GR 116352; (March, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 116352 March 13, 1997
J. & D.O. AGUILAR CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and ROMEO ACEDILLO, respondents.
FACTS
Private respondent Romeo Acedillo worked for petitioner J. & D.O. Aguilar Corporation as a helper-electrician starting February 1989. On January 16, 1992, he received a termination letter citing lack of available projects and an excess of workers. Acedillo subsequently filed a case for illegal dismissal after learning the company was hiring new workers while ignoring his request for reinstatement. The petitioner corporation contended that Acedillo was a project employee, hired on a contractual basis for specific undertakings, and that his employment was lawfully terminated upon project completion.
The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Acedillo, declaring his dismissal illegal, finding him a regular employee, and awarding monetary benefits. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed this decision on appeal. The NLRC emphasized that the nature of Acedillo’s work was necessary to the petitioner’s business and that the petitioner failed to prove his status as a project employee. The NLRC also placed the burden of proving payment or non-payment of labor standards benefits squarely on the employer.
ISSUE
Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in affirming the Labor Arbiter’s decision that Romeo Acedillo was a regular employee illegally dismissed and entitled to monetary awards.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding no grave abuse of discretion by the NLRC. The Court affirmed that Acedillo was a regular employee. The legal logic hinges on the application of Article 280 of the Labor Code and the burden of proof. An employee is deemed regular where the work performed is necessary or desirable in the usual business of the employer. The petitioner’s claim that Acedillo was a project employee required proof that he was hired for a specific project with a determined duration at the time of engagement. The petitioner failed to present any employment contract or concrete evidence to substantiate this claim.
The Court noted that Acedillo’s work as a helper-electrician was integral to the petitioner’s refrigeration business. Furthermore, his repeated rehiring after each project indicated that his services were continually necessary. The petitioner’s practice of maintaining a work pool, from which it drew workers for various projects, also supported the finding of regular employment. As held in prior jurisprudence, members of such a work pool, if considered company employees while in the pool, are non-project employees. The completion of a project does not sever the employer-employee relationship for these workers. Consequently, his dismissal without just or authorized cause was illegal. The award of monetary benefits was proper, with the burden to disprove such claims resting on the employer.