Case Summary (G.R. No. 187984)
Petitioner and Respondents
Petitioner: Francisco A. Labao, on behalf of SMPSA
Respondents: Lolito N. Flores et al., former SMPSA security guards at NPC-MRC
Key Dates
Memorandum requiring updated documents: July 27, 2004 (deadline July 30, 2004)
Relief from duty: September–October 2004
Individual complaints filed: March–April 2005
Labor Arbiter decision: December 27, 2005
NLRC resolution: July 31, 2006; denial of reconsideration September 29, 2006
Receipt dates of NLRC resolution: November 6, 2006 (Bicoy), October 13, 2006 (Atty. Plando), December 6, 2006 (respondents)
CA decision: September 5, 2008; resolution April 22, 2009
Supreme Court decision: November 15, 2010
Applicable Law
1987 Philippine Constitution; Rules of Court (Rule 65 on certiorari); Labor Code provisions on management prerogative, constructive dismissal, separation pay, backwages, and procedural periods.
Factual Background
SMPSA security guards at NPC-MRC were ordered to submit updated personal data and licenses for contract renewal. Respondents failed to comply despite notices, prompting their relief from duty and transfer orders. They received no new assignments for over six months and filed consolidated illegal dismissal and money claims with the NLRC, alleging constructive dismissal. SMPSA countered that relief from duty was valid management prerogative and that respondents had been directed to report for reassignment but refused.
Labor Arbiter’s Decision
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaints for lack of merit, ruling that SMPSA’s suspension of duty requirements was a legitimate exercise of management prerogative to protect business interests, especially given reports of falsified documents among security guards.
NLRC Ruling
The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter on July 31, 2006, holding that relief from duty was made in good faith and did not exceed the six-month permissible suspension period, noting respondents had been instructed to report for reassignment on January 25, 2005. A motion for reconsideration was denied on September 29, 2006.
Court of Appeals Ruling
On September 5, 2008, the CA reversed the NLRC, finding respondents constructively dismissed after more than six months off-detail. It held the January 17, 2005 notice did not interrupt the six-month floating period because respondents had not received it in time. The CA awarded separation pay (one month’s salary per year of service), backwages, allowances, and statutory benefits. A subsequent CA resolution (April 22, 2009) dismissed one co-petitioner for late filing but deemed the others’ petition timely in the interest of substantial justice.
Petition for Review
Petitioner Labao challenged the CA’s decision, arguing the respondents’ certiorari petition was filed 28 days late (counting from Atty. Plando’s receipt on October 13, 2006), that new counsel misrepresented the reckoning date, and that the record supported the LA and NLRC findings. Respondents maintained that their December 6, 2006 notice was the proper reckoning date and blamed former counsel’s secretary for misplacing the NLRC resolution.
Issues Presented
- Whether the CA erred in entertaining a late-filed petition for certiorari.
- Whether the CA correctly reversed the Labor Arbiter and NLRC decisions on the merits of constructive dismissal and relief from duty.
Supreme Court Ruling – Timeliness
Under Rule 65, Section 4 of the Rules of Court, a petition for certiorari must be filed within 60 days from notice of the resolution. Reglementary periods are strictly applied. The respondents’ petition was filed 28 days beyond the 60-day period counted from Atty. Plando’s receipt (October 13, 2006), rendering the petiti
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 187984)
Parties and Facts
- Petitioner Francisco A. Labao is proprietor and general manager of San Miguel Protective Security Agency (SMPSA), a licensed security-service contractor.
- Respondents (twenty SMPSA security guards) including Lolito N. Flores, Amado A. Daguisonan, Pepe M. Cantar, Julio G. Pagente, Jesus E. Arena, Crispin A. Navales, Oscar M. Vente, Artemio B. Aragon, Arnold M. Cantar, Alberto T. Cuadero, Rasmi E. Ronquillo, Pedro R. Gabutan, Elpedio E. Mentang, Wilfredo R. Miaosa, Roderick P. Nambatac, Marcial D. Rivera, Sande E. Castil, Crisostomo B. Esic, and Ambrosio M. Cantar (and Jimmy O. Bicoy) were assigned to the National Power Corporation–Mindanao Regional Center (NPC-MRC), Ditucalan, Iligan City.
- Each respondent had a monthly salary of ₱7,020.00.
- On July 27, 2004, Labao issued a memorandum requiring all guards to submit updated personal data files, security-guard professional license, and other documents by July 30, 2004 for contract renewal with NPC-MRC.
- Respondents failed to comply despite several notices; beginning September/October 2004, Labao relieved them from NPC-MRC duty and directed them to report to Senior Operations Officer Nemesio Sombilon for reassignment.
- In March/April 2005, respondents filed individual complaints for illegal dismissal and money claims with the Iligan City NLRC, later consolidated, alleging constructive dismissal after being without assignment for over six months.
Labor Arbiter and NLRC Proceedings
- SMPSA and Labao denied constructive dismissal, asserting valid management prerogative and that a January 17, 2005 notice directed respondents to SMPSA’s main office for reassignment, which they ignored.
- December 27, 2005: Labor Arbiter Noel Augusto S. Magbanua dismissed the consolidated complaints for lack of meri