned from Intel Phil. upon transferring to Intel HK, rendering his waiver valid and disqualifying him from retirement benefits due to incomplete service.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 200575)

Employment Background

Jeremias Cabiles joined Intel Phil. on April 16, 1997, as an Inventory Analyst and went through several promotions and assignments until he received an offer from Intel HK on December 12, 2006. Prior to accepting this offer, he sought clarification on his retirement benefits, specifically questioning if he would still be entitled to these benefits despite not having completed the required ten years of service.

Intel Phil.'s Response

In response to Cabiles' inquiry on January 23, 2007, Intel Phil. informed him that he would not qualify for retirement benefits since he had not yet reached the ten-year service mark. Cabiles accepted the job offer from Intel HK on January 31, 2007, indicating his acknowledgment of the conditions laid out by Intel Phil.

Resignation and Waiver

After accepting the position with Intel HK, Cabiles received a final pay package and signed a Release, Waiver, and Quitclaim acknowledging full settlement of all benefits due to him from Intel Phil. This waiver was later contested by Cabiles when he filed a complaint with the NLRC for retirement benefits, asserting that his total service should amount to over ten years when including his time at Intel HK.

Labor Arbiter’s Decision

The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Cabiles, declaring him eligible for retirement benefits, citing that relocation to Intel HK did not constitute a severance of employment. The Arbiter deemed that the Waiver signed by Cabiles only covered specific final payments and did not pertain to retirement benefits.

NLRC Ruling

Upon appeal, the NLRC modified the Labor Arbiter's ruling, holding Intel Phil. solely liable for Cabiles’ retirement benefits, finding theWaiver signed insufficient to preclude Cabiles' claim as retirement pay had not yet accrued at the time of his resignation.

Court of Appeals Decision

Intel Phil. sought relief through a petition for certiorari to the Court of Appeals, which ultimately dismissed the petition and upheld the NLRC's decision. Intel Phil.'s motion for reconsideration was also denied.

Petition for Review

The case was brought before the Supreme Court where Intel Phil. raised several issues, including claims of procedural error by the Court of Appeals, the NLRC's alleged abuse of discretion, and a demand for restitution of amounts previously paid to Cabiles under a writ of execution.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court found that Cabiles had effectively resigned from Intel Phil. upon accepting the position with Intel HK, which constituted a severance of his existing employment relationship. The Court rejected the theory of secondment, concluding that Cabiles' transfer to Intel HK was not an assignment but a permanent tra

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.