View full case

GIL CAPILI v. NLRC

FACTS:

Respondents Benigno Santos, Delfin Yuson, Luisito Santos, Ursino Basister, Ricardo Reyes, Joselito Santos, Jorge Binuya, and Nicolas Mulingbayan are licensed drivers of public utility jeepneys owned by petitioner Gil Capili. The drivers pay a rent or "boundary" of P280.00 and earn a net profit of P200.00 per day. On May 7, 1991, the drivers were required to sign contracts of lease to formalize their lessor-lessee relationship. Believing that signing the contracts was a condition precedent to continue driving for petitioners, all the drivers stopped plying their assigned routes. One week later, the drivers filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the Labor Arbiter, seeking separation pay. Fourteen of the complainants desisted and resumed plying their routes, while eight remained in the complaint. The Labor Arbiter ruled that the dispute arose from a misunderstanding between the parties and ordered the reinstatement of the drivers without back wages. The drivers appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) seeking separation pay and back wages.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the private respondents were illegally dismissed or voluntarily abandoned their jobs.

  2. Whether the private respondents are entitled to separation pay and back wages.

RULING:

  1. The Labor Arbiter ruled that the private respondents voluntarily abandoned their jobs, as it was unlikely for the petitioner to dismiss many employees at the same time. The drivers boycotted the petitioner by not reporting for work, and their refusal to sign the lease contract was merely a confirmation of the original concept of a no employer-employee relationship. The Labor Arbiter concluded that the breakage of the relationship was a product of misunderstanding and misappreciation of the situation by both parties.

  2. The Labor Arbiter directed the petitioner to reinstate the private respondents to their former position without loss of seniority rights and other benefits but without back wages.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The signing of a lease contract by drivers is not intended to prohibit them from continuing to drive, but to confirm the absence of an employer-employee relationship and to streamline the operation. (Misunderstanding of the parties)

  • Dismissal of many employees at the same time would cripple the operations of a business. (Sound business practice)

  • Abandonment of work occurs when an employee deliberately and unjustifiably desists from working for the employer. (Voluntary abandonment)