[ G.R. No. 141216. January 26, 2000]

BEST SECURITY AGENCY, et al., vs. ELENA T. SENOSA.

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 26, 2000.

G.R. No. 141216 (Best Security Agency and Antolina M. Oreta vs. Elena T. Senosa.)

Petitioners assails the decision of the Court of Appeals which reversed and set aside the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission thus reinstating the decision of the labor arbiter in NLRC Case No. 00-04-02561-97, for non-payment of holiday pay and separation pay instituted by private respondents Elena T. Senosa.

Private respondent was employed by petitioner as a lady guard and last assigned at Tanduay Distillery.

Upon the termination of petitioners' contract with Tanduay, private respondent was put on floating status. Upon failure of petitioner to rehire private respondent, the latter filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with other monetary claims.

The labor arbiter decided in favor of private respondent, ordering petitioners to pay separation pay equivalent to one-month salary for every year of service amounting to P58,728.04 and underpayment of wage of P133,541.39.

On appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission modified the decision of the labor arbiter, reducing the separation pay to only � month for every year of service, remanding the issue of wage differential to the arbitration branch of origin for further proceedings, and finally directing the labor arbiter to implead Tanduay Distillery as co-respondent.

Private respondent questioned the NLRC's decision in a petition before the Court of Appeals which rendered the assailed decision.

Thus, the instant petition which we find unavailing.

As correctly ruled by the Court of Appeals, separation pay, equivalent to one month salary for every year of service, is awarded as an alternative to reinstatement when the latter is no longer an option, and is computed from the commencement of employment up to the time of termination, including the imputed service for which the employee is entitled to backwages, with the salary rate prevailing at the end of the period of putative service being the basis for computation (Reformist Union of R.B. Liner, Inc. vs. NLRC, 266 SCRA 713 [1997]; Mabeza vs. NLRC, 271 SCRA 670 [1997]).

Likewise, the Court finds no error in the decision of the Court of Appeals in upholding the determinations made by the labor arbiter as to the award of wage differentials thus negating the necessity of remanding the case for further proceedings, for as correctly ratiocinated, petitioners were accorded ample opportunity to controvert private respondent's claim. The mere fact that the same was computed on a straight basis not render the computation erroneous.

Finally, it was not necessary for private respondent to implead Tanduay Distillery as co-respondent, considering that petitioner is private respondent's employer. Petitioner, may of course, if proper, seek appropriate remedy against Tanduay.

WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby denied.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com