EMS Manpower & Placement Services vs NLRC : 107723 : July 24, 1...
1 of 3
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1997/jul1997/107723.htm
SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 107723. July 24, 1997]
EMS MANPOWER AND PLACEMENT SERVICES, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL
LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and LUISA G. MANUEL,
respondents.
DECISION
ROMERO, J.:
This petition for certiorari with prayer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction
and/or a temporary restraining order seeks the nullification of the decision of public respondent
National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) dated November 29, 1991, awarding private
respondent her salary for the unexpired portion of her employment contract and attorneys fees,
as well as its resolution of October 28, 1992, denying her motion for reconsideration of said
decision.
Private respondent Luisa G. Manuel was hired as a domestic helper in Hong Kong by
Deborah Li Siu Yee on April 13, 1989, for a period of two years from the time of her arrival.
Under her employment contract,[1] secured through the efforts of petitioner placement agency
(EMS), she would receive HK$2,500.00 per month during the term of her contract. Luisa worked
for her Chinese employer in Hong Kong from August 2, 1989, until October 1, 1989, when she
was dismissed and repatriated to the Philippines after she made repeated demands for her
weekly rest day, of which she was denied from the start of her service, in violation of Clause 6(a)
of the employment contract.[2] She also complained that she was not allowed to meet or see
fellow Filipinos. By the time she left, she had only received a separation pay of HK$2,500.00 and
her return flight ticket.
On October 23, 1989, Luisa filed a complaint before the Adjudication Department of the
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) for illegal dismissal and illegal exaction
against Yee, EMS and its surety, Paramount Insurance Corporation. In a decision dated
February 18, 1991,[3] POEA Administrator Jose N. Sarmiento dismissed the complaint for lack of
merit. The only reasons he advanced were that Luisa was given her separation pay in lieu of
notice of her termination in compliance with clause 12(a)[4] of the employment contract, and Yee
actually paid her repatriation expenses as provided in clause 12(e)[5] of said contract and as
required by POEA Rules and Regulations. Thus, he concluded that under the circumstances,
respondent (Yee) has complied with the law and with complainants contract of employment and
her consequential repatriation cannot be termed illegal. In this regard, complainant cannot lay
claim over the salaries for the unexpired portion of her contract nor can this Office award the
same.
On appeal, the NLRC reversed and set aside POEA Administrator Sarmientos decision after
finding no evidence clear and convincing enough to support the POEAs finding that Luisa was
not illegally dismissed, and after concluding that there was no just cause for her dismissal.
Hence, on November 29, 1991, it rendered its assailed decision,[6] the dispositive portion of
which reads as follows:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the DECISION appealed from is reversed and set aside, and
another one is hereby rendered ordering respondent EMS Manpower and Placement Services to
1/24/2016 9:32 PM