G.R. No. 120180 January 20, 1998
SPOUSES ANNABELLE AND LINELL VILLARUEL, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND NARCISO GUARINO, respondents.

FACTS

Private respondent Narciso Guarino started working as a master baker at petitioners’ “Ideal Bakery” on June 15, 1988, with a daily wage of P40.00 and a work schedule from 6:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. and 11:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. the following day. On April 11, 1991, petitioners told Guarino not to report for work anymore after he asked for a ten-peso daily wage increase. On September 3, 1991, Guarino filed a complaint for recovery of wages, night shift differential, overtime pay, and 13th month pay, later amended to include illegal dismissal with claims for reinstatement or separation pay, backwages, service incentive leave, moral, exemplary and actual damages, plus attorney’s fees. Petitioners contended that Guarino was not an employee but a partner in the bakery business with a 50-50 profit-sharing agreement, and that he had abandoned his work to transfer to another bakery. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, ruling that no employer-employee relationship existed. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed this decision, finding Guarino to be a regular employee who was illegally dismissed and entitled to monetary claims. Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied.

ISSUE

Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in: (1) finding that an employer-employee relationship, not a partnership, existed between the parties; (2) ruling that private respondent did not abandon his work; and (3) directing petitioners to pay salary differentials, overtime pay, holiday premium, 13th month pay, and night shift differentials.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the NLRC decision. The Court held that the NLRC’s factual findings, supported by substantial evidence, are entitled to great respect and finality. The NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The claim of a partnership was unsupported by any documentary evidence such as a contract of partnership, accounting records, or business permits, giving rise to the presumption that evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced. On the issue of abandonment, the NLRC correctly found that Guarino transferred to another bakery only after his illegal dismissal, and petitioners failed to serve the required notice of termination for abandonment. Consequently, the illegal dismissal entitled Guarino to his monetary claims, including salary differentials, overtime pay, holiday premium, 13th month pay, night shift differentials, backwages, and, in lieu of reinstatement, separation pay equivalent to one month’s salary for every year of service.