Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 86 views

    Herma Shipyard Inc

    Uploaded by

    Russ Tuazon
    The respondents filed a complaint against the petitioners for illegal dismissal, regularization, and non-payment of benefits claiming they were regular employees. The petitioners argued the respondents were project-based employees hired for specific shipbuilding projects that had been completed. The court ruled the respondents were indeed project-based employees based on their employment contracts, the nature of the petitioners' business doing shipbuilding projects, and the fact that the respondents were aware of the project-based nature of their work and the approximate completion dates provided in their contracts. As project employees, their employment was properly terminated once their respective projects were finished.

    Copyright:

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

    Herma Shipyard Inc

    Uploaded by

    Russ Tuazon
    86 views1 page
    The respondents filed a complaint against the petitioners for illegal dismissal, regularization, and non-payment of benefits claiming they were regular employees. The petitioners argued the respondents were project-based employees hired for specific shipbuilding projects that had been completed. The court ruled the respondents were indeed project-based employees based on their employment contracts, the nature of the petitioners' business doing shipbuilding projects, and the fact that the respondents were aware of the project-based nature of their work and the approximate completion dates provided in their contracts. As project employees, their employment was properly terminated once their respective projects were finished.

    Original Description:

    Herma Shipyard Inc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The respondents filed a complaint against the petitioners for illegal dismissal, regularization, and non-payment of benefits claiming they were regular employees. The petitioners argued the respondents were project-based employees hired for specific shipbuilding projects that had been completed. The court ruled the respondents were indeed project-based employees based on their employment contracts, the nature of the petitioners' business doing shipbuilding projects, and the fact that the respondents were aware of the project-based nature of their work and the approximate completion dates provided in their contracts. As project employees, their employment was properly terminated once their respective projects were finished.

    Copyright:

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

    Herma Shipyard Inc

    Uploaded by

    Russ Tuazon
    The respondents filed a complaint against the petitioners for illegal dismissal, regularization, and non-payment of benefits claiming they were regular employees. The petitioners argued the respondents were project-based employees hired for specific shipbuilding projects that had been completed. The court ruled the respondents were indeed project-based employees based on their employment contracts, the nature of the petitioners' business doing shipbuilding projects, and the fact that the respondents were aware of the project-based nature of their work and the approximate completion dates provided in their contracts. As project employees, their employment was properly terminated once their respective projects were finished.

    Copyright:

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

    Herma Shipyard Inc. & Esguerra vs. Oliveros et. al. G.R. No.

    208936 April 17, 2017


    Topic: Project employees
    Facts:
    On June 17, 2009, the respondents filed before the Regional Arbitration Branch III, San
    Fernando City, Pampanga a Complaint for illegal dismissal, regularization, and non-payment of
    service incentive leave pay with prayer for the payment of full back wages and attorney's fees
    against petitioners. Respondents alleged that they are Herma Shipyard's regular employees
    who have been continuously performing tasks usually necessary and desirable in its business.
    On various dates, however, petitioners dismissed them from employment. Respondents further
    alleged that as a condition to their continuous and uninterrupted employment, petitioners made
    them sign employment contracts for a fixed period ranging from one to four months to make it
    appear that they were project-based employees. Per respondents, petitioners resorted to this
    scheme to defeat their right to security of tenure, but in truth there was never a time when they
    ceased working for Herma Shipyard due to expiration of project-based employment contracts.
    For their defense, petitioners argued that respondents were its project-based employees in its
    shipbuilding projects and that the specific project for which they were hired had already been
    completed.

    Issue:
    Are the respondents project-based employees?

    Ruling:
    Yes. A project employee under Article 280 (now Article 294) of the Labor Code, as amended, is
    one whose employment has been fixed for a specific project or undertaking, the completion or
    termination of which has been determined at the time of the engagement of the employee. The
    records of this case reveal that respondents were hired for each and every project. They were
    adequately informed of their employment status as project-based employees at least at the time
    they signed their employment contracts. They were fully apprised of the nature and scope of
    their work whenever they affixed their signature to their employment contract. Here, a
    meticulous examination of the contracts of employment reveals that while the tasks assigned to
    the respondents were indeed necessary and desirable in the usual business of Herma Shipyard,
    the same were distinct, separate, and identifiable from the other projects or contracts services.
    The nature of Herma Shipyard's business is only to hire workers when it has existing contracts
    for shipbuilding and repair. It is not engaged in the business of building vessels for sale which
    would require it to continuously construct vessels for its inventory and consequently hire a
    number of permanent employees. The completion of work or project automatically terminates
    their employment, in which case, the employer is, under the law, only obliged to render a report
    on the termination of the employment. Hence, Herma Shipyard should be allowed to reduce its
    work force into a number suited for the remaining work to be done upon the completion or
    proximate accomplishment of each particular project. As to the requirement that the completion
    or termination of the specific project or undertaking for which respondents were hired should be
    determined at the time of their engagement, it is enough that Herma Shipyard gave the
    approximate or target completion date in the project employment contract. Given the nature of
    its business and the scope of its projects which take months or even years to finish, the court
    does not expect Herma Shipyard to give a definite and exact completion date. In sum,
    considering their employment contracts and all other circumstances present, the respondents
    are deemed project employees.

    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