Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 82 views

    Mercidar Fishing Corp Vs NLRC

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous S1b6TV8
    - Private respondent Fermin Agao Jr. filed a complaint against petitioner Mercidar Fishing Corp for illegal dismissal, violation of labor laws, and non-payment of service incentive leave for 1990. He claimed he was constructively dismissed after being denied assignments when he returned from an approved 1-month leave. - Petitioner claimed private respondent abandoned his work by failing to report after leave expired and was absent without leave for 3 months. It also claimed it assigned him to another vessel but he was left behind. - The court ruled that fishermen employed by petitioner have no choice but to remain on board vessels under petitioner's effective control and supervision through vessel masters or patrons, and are thus entitled to service incentive leave pay

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Mercidar Fishing Corp Vs NLRC

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous S1b6TV8
    82 views1 page
    - Private respondent Fermin Agao Jr. filed a complaint against petitioner Mercidar Fishing Corp for illegal dismissal, violation of labor laws, and non-payment of service incentive leave for 1990. He claimed he was constructively dismissed after being denied assignments when he returned from an approved 1-month leave. - Petitioner claimed private respondent abandoned his work by failing to report after leave expired and was absent without leave for 3 months. It also claimed it assigned him to another vessel but he was left behind. - The court ruled that fishermen employed by petitioner have no choice but to remain on board vessels under petitioner's effective control and supervision through vessel masters or patrons, and are thus entitled to service incentive leave pay

    Original Description:

    case digest

    Original Title

    Mercidar Fishing Corp vs Nlrc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    - Private respondent Fermin Agao Jr. filed a complaint against petitioner Mercidar Fishing Corp for illegal dismissal, violation of labor laws, and non-payment of service incentive leave for 1990. He claimed he was constructively dismissed after being denied assignments when he returned from an approved 1-month leave. - Petitioner claimed private respondent abandoned his work by failing to report after leave expired and was absent without leave for 3 months. It also claimed it assigned him to another vessel but he was left behind. - The court ruled that fishermen employed by petitioner have no choice but to remain on board vessels under petitioner's effective control and supervision through vessel masters or patrons, and are thus entitled to service incentive leave pay

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    82 views1 page

    Mercidar Fishing Corp Vs NLRC

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous S1b6TV8
    - Private respondent Fermin Agao Jr. filed a complaint against petitioner Mercidar Fishing Corp for illegal dismissal, violation of labor laws, and non-payment of service incentive leave for 1990. He claimed he was constructively dismissed after being denied assignments when he returned from an approved 1-month leave. - Petitioner claimed private respondent abandoned his work by failing to report after leave expired and was absent without leave for 3 months. It also claimed it assigned him to another vessel but he was left behind. - The court ruled that fishermen employed by petitioner have no choice but to remain on board vessels under petitioner's effective control and supervision through vessel masters or patrons, and are thus entitled to service incentive leave pay

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    MERCIDAR FISHING CORP VS NLRC

    FACTS:
    - This case originated from a complaint filed on September 20, 1990 by private respondent Fermin Agao, Jr. against petitioner
    for illegal dismissal, violation of P.D. No. 851, and non-payment of five days service incentive leave for 1990. Private respondent had
    been employed as a bodegero or ships quartermaster on February 12, 1988. He complained that he had been constructively
    dismissed by petitioner when the latter refused him assignments aboard its boats after he had reported to work on May 28, 1990.
    [1]

    THE EMPLOYEE SAID:
    - he had been sick and thus allowed to go on leave without pay for one month from April 28, 1990 but that when he
    reported to work at the end of such period with a health clearance, he was told to come back another time as he could not
    be reinstated immediately. Thereafter, petitioner refused to give him work. For this reason, private respondent asked for a
    certificate of employment from petitioner on September 6, 1990. However, when he came back for the certificate on
    September 10, petitioner refused to issue the certificate unless he submitted his resignation. Since private respondent
    refused to submit such letter unless he was given separation pay, petitioner prevented him from entering the premises.
    [2]

    THE EMPLOYER SAID:
    -alleged that it was private respondent who actually abandoned his work. It claimed that the latter failed to report for work
    after his leave had expired and was, in fact, absent without leave for three months until August 28, 1998. Petitioner further
    claims that, nonetheless, it assigned private respondent to another vessel, but the latter was left behind on September 1,
    1990. Thereafter, private respondent asked for a certificate of employment on September 6 on the pretext that he was
    applying to another fishing company. On September 10, 1990, he refused to get the certificate and resign unless he was
    given separation pay

    -since the work of private respondent is performed away from its principal place of business, it has no way of verifying his
    actual hours of work on the vessel. It contends that private respondent and other fishermen in its employ should be
    classified as field personnel who have no statutory right to service incentive leave pay

    - the case of UFE vs Vivar was also cited

    THE RULING OF THE COURT:

    - In contrast, in the case at bar, during the entire course of their fishing voyage, fishermen employed by petitioner have no
    choice but to remain on board its vessel. Although they perform non-agricultural work away from petitioners business
    offices, the fact remains that throughout the duration of their work they are under the effective control and supervision of
    petitioner through the vessels patron or master as the NLRC correctly held.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy