G.R. Nos. 83380-81 Case Digest

G.R. Nos. 83380-81 November 15, 1989
Makati Haberda Shery Inc., Jorge Ledesma and Cecilio Inocencio, petitioners
vs NLRC, etc., respondents.
Ponente: Fernan

Facts:
This is a petition assailing the decision of NLRC affirming the decision of Labor Arbiter finding Haberda guilty of illegal dismissal and ordering him to reinstate the dismissed workers and in concluding that there is employer-employee relationship between workers and Haberda.

The complainants were working for Haberda as tailors, seamstress, sewers, basters and plantsadoras. Paid on a piece-rate basis with allowance when they report for work before 9:30am everyday.(MON-SAT)

July 1984, the labor organization where the complainants are members filed a complaint for underpayment of basic wage, living allowance, non-payment of overtime work, non-payment of holiday pay, non-payment of service incentive pay ad other benefits under wage orders.

During the pendency, Haberda dismiss the workers for the alleged job acceptance from another, which was denied by the workers and countered by filing a complaint for illegal dismissal. Which was granted by NLRC. Hence, this petition raising the issues on:

Issues: (1) employer-employee relationship? (2) workers entitled to monetary claims? (3) were respondents illegally dismissed?

Ruling:
(1) There is employer-employee relationship. The facts at bar indubitably reveal that the most important requisite of control is present. As gleaned from the operations of petitioner, when a customer enters into a contract with the haberdashery or its proprietor, the latter directs an employee who may be a tailor, pattern maker, sewer or "plantsadora" to take the customer's measurements, and to sew the pants, coat or shirt as specified by the customer. Supervision is actively manifested in all these aspects — the manner and quality of cutting, sewing and ironing.
(2) Because the workers were proven to be regular employees, they shall be entitled to minimum wages. Plus the respondents didn't appealed when the Labor Arbiter granted the minimum wage award to the workers in the first place. But workers are not entitled to incentive pay and other benefits because piece-rate workers are paid at fixed amount for performing work irrespective of the time consumed.
(3) There was no illegal dismissal to the two workers accused of the copied Barong Tagalog design, because when they were asked to explain to their employer, the workers did not but instead go AWOL. Imposing disciplinary sanctions upon an employee for just and valid cause is within the rights of the employer.