Superior Maintenance Services v. Bermeo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Superior Maintenance Services, Inc. (Superior Maintenance), a manpower agency, hired Carlos Bermeo (Bermeo) as a janitor in 1991. Bermeo was last assigned to Trinoma Mall until March 30, 2008. On August 28, 2008, Bermeo was deployed to French Baker at SM Marikina, but the client requested a replacement upon learning Bermeo was 54 years old. Procedural History: On September 5, 2008, Bermeo filed a complaint for constructive dismissal with a claim for separation pay against Superior Maintenance and its president, Gustavo Tambunting (petitioners). The Labor Arbiter (LA) found Bermeo to have been constructively dismissed, ordering petitioners to pay separation pay and 13th-month pay. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the LA, ruling that Bermeo was not constructively dismissed as his floating status was less than the six months required by law for it to ripen into constructive dismissal; however, it affirmed the grant of 13th-month pay. The Court of Appeals (CA) reinstated the LA's decision, finding Bermeo constructively dismissed. The Petition: Petitioners filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 seeking to reverse the CA's decision.
Issue(s)
Whether Bermeo was constructively dismissed from work due to being placed on floating status for an unreasonable period.
Ruling
The Court granted the petition, reversed the CA's decision, and reinstated the NLRC's ruling. The Court held that Bermeo was not constructively dismissed because his floating status did not exceed the six-month period allowed by Article 301 of the Labor Code, applied by analogy, and that his complaint was prematurely filed. The Court also noted that petitioners had offered Bermeo a new assignment even after the complaint was filed. WHEREFORE, the instant Petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated March 30, 2012 and Resolution dated July 26, 2012 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 111875 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The Decision dated August 13, 2009 and Resolution dated October 6, 2009 of the National Labor Relations Commission in NLRC LAC No. 03-000925-09 (NLRC NCR Case No. 09-12499-08), are hereby REINSTATED.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of constructive dismissal and floating status: The Court reiterated that temporary off-detail or floating status, when applied by analogy to Article 301 of the Labor Code, should not exceed six months. After six months, an employee on floating status is deemed constructively dismissed unless legally retrenched. In this case, Bermeo's last assignment ended on March 30, 2008, and he filed his complaint on September 5, 2008, which is less than six months. The Court found that the CA misconstrued the application of Article 301, stating it applies by analogy to prevent indefinite floating status, not solely to bona fide suspensions of business operations. Furthermore, the Court noted that petitioners had offered Bermeo a new assignment even after he filed his complaint, contradicting the LA's finding that no work was offered. Therefore, the filing of the complaint was premature, and Bermeo was not constructively dismissed.
Main Doctrine
The six-month period for temporary off-detail or floating status under Article 301 of the Labor Code, applied by analogy, is the maximum period an employee may be kept in such status. Beyond this period, the employee is deemed constructively dismissed, unless the employer can prove compliance with legal retrenchment requirements. However, the filing of a complaint for constructive dismissal is premature if it occurs within this six-month period, especially if the employer continues to offer assignments.