GR 111042; (October, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 111042 October 26, 1999
AVELINO LAMBO and VICENTE BELOCURA, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and J.C. TAILOR SHOP and/or JOHNNY CO, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioners Avelino Lambo and Vicente Belocura were employed as tailors by private respondent J.C. Tailor Shop. They worked from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily, including Sundays and holidays, and were paid on a piece-rate basis with a guaranteed minimum of P64.00 daily. On January 17, 1989, they filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and monetary claims. The Labor Arbiter ruled in their favor, awarding backwages, overtime pay, holiday pay, 13th month pay, and separation pay. The NLRC reversed this decision on appeal, finding that petitioners were not dismissed but had abandoned their work after a meeting where they insisted on being paid a straight minimum wage contrary to the prevailing piece-rate policy voted on by other employees.
ISSUE
The primary issues were (1) whether an employer-employee relationship existed between the parties, and (2) whether petitioners were illegally dismissed or had abandoned their work.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reinstating the Labor Arbiter’s decision with modification. On the first issue, the Court held that an employer-employee relationship indisputably existed. Petitioners, as piece-rate tailors working exclusively within the company premises under set hours and direct supervision, were regular employees. Payment by results is merely a method of compensation and does not negate the employment relationship defined by the employer’s power of control. The elements of selection, payment of wages, power of dismissal, and control were all present.
On the second issue, the Court ruled that petitioners were illegally dismissed, not guilty of abandonment. The alleged abandonment was not proven; abandonment requires a clear, deliberate, and unjustified refusal to resume employment. The evidence showed petitioners were dismissed for attempting to assert their statutory rights to benefits. The employer’s claim of a meeting where a vote was taken to retain the piece-rate system was deemed a contrivance to justify dismissal. The Court emphasized that the constitutional policy of protecting labor mandates a liberal interpretation in favor of the employee in dismissal cases. Consequently, petitioners were entitled to reinstatement or separation pay and full backwages. The awards for overtime and holiday pay were also reinstated as they were based on the established fact of working beyond regular hours and on holidays. The award of attorney’s fees was deleted as petitioners were represented by the Public Attorney’s Office.