View full case

JULIAN TUNGCUL TUPPIL v. LBP SERVICE CORPORATION

FACTS:

LBP Service Corporation (LBPSC) entered into a manpower services agreement with Land Bank of the Philippines and deployed janitors, messengers, and utility persons in its different branches in Metro Manila. Among these workers are Julian Tuppil, Jr., Diosdado Baterna, Nicanor Mapa, Demetrio Bautista, Jr., Norberto Navarro, Roldan Ramacula, Raymund Alentajan, Roel Solis, Ricardo Flores, Rizaldy De Leon, Zaldy Pedro, Joseph Reyes, and Ariel Ramos (Tuppil, et al.), as well as Larry Borja, Marlo Merced, Ferdinand Hosana, Rico Espeña, and Marcos Vasquez (Borja, et al.). When the contract between LBPSC and Land Bank expired in 2014, affected employees, including Tuppil, et al. and Borja et al., were recalled. Tuppil, et al. resigned while Borja, et al. were ordered to report back to work. Tuppil, et al. and Borja, et al. filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against LBPSC, alleging that they are regular employees performing services necessary and desirable to LBPSC's business. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, stating that Tuppil, et al. and Borja, et al. are fixed-term contractual employees. They failed to prove the fact of dismissal, and their resignation letters were voluntarily executed. The National Labor Relations Commission and the Court of Appeals affirmed the Labor Arbiter's findings.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether Tuppil, et al. and Borja, et al. are fixed-term contractual employees.

  2. Whether there was valid dismissal in this case.

RULING:

  1. The Court dismissed the complaint of Tuppil, et al. and Borja, et al. The court ruled that they are fixed-term contractual employees and their contracts with LBP Service merely lapsed due to the expiration of the contract between LBP Service and Land Bank. There was no evidence that LBP Service terminated their contracts. The notice of recall did not amount to termination of services.

  2. The court did not find any dismissal in this case. The court emphasized that Tuppil, et al. voluntarily resigned from their work.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Fixed-term contractual employment - The court recognized the validity of fixed-term employment contracts in this case.

  • Voluntary resignation - The court emphasized that Tuppil, et al. voluntarily resigned from their work.