Title
Jacob vs. 1st Step Manpower International Services, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 229984
Decision Date
Jul 8, 2020
Jacob, an OFW, alleged sexual harassment, maltreatment, and constructive dismissal in Saudi Arabia. Despite a contested settlement, the Supreme Court ruled in her favor, awarding damages and reinstating her claims.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 229984)

Applicable Law and Procedural History

The 1987 Philippine Constitution governs the case based on decision date (July 8, 2020). Relevant laws include Republic Act No. 8042 (Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995), as amended by Republic Act No. 10022, which governs the protection and welfare of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs), and labor jurisprudence on constructive dismissal. The case was initially ruled upon by the Labor Arbiter, appealed to and reversed by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), further appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), and finally elevated by certiorari to the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

Facts and Chronology of Events

Jacob was deployed abroad in January 2015 under a two-year contract with a monthly salary of US$400. On January 31, 2015, Jacob experienced sexual harassment when her male employer allegedly attempted rape. Reporting the incident to her female employer resulted in disbelief and subsequent maltreatment, including a physical assault on February 16, 2015. Feeling unsafe, Jacob escaped to the agency’s counterpart office but had to flee again through a window, sustaining a spinal injury in the fall. Medical records confirm surgery and treatment in Saudi Arabia. After repatriation arrangements facilitated by the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) and the Philippine Overseas Labor Office (POLO), Jacob executed a Final Settlement and Certification stating she voluntarily agreed to return home and that she received all due compensation. However, she later contested the validity of her signature on the settlement and filed a complaint for constructive dismissal, maltreatment, and unpaid wages.

Issues Presented

The core issue for resolution was whether Jacob was constructively dismissed from employment, rendering the Final Settlement void and entitling her to compensation and damages. Secondary issues involved the validity of the Final Settlement executed abroad and whether the petitioner voluntarily resigned or was forced to leave due to intolerable working conditions.

Findings of the Labor Arbiter

The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Jacob, finding constructive dismissal based on the detailed and categorical narration of maltreatment, including attempted rape, physical abuse, and intolerable working conditions by foreign employers. The Labor Arbiter gave little weight to the Final Settlement, noting its contested authenticity and that it was a mere photocopy. The Labor Arbiter ordered respondents to pay her wages for the unexpired contract period but denied claims for medical expenses and damages due to lack of supporting evidence at that point.

NLRC Decision

The NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter, dismissing the complaint for lack of merit. It held that the Final Settlement and Certification executed before the Philippine Embassy were valid, invoking the presumption of regularity in official acts of the Labor Attaché. The NLRC emphasized lack of convincing proof that the settlement was forged or involuntary and considered the absence of police or medical reports substantiating maltreatment or harassment allegations.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The CA upheld the NLRC decision, dismissing the petition and affirming the validity of the Final Settlement. The CA found inconsistencies in Jacob’s account, absence of prior complaints to authorities overseas, and ruled that the alleged maltreatment and attempted rape were not substantiated. The CA accorded weight to the Labor Attaché’s certification that petitioner personally appeared and signed the settlement.

Issues on Constructive Dismissal and Evidentiary Considerations

The Supreme Court reversed the CA ruling, finding grave abuse of discretion in disregarding the totality of evidence supporting Jacob’s claim of constructive dismissal. It clarified that constructive dismissal includes situations where employment is rendered unbearable by the employer’s acts, even without explicit termination or diminution of benefits. The petitioner’s detailed sworn declaration, supported by medical records documenting injury sustained during escape, was held as substantial evidence corroborating maltreatment and justifying her departure.

Validity of Final Settlement and Jurisdiction of Philippine Embassy

The Court emphasized that the Final Settlement was not conclusive proof of voluntary resignation since it was signed under duress as a condition for repatriation. The certification marked “seen and noted” by the Labor Attaché did not amount to attestation of its truthfulness by Jacob. The absence of a witness and petitioner’s denial of the authenticity of her signature further weakened respondents’ position. It noted that deeds of waiver or quitclaims executed under coercion or without full understanding are generally disfavored and may not bar employees from asserting their labor rights.

Burden of Proof on Resignation vs. Dismissal

Citing established labor law jurisprudence, the Court reaffirmed that when an employer alleges voluntary resignation, they bear the burden of proving such resignation was voluntary and not coerced. Respondents failed to meet this burden satisfactorily, relying heavily on the Final Settlement and uncorroborated assertions of homesickness. Petitioner’s consistent allegations supported by medical and contextual evidence outweighed respondents’ conclusory claims.

Award of Damages and Attorney’s Fees

The Court granted moral damages (P50,000) and exemplary damages (P25,000) due to the bad faith, oppressive, and humiliating circumstances surrounding

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.