G.R. No. 199166 - NELSON V. BEGINO, GENER DEL VALLE, MONINA AVILA-LLORIN AND MA. CRISTINA SUMAYAO, VS. ABS-CBN CORPORATION (FORMERLY, ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION) AND AMALIA VILLAFUERTE.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, finding merit in the causes of action set forth by the complainants, judgment is hereby rendered declaring complainants MONINA AVILA-LLORIN, GENER L. DEL VALLE, NELSON V. BEGINO and MA. CRISTINA V. SUMAYAO, as regular employees of respondent company, ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION. Accordingly, respondent ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation is hereby ORDERED to pay complainants, subject to the prescriptive period provided under Article 291 of the Labor Code, however applicable, the total amount of Php2,440,908.36 , representing salaries/wage differentials, holiday pay, service incentive leave pay and 13 th month pay, to include 10% of the judgment award as attorneys fees of the judgment award ( computation of the monetary awards are attached hereto as integral part of this decision ). Moreover, respondents are directed to admit back complainants to work under the same terms and conditions prevailing prior to their separation or, at respondents' option, merely reinstated in the payroll. Other than the above, all other claims and charges are ordered DISMISSED for lack of merit. [12] Aggrieved by the foregoing decision, respondents elevated the case on appeal before the NLRC, during the pendency of which petitioners filed a third complaint against the former, for illegal dismissal, regularization, non- payment of salaries and 13 th month pay, unfair labor practice, damages and attorneys fees. In turn docketed as NLRC Case No. Sub-RAB-V-05-03-00039-08, the complaint was raffled to Labor Arbiter Quiñones who issued an Order dated 30 April 2008, inhibiting himself from the case and denying respondents motion to dismiss on the grounds of res judicata and forum shopping. [13] Finding that respondents control over petitioners was indeed manifest from the exclusivity clause and prohibitions in the Talent Contracts and/or Project Assignment Forms, on the other hand, the NLRC rendered a Decision dated 31 March 2010, affirming said Labor Arbiters appealed decision. [14] Undeterred by the NLRCs 31 August 2010 denial of their motion for reconsideration, [15] respondents filed the Rule 65 petition for certiorari docketed before the CA as CA-G.R. SP No. 116928 which, in addition to taking exceptions to the findings of the assailed decision, faulted petitioners for violating the rule against forum shopping. [16] On 29 June 2011, the CA rendered the herein assailed decision, reversing the findings of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC. Ruling out the existence of forum shopping on the ground that petitioners' second and third complaints were primarily anchored on their termination from employment after the filing of their first complaint, the CA nevertheless discounted the existence of an employer-employee relation between the parties upon the following findings and conclusions: (a) petitioners, were engaged by respondents as talents for periods, work and the program specified in the Talent Contracts and/or Project Assignment Forms concluded between the