Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 122917 July 12, 1999
MARITES BERNARDO, ELVIRA GO DIAMANTE, REBECCA E. DAVID, DAVID P.
PASCUAL, RAQUEL ESTILLER, ALBERT HALLARE, EDMUND M. CORTE,
JOSELITO O. AGDON GEORGE P. LIGUTAN JR., CELSO M. !AAR, ALE" G.
CORPU, RONALD M. DEL#IN, RO$ENA M. TABAQUERO, CORAON C. DELOS
RE!ES, ROBERT G. NOORA, MILAGROS O. LEQUIGAN, ADRIANA #.
TATLONGHARI, I%E CABANDUCOS, COCO! NOBELLO, DORENDA
CANTIMBUHAN, ROBERT MARCELO, LILIBETH Q. MARMOLEJO, JOSE E.
SALES, ISABEL MAMAUAG, VIOLETA G. MONTES, ALBINO TECSON, MELOD! V.
GRUELA, BERNADETH D. AGERO, C!NTHIA DE VERA, LANI R. CORTE, MA.
ISABEL B. CONCEPCION, DINDO VALERIO, ENAIDA MATA, ARIEL DEL PILAR,
MARGARET CECILIA CANOA, THELMA SEBASTIAN, MA. JEANETTE
CERVANTES, JEANNIE RAMIL, ROAIDA PASCUAL, PIN%! BALOLOA,
ELIABETH VENTURA, GRACE S. PARDO &'( TIMOSA,petitioners,
vs.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION &'( #AR EAST BAN% AND TRUST
COMPAN!, respondents.

PANGANIBAN, J.:
The Magna Carta for Disabled Persons andates that !ualified disabled persons be
"ranted the sae ters and conditions of eplo#ent as !ualified able$bodied
eplo#ees. Once the# have attained the status of re"ular %or&ers, the# should be
accorded all the benefits "ranted b# la%, not%ithstandin" %ritten or verbal contracts to
the contrar#. This treatents is rooted not erel# on charit# or accoodation, but on
'ustice for all.
The Case
(hallen"ed in the Petition for Certiorari
1
before us is the )une *+, ,--. Decision
2
of the
National /abor Relations (oission 0N/R(1,
)
%hich affired the 2u"ust, ** ,--3
rulin" of /abor 2rbiter (ornelio /. /insan"an. The labor arbiter4s Decision disposed as
follo%s5
*
6H7R78OR7, 'ud"ent is hereb# rendered disissin" the above$
entioned coplaint for lac& of erit.
2lso assailed is the 2u"ust 3, ,--. Resolution
+
of the N/R(, %hich denied the Motion
for Reconsideration.
The Facts
The facts %ere suari9ed b# the N/R( in this %ise5
,
(oplainants nuberin" 3: 0p. ,;<, Records1 are deaf$utes %ho
%ere hired on various periods fro ,-== to ,--: b# respondent 8ar
7ast >an& and Trust (o. as Mone# Sorters and (ounters throu"h a
uniforl# %orded a"reeent called ?7plo#ent (ontract for
Handicapped 6or&ers?. 0pp. <= @ <-, Records1 The full teAt of said
a"reeent is !uoted belo%5
7MP/OBM7NT (ONTR2(T 8OR
H2NDI(2PP7D 6ORC7RS
This (ontract, entered into b# and bet%een5
82R 72ST >2NC 2ND TRDST (OMP2NB, a
universal ban&in" corporation dul# or"ani9ed and
eAistin" under and b# virtue of the la%s of the
Philippines, %ith business address at 87>T(
>uildin", Muralla, Intrauros, Manila, represented
herein b# its 2ssistant Vice President, MR.
8/OR7NDO E. M2R2N2N, 0hereinafter referred to
as the ?>2NC?1F
$and$
GGGGG, GGGGG #ears old, of le"al a"e,
GGGG, and residin" at 0hereinafter referred to as
the 0?7MP/OB77?1.
1
6ITN7SS7TH 5 That
6H7R72S, the >2NC, co"ni9ant of its social responsibilit#, reali9es that there
is a need to provide disabled and handicapped persons "ainful eplo#ent
and opportunities to reali9e their potentials, uplift their socio$econoic %ell
bein" and %elfare and a&e the productive, self$reliant and useful citi9ens to
enable the to full# inte"rate in the ainstrea of societ#F
6H7R72S, there are certain positions in the >2NC %hich a# be filled$up b#
disabled and handicapped persons, particularl# deaf$utes, and the >2NC
haHsI been approached b# soe civic$inded citi9ens and authori9ed
"overnent a"encies Hre"ardin"I the possibilit# of hirin" handicapped %or&ers
for these positionsF
6H7R72S, the 7MP/OB77 is one of those handicapped %or&ers %ho H%ereI
recoended for possible eplo#ent %ith the >2NCF
NO6, TH7R78OR7, for and in consideration of the fore"oin" preises and in
copliance %ith 2rticle =+ of the /abor (ode of the Philippines as aended,
the >2NC and the 7MP/OB77 have entered into this 7plo#ent (ontract as
follo%s5
,. The >2NC a"rees to eplo# and train the 7MP/OB77, and the
7MP/OB77 a"rees to dili"entl# and faithfull# %or& %ith the >2NC, as Money
Sorter and Counter.
*. The 7MP/OB77 shall perfor aon" others, the follo%in" duties and
responsibilities5
i. Sort out bills accordin" to colorF
ii. (ount each denoination per hundred, either anuall# or %ith the aid
of a countin" achineF
iii. 6rap and label bills per hundredF
iv. Put the %rapped bills into bundlesF and
v. Subit bundled bills to the ban& teller for verification.
:. The 7MP/OB77 shall under"o a trainin" period of one 0,1 onth, after
%hich the >2NC shall deterine %hether or not heJshe should be allo%ed to
finish the reainin" ter of this (ontract.
3. The 7MP/OB77 shall be entitled to an initial copensation of P,,=.++ per
da#, sub'ect to ad'ustent in the sole 'ud"ent of the >2NC, pa#able ever#
,.th and end of the onth.1wphi1.nt
.. The re"ular %or& schedule of the 7MP/OB77 shall be five 0.1 da#s per
%ee&, fro Monda#s thru 8rida#s, at ei"ht 0=1 hours a da#. The 7MP/OB77
a# be re!uired to perfor overtie %or& as circustance a# %arrant, for
%hich overtie %or& heJshe HshallI be paid an additional copensation of
,*.K of his dail# rate if perfored durin" ordinar# da#s and ,:+K if
perfored durin" Saturda# or HaI rest da#.
<. The 7MP/OB77 shall li&e%ise be entitled to the follo%in" benefits5
i. Proportionate ,:th onth pa# based on his basic dail# %a"e.
ii. 8ive 0.1 da#s incentive leave.
iii. SSS preiu pa#ent.
;. The 7MP/OB77 binds hiselfJherself to abide Hb#I and copl# %ith all the
>2NC Rules and Re"ulations and Policies, and to conduct hiselfJherself in a
anner eApected of all eplo#ees of the >2NC.
=. The 7MP/OB77 ac&no%led"es the fact that heJshe had been eplo#ed
under a special eplo#ent pro"ra of the >2NC, for %hich reason the
standard hirin" re!uireents of the >2NC %ere not applied in hisJher case.
(onse!uentl#, the 7MP/OB77 ac&no%led"es and accepts the fact that the
ters and conditions of the eplo#ent "enerall# observed b# the >2NC
%ith respect to the >2NC4s re"ular eplo#ee are not applicable to the
7MP/OB77, and that therefore, the ters and conditions of the
7MP/OB774s eplo#ent %ith the >2NC shall be "overned solel# and
eAclusivel# b# this (ontract and b# the applicable rules and re"ulations that
the Departent of /abor and 7plo#ent a# issue in connection %ith the
eplo#ent ofdisabled and handicapped %or&ers. More specificall#, the
7MP/OB77 hereb# ac&no%led"es that the provisions of >oo& SiA of the
/abor (ode of the Philippines as aended, particularl# on re"ulation of
eplo#ent and separation pa# are not applicable to hiJher.
2
-. The 7plo#ent (ontract shall be for a period of siA 0<1 onths or fro
GG to GG unless earlier terinated b# the >2NC for an# 'ust or reasonable
cause. 2n# continuation or eAtension of this (ontract shall be in %ritin" and
therefore this (ontract %ill autoaticall# eApire at the end of its ters unless
rene%ed in %ritin" b# the >2NC.
IN 6ITN7SS 6H7R7O8, the parties, have hereunto affiAed their si"natureHsI
this GG da# of GGG, GGG at Intrauros, Manila, Philippines.
In ,-==, t%o 0*1 deaf$utes %ere hired under this 2"reeentF in ,-=- another t%o 0*1F
in ,--+, nineteen 0,-1F in ,--, siA 0<1F in ,--*, siA 0<1 and in ,--:, t%ent#$one 0*,1.
Their eplo#entHsI %ere rene%ed ever# siA onths such that b# the tie this case
arose, there %ere fift#$siA 0.<1 deaf$utes %ho %ere eplo#ed b# respondent under the
said eplo#ent a"reeent. The last one %as Thela Malindo# %ho %as eplo#ed in
,--* and %hose contract eApired on )ul# ,--:.
AAA AAA AAA
Disclaiin" that coplainants %ere re"ular eplo#ees, respondent 8ar 7ast >an& and
Trust (opan# aintained that coplainants %ho are a special class of %or&ers G the
hearin" ipaired eplo#ees %ere hired teporaril# under HaI special eplo#ent
arran"eent %hich %as a result of overtures ade b# soe civic and political
personalities to the respondent >an&F that coplainantHsI %ere hired due to ?pa&iusap?
%hich ust be considered in the li"ht of the conteAt career and %or&in" environent
%hich is to aintain and stren"then a corps of professionals trained and !ualified
officers and re"ular eplo#ees %ho are baccalaureate de"ree holders fro eAcellent
schools %hich is an unbendin" polic# in the hirin" of re"ular eplo#eesF that in addition
to this, trainin" continues so that the re"ular eplo#ee "ro%s in the corporate ladderF
that the idea of hirin" handicapped %or&ers %as acceptable to the onl# on a special
arran"eent basisF that it %as adopted the special pro"ra to help tide over a "roup of
%or&ers such as deaf$utes li&e the coplainants %ho could do anual %or& for the
respondent >an&F that the tas& of countin" and sortin" of bills %hich %as bein"
perfored b# tellers could be assi"ned to deaf$utes that the countin" and sortin" of
one# are tellerin" %or&s %hich %ere al%a#s lo"icall# and naturall# part and parcel of
the tellers4 noral functionsF that fro the be"innin" there have been no separate ites
in the respondent >an& plantilla for sortes or countersF that the tellers theselves
alread# did the sortin" and countin" chore as a re"ular feature and inte"ral part of their
duties 0p. -;, Records1F that throu"h the ?pa&iusap? of 2rturo >or'al, the tellers %ere
relieved of this tas& of countin" and sortin" bills in favor of deaf$utes %ithout creatin"
ne% positions as there is no position either in the respondent or in an# other ban& in the
Philippines %hich deals %ith purel# countin" and sortin" of bills in ban&in" operations.
Petitioners specified %hen each of the %as hired and diissed, viz5
7
N2M7 O8 P7TITION7R 6ORCP/2(7 Date Hired Date Disissed
,. M2RIT7S >7RN2RDO Intrauros ,*$Nov$-+ ,;$Nov$-:
*. 7/VIR2 EO DI2M2NT7 Intrauros *3$)an$-+ ,,$)an$-3
:. R7>7((2 7. D2VID Intrauros ,<$2pr$-+ *:$Oct$-:
3. D2VID P. P2S(D2/ >el$2ir ,.$Oct$== *,$Nov$-3
.. R2LD7/ 7STI//7R Intrauros *$)ul$-* 3$)an$-3
<. 2/>7RT H2//2R7 6est 3$)an$-, -$)an$-3
;. 7DMDND M. (ORT7M >el$2ir ,.$)an$-, :$Dec$-:
=. )OS7/ITO O. 2EDON Intrauros .$Nov$-+ ,;$Nov$-:
-. E7ORE7 P. /IEDT2N )R. Intrauros <$Sep$=- ,-$)an$-3
,+. (7/SO M. B2M2R Intrauros =$8eb$-: =$2u"$-:
,,. 2/7N E. (ORPDM Intrauros ,.$8eb$-: ,.$2u"$-:
,*. RON2/D M. D7/8IN Intrauros **$8eb$-: **$2u"$-:
,:. RO67N2 M. T2>2LD7RO Intrauros **$8eb$-: **$2u"$-:
,3. (OR2MON (. D7/OS R7B7S Intrauros =$8eb$-: =$2u"$-:
,.. RO>7RT E. NOOR2 Intrauros ,.$8eb$-: ,.$2u"$-:
,<. MI/2EROS O. /7LDIE2N Intrauros ,$8eb$-: ,$2u"$-:
,;. 2DRI2N2 8. T2T/ONEH2RI Intrauros **$)an$-: **$)ul$-:
,=. IC7 (2>DNDD(OS Intrauros *3$8eb$-: *3$2u"$-:
,-. (O(OB NO>7//O Intrauros **$8eb$-: **$2u"$-:
*+. DOR7ND2 (2TIM>DH2N Intrauros ,.$8eb$-: ,.$2u"$-:
*,. RO>7RT M2R(7/O 6est :, )D/ -: = ,$2u"$-:
**. /I/I>7TH L. M2RMO/7)O 6est ,.$)un$-+ *,$Nov$-:
*:. )OS7 7. S2/7S 6est <$2u"$-* ,*$Oct$-:
*3. IS2>7/ M2M2D2E 6est =$Ma#$-* ,+$Nov$-:
*.. VIO/7T2 E. MONT7S Intrauros *$8eb$-+ ,.$)an$-3
*<. 2/>INO T7(SON Intrauros ;$Nov$-, ,+$Nov$-:
*;. M7/ODB >. ERD7/2 6est *=$Oct$-, :$Nov$-:
*=. >7RN2D7TH D. 2E7RO 6est ,-$Dec$-+ *;$Dec$-:
*-. (BNTHI2 D7 V7R2 >el$2ir *<$)un$-+ :$Dec$-:
:+. /2NI R. (ORT7M >el$2ir ,.$Oct$== ,+$Dec$-:
:,. M2RI2 IS2>7/ >.(ON(7P(ION 6est <$Sep$-+ <$8eb$-3
:*. DINDO V2/7RIO Intrauros :+$Ma#$-: :+$Nov$-:
::. M7N2ID2 M2T2 Intrauros ,+$8eb$-: ,+$2u"$-:
:3. 2RI7/ D7/ PI/2R Intrauros *3$8eb$-: *3$2u"$-:
3
:.. M2RE2R7T (7(I/I2 (2NOM2 Intrauros *;$)ul$-+ 3$8eb$-3
:<. TH7/M2 S7>2STI2N Intrauros ,*$Nov$-+ ,;$Nov$-:
:;. M2. )72N7TT7 (7RV2NT7S 6est <$)un$-* ;$Dec$-:
:=. )72NNI7 R2MI/ Intrauros *:$2pr$-+ ,*$Oct$-:
:-. ROM2ID2 P2S(D2/ >el$2ir *+$2pr$=- *-$Oct$-:
3+. PINCB >2/O/O2 6est :$)un$-, *$Dec$-:
3,. 7/IM2>7TH V7NTDR2 6est ,*$Mar$-+ 87> -3 HsicI
3*. ER2(7 S. P2RDO 6est 3$2pr$-+ ,:$Mar$-3
3:. RI(O TIMOS2 Intrauros *=$2pr$-: *=$Oct$-:
2s earlier noted, the labor arbiter and, on appeal, the N/R( ruled a"ainst herein
petitioners. Hence, this recourse to this (ourt.
9
The Ruling o the !"RC
In affirin" the rulin" of the labor arbiter that herein petitioners could not be deeed
re"ular eplo#ees under 2rticle *=+ of the /abor (ode, as aended, Respondent
(oission ratiocinated as follo%s5
6e a"ree that 2rt. *=+ is not controllin" herein. 6e "ive due
credence to the conclusion that coplainants %ere hired as an
accoodation to HtheI recoendation of civic oriented
personalities %hose eplo#entHsI %ere covered b# . . . 7plo#ent
(ontractHsI %ith special provisions on duration of contract as specified
under 2rt. =+. Hence, as correctl# held b# the /abor 2rbiter a #uo, the
ters of the contract shall be the la% bet%een the parties.
1-
The N/R( also declared that the Ma"na (arta for Disabled Persons %as not applicable,
?considerin" the prevailin" circustancesJilieu of the case.?
$ssues
In their Meorandu, petitioners cite the follo%in" "rounds in support of their cause5
I. The Honorable (oission coitted "rave abuse of discretion in
holdin" that the petitioners G one# sorters and counters %or&in" in
a ban& G %ere not re"ular eplo#ees.
II. The Honorable (oission coitted "rave abuse of discretion in
holdin" that the eplo#ent contracts si"ned and rene%ed b# the
petitioners G %hich provide for a period of siA 0<1 onths G %ere
valid.
III. The Honorable (oission coitted "rave abuse of discretion
in not appl#in" the provisions of the Ma"na (arta for the Disabled
0Republic 2ct No. ;*;;1, on proscription a"ainst discriination
a"ainst disabled persons.
11
In the ain, the (ourt %ill resolve %hether petitioners have becoe re"ular eplo#ees.
This Court%s Ruling
The petition is eritorious. Ho%ever, onl# the eplo#ees, %ho %or&ed for ore than siA
onths and %hose contracts %ere rene%ed are deeed re"ular. Hence, their disissal
fro eplo#eent %as ille"al.
&reli'inary Matter5
&ropriety o Certiorari
Respondent 8ar 7ast >an& and Trust (opan# ar"ues that a revie% of the findin"s of
facts of the N/R( is not allo%ed in a petition for certiorari. Specificall#, it aintains that
the (ourt cannot pass upon the findin"s of public respondent that petitioners %ere not
re"ular eplo#ees.
True, the (ourt, as a rule, does not revie% the factual findin"s of public respondents in
a certiorari proceedin". In resolvin" %hether the petitioners have becoe re"ular
eplo#ees, %e shall not chan"e the facts found b# the public respondent. Our tas& is
erel# to deterine %hether the N/R( coitted "rave abuse of discretion in appl#in"
the la% to the established facts, as above$!uoted fro the assailed Decision.
Main $ssue
(re &etitioners Regular )'ployeeO
Petitioners aintain that the# should be considered re"ular eplo#ees, because their
tas& as one# sorters and counters %as necessar# and desirable to the business of
respondent ban&. The# further alle"e that their contracts served erel# to preclude the
application of 2rticle *=+ and to bar the fro becoin" re"ular eplo#ees.
4
Private respondent, on the other hand, subits that petitioners %ere hired onl# as
?special %or&ers and should not in an# %a# be considered as part of the re"ular
copleent of the >an&.?
12
Rather, the# %ere ?special? %or&ers under 2rticle =+ of the
/abor (ode. Private respondent contends that it never solicited the services of
petitioners, %hose eplo#ent %as erel# an ?accoodation? in response to the
re!uests of "overnent officials and civic$inded citi9ens. The# %ere told fro the
start, ?%ith the assistance of "overnent representatives,? that the# could not becoe
re"ular eplo#ees because there %ere no plantilla positions for ?one# sorters,? %hose
tas& used to be perfored b# tellers. Their contracts %ere rene%ed several ties, not
because of need ?but erel# for huanitarian reasons.? Respondent subits that ?as of
the present, the ?special position? that %as created for the petitioners no lon"er eAistHsI
in private respondent Hban&I, after the latter had decided not to rene% an#ore their
special eplo#ent contracts.?
2t the outset, let it be &no%n that this (ourt appreciates the nobilit# of private
respondent4s effort to provide eplo#ent to ph#sicall# ipaired individuals and to
a&e the ore productive ebers of societ#. Ho%ever, %e cannot allo% it to elude
the le"al conse!uences of that effort, sipl# because it no% dees their eplo#ent
irrelevant. The facts, vie%ed in li"ht of the /abor (ode and the Ma"na (arta for
Disabled Persons, indubitabl# sho% that the petitioners, eAcept siAteen of the, should
be deeed re"ular eplo#ees. 2s such, the# have ac!uired le"al ri"hts that this (ourt
is dut#$bound to protect and uphold, not as a atter of copassion but as a
conse!uence of la% and 'ustice.
The unifor eplo#ent contracts of the petitioners stipulated that the# shall be trained
for a period of one onth, after %hich the eplo#er shall deterine %hether or not the#
should be allo%ed to finish the <$onth ter of the contract. 8urtherore, the eplo#er
a# terinate the contract at an# tie for a 'ust and reasonable cause. Dnless rene%ed
in %ritin" b# the eplo#er, the contract shall autoaticall# eApire at the end of the
ter.1wphi1.nt
2ccordin" to private respondent, the eplo#ent contracts %ere prepared in
accordance %ith 2rticle =+ of the /abor code, %hich providesF
2rt. =+. )'ploy'ent agree'ent. G 2n# eplo#er %ho eplo#s
handicapped %or&ers shall enter into an eplo#ent a"reeent %ith
the, %hich a"reeent shall include5
0a1 The naes and addresses of the handicapped %or&ers to be
eplo#edF
0b1 The rate to be paid the handicapped %or&ers %hich shall be not
less than sevent# five 0;.K1 per cent of the applicable le"al iniu
%a"eF
0c1 The duration of eplo#ent periodF and
0d1 The %or& to be perfored b# handicapped %or&ers.
The eplo#ent a"reeent shall be sub'ect to inspection b# the
Secretar# of /abor or his dul# authori9ed representatives.
The stipulations in the eplo#ent contracts indubitabl# confor %ith the aforecited
provision. Succeedin" events and the enactent of R2 No. ;*;; 0the Ma"na (arta for
Disabled Persons1,
1)
ho%ever, 'ustif# the application of 2rticle *=+ of the /abor (ode.
Respondent ban& entered into the aforesaid contract %ith a total of .< handicapped
%or&ers and rene%ed the contracts of :; of the. In fact, t%o of the %or&ed fro ,-==
to ,--:. Veril#, the rene%al of the contracts of the handicapped %or&ers and the hirin"
of others lead to the conclusion that their tas&s %ere beneficial and necessar# to the
ban&. More iportant, these facts sho% that the# %ere !ualified to perfor the
responsibilities of their positions. In other %ords, their disabilit# did not render the
un!ualified or unfit for the tas&s assi"ned to the.
In this li"ht, the Ma"na (arta for Disabled Persons andates that a #ualiied disabled
eplo#ee should be "iven the sae ters and conditions of eplo#ent as a
#ualiied able$bodied person. Section . of the Ma"na (arta provides5
Sec. .. )#ual *pportunity or )'ploy'ent. G No disabled person
shall be denied access to opportunities for suitable eplo#ent. 2
!ualified disabled eplo#ee shall be sub'ect to the sae ters and
conditions of eplo#ent and the sae copensation, privile"es,
benefits, frin"e benefits, incentives or allo%ances as a !ualified able
bodied person.
The fact that the eplo#ees %ere !ualified disabled persons necessaril# reoves the
eplo#ent contracts fro the abit of 2rticle =+. Since the Ma"na (arta accords
the the ri"hts of !ualified able$bodied persons, the# are thus covered b# 2rticle *=+ of
the /abor (ode, %hich provides5
2rt. *=+. Regular and Casual )'ploy'ent. G The provisions of
%ritten a"reeent to the contrar# not%ithstandin" and re"ardless of
the oral a"reeent of the parties, an eplo#ent shall be deeed to
5
be re"ular %here the eplo#ee has been en"a"ed to perfor
activities %hich are usuall# necessar# or desirable in the usual
business or trade of the eplo#er, eAcept %here the eplo#ent has
been fiAed for a specific pro'ect or underta&in" the copletion or
terination of %hich has been deterined at the tie of the
en"a"eent of the eplo#ee or %here the %or& or services to be
perfored is seasonal in nature and the eplo#ent is for the
duration of the season.
2n eplo#ent shall be deeed to be casual if it is not covered b#
the precedin" para"raph5 Provided, That, an# eplo#ee %ho has
rendered at least one #ear of service, %hether such service is
continuous or bro&en, shall be considered as re"ular eplo#ee %ith
respect to the activit# in %hich he is eplo#ed and his eplo#ent
shall continue %hile such activit# eAists.
The test of %hether an eplo#ee is re"ular %as laid do%n in +e "eon v. !"RC,
1*
in
%hich this (ourt held5
The priar# standard, therefore, of deterinin" re"ular eplo#ent
is the reasonable connection bet%een the particular activit#
perfored b# the eplo#ee in relation to the usual trade or business
of the eplo#er. The test is %hether the forer is usuall# necessar#
or desirable in the usual business or trade of the eplo#er. The
connection can be deterined b# considerin" the nature of the %or&
perfored and its relation to the schee of the particular business or
trade in its entiret#. 2lso if the eplo#ee has been perforin" the 'ob
for at least one #ear, even if the perforance is not continuous and
erel# interittent, the la% dees repeated and continuin" need for
its perforance as sufficient evidence of the necessit# if not
indispensibilit# of that activit# to the business. Hence, the eplo#ent
is considered re"ular, but onl# %ith respect to such activit#, and %hile
such activit# eAist.
6ithout a doubt, the tas& of countin" and sortin" bills is necessar# and desirable to the
business of respondent ban&. 6ith the eAception of siAteen of the, petitioners
perfored these tas&s for ore than siA onths. Thus, the follo%in" t%ent#$seven
petitioners should be deeed re"ular eplo#ees5 Marites >ernardo, 7lvira Eo
Diaante, Rebecca 7. David, David P. Pascual, Ra!uel 7stiller, 2lbert Hallare, 7dund
M. (orte9, )oselito O. 2"don, Eeor"e P. /i"utan )r., /ilibeth L. Marole'o, )ose 7.
Sales, Isabel Maaua", Violeta E. Montes, 2lbino Tecson, Melod# V. Eruela,
>ernadeth D. 2"ero, (#nthia de Vera, /ani R. (orte9, Ma. Isabel >. (oncepcion,
Mar"aret (ecilia (ano9a, Thela Sebastian, Ma. )eanette (ervantes, )eannie Rail,
Ro9aida Pascual, Pin&# >aloloa, 7li9abeth Ventura and Erace S. Pardo.
2s held b# the (ourt, ?2rticles *=+ and *=, of the /abor (ode put an end to the
pernicious practice of a&in" peranent casuals of our lo%l# eplo#ees b# the siple
eApedient of eAtendin" to the probationar# appointents, ad ininitu'.?
1+
The contract
si"ned b# petitioners is a&in to a probationar# eplo#ent, durin" %hich the ban&
deterined the eplo#ees4 fitness for the 'ob. 6hen the ban& rene%ed the contract
after the lapse of the siA$onth probationar# period, the eplo#ees thereb# becae
re"ular eplo#ees.
1,
No eplo#er is allo%ed to deterine indefinitel# the fitness of its
eplo#ees.
2s re"ular eplo#ees, the t%ent#$seven petitioners are entitled to securit# of tenureF
that is, their services a# be terinated onl# for a 'ust or authori9ed cause. >ecause
respondent failed to sho% such cause,
17
these t%ent#$seven petitioners are deeed
ille"all# disissed and therefore entitled to bac& %a"es and reinstateent %ithout loss
of seniorit# ri"hts and other privile"es.
1.
(onsiderin" the alle"ation of respondent that
the 'ob of one# sortin" is no lon"er available because it has been assi"ned bac& to
the tellers to %ho it ori"inall# belon"ed,
1.
petitioners are hereb# a%arded separation
pa# in lieu of reinstateent.
2-
>ecause the other siAteen %or&ed onl# for siA onths, the# are not deeed re"ular
eplo#ees and hence not entitled to the sae benefits.
(pplicability o the
,rent Ruling
Respondent ban&, citin" ,rent School v. -a'ora
21
in %hich the (ourt upheld the
validit# of an eplo#ent contract %ith a fiAed ter, ar"ues that the parties entered into
the contract on e!ual footin". It adds that the petitioners had in fact an advanta"e,
because the# %ere bac&ed b# then DS6D Secretar# Mita Pardo de Tavera and
Representative 2rturo >or'al.
6e are not persuaded. The ter liit in the contract %as preised on the fact that the
petitioners %ere disabled, and that the ban& had to deterine their fitness for the
position. Indeed, its validit# is based on 2rticle =+ of the /abor (ode. >ut as noted
earlier, petitioners proved theselves to be #ualiied disabled persons %ho, under the
Ma"na (arta for Disabled Persons, are entitled to ters and conditions of eplo#ent
en'o#ed b# #ualiied able$bodied individualsF hence, 2rticle =+ does not appl# because
petitioners are #ualiied for their positions. The validation of the liit iposed on their
6
contracts, iposed b# reason of their disabilit#, %as a "larin" instance of the ver#
ischief sou"ht to be addressed b# the ne% la%.
Moreover, it ust be ephasi9ed that a contract of eplo#ent is ipressed %ith
public interest.
22
Provisions of applicable statutes are deeed %ritten into the contract,
and the ?parties are not at libert# to insulate theselves and their relationships fro the
ipact of labor la%s and re"ulations b# sipl# contractin" %ith each other.?
2)
(learl#,
the a"reeent of the parties re"ardin" the period of eplo#ent cannot prevail over the
provisions of the Ma"na (arta for Disabled Persons, %hich andate that petitioners
ust be treated as !ualified able$bodied eplo#ees.
Respondent4s reason for terinatin" the eplo#ent of petitioners is instructive.
>ecause the >an"&o Sentral n" Pilipinas 0>SP1 re!uired that cash in the ban& be turned
over to the >SP durin" business hours fro =5++ a.. to .5++ p.., respondent resorted
to ni"httie sortin" and countin" of one#. Thus, it reasons that this tas& ?could not be
done b# deaf utes because of their ph#sical liitations as it is ver# ris&# for the to
travel at ni"ht.?
2*
6e find no basis for this ar"uent. Travellin" at ni"ht involves ris&s to
handicapped and able$bodied persons ali&e. This eAcuse cannot 'ustif# the terination
of their eplo#ent.
*ther .rounds Cited by Respondent
Respondent ar"ues that petitioners %ere erel# ?accoodated? eplo#ees. This fact
does not chan"e the nature of their eplo#ent. 2s earlier noted, an eplo#ee is
re"ular because of the nature of %or& and the len"th of service, not because of the
ode or even the reason for hirin" the.
7!uall# unavailin" are private respondent4s ar"uents that it did not "o out of its %a# to
recruit petitioners, and that its plantilla did not contain their positions. In ". T. +atu
v. !"RC,
2+
the (ourt held that ?the deterination of %hether eplo#ent is casual or
re"ular does not depend on the %ill or %ord of the eplo#er, and the procedure of hirin"
. . . but on the nature of the activities perfored b# the eplo#ee, and to soe eAtent,
the len"th of perforance and its continued eAistence.?
Private respondent ar"ues that the petitioners %ere infored fro the start that the#
could not becoe re"ular eplo#ees. In fact, the ban& adds, the# a"reed %ith the
stipulation in the contract re"ardin" this point. Still, %e are not persuaded. The %ell$
settled rule is that the character of eplo#ent is deterined not b# stipulations in the
contract, but b# the nature of the %or& perfored.
2,
Other%ise, no eplo#ee can
becoe re"ular b# the siple eApedient of incorporatin" this condition in the contract of
eplo#ent.
In this li"ht, %e iterate our rulin" in Ro'ares v. !"RC5
27
2rt. *=+ %as eplaced in our statute boo&s to prevent the
circuvention of the eplo#ee4s ri"ht to be secure in his tenure b#
indiscriinatel# and copletel# rulin" out all %ritten and oral
a"reeents inconsistent %ith the concept of re"ular eplo#ent
defined therein. 6here an eplo#ee has been en"a"ed to perfor
activities %hich are usuall# necessar# or desirable in the usual
business of the eplo#er, such eplo#ee is deeed a re"ular
eplo#ee and is entitled to securit# of tenure not%ithstandin" the
contrar# provisions of his contract of eplo#ent.
AAA AAA AAA
2t this 'uncture, the leadin" case of ,rent School/
$nc. v. -a'ora proves instructive. 2s reaffired in subse!uent cases,
this (ourt has upheld the le"alit# of fiAed$ter eplo#ent. It ruled
that the decisive deterinant in ?ter eplo#ent? should not be the
activities that the eplo#ee is called upon to perfor but the da#
certain a"reed upon the parties for the coenceent and
terination of their eplo#ent relationship. >ut this (ourt %ent on to
sa# that %here fro the circustances it is apparent that the periods
have been iposed to preclude ac!uisition of tenurial securit# b# the
eplo#ee, the# should be struc& do%n or disre"arded as contrar# to
public polic# and orals.
In renderin" this Decision, the (ourt ephasi9es not onl# the constitutional bias in favor
of the %or&in" class, but also the concern of the State for the pli"ht of the disabled. The
noble ob'ectives of Ma"na (arta for Disabled Persons are not based erel# on charit#
or accoodation, but on 'ustice and the e!ual treatent of #ualiiedpersons, disabled
or not. In the present case, the handicap of petitioners 0deaf$utes1 is not a hindrance
to their %or&. The elo!uent proof of this stateent is the repeated rene%al of their
eplo#ent contracts. 6h# then should the# be disissed, sipl# because the# are
ph#sicall# ipairedO The (ourt believes, that, after sho%in" their fitness for the %or&
assi"ned to the, the# should be treated and "ranted the sae ri"hts li&e an# other
re"ular eplo#ees.
In this li"ht, %e note the Office of the Solicitor Eeneral4s pra#er 'oinin" the petitioners4
cause.
2.
6H7R78OR7, preises considered, the Petition is hereb# ER2NT7D. The )une *+,
,--. Decision and the 2u"ust 3, ,--. Resolution of the N/R( are R7V7RS7D and
S7T 2SID7. Respondent 8ar 7ast >an& and Trust (opan# is hereb# ORD7R7D to
7
pa# bac& %a"es and separation pa# to each of the follo%in" t%ent#$seven 0*;1
petitioners, nael#, Marites >ernardo, 7lvira Eo Diaante, Rebecca 7. David, David P.
Pascual, Ra!uel 7stiller, 2lbert Hallare, 7dund M. (orte9, )oselito O. 2"don, Eeor"e
P. /i"utan )r., /iliberh L. Marole'o, )ose 7. Sales, Isabel Maaua", Violeta E.
Montes, 2lbino Tecson, Melod# V. Eruela, >ernadeth D. 2"ero, (#nthia de Vera, /ani R.
(orte9, Ma. Isabel >. (oncepcion, Mar"aret (ecilia (ano9a, Thela Sebastian, Ma.
)eanette (ervantes, )eannie Rail, Ro9aida Pascual, Pin&# >aloloa, 7li9abeth Ventura
and Erace S. Pardo. The N/R( is hereb# directed to copute the eAact aount due
each of said eplo#ees, pursuant to eAistin" la%s and re"ulations, %ithin fifteen da#s
fro the finalit# of this Decision. No costs.1wphi1.nt
SO ORD7R7D.
8