G.R. No. 97369 July 31, 1997
P.I. MANPOWER PLACEMENTS, INC., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (SECOND DIVISION), and NORBERTO CUENTA, SR., respondents.

FACTS

Private respondent Norberto Cuenta, Sr. applied with petitioner P.I. Manpower Placements Inc. for overseas employment as a trailer driver. Danny Alonzo, representing himself as an agent of petitioner, and Teresita Rivera, petitioner’s Operations Manager, facilitated his application. Cuenta paid a placement fee of P10,800.00 (P3,000.00 partially and P7,800.00 later) and signed a blank Agency-Worker Agreement upon Rivera’s assurance that his salary would be $440.00 a month. Upon deployment to Dharan, Saudi Arabia, Cuenta discovered his deploying agent was LPJ Enterprises Inc., not P.I. Manpower, and his monthly salary was SR960.00, not $440.00. He was assigned by foreign employer Al Jindan Contracting and Trading Establishment. On March 23, 1989, he was dismissed without prior notice or investigation. After returning to the Philippines, he filed a complaint with the POEA for illegal dismissal, non-payment of wages, and recruitment violations against P.I. Manpower, LPJ Enterprises, and Al Jindan. The POEA held them jointly and severally liable. The NLRC affirmed the POEA decision. Petitioner denies liability, claiming Cuenta was a walk-in applicant accepted only for “manpooling,” that he was referred to LPJ Enterprises, and that his dismissal was for just cause (unwillingness to work and threats) as a probationary employee.

ISSUE

1. Whether private respondent Norberto Cuenta, Sr. was illegally dismissed.
2. Whether petitioner P.I. Manpower Placements Inc. is jointly and solidarily liable with LPJ Enterprises Inc. and Al Jindan Contracting and Trading Establishment for Cuenta’s claims.

RULING

1. Yes, private respondent was illegally dismissed. The burden of proving just cause for dismissal rests on the employer. Petitioner failed to substantiate its claim with substantial evidence. The telegram from the foreign employer alleging Cuenta was unwilling to work and threatening others lacked proof of due execution and supporting evidence. Furthermore, Cuenta was dismissed without notice and investigation, violating due process. The claim that he was a probationary employee who could be dismissed anytime is without merit; he was hired for a fixed term, and even probationary employees are entitled to security of tenure and cannot be dismissed except for cause and after due process.
2. Yes, petitioner is jointly and solidarily liable. Petitioner, through its Operations Manager Teresita Rivera, actively participated in Cuenta’s recruitment and deployment. Rivera facilitated the processing of his papers, corresponded with the Bureau of Land Transportation, collected placement fees, issued an order of payment, and delivered his employment documents. These acts constitute recruitment as defined by law. Petitioner cannot evade liability by claiming Rivera acted in her personal capacity or that it did not receive the fees; Rivera was a responsible officer using petitioner’s business address, name, seal, and facilities. The joint and solidary liability of recruitment agencies and foreign employers is designed to ensure aggrieved workers receive immediate payment. The NLRC’s factual findings, supported by substantial evidence, are accorded respect. The practice of “reprocessing” or referring applicants is an act of recruitment that entails liability for its consequences.