Professional Documents
Culture Documents
12 Pure Foods Corp v. NLRC
12 Pure Foods Corp v. NLRC
_______________
* FIRST DIVISION
** Those included in et al. are not enumerated in the caption and in
the body of the petition. Logically, these respondents are the
134
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 1 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
135
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 2 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
136
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 3 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 4 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
137
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 5 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
3 Rollo, 47.
4 Id., 51.
138
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 6 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
5 Id., 59.
139
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 7 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
140
Thus, the two kinds of regular employees are: (1) those who
are engaged to perform activities which are necessary or
desirable in the usual business or trade of the employer;
and (2) those casual employees who have rendered at least
one year of service, whether continuous or broken, 6
with
respect to the activity in which they are employed.
In the instant case, the private respondentsÊ activities
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 8 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
6 See Philippine Geothermal, Inc. v. NLRC, 189 SCRA 211, 215 [1990];
Mercado v. NLRC, 201 SCRA 332, 341-342 [1991]; Aurora Land Project
Corp. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 114733, 2 January 1997.
7 Tucor Industries, Inc. v. NLRC, 197 SCRA 296, 301 [1991].
141
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 9 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
142
[I]t could not be supposed that private respondents and all other so-
called „casual‰ workers of [the petitioner] KNOWINGLY and
VOLUNTARILY agreed to the 5-month employment contract.
Cannery workers are never on equal terms with their employers.
Almost always, they agree to any terms of an employment contract
just to get employed considering that it is difficult to find work
given their ordinary qualifications. Their freedom to contract is
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 10 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
143
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 11 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
wage, cost-of-living
11
allowance, sick leave, holiday pay, and
13th month pay. Indeed, the petitioner succeeded in
evading the application of labor laws. Also, it saved itself
from the trouble or burden of establishing a just cause for
terminating employees by the simple expedient of refusing
to renew the employment contracts.
The five-month period specified in private respondentsÊ
employment contracts having been imposed precisely to
circumvent the constitutional guarantee on security of
tenure should, therefore, be struck down12 or disregarded as
contrary to public policy or morals. To uphold the
contractual arrangement between the petitioner and the
private respondents would, in effect, permit the former to
avoid hiring permanent or regular employees by simply
hiring them on a temporary or casual basis, thereby 13
violating the employeesÊ security of tenure in their jobs.
The execution by the private respondents of a „Release
and Quitclaim‰ did not preclude them from questioning the
termination of their services. Generally, quitclaims by
laborers are frowned upon as contrary to public policy and
are held to be ineffective to 14bar recovery for the full
measure of the workersÊ rights. The reason for the rule is
that the employer
15
and the employee do not stand on the
same footing.
Notably, the private respondents lost no time in filing a
complaint for illegal dismissal. This act is hardly expected
from employees16 who voluntarily and freely consented to
their dismissal.
_______________
144
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 12 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
_______________
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 13 of 14
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 283 23/11/2020, 9)35 AM
19 See Reformist Union of R.B. Liner, Inc. v. NLRC, supra note 18.
145
··o0o··
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000175f2b72b7413a2f6ba003600fb002c009e/p/AQR243/?username=Guest Page 14 of 14