Anda di halaman 1dari 2

-Petitioners Fulache et al.

became aware of the CBA only when they obtained copies


3. FULACHE v, ABS-CBN of the agreement and learned they were excluded from its coverage not being regular
January 21, 2010 employees but merely temporary
Jenell Cruz
-They claimed they already tendered 1 yr. of service and should be recognized as
NATURE Employer-Employee Relationship regulars entitled to security of tenure and to privileges & benefits enjoyed by regular
Plaintiff Farley Fulache et al. employees
Defendant ABS-CBN
Ponente J., Brion -ABS-CBN allege that petitioners Fulache et al.’s services were contracted on vari-
ous dates by its Cebu station as independent contractors/off cam talents and were not
RECIT READY DIGEST entitled to regularization in these capacities

Petitioners Fulache et. al were drivers/cameramen in ABS-CBN. They filed a com- -While appeal was pending, ABS-CBN dismissed petitioner Fulache et al. from em-
plaint for regularization, unfair labor practice, several money claims. Fulache alleged ployment for refusal to sign a service contract
that they were excluded in the Collective Bargaining Agreement that was executed
between ABS-CBN and its rank-and-file employees for being temporary employees -Labor Arbiter Pendoque held that petitioners Fulache et al. were regular ABS-CBN
only. Fulache claimed that they already served 1 year as employees and should be employees, not independent contractors and therefore, entitled to benefits but found
entitled to such benefits. While the case was pending, petitioners were dismissed that they were dismissed due to redundancy which is an authorized cause  ordered
from employement for refusing to sign a service contract. to be awarded separation pay in lieu of reinstatement

The Court ruled that under the terms of the CBA, petitioners are members of the ap- -ABS-CBN appealed to NLRC  ruled that there was an employer-employee rela-
propriate bargaining unit because they are regular rank-and-file employees and do tionship between parties because:
not belong to the excluded categories. Nothing in the records show that they are su- 1. ABS-CBN exercised control over petitioners Fulache in the performance of
pervisory or confidential employees, neither are they casual nor probationary. Most their work
importantly, the Labor Arbiter’s decision was affirmed all the way to the CA level 2. Petitioners were regular employees because the engaged to perform activi-
ruling against ABS-CBN’s submission that they are independent contractors. ties necessary for ABS-CBN’s business
3. They are not considered contractual employees because their salary is paid
DOCTRINE. monthly and not on basis of their work
As regular employees, petitioners fall within the coverage of the bargaining unit
and are therefore entitled to CBA benefits as a matter of law and contract. Under -NLRC then REVERSED the illegal dismissal case
the terms of the CBA, petitioners are members of the appropriate bargaining unit
because they are regular rank-and-file employees and do not belong to any of the -ABS-CBN filed an MR and reiterated that petitioners Fulache et al. were independ-
excluded categories. ent contractors
Thus, as regular rank-and-file employees, they fall within the CBA coverage. ISSUE/S and RULING.
And, under the CBA’s express terms, they are entitled to its benefits. WON petitioners Fulache et al. were regular rank-and-file employees and therefore
entitled to the benefits provided in the CBA- YES
FACTS.
-Petitioners Farley Fulache et al. and Cresente Atinen who were employed as driv- Under the terms of the CBA, petitioners Fulache et al. are members of the appropri-
ers/cameramen in ABS-CBN filed 2 separate complaints for regularization, unfair ate bargaining unit because they are regular rank-and-file employees and do not be-
labor practice, and several money claims against the latter long to the excluded categories

-Petitoners Fulache et al. allege that ABS-CBN and its rank-and-file employees un- -Nothing in the records show that they are supervisory or confidential employees,
ion executed a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) neither are they casual nor probationary employees

LABOR LAW 1 | G01 | ATTY. QUAN


-Most importantly, the Labor Arbiter’s decision was affirmed all the way to the CA
level ruling against ABS-CBN’s submission that they are independent contractors

-With regard to the illegal dismissal case, ABS-CBN took matters into its own hands
and terminated the petitioners’ services, clearly disregarding its own appeal pending
with the NLRC:
 this appeal posited that petitioners were not employees (whose services
therefore could be terminated through dismissal under the Labor Code)
 they were independent contractors whose services could be terminated at
will, subject only to the terms of their contracts
 to justify the termination of service, the company cited redundancy as its au-
thorized cause but offered no justificatory supporting evidence

-ABS-CBN’s intent based on records, was to transfer the petitioners and their activi-
ties to a service contractor without paying attention to the requirements of our labor
laws  hence, ABS-CBN dismissed petitioners when they refused to sign up with
the service contractor

-The petitioners’ dismissal was not only unjust and in bad faith but also when they
were already recognized as regular employees for refusing to sign up with its service
contractor

WHEREFOREM petition is GRANTED. CA decision is REVERSED and SET


ASIDE. Petitioners are reinstated + entitled to benefits/privileges.
WINNER: Petitioners Fulache et al.

LABOR LAW 1 | G01 | ATTY. QUAN

Anda mungkin juga menyukai