G.R. No. 176419 ; November 27, 2013
GMA NETWORK, INC., Petitioner, vs. CARLOS P. PABRIGA, GEOFFREY F. ARIAS, KIRBY N. CAMPO, ARNOLD L. LAGAHIT, and ARMAND A. CATUBIG, Respondents.

FACTS

Respondents were hired by petitioner GMA Network, Inc. as television technicians on various dates from 1993 to 1997. Their duties included manning the technical operations center, acting as transmitter/VTR men, performing maintenance work, and serving as cameramen. On July 19, 1999, they filed a complaint regarding their employment conditions. After being confronted by management about the complaint, they were barred from entering the workplace on August 10, 1999. They subsequently filed an amended complaint for illegal dismissal and unfair labor practice. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaints for illegal dismissal but ordered payment of 13th-month pay. On appeal, the NLRC reversed the decision, declaring respondents as regular employees entitled to separation pay, 13th-month pay, night shift differential, and service incentive leave pay. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC decision.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether respondents are regular employees or project employees of GMA Network, Inc., and consequently, whether they are entitled to the awarded monetary benefits.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals with modification, deleting the award of attorney’s fees. The Court ruled that respondents are regular employees. The legal logic rests on the nature of their duties, which were necessary and desirable to petitioner’s usual business of television broadcasting. Their work was not confined to a specific project with a predetermined end. The Court emphasized that the principal test for regular employment is whether the work performed is usually necessary or desirable in the usual business of the employer, not the employment contract’s nomenclature. Petitioner failed to substantiate its claim of project employment, as it did not present evidence of the specific projects respondents were hired for, their durations, or reports of termination to the DOLE as required for project employees in the construction industry. The termination of respondents, effected by barring them from work after filing a complaint, constituted illegal dismissal. As regular employees illegally dismissed, they are entitled to separation pay in lieu of reinstatement. The award of night shift differential and service incentive leave pay stands as they are statutory benefits for regular employees. However, the award of attorney’s fees was deleted for lack of factual and legal justification in the NLRC decision.