G.R. No. 117043 January 14, 1998
FELIX VILLA, ALIBANGBANG, IRENEO; ALIBANGBANG, EFREN; ABELLANOSA ELDIE; AGARAO, SOFRONIO; ALIFANTA, JOSE; ALQUIZA, LORENZO; ALVIOLA, HERMOQUITO; AMONDINA, NOE; ANGOT, ISIDRO; ANDRADA, CATALINO; ARUTA, ROBERTO; AVILES, ZALDY; APAON, CESAR; ARTAJO, EDWIN; ALCOPRA, ANTONIO, JR.; BALASE, PABLITO; BANCALE, NEMESIO, BARICOG, GAUDENCIO; BACULIO, CIPRIANO; BATION, DOMINGO; BAYER, FELYBERT; BENELAYO, JOVENCIO; BERIGONDO, MARIANO; BEGORNIA, ELIZAR; BUTASLAC, APOLINAR; BONCALES, DIOLLE; BASTATAS, ROSENDO; BLASABAS, BONIFACIO; BALDESCO, OLYMPIO; BARICUATRO, DELFIN; BARBON, BEN; BENDONG, BERNARDO; BUTON, ROQUE; CAHAYAG, RODRIGO; CAHAYAG, REMEGIO; CALDERON, DANILO; CANOY, ERLITO; CABUS, ZENAS; CAPIN, JUANITO; CIMENI, ALBERTO; CELOSIA, MONTANO; CANILLO, TITO; COLOYAN, CARLOS; CUTAD, ALIPIO; CAPOTE, LIBRENDO; COLALJO, EDGARDO; CABILUNA, ELIAS; CABILI, ARTHURO; COMA, ROGELIO; CASAS, RODRIGO; COLLAMAR, ROSALIM; CABALLERO, ORLANDO; CARCELLAR, ANTONIO; DEGOMA, DEOCADIO; DAGUISONAN, ROMEO; DE LA CRUZ, VICENTE; DELIMA, SEGUNDO; EDAYAN, ROSITO; ELMEDULAN, RUDY; FLORES, RELENDIO; FLORES, CRESENCIANO; FLORES, GREGORIO; FLORES, ROMUALDO; FUENTES, RODULFO; FORMENTERA, ELEUTERIO; GALUPO, ELMER; GARBAN, FLORENCIO; GUZMAN, REYNALDO; GORDO, CEFERINO; GENON, ESTEBAN; GADIA, NERIO; HERNANDO, BERNARDINO; JAPITAN, DANIEL; JUMAWAN, ROLANDO; LAGLARIO, ELPIDIO; LAURINO, GENEROSO; LAPUZ, TEODOLO; LILA, NORBERTO; LLABAN, BONIFACIO; LUMEN, ROMEO; LISUNDRA, JOSE; MACAPAS, ELIZALDE; MANLIGUEZ, SAMSON; MANCIO, ROBERTO; MALINAO, CARLITO; MALAYA, SIMPLICIO; MANUGAS, NARCISO; MASIADA, EFREN; NARCISO, ELIAS; NUEVA, JUSTINIANO; OBIDO, ANELOMIO; OLIVEROS, FRANCISCO; OCAY, FIDEL; OLADO, JONATHAN; ONG, CARLITO; PAHUYO, HENRY; PAYPA, EDUARDO; PEREW-PEREW, ANTONIO; PERMITES, BOBBY; PACAÑA, CRISTITUTO; PONGON, RUBEN; PATOY, MANUEL; POGALES, ROBERTO; PARAGAMAC, MIGUEL; PARDILLO, ENGRACIO; PARAN, BENITO; RELLEN, RONNIE; RENTUZA, ALFREDO; REBUTAZO, INOCENCIO; RUEDAS, SIEGFREDO; ROBLE, ERLITO; RAMIREZ, CESAR; RAMAYRAT, ROBERTO; RAZO, WILLIE; RIVA, LEOPOLDITO; REYSOMA, BENNY; SANCHEZ, ROMULO; SANCHEZ, MANUELITO; SARDUAL, CAYETANO; SIQUELLO, EDRIE; SALIC, MAGDALINO; SIENES, GILBERT; SARA, NICANOR; SIACOR, LUCIO; SIMPROTA, CRISPIN; TABEROS, VIRGILIO; TARDO, ALEX; TAMPOG, ALEJANDRE; TAMPARONG, FRANCISCO; TAMPARONG, PRIMO; TINOY, JESUS; UMBAY, NOEL; UMBAY, RONILO; VACALARES, ALVIN; VELUS, CRISPIN; VERANO, MANOLO; VILLARINO, FLORENCIO; VERGARA, JOSE; VILLAPLAZA, MARCELO; GALORIO, RUBEN; DAYGAM, RUDENCIO; GELLICA, APOLLO; SARUSAL, FELIX; CAPUYAN, RUPERTO; VILLAMOR, PEDRITO; ALLAS, AQULINO, JR.; GARBAN, DIOSCORO; DELIMA, DIOSDADO; OBIDO, ELISER (All members of NSCWA with Felix Villa as president, representing Petitioners), petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, Fifth Division and NATIONAL STEEL CORPORATION, respondents.

FACTS

Respondent National Steel Corporation (NSC) embarked on a Five-Year Expansion Program (FYEP). One of its major projects was a billet steelmaking plant. As part of this, NSC ventured into an experimental shipbreaking operation to obtain scrap metal as raw material. This project was stopped and completely phased out by November 1986 due to scarcity of vessels, higher costs, and unsuitability of raw materials, leading to the termination of the laborers hired for the project. Prior to this, labor problems arose. The National Steel Corporation Employees Association-Southern Philippines Federation of Labor (NSCEA-SPFL) filed a notice of strike, raising issues including the non-regularization of contractual employees. Then Labor Minister Augusto S. Sanchez rendered a decision on August 4, 1986, finding that masons, carpenters, laborers, electricians, painters, cutters, riggers, and others were contractual employees hired on a per project basis. The decision directed NSC to submit records to determine regular contractual employees under Article 281 of the Labor Code. The workers’ petition to the Supreme Court (G.R. No. 76948) resulted in a Resolution on November 14, 1988, which set aside the August 4, 1986 Order and remanded the case to the NLRC for a formal hearing on factual issues, including the status of the employees. The NLRC heard the case and eventually rendered a decision on April 14, 1994, which was affirmed by the NLRC en banc on August 5, 1994. The NLRC found that the petitioners were project employees hired for specific projects under NSC’s expansion program, such as shipbreaking, and their employment was co-terminous with the completion of each project. The NLRC concluded they were not regular employees. The petitioners, through the National Steel Corporation Workers Association (NSCWA), filed the instant petition for certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether or not workers contracted as project employees may be considered as regular employees on account of their performance of duties inherent in the business of the employer.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the decision and resolution of the NLRC. The Court held that the petitioners were project employees. Their employment was fixed for a specific project or undertaking, the completion or termination of which had been determined at the time of their engagement. The shipbreaking project was distinct from the main business of NSC, which was steel production. The fact that the petitioners performed tasks necessary or desirable in the usual business of the employer is not conclusive evidence of regular employment if the employee was hired for a specific project with a predetermined period of completion. The Court further ruled that the proviso in the second paragraph of Article 280 of the Labor Code, stating that an employee who has rendered at least one year of service shall be considered a regular employee, applies only to casual employees and not to project employees. Length of service is not the controlling determinant of the employment tenure of a project employee. A project employee remains as such regardless of the number of projects in which he has worked.