View full case

VIVIAN Y.IMBUIDO v. NLRC

FACTS:

The petitioner in this case is a data encoder who had multiple employment contracts with the private respondent, International Information Services, Inc. These contracts were for specific projects and had a duration of three months, terminating upon completion of the project or for just and lawful causes. In September 1991, the petitioner and twelve other employees filed a petition for certification election. Subsequently, on October 18, 1991, the petitioner received a termination letter from the respondent, alleging low volume of work. In response, the petitioner filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). The labor arbiter initially ruled in favor of the petitioner in the complaint for illegal dismissal. However, upon appeal, the NLRC reversed the labor arbiter's decision and dismissed the complaint.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the petitioner is a project employee or a regular employee.

  2. Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in remanding the awarded service incentive leave pay for further arbitration.

  3. Whether the petitioner is a regular employee entitled to security of tenure.

  4. Whether the alleged causes of petitioner's dismissal are valid under the Labor Code.

  5. Whether the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement, back wages, and other benefits.

  6. Whether the petitioner is entitled to service incentive leave pay.

RULING:

  1. The petitioner is considered a regular employee. While the NLRC determined that the petitioner is a project employee, the Supreme Court disagreed and held that the petitioner has acquired the status of a regular employee. The Court cited a recent case which stated that a project employee can become a regular employee if there is a continuous rehiring of project employees even after the cessation of a project, and if the tasks performed by the alleged project employee are vital, necessary, and indispensable to the usual business or trade of the employer. In this case, the petitioner was continuously rehired for more than three years and performed tasks that were necessary and desirable to the employer's business. Therefore, the petitioner is considered a regular employee.

  2. The NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in remanding the awarded service incentive leave pay for further arbitration.

  3. The petitioner is considered a regular employee because she has been continuously re-hired by the same employer for the same tasks or nature of tasks that are vital, necessary, and indispensable to the usual business or trade of the employer.

  4. The alleged causes of petitioner's dismissal, low volume of work and completion of the project, are not valid causes for dismissal under the Labor Code.

  5. The petitioner is entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other privileges, as well as full back wages, inclusive of allowances, and other benefits or their monetary equivalent.

  6. The petitioner is entitled to service incentive leave pay.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The principal test for determining whether an employee is a project employee or a regular employee is whether the employee was engaged to carry out a specific project or undertaking, the duration and scope of which were specified at the time of engagement.

  • A project employee can acquire the status of a regular employee if there is a continuous rehiring of project employees even after the completion of a project, and if the tasks performed by the alleged project employee are vital, necessary, and indispensable to the usual business or trade of the employer.

  • The continuous re-hiring of a project or work pool employee for the same tasks or nature of tasks indicates regular employment.

  • Once a project or work pool employee has gained the status of a regular employee, he/she is entitled to security of tenure.

  • A regular employee can only be dismissed for a just or authorized cause under the Labor Code.

  • The alleged causes of dismissal must comply with the provisions of Articles 282 and 283 of the Labor Code.

  • A wrongfully dismissed employee is entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other privileges, as well as full back wages and other benefits.

  • Service incentive leave pay is demandable after one year of service and should be computed up to the date of reinstatement.