& AURORA CRUZ regular: they fall under EXCEPTION in A280 FACTS: “except x x x where work Petitioners: agricultural workers utilized by or services to be private respondents (Aurora Cruz, Francisco performed is seasonal in Borja, Leticia Borja and Sto. Nino Realty nature and the Inc.) in all agricultural phases of work on employment is for the the 7 ½ ha of rice land and 10 ha of sugar duration of the season.” land owned by the latter Aurora Cruz: petitioners NOT regular EEs ISSUE: WON petitioners are regular employees. NO. o Services were engaged through casual only supply workers (mandarols [Sps Fortunato and Rosa Mercado]) to HELD: do particular phase of agricultural First par of A280 LC degines regular employees: work necessary in rice production regular where activities are necessary or desirable to and/or sugar cane production, after business, EXCEPT for project employees which they are free to render Project employee: services to other farm owners 1. Fixed for specific project or LA: NOT regular EEs undertaking, termination determined @ o Nature of hiring phases of work time of engagement for definite period of time, after 2. Work SEASONAL IN NATURE, which services available to other employment for duration of season farm ownrs 2nd par of A280 LC: casual employees who have o Sworn statement of one of rendered >1yr service: REGULAR petitioners, Fortunato Mercado Jr.: Petitioners contend that this proviso is they were hired only as casuals, applicable to their case on on and off basis, thus it was within prerogative of Aurora WON Proviso applicable only to employees who are to take them in for further work deemed casuals, but not to the project after phase is completed employees nor te regular EEs treated in o Real cause of complaint probably A280(1)1 because of filing of criminal complaint for theft against Petitioners are SEASONAL employees Reynaldo Mercado, son of the Employment ends upon completion of mandarols (petitioners are all project or season related) Termnation NOT illegal dismissal NLRC: affirmed LA Petitioners: employment, even if seasonal, continued for so many years that by express provision of A280 LC, they have become regular and permanent employees o Also invoke Policy Ins #12: what determines regularity or casualness is not emp contract, but NATURE of job o >1yr : regular o They have been doing all phases of agricultural work for so many yrs, activities necessary, desirable and indispensable to business Respondents: only hired as casuals o Chief of Special Task force of NLRC 1 Office of proviso: qualify or modify only phrase immediately preceding it or restrain or limit generality of clause that it immediately Regional office had same finding – follows. To be construed with regerence to imm preceding part of rule on findings of fact of admin provision to which it is attached, not to statute itself or to other exceptions. Only exception: clear legislative intent. P.I. 12.: Proviso in agencies A280(2) not designed to stifle small-scale businesses nor to oppress NLRC filed separate comment agricultural land owners to further interests of laborers. Only seeks to eliminate abuses of ERs against EEs
ABRAHAM RIMANDO, Petitioner, vs. NAGUILIAN EMISSION TESTING CENTER, INC., Represented by Its President, ROSEMARIE LLARENAS and HON. COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents.
James Corke v. Sameiet M. S. Song of Norway, Royal Caribbean Cruise Line A/s Royal Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc., and Per Oslebye, M.D., 572 F.2d 77, 2d Cir. (1978)