View full case

FARLEY FULACHE v. ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

FACTS:

This case involves petitioners who were employees of ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation-Cebu (ABS-CBN). In the regularization case, the petitioners claimed that they should be recognized as regular employees entitled to security of tenure and privileges and benefits enjoyed by regular employees. ABS-CBN, on the other hand, asserted that the petitioners were independent contractors. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the petitioners and declared them as regular employees, but ABS-CBN appealed the ruling. In the illegal dismissal case, the petitioners were dismissed for refusing to sign employment contracts with service contractor Able Services. ABS-CBN argued that the dismissal was due to the contracting out of certain work or services. The Labor Arbiter upheld the validity of ABS-CBN's contracting out of certain work or services.

In another set of facts, the petitioners Fulache, Jabonero, Castillo, Lagunzad, and Atinen were initially dismissed by ABS-CBN due to redundancy. The Labor Arbiter awarded them separation pay, but ABS-CBN appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). The NLRC ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring an employer-employee relationship and granting regularization, backwages, and separation pay. ABS-CBN moved for reconsideration, asserting that the petitioners were independent contractors and not entitled to backwages or Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) benefits. The NLRC reinstated the labor arbiter's decision, affirming regularization and granting backwages, separation pay, and CBA benefits. The petitioners filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals (CA), which upheld the NLRC's decision. The petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied.

Furthermore, the petitioners filed a petition for certification election, claiming to be members of the bargaining unit and entitled to CBA benefits. The Labor Arbiter initially ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring them regular employees. ABS-CBN appealed to the NLRC, which reversed the labor arbiter's ruling. The NLRC's decision became final and executory. The petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. They also filed a second motion for reconsideration, which the NLRC also denied. The petitioners then filed a petition for certiorari with the CA, arguing that the NLRC's decision was based on issues not raised in ABS-CBN's appeal. The CA dismissed the petition and affirmed the NLRC's ruling that the petitioners were not regular employees and not entitled to CBA benefits.

ABS-CBN raises several grounds in this case. It argues that the petition should be dismissed because it raises questions of fact, not of law. It contends that the questions of whether the petitioners were covered by the CBA, entitled to CBA benefits, and illegally dismissed due to redundancy are factual matters that cannot be reviewed on certiorari. ABS-CBN also asserts that the issues and arguments raised by the petitioners were already presented in their pleadings with the CA and do not warrant further consideration. It further claims that the NLRC did not commit any grave abuse of discretion in reinstating the labor arbiter's decisions and that the petitioners' failure to appeal the labor arbiter's decisions rendered them final and unappealable. ABS-CBN argues that in the absence of any illegal dismissal, the petitioners are not entitled to reinstatement, backwages, damages, and attorney's fees.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the petition raises only questions of law in compliance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.

  2. Whether the petitioners, as regular employees, are members of the bargaining unit entitled to CBA benefits.

  3. Whether petitioners Fulache, Jabonero, Castillo, and Lagunzad were illegally dismissed.

  4. Whether ABS-CBN acted in bad faith in terminating the services of the petitioners.

  5. Whether ABS-CBN violated labor laws and the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) in terminating the petitioners' services.

  6. Whether ABS-CBN's actions can be characterized as forum-shopping.

  7. Whether the dismissal of the petitioners was illegal.

  8. Whether the petitioners are entitled to reinstatement, backwages, benefits, moral damages, and attorney's fees.

RULING:

  1. The petition does not violate Rule 45 as the petitioners questioned the misapplication of the law and jurisprudence on the recognized facts, rather than questioning the findings of facts themselves.

  2. The petitioners, as regular employees, are members of the appropriate bargaining unit and are entitled to CBA benefits according to the labor arbiter's decision that affirmed their regular employment status.

  3. The issue of whether petitioners Fulache, Jabonero, Castillo, and Lagunzad were illegally dismissed is not explicitly resolved in this section of the case.

  4. ABS-CBN acted in bad faith in terminating the services of the petitioners. The Court found that ABS-CBN, in pursuing its appeal against the labor arbiter's decision declaring the petitioners as regular employees, terminated their services to avoid their regularization. ABS-CBN disregarded its own appeal before the NLRC and dismissed the petitioners without providing justificatory evidence for the termination. ABS-CBN's actions demonstrated a clear intent to defeat or circumvent the rights of its employees.

  5. ABS-CBN violated labor laws and the CBA in terminating the petitioners' services. ABS-CBN claimed redundancy as the authorized cause for dismissal but failed to provide supporting evidence. It also disregarded the requirements of labor laws by transferring the petitioners and their activities to a service contractor without respecting the existing CBA. ABS-CBN's exercise of management prerogative was not undertaken in good faith and resulted in unfair labor practices.

  6. ABS-CBN's actions can be characterized as forum-shopping. By pursuing its appeal and simultaneously implementing the dismissal action when the labor arbiter's ruling was under review, the Court considered ABS-CBN's actions as an affront to the NLRC's authority and an abuse of the appeal process. ABS-CBN's intent was to render useless the labor arbiter's decision in the regularization case. As such, ABS-CBN's actions can be deemed as forum-shopping.

  7. The Court declared that the dismissal of the petitioners was illegal as it was unjust, in bad faith, and in violation of their rights as regular employees.

  8. The Court ruled that the petitioners are entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other privileges, full backwages and other monetary benefits from the time of their dismissal until their actual reinstatement. They are also entitled to moral damages and attorney's fees.

PRINCIPLES:

  • A question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the correct application of law or jurisprudence to a certain set of facts.

  • A question of fact exists when a doubt or difference arises as to the truth or falsehood of facts or when the query invites calibration of the whole evidence.

  • Prohibited pleadings under the NLRC rules of procedure, such as a second motion for reconsideration, will be denied.

  • Regular employees are entitled to the benefits and privileges attached to their regular employment status, including those provided by law and the employment contract.

  • CBA coverage is not only a question of fact but also of law and contract, dependent on the employee's regular rank-and-file status and non-inclusion in the excluded categories laid out by the CBA.

  • Employers cannot act in bad faith in terminating employees. Termination must be based on just and authorized causes defined under the Labor Code.

  • Employers must respect the terms of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) when making decisions that affect the security of tenure of employees. Non-compliance may constitute unfair labor practice.

  • Exercise of management prerogative must be undertaken in good faith and should not aim to defeat or circumvent the rights of employees under labor laws or valid agreements.

  • Prohibition against forum-shopping applies to actions filed with the intent of securing a favorable ruling by pursuing multiple avenues. Bad faith actions may result in the dismissal of the actions involved.

  • Illegally dismissed employees are entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other privileges, full backwages, and other benefits or their monetary equivalent.

  • Employees who were unjustly dismissed and compelled to litigate to protect their rights and interests are entitled to moral damages and attorney's fees.