LESSON 7.
SEIRI appealed to the NLRC-Cebu and submitted the following additional evidence:
GR No. 186621 – SOUTH EAST INTERNATIONAL RATTAN, INC. v. JESUS J. COMING
VILLARAMA, JR., J.
JJ Coming claims he was illegally dismissed by his employer SEIRI. The latter claimed that they
did not have an employer-employee relationship but this was belied by their own statement in one
of their submissions.
DOCTRINE
In any controversy between a laborer and his master, doubts reasonably arising from the evidence
are resolved in favor of the laborer.
As a regular employee, respondent enjoys the right to security of tenure under Article 279 42 of
the Labor Code and may only be dismissed for a just 43 or authorized 44 cause, otherwise the
dismissal becomes illegal.
FACTS
1. Petitioner South East International Rattan Inc. (SEIRI) is a domestic corporation engaged in
manufacturing and exporting furniture to various countries and has it's principal place of
business in Mandaue City, Cebu.
2. Estanislao Agbay is its President and General Manager.
3. Jesus J. Coming ("JJ") was hired by SEIRI as a Sizing Machine Operator on March 17, 1984.
He claims the following:
a. His work schedule is from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
b. Initially, compensation was "pakiao" basis but in June 1984 it became fixed at PHP
150/ day, paid weekly.
c. 1990 – SEIRI told him to stop working and resume work in 2 months time.
d. SEIRI (and even his brother Vicente) persuaded him not to complain, saying that
they might not call him back for work if he does so.
e. In January 2002, despite being an employee for a number of years already with
his work performance never questioned, JJ was DISMISSED WITHOUT LAWFUL
CAUSE
i. Company claims that they are having financial difficulties
f. JJ also submitted affidavits executed by his alleged co-workers claiming that he
was their co-worker in SEIRI Rattan
4. After waiting for over a year for SEIRI to call him back for work, he finally filed a complaint
before the regional LA, but his brother was used by SEIRI to persuade him to withdraw such
case.
5. Petitioner SEIRI claims the following:
a. Denied having hired JJ
b. That they were incorporated only in 1986
c. That JJ actually worked for SEIRI's furniture suppliers because when the company
started in 1987, it was purely buying and exporting furniture only (so no sizing
machine needed)
d. Stressed that JJ was not included in the list of employees submitted to the SSS
e. The respondent's brother (Victor) also executed an affidavit supporting SEIRI's
claims
f. Two others (Allan Mayol and Faustino Apondar) also issued notarized certification
claiming that JJ worked for them instead
g. Also tried to discredit the affidavits executed by JJ's co-workers by stating that they
were merely disgruntled workers with an axe to grind against SEIRI because of the
latter's recommendation to mete out disciplinary measures against such workers.
6. Labor Arbiter Ernesto Carreon ruled in favor of JJ and adjudged him to be a regular
employee of SEIRI working for the latter for almost 20 years. LA Carreon ruled that JJ should
be awarded around PHP 171,773.
a. Copies of their payrolls and pay records of employees
b. Affidavit of SEIRI Treasurer Agbay
c. Another affidavit of Vicente Coming (JJ's brother) averring:
i. JJ worked with Mayol as a core marker/ splitter
ii. Thereafter they joined another job and worked for a while with Eleuterio
Agbay in Labogon, Cebu in 1989 and it was only towards the end of
1999 when JJ was taken back by Mayol as a machine operator, for an
on and off basis, not regular in nature.
8. The NLRC ruled in favor of SEIRI and dismissed the complaint, as well as the motion for
reconsideration of JJ.
9. JJ appealed to the CA which reinstated the LA's decision and added that the computation of
back wages should be computed from the time of illegal termination until finality of decision.
10. SEIRI's motion for reconsideration was denied.
11. Hence this petition with the Supreme Court.
ISSUE with HOLDING
1. Whether there exists an employer-employee relationship between SEIRI and JJ. YES
THERE IS, BASED ON SEIRI'S OWN ADMISSION.
a. This is a question of fact but the SC makes an exception especially when the LA,
NLRC and CA decisions are conflicting.
b. SC used the four-fold test:
i. Selection and engagement of employee
ii. Payment of wages
iii. Power of dismissal
iv. Power to control employee's conduct (control test)
c. Substantial evidence is required to prove the foregoing i.e. the amount of relevant
evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a
conclusion.
d. SEIRI'S statement that the Court construed to be as an admission"….Since the
five workers were occupying and working on a leased premises of the private
respondent, they were called workers of SEIRI (private respondent). Such
admission however, does not connote employment. For the truth of the matter, all
of the five employees of the supplier assigned at the leased premises of the private
respondent…"
e. Petitioners' admission that the five affiants were their former employees is binding
upon them and they did not submit proof that these employees (which included JJ)
were independent contractors. Hence they failed to discharge their burden of
proving their own affirmative allegation.
2. Whether the back wages should be computed from the time of illegal termination until finality
of decision. – YES
a. Where reinstatement is no longer viable as an option, back wages shall be
computed from the time of the illegal termination up to the finality of the decision.
Separation pay equivalent to one month salary for every year of service should
likewise be awarded as an alternative in case reinstatement in not possible.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION
WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari is DENIED. The Decision dated February 21,
2008 and Resolution dated February 9, 2009 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. No. CEB-SP No.
02113 are hereby AFFIRMED and UPHELD.
DIGESTER: