Parties Cannot Evade the Application of Labor Laws by mere Expedient of a Contract
Lapastora and Ubalubao alleged that they worked as room attendants of Olympic Housing, Inc. (OHI), the entity engaged in the management of Olympia Executive Residences (OER) from March 1995 and June 1997, respectively, until they were placed on floating status on February 24, 2000, through a memorandum sent by Fast Manpower.
They alleged that they were directly hired by the company and received salaries from its operations clerk. They also claimed that OHI exercised control over them as they were issued time cards, disciplinary action reports and checklists of room assignments. It was also OHI which terminated their employment after they petitioned for regularization. Prior to their dismissal, they were subjected to investigations for their alleged involvement in the theft of personal items and cash belonging to hotel guests and were summarily dismissed by OHI despite lack of evidence.
For their part, OHI and Limcaoco alleged that Lapastora and Ubalubao were not employees of the company but of Fast Manpower, with which it had a contract of services, particularly, for the provision of room attendants. They claimed that Fast Manpower is an independent contractor. Fast Manpower reiterated that it is a legitimate manpower agency and that it had a valid contract of services with OHI, pursuant to which Lapastora and Ubalubao were deployed as room attendants. Lapastora and Ubalubao were, however, found to have violated house rules and regulations and were reprimanded accordingly. It denied the employees’ claim that they were dismissed and maintained they were only placed on floating status for lack of available work assignments.
Subsequently, a memorandum of agreement was executed, stipulating the transfer of management of the OER from OHI to HSAI-Raintree, Inc. (HSAI-Raintree). Thereafter, OHI informed the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) of its cessation of operations due to the said change of management and issued notices of termination to all its employees. This occurrence prompted some union officers and members to file a separate complaint for illegal dismissal and unfair labor practice against OHI, Olympia Condominium Corporation (OCC) and HSAI-Raintree.
The SC held that Lapastora was illegally dismissed. Lapastora was a regular employee of OHI.
Lapastora has been under the continuous employ of OHI since March 3, 1995 until he was placed on floating status in February 2000. His uninterrupted employment by OHI, lasting for more than a year, manifests the continuing need and desirability of his services, which characterize regular employment in Article 280 of the Labor Code.
The fact alone that Lapastora was allowed to work for an unbroken period of almost five years is all the same a reason to consider him a regular employee. OHI miserably failed to discharge its burdens thus making Lapastora’s termination illegal.
Guide to Valid Dismissal of Employees
That there is an existing contract of services between OHI and Fast Manpower where both parties acknowledged the latter as the employer of the housekeeping staff, including Lapastora, did not alter established facts proving the contrary.
The parties cannot evade the application of labor laws by mere expedient of a contract considering that labor and employment are matters imbued with public interest. It cannot be subjected to the agreement of the parties but rather on existing laws designed specifically for the protection of labor
(Olimpia Housing, Inc. vs. Lapastora, G.R. No. 187691, January 13, 2016)
Comments (16)
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here to that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 70672 additional Information to that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Information to that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] There you will find 40882 additional Info on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Info here on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
… [Trackback]
[…] There you can find 47809 more Info on that Topic: lvsbooks.com/parties-cannot-evade-application-labor-laws-mere-expedient-contract/ […]
Comments are closed.