You are on page 1of 2

GR NO.

97369

SC DECISION:

reason why Teresita Rivera should go to all the


trouble of making sure that private respondent
was deployed, if petitioner had no part in the
recruitment of Cuenta. That private respondent is
not an illiterate who could be victimized is not a
reason for finding that he could not have failed to
notice that he was signing up for employment
overseas with another agency and not with
petitioner. He was assured that everything he and
Rivera had agreed could be embodied in the
contract and he believed Rivera.”

- PI is solidarily liable for the claims of the


complaint. The joint and solidary liability
imposed by law against recruitment agencies and
foreign employers is meant to assure the
aggrieved worker of immediate and sufficient
payment of what is due him. This is in line with
the policy of the State to protect and alleviate the
plight of the working class.
GR NO. 97369 GR NO. 97369

FACTS:

POEA:
- Complainant applied as trailer driver with
PI Manpower and was required by teresita
- In favor of the complainant
Rivera, the Operations Manager of PI
- Ordered to pay unpaid salary
manpower to submit all necessary documents
including the placement fee amounting to NLRC :
10,800.
- Complainant was made to sign in a blank - Affirm POEA’s decision
document,(the Agency-Worker Agreement) SC DECISION:
assuring him that the terms and conditions of
his employment as agreed would be stated in 1.) Affirm NLRC
the contract, particularly his salary at $440.00
a month. However, on the day of his flight, - In termination cases, the burden of proving
he found out that his deploying agent was just and valid grounds for dismissal rests
LPJ Enterprises and not PI Manpower and upon the employer. The telegram9 claimed to
that his monthly salary was SR 960.00 and have been sent by Mohd Abu Dawood,
not $440.00 which was less than what he and general manager of Al Jindan, has no
Teresita Rovera have agreed. probative value to prove just cause for
- Upon arriving in Dharan, Saudi Arabia, Cuenta's dismissal. There is no proof of its
Cuenta was assigned by Al Jindan due execution and no concrete evidence to
Contracting and Trading Establishment (Al support its contents. It does not prove the
Jindan) to drive a trailer. He was later charge that Cuenta was a dangerous person
informed that he would receive an allowance who carried deadly weapon to work and who
of SR200.00 for the first two months but failed to meet the minimum requirements set
none in the third, because he was on by his employer. Petitioner failed to adduce
probation. On March 23, 1989, without prior substantial evidence to prove its allegations.
notice and investigation Cuenta was
dismissed and told to pack up and surrender - Complainant was an EMPLOYEE HIRED
his working permit (Iguama). FOR A FIXED TERM whose employment
was to end the only at the expiration of the
period stipulated in his contract. 10 But even if
COMPLAINT FOR: illegal dismissal and non he was a probationary employee, he is
payment of wages nonetheless entitled to constitutional
protection of security of tenure that no
- Criminal case of estafa and illegal worker shall be dismissed except for cause
dismissal but was dismissed for the lack provided by law 11 and after due process
of deceit and misrepresentation.

ISSUE: 1.) WON complainant was employed on - With respect to the third issue, the Supreme
probationary or for a fixed term Court said “The fact, however, is that private
respondent, after arriving in the Philippines,
2.) WON termination was for a just cause promptly went to P.I. Manpower's office and
complained to its owner, Mr. Depsi. If
3.) WON PI Manpower or LPJ is liable to the Cuenta knew that LPJ Enterprises was his
claims of Cuenca agency, he would have undoubtedly have
gone to the latter's office and not to P.I.
Manpower. Moreover, we cannot find any

You might also like