G.R. No. 157966 ; January 31, 2008
EDDIE PACQUING, et al., petitioners, vs. COCA-COLA PHILIPPINES, INC., respondent.

FACTS

Petitioners were sales route helpers or cargadores-pahinantes for respondent Coca-Cola, with employment periods ranging from 1980 to 1996. They worked in teams of three per delivery truck. On October 22, 1996, they filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and regularization, asserting their work was necessary to the company’s business. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, ruling petitioners were temporary workers hired via an independent contractor and their work was not necessary to respondent’s primary business of manufacturing soft drinks.
Petitioners appealed to the NLRC. However, the appeal memorandum was verified by only two of the eight petitioners. The NLRC dismissed the appeal, noting the lack of proper verification rendered the decision final as to the others, and affirmed that petitioners’ duties pertained to post-production delivery, not the main business. Their subsequent Motion for Reconsideration was denied. They then filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals, where the verification and certification against forum shopping was signed by only five petitioners.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) whether the CA correctly dismissed the petition for certiorari due to defective verification and certification against forum shopping; and (2) whether petitioners were regular employees of respondent.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition. On procedural grounds, the Court upheld the CA’s dismissal. While verification is generally formal, a certification against forum shopping is a substantive requirement. The failure of some petitioners to sign it was fatal, as it is a personal undertaking not excused by the fact that some co-parties signed. The rule applies strictly even in labor cases to prevent forum shopping.
On the substantive issue, the Court affirmed that petitioners were not regular employees. The test for regularization under Article 280 of the Labor Code is whether the work is necessary or desirable in the usual business of the employer. The company’s primary business is manufacturing soft drinks. The work of cargadores-pahinantes—loading and unloading products—is part of the sales and distribution process, which is merely ancillary to the main manufacturing business. Being necessary to an ancillary operation does not equate to being necessary to the employer’s principal business. Therefore, petitioners were legally considered casual employees, not entitled to regularization or the reliefs sought from their dismissal.