Title
Sigma Personnel Services vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 108284
Decision Date
Jun 30, 1993
Susan Sumatre, a domestic helper in Abu Dhabi, suffered abuse, leading to mental trauma and illegal dismissal. The Supreme Court ruled her employer and recruitment agency solidarily liable for unpaid wages, affirming her sister’s capacity to sue on her behalf.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 220605)

Circumstances of Employment

Susan Sumatre was recruited for overseas employment, with her application processed by Sigma Personnel Services after paying a placement fee of P11,500. She was deployed on August 1, 1987, to work for the National Center for Commercial Relations and Services (NCCRS) in Abu Dhabi, where she suffered severe abuse from her employer, including physical violence and sexual assault. After only two weeks, she was repatriated to the Philippines, exhibiting symptoms of mental distress, including incoherence and claims of having been raped.

Legal Proceedings and Complaint

On March 9, 1988, Cynthia Sumatre, Susan’s sister, filed a complaint against Sigma and SPM Services with the POEA for unpaid salaries amounting to US$150 per month for the entire duration of a two-year contract. The petitioner contended that Sumatre was not illegally dismissed, claiming she failed her probationary period and was repatriated due to a mental disorder. They also disputed Cynthia's capacity to file the complaint.

POEA and NLRC Rulings

The POEA ruled in favor of Cynthia and Susan Sumatre, holding that Sigma and SPM Services were solidarily liable for unpaid salaries totaling US$4,800, plus attorney’s fees. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed this decision upon appeal. The main contention on appeal highlighted the legality of Sumatre’s dismissal and whether Sigma had justifiable grounds for termination under the Labor Code.

Grounds for Dismissal Analysis

Article 281 of the Labor Code allows termination of probationary employees based on just cause or failure to meet reasonable qualification standards. The second ground did not apply, as Sumatre was repatriated after two weeks. Sigma argued her dismissal was justified due to her behaviors indicating mental instability. However, the findings from a mental health examination indicated that Sumatre had no prior psychiatric issues and had likely developed her condition due to the abuse experienced while employed.

Burden of Proof and Agency Responsibilities

The burden of proof in termination cases lies with the employer, which Sigma failed to substantiate, particularly regarding claims that Sumatre’s injuries were self-inflicted. Moreover, under Section 2(e), Rule V, Book I, the private employment agency is responsible for the implementation of the employment contract of overseas workers. Consequently, Sigma was deemed solidarily liable with the foreign employer for the claims of Sumatre.

Capacity to Sue and Procedure

Sigma challenged Cynthia Sumatre’s capacity to sue; however, this position lacked merit since she filed on behalf of her sister as a real party in interest. The procedural rules in labor cases call for a simplified process, prioritizing efficient resolutions over technicalities, ensuring fair access to justice for aggrieved employees.

Ruling on Back Wages

The court highlighted that the objective i

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.