ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[ G.R. No. 142320. September 6, 2000]
RICARDO REYES, et al. vs. CA, et al.
FIRST DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated SEPT 6 2000.
G.R. No. 142320 (Ricardo Reyes and Andres Barriuan, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, National labor Relations Commission, et al.)
Private respondents worked as office clerks and messengers for herein petitioners who were engaged in the acceptance and delivery of remittances. When they asked that they be paid 13th month pay and service incentive leave pay, petitioner Reyes informed them that the company will close down due to heavy losses. The company ceased operations in the middle of September 1992 and the employment of herein private respondents was terminated. However, a week later, the company reopened with a new set of employees.
Private respondents filed a case for illegal dismissal with prayer for reinstatement, as well as payment of 13th month pay, service incentive leave pay and holiday pay. On their part, petitioners alleged that some of the private respondents absconded with P183,329.00 while the others voluntarily and willfully ceased and stopped rendering contractual services and abandoned their jobs.
On January 7, 1994, the Labor Arbiter rendered his decision, the dispositive portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, finding the above-entitled complaint to be without factual and legal basis, judgment is hereby rendered dismissing the same.
On appeal to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), the said decision was reversed accordingly:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, this appeal is Granted and the decision appealed from dismissing this complaint is Vacated. A new decision is hereby entered ordering respondents to reinstate complainant to their former positions without loss of seniority rights and with full backwages less earnings elsewhere, if any, during said period as well as money claims based on the detailed computations, to wit:
xxx����� xxx����� xxx
Summary:
Backwages |
SL |
13 th Month Pay |
Attorney's Fees |
Total |
|
1.Ulysses Martirez |
P94,705.17 |
2,307.75 |
10,000.00 |
10,701.30 |
117,714.22 |
2.Jonathan Martirez |
94,705.17 |
2,307.75 |
10,000.00 |
10,701.30 |
117,714.22 |
3.Shane Martirez |
94,705.17 |
2,307.75 |
10,750.00 |
10,776.30 |
118,539.22 |
4.Alan Caalim |
94,705.17 |
2,307.75 |
10,000.00 |
10,701.30 |
117,714.22 |
5.Bert Enciso |
94,705.17 |
2,307.75 |
10,000.00 |
10,701.30 |
117,714.22 |
6. Pe�afranciaMartirez |
94,705.17 |
2,307.75 |
10,000.00 |
10,701.30 |
117,714.22 |
7.Alicia Caalim |
78,131.80 |
1,903.95 |
7,900.00 |
8,793.58 |
96,729.33 |
8.Paulina Martirez |
94,705.17 |
2,307.75 |
10,000.00 |
10,701.30 |
117,714.22 |
TOTAL |
P741,067.99 |
18,058.20 |
79,150.00 |
83,827.68 |
922,103.87 |
Should reinstatement be no longer possible, respondents are ordered to pay complainants their separation pay of one month salary for every year of service a fraction of six months, to be considered as one year, in addition to backwages.
SO ORDERED.
The petition before the Court of Appeals questioning the NLRC decision was dismissed. Hence, the instant petition.
It appearing that petitioners are merely questioning the factual findings of the Court of Appeals which affirmed the findings of the National Labor Relations Commission and it appearing that the instant petition failed to show any extraordinary circumstance to justify a departure from the established doctrine that the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are conclusive on this Court and will not be disturbed on appeal, this Court Resolves to DISMISS the instant petition.Ynares-Santiago, J., on leave.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH