G.R. No. 166757 - ROMMEL C. OREGAS, DARWIN R. HILARIO AND SHERWIN A. ARBOLEDA, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, DUSIT HOTEL NIKKO, PHILIPPINE HOTELIER'S INCORPORATED AND FVA MANPOWER TRAINING CENTER & SERVICES.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, petitioners' real and actual employer is FVA. On March 6, 2001, Labor Arbiter Potenciano S. Cañizares, Jr. rendered a decision dismissing the complaint for lack of merit. He declared that petitioners failed to prove that they were employees of Dusit. Petitioners themselves admitted that they transferred to FVA after their previous placement agencies terminated their contracts of services with Dusit. Labor Arbiter Cañizares also noted that petitioners signed application and employment contracts with FVA and were under its payrolls and accounts. Thus, FVA was petitioners' employer. Finally, he ruled that petitioners were merely recalled and not dismissed from the service by FVA. On appeal, the NLRC issued a Resolution dated August 25, 2003, modifying the decision of Labor Arbiter Cañizares. The NLRC observed that the four-fold test in determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship is present in petitioners' relationship with FVA. On the matter of selection and engagement, records showed that petitioners applied with and were employed by FVA. Although they were required to test drive by Dusit, it was done only to verify if they had the necessary skills and competence required by the job. On the matter of control, it was established that petitioners maintained their daily time records with FVA. On the matter of dismissal, FVA exercised its power to dismiss when it recalled petitioners from Dusit. Finally, on the matter of payment of wages, it is undisputed that petitioners were under the payrolls and accounts of FVA. Nevertheless, the NLRC noted that after petitioners' recall, they were no longer given new assignments. Since more than six months have already lapsed, petitioners were deemed to have been constructively dismissed and therefore entitled to separation pay of one-half month pay for every year of service. The decretal portion of the resolution reads: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is partly GRANTED and the Decision dated 06 March 2001 is hereby MODIFIED ordering respondent-appellee FVA to pay separation pay of one-half month pay for every year of service to complainants-appellants,to wit: 1) Arboleda - P 8,716.50 2) Hilario - P 11,622.00 3) Oregas - P 11,622.00 The appeal of the other complainants-appellants namely Jonathan Palacol, Allan Garcia, Rio Rose Tresnado, Maricel Cadayona, Herman Mosaso, Anthony Paggao, Mark Clint Morado, Ramina Espinosa, Jorge Coronado, Ruben de Jesus and Luis Lim was earlier DISMISSED due to the amicable settlement reached by the parties. SO ORDERED.