GR 113166; (February, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. 113166 ; February 1, 1996
ISMAEL SAMSON, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and ATLANTIC GULF AND PACIFIC CO., MANILA, INC., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Ismael Samson had been employed by private respondent Atlantic Gulf and Pacific Co., Manila, Inc. (AG&P) since April 1965, working as a rigger and later as a rigger foreman on various construction projects, including overseas assignments from 1977 to 1985. On November 5, 1989, Samson filed a complaint seeking the conversion of his status from a project employee to a regular employee, along with monetary claims. The Labor Arbiter ruled in his favor, declaring him a regular employee. The Arbiter emphasized AG&P’s failure to report the termination of each project to the Public Employment Office as required by DOLE Policy Instruction No. 20 and noted that Samson, as part of a work pool, was not free to offer his services to other employers, indicating continuous employment.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision. The NLRC ruled that Samson was a project employee, engaged for fixed and determinable periods. It held that Policy Instruction No. 20 had been superseded by Department Order No. 19, which removed the presumption of regular employment from non-compliance with reporting requirements. The NLRC also stated that repeated re-hiring for successive projects does not automatically confer regular status in the construction industry, and that length of service is not a controlling yardstick for project employees.
ISSUE
Whether petitioner Ismael Samson is a project employee or a regular employee of AG&P.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that Samson is a regular employee. The legal logic hinges on the application of Article 280 of the Labor Code and jurisprudential tests for regular employment, not merely on technical compliance with reporting rules. The Court found that the evidence, including a certification from AG&P itself, conclusively showed that Samson was repeatedly and successively re-hired by AG&P from 1965 onward. After the completion of one project, he was re-hired almost immediately—within a gap of one day to one week—for the next project.
This pattern of re-hiring demonstrates that Samson was not hired for a specific, singular project with a foreseeable end. Instead, he was continuously engaged for tasks necessary and desirable to AG&P’s usual business of construction. His repeated engagement over many years, without any meaningful break, indicates that his employment was not coterminous with any discrete project but was essentially permanent in nature. The Court thus held that he belonged to a “work pool” from which AG&P drew workers for its projects, and such membership constituted regular employment. The NLRC’s decision was reversed, and the Labor Arbiter’s ruling reinstated.