Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

SAMEER OVERSEAS V CABILES Management Services, Inc. (Pacific) as of August 6, 1997.

Thus,
G.R. No. 170139 petitioner asserts that it was already substituted by Pacific Manpower.
August 05, 2014 - Pacific Manpower moved for the dismissal of the complaint, claiming
LEONEN, J. that there was no employer-employee relationship between them. The
LABOR LAW: PURPOSE Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint. Joy then appealed to National
FACTS: Labor Relations Commission which then declared that Joy was indeed
- Petitioner, Sameer Overseas Placement Agency, Inc., is a recruitment illegally dismissed, not ruling, however, on the placement fees for lack
and placement agency. Responding to an ad it published, respondent, of jurisdiction. Upon the petitioner’s appeal, the CA affirmed the
Joy C. Cabiles, submitted her application for a quality control job in NLRC’s decision. Petitioner reiterates that there was just cause for
Taiwan. Joy’s application was accepted. Joy was later asked to sign a termination because there was a finding of Wacoal that respondent was
one-year employment contract for a monthly salary of NT$15,360.00. inefficient in her work. Therefore, it claims that respondent’s dismissal
She alleged that Sameer Overseas Agency required her to pay a was valid. Hence, this appeal.
placement fee of P70,000.00 when she signed the employment
contract. ISSUE: W/N Joy Cabiles was validly dismissed from her job.
- Joy was deployed to work for Taiwan Wacoal, Co. Ltd. (Wacoal) on
June 26, 1997. She alleged that in her employment contract, she agreed HELD: NO
to work as quality control for one year, but in Taiwan, she was asked
to work as a cutter. The SC is in favour of the respondent. The burden of proving that there is just
- Sameer Overseas Placement Agency claims that on July 14, 1997, a cause for termination is on the employer. Sameer Overseas Placement Agency
certain Mr. Huwang from Wacoal informed Joy, without prior notice, failed to show that there was just cause for causing Joy’s dismissal. The
that she was terminated and that “she should immediately report to employer, Wacoal, also failed to accord her due process of law.
their office to get her salary and passport.” She was asked to “prepare
for immediate repatriation.” Indeed, employers have the prerogative to impose productivity and quality
standards at work. They may also impose reasonable rules to ensure that the
- Joy claims that she was told that from June 26 to July 14, 1997, she
employees comply with these standards. Failure to comply may be a just cause
only earned a total of NT$9,000. According to her, Wacoal deducted
for their dismissal.
NT$3,000 to cover her plane ticket to Manila.
- On October 15, 1997, Joy filed a complaint with the National Labor
This prerogative, however, should not be abused. It is “tempered with the
Relations Commission against petitioner and Wacoal. She claimed that
employee’s right to security of tenure.” Workers are entitled to substantive and
she was illegally dismissed. She asked for the return of her placement
procedural due process before termination. They may not be removed from
fee, the withheld amount for repatriation costs, payment of her salary
employment without a valid or just cause as determined by law and without
for 23 months as well as moral and exemplary damages.19 She
going through the proper procedure.
identified Wacoal as Sameer Overseas Placement Agency’s foreign
principal.
Employees are not stripped of their security of tenure when they move to work
- The petitioner alleged that respondent's termination was due to her in a different jurisdiction. With respect to the rights of overseas Filipino workers,
inefficiency, negligence in her duties, and her “failure to comply with we follow the principle of lex loci contractus - the law of the place where
the work requirements of her foreign employer.” Moreover, it also the contract is made. Security of tenure for labor is guaranteed by our
claimed that it did not ask for a placement fee of P70,000.00. Constitution.
Furthermore, petitioner added that Wacoal's accreditation with
petitioner had already been transferred to the Pacific Manpower & In this case, petitioner merely alleged that respondent failed to comply with her
foreign employer’s work requirements and was inefficient in her work. No
evidence was shown to support such allegations. Petitioner did not even bother
to specify what requirements were not met, what efficiency standards were
violated, or what particular acts of respondent constituted inefficiency.

There was also no showing that respondent was sufficiently informed of the
standards against which her work efficiency and performance were judged. The
parties’ conflict as to the position held by respondent showed that even the
matter as basic as the job title was not clear.

The bare allegations of petitioner are not sufficient to support a claim that there
is just cause for termination. There is no proof that respondent was legally
terminated.

Under the Constitution, labor is afforded special protection. Overseas workers


regardless of their classifications are entitled to security of tenure, at least for the
period agreed upon in their contracts. This means that they cannot be dismissed
before the end of their contract terms without due process. If they were illegally
dismissed, the workers’ right to security of tenure is violated.

Overseas Filipino workers brave alien cultures and the heartbreak of families left
behind daily. They would count the minutes, hours, days, months, and years
yearning to see their sons and daughters. We all know of the joy and sadness
when they come home to see them all grown up and, being so, they remember
what their work has cost them. Unknown to them, they keep our economy afloat
through the ebb and flow of political and economic crises. They are our true
diplomats, they who show the world the resilience, patience, and creativity of
our people. Indeed, we are a people who contribute much to the provision of
material creations of this world.

This government loses its soul if we fail to ensure decent treatment for all
Filipinos. We default by limiting the contractual wages that should be paid to
our workers when their contracts are breached by the foreign employers. While
we sit, this court will ensure that our laws will reward our overseas workers with
what they deserve: their dignity.

Inevitably, their dignity is ours as well.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen