Case Summary (G.R. No. 112574)
Employment Background and Dispute
Fermin Agao, Jr. was employed as a "bodegero" or ship's quartermaster beginning February 12, 1988. He alleged constructive dismissal when the petitioner refused to assign him to work aboard its boats after he returned from a one-month leave without pay due to sickness. Upon reporting back on May 28, 1990, with a health clearance, he was reportedly told to return another time and was subsequently denied work. Requests for a certificate of employment were refused unless he submitted a resignation letter, which Agao declined without receipt of separation pay. Thereafter, petitioner prevented him from entering company premises.
Petitioner's Defense and Counter-Allegations
The petitioner asserted that Agao was the one who abandoned his work by failing to report after his leave expired, leading to an absence of three months until August 28, 1990. They claimed to have assigned him to a vessel, but Agao allegedly refused to board on September 1, 1990. Agao's request for a certificate of employment on September 6, 1990, was viewed by the petitioner as a pretext to seek employment elsewhere. The refusal to obtain the certificate or submit to resignation without separation pay led the petitioner to bar his access to the premises.
Labor Arbiter’s Decision
On February 18, 1992, Labor Arbiter Arthur L. Amansec held that Mercidar Fishing Corporation unlawfully dismissed Agao, ordering his reinstatement with back wages, 13th month pay, and incentive leave pay for 1990. Claims beyond these were dismissed.
NLRC Decision and Motion for Reconsideration
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), on August 30, 1993, affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s ruling and dismissed the petitioner's appeal on the basis that fishermen employees could not be considered “field personnel” exempt from service incentive leave without merit. The NLRC also denied the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in October 1993.
Legal Issue on Classification as Field Personnel (Article 82, Labor Code)
A core issue addressed was whether fishermen such as Agao are “field personnel” under Article 82 of the Labor Code and thus exempt from service incentive leave pay. The petitioner invoked Article 82 which excludes “field personnel”—non-agricultural employees working away from the principal place of business whose actual work hours cannot be reasonably determined—from certain benefits.
Interpretation of “Field Personnel” under Labor Code and Jurisprudence
The Supreme Court explained that the definition of “field personnel” must consider whether the employer can reasonably supervise or determine the employee's actual working hours. The Court referred to its prior ruling in Union of Filipro Employees v. Vicar (205 SCRA 200), underscoring that “whose actual hours of work in the field cannot be determined with reasonable certainty” means employees whose time and performance are unsupervised by the employer.
Distinction Between Sales Personnel and Fishermen
While sales personnel like those in Nestlé Philippines were deemed field personnel because their exact work hours could not be reliably tracked despite fixed work schedules, fishermen under Mercidar Fishing Corporation differ. The Court noted fishermen had no option but to remain aboard vessels during fishing voyages and were under continuous control and supervision of the vessel’s master, who acted on behalf of the employer.
On Constructive Dismissal and Abandonment
The factual findings supported Agao’s claims of constructive dismissal based on evidence of his timely reporting with a medical clearance and employer refusal to reinstate him. The Court emphasized established jurisprudence that abandonment requires both intention and overt acts indicating no interest in working. Agao’s filing of a complaint seeking reinstatement negated any presumed abandon
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 112574)
Parties Involved and Nature of the Case
- Petitioner: Mercidar Fishing Corporation, represented by its President Domingo B. Naval.
- Respondents: National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and private respondent Fermin Agao, Jr.
- Case arises from a petition for certiorari filed by Mercidar Fishing Corporation seeking to set aside the NLRC decision dated August 30, 1993, which dismissed petitioner’s appeal from the Labor Arbiter’s ruling.
- The Labor Arbiter’s decision pertained to a complaint filed by Fermin Agao, Jr. alleging illegal dismissal, violation of P.D. No. 851, and non-payment of five days service incentive leave for the year 1990.
Facts of the Case
- Fermin Agao, Jr. was employed as a "bodegero" or ship’s quartermaster beginning February 12, 1988.
- Agao was allowed to go on leave without pay for one month starting April 28, 1990 due to illness; he returned to work on May 28, 1990 with a medical clearance.
- Upon reporting, petitioner refused to reinstate Agao immediately and later refused to assign him work on the boats.
- When Agao requested a certificate of employment on September 6, 1990, petitioner declined to issue it unless Agao submitted a resignation letter.
- Agao refused to resign without receiving separation pay; subsequently, petitioner prevented him from entering the company premises.
- Petitioner contended Agao abandoned his work by not reporting after his leave expired and alleged he was absent without leave for three months until August 28, 1998.
- Petitioner claimed that Agao was assigned to another vessel but was left behind on September 1, 1990, and that Agao asked for a certificate of employment as a pretext to apply elsewhere.
Procedural History
- Labor Arbiter Arthur L. Amansec ruled on February 18, 1992, ordering petitioner to reinstate Agao with backwages, pay his 13th month pay, and service incentive leave pay for 1990; all other claims were dismissed.
- Petitioner appealed to the NLRC, which on August 30, 1993, dismissed the appeal for lack of merit, upholding the Labor Arbiter’s findings.
- The NLRC further denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration on October 25, 1993.
- Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court seeking to annul these rulings.
Issues Presented
- Whether fishing crew members like Fermin Agao, Jr., should be classified as "field personnel" under Article 82 of the Labor Code and thus be excluded from entitlement to service incentive leave pay.
- Whether the NLRC acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in upholding the Labor Arbiter’s finding that petitioner had constructively dismissed the private respondent.
Legal Provisions and Definitions
- Article 82 of the Labor Code covers employees in all establishments, excluding government employees, field personnel, family members, domestic helpers, personal service workers, and workers paid by results.
- "Field personnel" is defined as non-agricultural employees who perform duties regularly away from the employer’s principal place of business or branch offi