Case Digest

G.R. Nos. 181913 & 182158, March 5, 2010

Daniel Javellana, Jr. vs Albino Belen

FACTS :

Petitioner Javellana hired respondent Albino Belen (Belen) on January 31, 1994 as a
company driver. August 19, 1999 was a long day for Belen which ended the following
day at 4:30 am where he travelled to geographically apart provinces of Quezon,
Batangas, and Bulacan to perform all the tasks required of him, including the repair of
the delivery truck.

He was summoned to the office at 8:20am of August 20, 1999 but since Javellana was
gone, Belen went home and slept but was back at the office at 4:00pm. Javellana
fired him right there and then. Belen asked for separation pay but he later refused
Javellana’s offer of P5,000 only.

Belen filed a complaint of illegal dismissal on May 9, 2000.

On November 25, 2002, the Labor Arbiter adjudged that Belen was illegally dismissed
as a company driver. The Labor Arbiter awarded him separation pay, backwages, 13th
month pay, SILP, holiday pay, salary differential and attorney’s fees.

Javellana appealed to the NLRC which held that Belen was a family driver and
modified the award deleting the back wages and separation pay and granting Belen
only 15 day salary as indemnity. NLRC denied the motion for reconsideration of Belen.

Belen appealed to the Court of Appeals which ruled that Belen was a company driver
and that he was indeed illegally dismissed. It reverted to the decision of the labor
arbiter but with modification due to error in computation of back wages and separation
pay.

ISSUE : Whether or not the computation of the monetary award of the labor arbiter is
accurate

RULING : Yes

Article 279 of the Labor Code, as amended, speaks of security of tenure. In case of
regular employment, the employer shall not terminate the services of a regular
employee without just cause or when authorized by this rule. An employee who is
unjustly dismissed from work shall be entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority
rights and other privileges and to his full backwages, inclusive of allowances, and to his
other benefits or their monetary equivalent computed from the time his compensation
was withheld from him up to the time of his actual reinstatement.

Since Belen opted for separation pay instead of reinstatement, the labor arbiter’s
computation when it rendered its decision was time bound, which was from August 20,
1999 to November 25, 2002. Such computation then, was accurate.

The decision of the labor arbiter was not implemented but was challenged until the
finding of illegal dismissal of the labor arbiter was affirmed by the Court of Appeals in
its decision on September 22, 2008, but modified the awards.

Based on the petition for certiorari by Belen, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision
of the Labor with modification on the awards which pertained to the periods as no
payment has been made to petitioner yet. Backwages shall be computed from the time
of his dismissal, August 20, 1999 up to the finality of the decision of the CA on illegal
dismissal and the separation pay shall be computed from the date of his employment,
January 31, 1999 to September 22, 2008.

Author :

Corazon S. Hernandez

January 23, 2019