Rcpubli.

of thc Philippinca
Depanment of Labor and Emgloym€nt
NANONA! LAAOR REIATIONs COMMISSION
aegional Arbitration Branch No. xlll
Butuan city

FLORENCIO U. IONTOCO 5R., VICENTE A-

NUDAIO, V€RUI{O P. LUMINARE'
RENATO DELA CRUZ JOVITA, LEBERT D.
LAq'fiAN
Ptatnttlls,
NIR( CASE NO, RA&9{T
ooo56'2ota

ASIAPRO ANO OR MARIE 5OL sANGA

Dden.tantt

PoStTtoN PAPER FOR THE COMPIAIiIANTS

COiiPIAiNANIS, VERUNO P. LUMINAREs' RENATO DEIA CRUZ

'OVITA'
LEBERT D. IACAOMAN, by counsel, respectfully submitthis po5ition paper and

PREFATORY sTATEMENT

'tTt€ Stdte cftirms ldbor ds ! prlmdry so(ldl

e.onomk torce, fherctorc, it shall p.ote.t the .ighB ol
wotuets dnd promote theh $tetorc'"

OF THE CAST
'ACT5
1. complainants are all working within the premiset of sRMl, a
mining company in Tubay, Agusan del Norte thev .re however under the
emplol of Asiapro Cooperative as allegedlY the latter being a legitimate iob
contractor of sRMt. Atthough confused, what matteE {or complainants is to
hav€ a work to sustain a living forthei.families-

2. Complainants have been workingforthe companv and Asiapro for

sevefal years, parti€ularly Lebert Lacadman was und€r Asiapro from May 16'
2orl toJanuary 8,2ot5 as mechani( maintenan(e

j. Howcvcr, on January 3, 2015, thcy were just informcd bv

respondents that they willbe transferr€d to HelPing Ha''! s astheiragency' On
thdi ddv. without exPlanation rust point bid{rt told them thev
'ery 'esoondents
will have to leave their employ€€s and they will be urd4ianother agencv A
Cisguise made to avoid any liability to their employe€s whom they just
terminated without caus€.

4. Complainants were then made sign a document, an

to
acknowledgment receipt or otherwise, respondent told them that if they wila
not sign the docum€ntthey cannot get their cashbonds. Allotthem were able
to get their cash bond but not a singl€ one of them rec€ived their separation

5. when they were transferred to Helping Hands, all

were made to submit new requirements for thelr work, sadly,
that both th€ contracting company and Asiapro did not value the length of
service complainants have renderedto them.

tssuES

\ 4rether or not th€ complainants were illegally dismissed theirjob and

are entitled to s€paration pay? 'n

wherher or not complainant is entitled to monetary claims dnd dam..'gesl

otscusstoN

6. Based on the for€going fads, there i. no dispute that

complainants are regular cmploy€es of AS|A PRO, especirlly the latter having
always claimed to be a legitimate job contractor. Under Art. 28o of th€ Labor
Cod€. the provisions of writt€n agreement to th€ contrary notwithstanding
and r€gardfess of the oraf agreement of the parties, an enplopenr sholl be
deeme.l to be rcgular where rhe enployee hat been engaged ro pe4on
n<tlvltles whlh arc utually ne.estiry or deslrabk in th€ usual bu5ine55 or trdde
of the employer, xxx. lEmphasis oursl

7. th!s, all complainants are entitled to secunty of

Having said as
tenure and cannot iust be terminate.l without jr'st or .uthori2ed cause,
especially that they have been worklng for several year5 akeady in the same
company/agency. Article 179 of the Labor Code of the Philippines provides

Afti.le 1/9. se.udty ol teAure. ln .oses al rcgutot enptoynent,

rhe employq shall nor t.nlndr. rhe snk s ot an etnptoye
d.qt fo. d tusr @!.. or uh.n d/rhodz.d by thle tla An
enptoyee who is uniustly dtsnts*a Ion ||otk 5hott be ehtitted to
r€tut.tement without loss of seniority tightta doth4t p rihEs
dndrohislu bactwaget, inclusi@ ol ollowonces, ond to his orher
ot then mofttoty equiwle r..npured lton the rire hit
'enefirs
<onp.nsdrio was wjrhhet t ton hih up to the ttme ol hit dcr@l
.e in t re n e A t. [a h Ph a t is t u p pl i e d]
t:o
 8. The provisionoflaw is.learand unequivo.alan establishing that an
employer cannot dismiss an employee at any time without any valid reason.
Just (ause is ne(essary and requlrer that the .eason or cause must be l€gally
acceptable and suffici€nt. Th€ Labor Code further enumerates the following
authorized causes for termination by employer und€r Article 281and 184r

rhe althotuea @lses fot rerhiturion .f enployee orc enuneruted lndet A^kle
23t ond 284 af the Lobot aade, os Iottows:

t^sullorbn ol hboreving derices, Jh. inttollotion of l4botsving deri<es

c@r.nptotes the insroild.i@ of Mhiaery .o efl&t @tty oh.l effkien y h rhe
de thod ot p to4u.Ii on FI.

Redtndoncy. ReduntLn y exisrs ||hete the setrices af o^ enployee ate ih exces o!

what E eosoMttly .lenonded by the actuol rcqukeme^re .fthe enteryite. A
oosirio1 is tedundont *here it supe4l@us, dhd supe4tdiry ol a positidh ol
poriions b€ the outcome ol o runbet of factots, such os @et hning ol
'oy
watl<ets, de.t@sed of voluoe butiness. ot droppi^8 of d portnubt ptodu.r line ol
servi.e o.tivitv prcviausly nanufa.turcd ot undettoken by rhe enterytise[t].

Retrelchnenr to ptevent lastes. Rettehchmenl i5 on e<onomi. gound ro ted!.e

rhe hunber af ecplayees. Renenchment is the rcd!.lia. ot' Pesonnet lot rh.
p!ryose of cunihg dNn on .ons of opetatio$ in retns of ntoies dnd wdE$
rcto^ed to 6r d^ enpbyet be@use ol t<Bs6 i^ operotton d a business G@sion€d
by toct oi wk ond @nidetdbre reduction the vorume oi butiDestlrl. ii is
son rires otto rct'eied ro as dowAsizinE tt is'noined dt evinS o rtno&btty airnS
b!5jn.$ettoblehnenttroD@ern@[ycolldpejn8,

closwe ot .eetion of opznaion, Ihe clorlr€ of o brtiners 6tdbri5hn€Di ir d

Ercund lat the telni..t'an ot' rhe se1i.es af an ehptolee unlets th€ cJoling is for
the pwpose af ci.cuwenting pertin€nt P.ovisions of the Ldbor Code

Disedse. Anenployet mdy tenin.te the setvices of dn enployee who hdr been
founa b be sufferin' ftotu ary atsease ond whote .oatinled enplaynenr is
ptahibired by ldw or i5 ptejtdkidl to his heahh os welt ot the heolth of hls .e

9. In the instant case, no iust or authorized.ause can be infered

from the surrounding drcumstances. Complainants were just irformed that
they will b€ under H€lping Hands instead; they w€r€ outrightly dismissed for
reasons only known to theiremployer.

ro. r
:L is b:)r('equirement that before an erproyee (oJld be
dismissed by an employet they should first be a(.orded du€ process, orthere
should be a lust or authorized cause why they are severed from emplovm€nt

11. This being so, complainants are then entitledto claim for reliefs as
provided in the above-cited Article 279 of the Labor Code that an iilegally
dismissed emoloyee "shdll be entftled to rclnttatement withot t iost of senlorlty
rights ond othet priviletes dnd ro hls flll ba.kwdges, in tusive of allowan(es'
and to hls othet benelitJ or tt€lr morctary eqttkalenr .omPuted fro'n th. time
 VERIFICATION

We, VERLI O P. LUMII{AREs, REflATo DELA CiUZ ,OVITA, IEBERT T.

IACAOMAN, all of legal age, Filipinos, and residents of Agusan del Norte, after
havine been sworn to an oath in accordance with law, hercbv d€pose and say
THAT;

1. we ale rhe complainants in thc instant casc;

2. We cEused the prepdrdnon of the foregoint docunenli

3. We have read its contents and affnm that tllallegations therein are
true and correct to tbe best of our personal knowledge and based on suthefltic

4. We have not commenced any a€tion or filed any claim involving the
same issues in any court, tribunalor qoasijudicial bodies, and to the best of mv
knowt€d8e no such other action or claim Pendins ther€in and if we should learn
thatthe same has b€en filed, we shall report the fad within five daYs the.efrom
to the court whereinthe initiatory pleadin8 has been filed-

WITNE55 MY HAND, this tEB 0 F 21? 9 in Butuan city, Philippines.

(
vERul(th. ruMrrAREs RENA ciuzlovlTA,
RTPUBL PH L PPINs[' )
'OFTH!

Ear nF
' i: atrl Bltuan
SUBSCRIBED ANO SWORN TO SEfORE ME this
their Picture and
City, affiant exhibitjng to me their lDs as above stated, bearing
srgnature, sed'.8 as competent evidence of ther. identitv, known to me and to
me known to be the tame peEons who executed the foresoing and who
aLtnorledte that the tam€ is their voluntarv ad and deedz''

o". M !f