Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
*
G.R. No. 164156. September 26, 2006.
_______________
* FIRST DIVISION.
205
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
Same; Same; The party who failed to appeal from the decision
of the Labor Arbiter to the National Labor Relations Commission
can still participate in a separate appeal timely filed by the
adverse party as the situation is considered to be of greater benefit
to both parties.—Admittedly, respondents failed to perfect their
appeal from the decision of the Labor Arbiter within the
reglementary period therefor. However, petitioner perfected its
appeal within the period, and since petitioner had filed a timely
appeal, the NLRC acquired jurisdiction over the case to give due
course to its appeal and render the decision of November 14, 2002.
Case law is that the party who failed to appeal from the decision
of the Labor Arbiter to the NLRC can still participate in a
separate appeal timely filed by the adverse party as the situation
is considered to be of greater benefit to both parties.
206
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
207
208
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
209
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
Before us
1
is a petition for review on certiorari of the
Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No.
76582 and the Resolution denying the motion2 for
reconsideration
3
thereof. The CA affirmed the Decision and
Resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission
(NLRC) in NLRC Case No. V-000762-2001 (RAB Case No.
VII-10-1661-2001) which likewise affirmed, with
modification, the decision of the Labor Arbiter declaring
the respondents Marlyn Naza-
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
210
The Antecedents
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
4 Rollo, p. 180.
211
Monday – Saturday
4:30 A.M.—8:00 A.M.—Marlene Nazareno.
Miss Nazareno will then be assigned at the Research Dept.
From 8:00 A.M. to 12:00
4:30 P.M.—12:00 MN—Jennifer Deiparine
Sunday
5:00 A.M.—1:00 P.M.—Jennifer Deiparine
1:00 P.M.—10:00 P.M.—Joy Sanchez
_______________
5 Id., at p. 183.
6 Id., at p. 213.
212
I. Jennifer Deiparine:
Exhibit “A” —ABS-CBN Employee’s Identification Card
Exhibit “B” —ABS-CBN Salary Voucher from Nov.
Exhibit “B-1” & 1999 to July 2000 at P4,000.00
Exhibit “B-2”
Date employed: September 15, 1995
Length of 5 years & nine (9) months
service:
II. Merlou Gerzon —ABS-CBN Employee’s Identification Card
Exhibit “C”
Exhibit “D”
Exhibit “D-1” &
_______________
7 Id., at p. 174.
8 Id., at pp. 248-250.
213
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
214
For its part, petitioner alleged in its position paper that the
respondents were PAs who basically assist in the conduct
of a particular program ran by an anchor or talent. Among
their duties include monitoring and receiving incoming
calls from listeners and field re-porters and calls of news
sources; generally, they perform leg work for the anchors
during a program or a particular production. They are
considered in the industry as “program employees” in that,
as distinguished from regular or station employees, they
are basically engaged by the station for a particular or
specific program broadcasted by the radio station.
Petitioner asserted that as PAs, the complainants were
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 13/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
215
1) Unzanith
2) Serbisyo de Arevalo
3) Arangkada (evening edition)
4) Balitang K (local version)
5) Abante Subu
6) Pangutana Lang
(a) Unzanith
(b) Serbisyo de Arevalo
(c) Arangkada (evening edition)
(d) Balitang K (local version)
(e) Abante Sugbu
(f) Pangutana Lang
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 14/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
2) On Thursdays
Nagbagang Balita
3) On Saturdays
4) On Sundays:
_______________
216
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
217
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 17/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
aggregate amount of
_______________
14 Rollo, p. 172.
218
_______________
15 Rollo, p. 218.
219
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 19/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
220
_______________
17 Rollo, p. 36.
18 Id., at pp. 58-59.
221
_______________
222
22
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 22/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
22
rights and obligations of the parties. We have held in a
catena of cases that technical rules are not binding in labor
cases and are not to be applied strictly
23
if the result would
be detrimental to the workingman.
Admittedly, respondents failed to perfect their appeal
from the decision of the Labor Arbiter within the
reglementary period therefor. However, petitioner
perfected its appeal within the period, and since petitioner
had filed a timely appeal, the NLRC acquired jurisdiction
over the case to give due course to its appeal and render
the decision of November 14, 2002. Case law is that the
party who failed to appeal from the decision of the Labor
Arbiter to the NLRC can still participate in a separate
appeal timely filed by the adverse party as the situation
24
is
considered to be of greater benefit to both parties.
We find no merit in petitioner’s contention that the
Labor Arbiter abused his discretion when he admitted
respondents’ position paper which had been belatedly filed.
It bears stressing that the Labor Arbiter is mandated by
law to use every reasonable means to ascertain the facts in
each case speedily and objectively, without technicalities of
25
law or procedure, all in the interest of due process.
Indeed, as stressed by the appellate court, respondents’
failure to submit a position paper on time is not a ground
for striking out the paper
26
from the records, much less for
dismissing a complaint. Likewise, there is simply no truth
to petitioner’s assertion that it was denied due process
when the Labor Arbiter admitted respondents’ position
paper without requiring it to file a comment before
admitting said position paper. The essence of due process
in administrative proceedings is
_______________
22 Buenaobra v. Lim King Guan, G.R. No. 150147, January 20, 2004,
420 SCRA 359, 364 (2004).
23 Huntington Steel Products, Inc. v. National Labor Relations
Commission, G.R. No. 158311, November 14, 2004, 442 SCRA 551, 560.
24 See Sandol v. Pilipinas Kao, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 87530, June 13,
1990, 186 SCRA 491.
25 Panlilio v. National Labor Relations Commission, 346 Phil. 30, 35-36;
281 SCRA 53, 57 (1997).
26 U.I.C. v. U.I.C. Teaching & Non-Teaching Personnel and Employees
Union, 414 Phil. 522, 533; 362 SCRA 242, 250 (2001).
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 23/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
223
dismissing the same; otherwise, his only remedy shall be to re-file the
case in the arbitration branch of origin.”
_______________
27 Mayon Hotel & Restaurant v. Adana, G.R. No. 157634, May 16, 2005,
458 SCRA 609, 629-630.
28 Philips Semiconductors (Phils.), Inc. v. Fadriquela, Infra note 35, at
p. 418.
224
“In any proceedings before the Commission or any of the Labor Arbiters,
the rules of evidence prevailing in courts of law or equity shall not be
controlling and it is the spirit and intention of this Code that the
Commission and its members and the Labor Arbiters shall use every and
all reasonable means to ascertain the facts in each case speedily and
objectively and without regard to technicalities of law or procedure, all in
the interest of due process.”
“In admitting the respondents’ position paper albeit late, the Labor
Arbiter acted within her discretion. In fact, she is enjoined by law to use
every reasonable means to ascertain the facts in each case speedily and
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 25/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
“Due process requirements are satisfied where the parties are given the
opportunities to submit position papers.” (Laurence vs. NLRC, 205 SCRA
737)
_______________
225
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 26/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
226
31
In Universal Robina Corporation v. Catapang, the Court
reiterated the test in determining whether one is a regular
employee:
“Even while the language of law might have been more definitive,
the clarity of its spirit and intent, i.e., to ensure a “regular”
worker’s security of tenure, however, can hardly be doubted. In
determining whether an employment should be considered
regular or non-regular, the applicable test is the reasonable
connection between the particular activity performed by the
employee in relation to the usual business or trade of the
employer. The standard, supplied by the law itself, is whether the
work undertaken is necessary or desirable in the usual business
or trade of the employer, a fact that can be assessed by looking
into the nature of the services rendered and its relation to the
general scheme under which the business or trade is pursued in
the usual course. It is distinguished from a specific undertaking
that is divorced from the normal activities required in carrying on
the particular business or trade. But, although the work to be
performed is only for a specific project or seasonal, where a person
thus engaged has been performing the job for at
_______________
227
_______________
228
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 29/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 30/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
229
_______________
230
B. Payment of Wages
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 32/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
231
bargaining power to demand and receive such huge talent fees for
his services. The power to bargain talent fees way above the
salary scales of ordinary employees is a circumstance indicative,
but not conclusive, of an independent contractual relationship.
The payment of talent fees directly to SONZA and not to
MJMDC does not negate the status of SONZA as an independent
contractor. The parties expressly agreed on such mode of
payment. Under the Agreement, MJMDC is the AGENT of
SONZA, to whom MJMDC would 44
have to turn over any talent fee
accruing under the Agreement.”
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 33/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
232
45
tor. The Court will peruse beyond any such agreement to
examine the 46
facts that typify the parties’ actual
relationship.
It follows then that respondents are entitled to the
benefits provided for in the existing CBA between
petitioner and its rank-and-file employees. As regular
employees, respondents are entitled to the benefits granted
to all47 other regular employees of petitioner under the
CBA. We quote with approval the ruling of the appellate
court, that the reason why production assistants were
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 34/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
_______________
233
——o0o——
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 36/37
7/23/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 503
234
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c1c4ac235fdd5661e003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 37/37