(NLRC). He prayed for an award of nineteen thousand nine hundred and twenty three dollars (US$19,923.00) as actual damages, forty thousand pesos (P40,000.00) as exemplary damages and attorneys fees equivalent to 20% of the damages prayed for. The complaint named MHC, MHICL, the Palace Hotel and Mr. Shmidt as respondents. The Palace Hotel and Mr. Shmidt were not served with summons and neither participated in the proceedings before the Labor Arbiter.[18] On June 27, 1991, Labor Arbiter Ceferina J. Diosana, decided the case against petitioners, thus:[19] WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered: 1. directing all the respondents to pay complainant jointly and severally; a) $20,820 US dollars or its equivalent in Philippine currency as unearned salaries; b) P50,000.00 as moral damages; c) P40,000.00 as exemplary damages; and d) Ten (10) percent of the total award as attorneys fees. SO ORDERED. On July 23, 1991, petitioners appealed to the NLRC, arguing that the POEA, not the NLRC had jurisdiction over the case. On August 28, 1992, the NLRC promulgated a resolution, stating: [20] WHEREFORE, let the appealed Decision be, as it is hereby, declared null and void for want of jurisdiction. Complainant is hereby enjoined to file his complaint with the POEA. SO ORDERED. On September 18, 1992, respondent Santos moved for reconsideration of the aforequoted resolution. He argued that the case was not cognizable by the POEA as he was not an overseas contract worker.[21] On May 31, 1993, the NLRC granted the motion and reversed itself. The NLRC directed Labor Arbiter Emerson Tumanon to hear the case on the question of whether private respondent was retrenched or dismissed.[22] On January 13, 1994, Labor Arbiter Tumanon completed the proceedings based on the testimonial and documentary evidence presented to and heard by him. [23]