View full case

AUTO BUS TRANSPORT SYSTEMS v. ANTONIO BAUTISTA

FACTS:

Respondent Antonio Bautista has been employed by petitioner Auto Bus Transport Systems, Inc. (Autobus) as a driver-conductor since May 24, 1995. He was paid on a commission basis, seven percent (7%) of the total gross income per travel, on a twice a month basis.

On January 3, 2000, while driving Autobus No. 114, respondent accidentally bumped the rear portion of Autobus No. 124 due to the latter vehicle suddenly stopping at a sharp curve without warning.

Respondent claimed that the accident happened because he was compelled by management to go back to Roxas, Isabela despite not having slept for almost twenty-four (24) hours. He also alleged that he was not allowed to work until he fully paid for the cost of repair of the damaged buses. After a month, management sent him a letter of termination.

Respondent filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and nonpayment of 13th month pay and service incentive leave pay against Autobus.

The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for illegal dismissal but awarded respondent his 13th month pay and service incentive leave pay. The NLRC modified the decision by deleting the award of 13th month pay. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC decision, which led to the filing of the present petition.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not the respondent is entitled to service incentive leave.

  2. Whether or not the three (3)-year prescriptive period provided under Article 291 of the Labor Code, as amended, is applicable to the respondent's claim of service incentive leave pay.

RULING:

  1. The Court ruled that the respondent is entitled to service incentive leave. It was established that the respondent is not a field personnel but a regular employee whose actual hours of work in the field can be determined with reasonable certainty and who is under constant supervision while at work.

  2. The Court held that the three (3)-year prescriptive period for claiming service incentive leave pay begins from the time when the employer fails to pay its monetary equivalent after a demand for commutation or upon termination of the employee’s services. Since the respondent filed the claim within one month of his dismissal, it was within the prescriptive period.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Article 95 of the Labor Code Entitlement to a yearly service incentive leave of five days with pay for employees who have rendered at least one year of service.

  • Rule V, Book III of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Labor Code Exemptions to the service incentive leave, particularly for field personnel.

  • Article 291 of the Labor Code Three-year prescriptive period for all money claims arising from employer-employee relationships.

  • Ejusdem generis Applying general and unlimited terms in relation to specific terms that they follow.

  • Service incentive leave specifics Entitlement to leave or its monetary equivalent upon resignation or separation, accruing year by year but claiming within three years from the time of dismissal or demand.