GR 156381; (October, 2005) (Digest)
G.R. No. 156381 October 14, 2005
JSS INDOCHINA CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. GERARDO R. FERRER, et al., Respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner JSS Indochina Corporation recruited respondents as construction workers for its Taiwan-based principal, Formosa Plastics Corporation, under one-year contracts with a monthly salary of NT$15,360.00. Upon deployment to Taiwan on May 1, 1997, respondents were not employed by Formosa Plastics as stipulated. Instead, they were directed to work as cable tray/pipe tract workers for a different entity, Shin Kwan Enterprise Co., Ltd. Assisted by Manila Economic and Cultural Office officials, respondents executed affidavits regarding this unauthorized assignment. They were subsequently repatriated to the Philippines on May 17, 1997.
Respondents filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, payment of salaries, and refund of placement fees. The Labor Arbiter ruled in their favor, finding they were forced to resign as they were “left out” from employment, and ordered petitioner and its principal to pay three months’ salary and reimburse placement fees jointly and severally. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed this decision. Petitioner elevated the case to the Court of Appeals via certiorari, arguing grave abuse of discretion.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the petition and upholding the finding of illegal dismissal and the award of monetary claims to the respondents.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision. The legal logic rests on the petitioner’s failure to substantiate a valid termination and its breach of the employment contracts. The core finding was that respondents were not deployed to the specific principal and position stipulated in their approved contracts. A recruitment agency has a non-delegable duty to ensure the foreign principal complies with the contract terms. The mere allegation that Shin Kwan was a subcontractor was insufficient, as petitioner failed to provide independent proof of this relationship or that the reassignment was sanctioned. Consequently, the repatriation constituted a dismissal without just or authorized cause.
The award of three months’ salary for every year of the unexpired term, pursuant to the law, was proper as the contracts were for one year and the workers were dismissed immediately. The joint and several liability of the local agency and the foreign principal is mandated by Section 10 of R.A. 8042 (Migrant Workers Act) to ensure effective recovery of money claims by overseas workers. The Court emphasized the strict enforcement of rules governing overseas employment to protect workers from exploitation.