Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1988 > April 1988 Decisions > G.R. No. L-66890 April 15, 1988 - HERMINIO FLORES, ET AL. v. FUNERARIA NUESTRO, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-66890. April 15, 1988.]

HERMINIO FLORES and HERMINIA FLORES, Petitioners, v. FUNERARIA NUESTRO and/or FORTUNATO NUESTRO and the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, Respondents.


SYLLABUS


1. LABOR AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONS; SOCIAL SECURITY LAW; REGISTERING PETITIONERS WITH THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, PROOF OF EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP. — That fact the respondent had registered the petitioners with the Social Security System is proof that they were indeed his employees. The coverage of Social Security Law is predicated on the existence of an employer-employee relationship.

2. ID.; LABOR LAWS; EMPLOYMENT; ABANDONMENT; CONSTRUED. — To constitute abandonment, there must be a clear and deliberate intent to discontinue one’s employment without any intention of returning back.

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; NEGATED WHERE EMPLOYEE WAS COMPELLED TO LEAVE THE PREMISES AND IMMEDIATELY FILED COMPLAINT FOR REINSTATEMENT. — The record shows that petitioners were only compelled to leave the premises, which they regarded as their home, when the respondent inflicted physical injuries upon petitioner Herminio Flores. Apparently, what they had given up was only their place of residence but not their jobs. The immediate filing of a complaint for illegal dismissal against respondent with a prayer for reinstatement shows that petitioners were not abandoning their work.

4. ID.; ID.; ID.; REINSTATEMENT NOT FEASIBLE WHERE THERE IS POSSIBLE CONFRONTATION; AWARD OF DAMAGES PROPER. — Where there is a finding of illegal dismissal, the general principle is that an employee is entitled to reinstatement and to receive backwages from the date of his dismissal up to the time of his reinstatement. However, the circumstances in this case make the reinstatement of petitioners no longer feasible; any possible confrontation between the parties in view of their already strained relationship should be avoided. An award of six (6) months backwages based on their latest salary is a reasonable alternative to reinstatement under the circumstances.


D E C I S I O N


YAP, J.:


In this petition for certiorari, petitioners seek to annul and set aside the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), dated December 6, 1983, dismissing their complaint for illegal dismissal but ordering respondents to pay them their living allowances from October 1980 until October 1982 when their employment was terminated. Petitioners pray that judgment be rendered ordering the respondents (1) to reinstate them to their former or equivalent positions, with full backwages from the time of their illegal dismissal up to their actual reinstatement, or if reinstatement should become impossible because of the strained relations between petitioners and respondent, to pay them separation pay; and (b) to pay petitioners their unpaid benefits provided for under all the labor standard laws invoked by them.

It appears from the record that petitioner spouses Herminio and Herminia Flores had worked for respondent Fortunato Nuestro in his funeral parlor known as Funeraria Nuestro since June, 1976, respectively, as helper-utility man and as bookkeeper, embalmer and cashier. On October 7, 1980, respondent Fortunato Nuestro registered the petitioner spouses with the Social Security System, as his employees with a monthly salary of P200.00 each. Thereafter, Herminio Flores was paid P750.00 a month, plus P200.00 monthly allowance, while Herminia’s salary was increased to P500.00 a month. The petitioners were given living quarters right inside the compound of the funeral parlor.

On October 30, 1982, Herminio Flores and respondent Fortunato Nuestro had an altercation, during which the former was physically assaulted by the latter and suffered a punctured wound on the lower lip and an abrasion in the scapular region (L). Herminio was treated at the Bataan Provincial Hospital and subsequently, he filed an action for slight physical injuries against the respondent, which was docketed as Criminal Case No. 2249 of the Municipal Court of Pilar, Bataan. Respondent, however, claimed that he merely shoved the arm of Herminio when the latter pointed a finger at him and uttered abusive remarks against him. As a result of the incident and fearing for his safety, petitioner Herminio Flores, together with his family, was compelled to vacate his living quarters at the funeral parlor and had to seek protection from the Integrated National Police of Pilar, Bataan.

On November 15, 1982, petitioners filed a complaint against respondent for illegal dismissal, underpayment of living allowances, non-payment of five (5) days incentive leave and nonpayment of overtime compensation. The respondent denied the existence of employer-employee relation with the petitioners and further alleged that in any event the petitioners had abandoned their work on October 30, 1982.

On May 23, 1983, Labor Arbiter Federico Bernardo rendered a decision finding that no employer-employee relationship existed between the parties and dismissing the complaint. He held that Herminio Flores was merely a contractual worker paid on a piece-work basis, while Herminia Flores was a domestic helper; and that on October 30, 1982, they abandoned their work.

On appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission, while holding that an employer-employee relationship existed between the parties, found that the petitioners had abandoned their work, thus precluding them from seeking reinstatement with backwages. However, the Commission ordered respondent to pay the petitioners their living allowances from October 1980 until October 1982 when the employment relations were severed.chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad

In finding the existence of an employer-employee relationship between respondent and petitioners, the NLRC committed no grave abuse of discretion. That the respondent had registered the petitioners with the Social Security System is proof that they were indeed his employees. The coverage of Social Security Law is predicated on the existence of an employer-employee relationship. 1

On the issue of abandonment, however, we find the ruling of the NLRC that petitioners had abandoned their employment to be contrary to the evidence. To constitute abandonment, there must be a clear and deliberate intent to discontinue one’s employment without any intention of returning back. 2 The record shows that petitioners were only compelled to leave the premises, which they regarded as their home, when the respondent inflicted physical injuries upon petitioner Herminio Flores. Apparently, what they had given up was only their place of residence but not their jobs. The immediate filing of a complaint for illegal dismissal against respondent with a prayer for reinstatement shows that petitioners were not abandoning their work. 3 As aptly observed by the Solicitor General, to uphold the ruling of the respondent Commission that the petitioners abandoned their job "is to put a premium on the commission of a crime by an employer against an employee to force the latter to leave his employment so as to preclude said employee from seeking reinstatement with backwages."cralaw virtua1aw library

Where there is a finding of illegal dismissal, the general principle is that an employee is entitled to reinstatement and to receive backwages from the date of his dismissal up to the time of his reinstatement. However, the circumstances in this case make the reinstatement of petitioners no longer feasible; any possible confrontation between the parties in view of their already strained relationship should be avoided. An award of six (6) months backwages based on their latest salary is a reasonable alternative to reinstatement under the circumstances. 4 As found by the respondent Commission, respondent should also pay the petitioners their living allowances from October 1980 until October 1982 when their employment relations were severed. As to petitioners’ other money claims, we find no reason to disturb the Commission’s ruling disallowing them for insufficiency of evidence.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is modified, and respondent is hereby ordered to pay each petitioner 1) backwages equivalent to six (6) months pay, and 2) cost of living allowances from October 1980 until October 1982.

SO ORDERED.

Melencio-Herrera, Paras, Padilla and Sarmiento, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila v. Social Security Commission, 1 SCRA 10; Insular Life Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Social Security Commission, 3 SCRA 739; Insular Lumber Company v. SSS, 7 SCRA 121; Investment Planning Corp. of the Phil. v. SSS, 12 SCRA 924, SSS v. CA, 30 SCRA 210.

2. Capital Garment Corporation v. Ople, 117 SCRA 473.

3. Judric Canning Corporation v. Inciong, 115 SCRA 887; Flexo Manufacturing Corp. v. NLRC, 135 SCRA 145; Remerco Garments Manufacturing v. Minister of Labor and Employment, 135 SCRA 169.

4. Fernando v. Angat Labor Union, 5 SCRA 248.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





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






April-1988 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-78926 April 6, 1988 - IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST PONCIANO B. JACINTO

  • G.R. No. L-29674 April 8, 1988 - CUA SUN KE v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-31920 April 8, 1988 - LIMPAN INVESTMENT CORPORATION v. LIM SY

  • G.R. No. L-42087 April 8, 1988 - URSULA VDA. DE CLEMENTE v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-45484 April 8, 1988 - ZOSIMO CAPACIO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-55730 April 8, 1988 - BERNARDO PATAGAN v. DOMINGO D. PANIS

  • G.R. No. L-58822 April 8, 1988 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ANGEL G. SANGALANG

  • G.R. No. L-69377 April 8, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEXANDER ALBOFERA

  • G.R. No. L-78592 April 8, 1988 - MUNICIPALITY OF MALOLOS v. LIBANGANG MALOLOS, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-72566 April 12, 1988 - DELBROS HOTEL CORPORATION v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT

  • G.R. No. L-77663 April 12, 1988 - PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOV’T v. EMMANUEL G. PEÑA

  • G.R. No. L-34973 April 14, 1988 - YUNG UAN CHU v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-71782 April 14, 1988 - HADJI IBRAHIM S. PANGANDAMAN, ET AL. v. DIMAPORO T. CASAR

  • G.R. No. L-74669 April 14, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIAPAR QUIMA

  • G.R. No. L-37933 April 15, 1988 - FISCAL CELSO M. GIMENEZ, ET AL. v. RAMON E. NAZARENO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28409 April 15, 1988 - HIGINA ALBA v. DANIEL SANTANDER, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29171 April 15, 1988 - INDUSTRIAL POWER SALES, INC. v. DUMA SINSUAT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29749 April 15, 1988 - PLACIDA PEZA, ET AL. v. FEDERICO C. ALIKPALA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30036 April 15, 1988 - MARCOS BORDAS v. SENCENO CANADALLA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30796 April 15, 1988 - SILVERIO ANTIPORDA v. REINERIO J. TICAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-31390 April 15, 1988 - FREE TEL. WORKERS UNION v. PHIL. LONG DISTANCE TEL. CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-32243 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUGENIO CRISOSTOMO

  • G.R. No. L-32596 April 15, 1988 - INTEGRATED CONST. SERVICES, INC., ET AL. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMM., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-33237 April 15, 1988 - GREGORIO T. CRESPO v. PROV’L. BOARD OF NUEVA ECIJA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-35697-99 April 15, 1988 - ELADIA DE LIMA, ET AL. v. LAGUNA TAYABAS CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-35767 April 15, 1988 - RAYMUNDO A. CRYSTAL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-36626 April 15, 1988 - ANDRES DE LA MERCED, ET AL. v. TEODORO DE GUZMAN

  • G.R. No. L-37206 April 15, 1988 - PHIL. AM. MGMT. EMPLOYEES ASSO., ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-37400 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SABANGAN CABATO

  • G.R. No. L-37974 April 15, 1988 - FAR EASTERN REALTY INVESTMENT, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-38538 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANDRES MANGLALLAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-39136 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO MALAZZAB

  • G.R. No. L-40307 April 15, 1988 - FILOIL MARKETING CORP. v. DY PAC & CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-40953 April 15, 1988 - LOURDES LUKBAN-ANG v. MIGUEL LUKBAN

  • G.R. No. L-40988 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARCITO MAGDARAOG

  • G.R. Nos. L-41182-3 April 15, 1988 - DR. CARLOS L. SEVILLA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-41278 April 15, 1988 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. PEDRO T. SANTIAGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-41462 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REMY DIÑO

  • G.R. No. L-42230 April 15, 1988 - LAURO IMMACULATA v. PEDRO C. NAVARRO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-43938 April 15, 1988 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-44338 April 15, 1988 - ROSARIO C. BUCCAT v. LIBRADA ROSALES DISPO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-44461 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CEFERINO MANUEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-44649 April 15, 1988 - DAYLINDA A. LAGUA, ET AL. v. VICENTE N. CUSI, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-44932 April 15, 1988 - JOSE CARANDANG, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-45063 April 15, 1988 - EDUARDO S. SAN JUAN v. NIEVES RALLOS CUENTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-45144 April 15, 1988 - CITY GOVERNMENT OF TOLEDO CITY v. PIO FERNANDOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-45390 April 15, 1988 - HERMENEGILDO BELEN, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-46102 April 15, 1988 - BENJAMIN SEGOVIA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-46934 April 15, 1988 - ALFREDO CUYOS v. NICOLAS P. GARCIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-47270 April 15, 1988 - ERNESTO DORIA v. ARTEMON D. LUNA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-47745 April 15, 1988 - JOSE S. AMADORA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-47851 April 15, 1988 - JUAN F. NAKPIL & SONS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-48068 April 15, 1988 - EMILIO J. GONZALES, ET AL. v. EUSEBIO M. LOPEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-48335 April 15, 1988 - JUAN AGUILA v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF BATANGAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-48697 April 15, 1988 - FRANCISCA DELA CRUZ, ET AL. v. FILOMENA DELA CRUZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-48949 April 15, 1988 - JOSE M. LONTOC v. MD TRANSIT & TAXI CO., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-49008 April 15, 1988 - FEDERICO H. TOLENTINO v. RICARDO D. GALANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-49219 April 15, 1988 - CONCEPCION FERNANDEZ DEL OCAMPO, ET AL. v. BERNARDA FERNANDEZ ABESIA

  • G.R. No. L-49281 April 15, 1988 - AMORANTE PLAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-49299 April 15, 1988 - NORA CONTADO, ET AL. v. RUFILO L. TAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-50096 April 15, 1988 - KERIMA POLOTAN-TUVERA, ET AL. v. ABELARDO M. DAYRIT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-53208-53333 April 15, 1988 - ANGELINA ESCANO v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-53642 April 15, 1988 - LEONILO C. DONATO v. ARTEMON D. LUNA, ET AL.xa

  • G.R. No. L-54598 April 15, 1988 - JOSE B. LEDESMA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.xx

  • G.R. Nos. L-56741-42 April 15, 1988 - AURORA MEJIA v. MANUEL PAMARAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-57469 April 15, 1988 - GUEVARA REALTY, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-57650 April 15, 1988 - CATALINO Y. TINGA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-58404 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCELINO BULOSAN

  • G.R. No. L-58870 April 15, 1988 - CEBU INSTITUTE OF TECH. v. BLAS OPLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-61079-81 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIA LOREN QUIZADA

  • G.R. No. L-65175 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCELINO GUARNES

  • G.R. No. L-65674 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO B. CAPULONG

  • G.R. No. L-65882-84 April 15, 1988 - NATIONAL POWER CORP. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66646 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RONIE CABOVERDE

  • G.R. No. L-66838 April 15, 1988 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PROCTER & GAMBLE PHIL. MFTG. CORP., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66890 April 15, 1988 - HERMINIO FLORES, ET AL. v. FUNERARIA NUESTRO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-68375 April 15, 1988 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. WANDER PHIL., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-68733 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUEL MELICOR

  • G.R. No. L-69866 April 15, 1988 - ROGELIO ABERCA, ET AL. v. FABIAN VER, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-70999 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FEDERICO ESPINA

  • G.R. No. L-71712 April 15, 1988 - HONORATO MALIG, ET AL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-72564 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANITA CLAUDIO

  • G.R. No. L-72878 April 15, 1988 - ALMENDRAS MINING CORP. v. OFFICE OF THE INSURANCE COMM., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-75044 April 15, 1988 - JAPAN AIR LINES v. OFF. OF THE MIN. OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-75069 April 15, 1988 - ERLINDA O. CABRERA v. VICTORIANA E. VILLANUEVA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-76141 April 15, 1988 - ANACLETO BERNABE, ET AL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. L-77279 April 15, 1988 - MANUELA S. CATAN, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-78189 April 15, 1988 - DALUMA ANGGAY, ET AL. v. FRANCISCO L. ABALOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-75983 April 15, 1988 - MANUEL R. CRUZ, ET AL. v. JUAN PONCE ENRILE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-77422 April 15, 1988 - LIWAYWAY PUBLISHING, INC., ET AL. v. PRESIDENTIAL COMM. ON GOOD GOV’T., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-77685 April 15, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NESTOR ENCISO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-78178 April 15, 1988 - DELIA BAILON-CASILAO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-78946 April 15, 1988 - NENITA PALMA-FERNANDEZ v. ADRIANO DE LA PAZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-81550 April 15, 1988 - CESAR A. CERENO v. LUIS D. DICTADO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-82001 April 15, 1988 - JUANITO PAJARO v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • A.M. Nos. 88-4-5433 April 15, 1988 - IN RE: RAUL M. GONZALEZ

  • A.C. No. 3135 April 15, 1988 - MIGUEL CUENCO v. MARCELO B. FERNAN

  • G.R. No. L-54357 April 25, 1988 - REYNALDO PASCO, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF BULACAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-58797 April 25, 1988 - ANTONIO QUIRINO, ET AL. v. NATHANAEL M. GROSPE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-64507 April 25, 1988 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NESTOR GANDUMA

  • G.R. No. L-26306 April 27, 1988 - TESTATE ESTATE OF THE LATE GREGORIO VENTURA, ET AL. v. GROGORIA VENTURA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-41132 April 27, 1988 - VICTORINO HERNANDEZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-46684 April 27, 1988 - ROSALINA G. NAVALTA v. GOV’T. SERVICE INS. SYSTEM, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-49982 April 27, 1988 - ELIGIO ESTANISLAO, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-65192 April 27, 1988 - RODOLFO DELA CRUZ v. FELIX L. MOYA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-79690-707 April 27, 1988 - ENRIQUE A. ZALDIVAR v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-77372 April 29, 1988 - LUPO L. LUPANGCO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-82380 April 29, 1988 - AYER PRODUCTIONS PTY. LTD., ET AL. v. IGNACIO M. CAPULONG, ET AL.