Fulache vs ABS-CBN Corporation AUTHOR: Magsino, Patricia Marie C.

[G.R. No. 183810, Jan. 21, 2010] NOTES:

TOPIC: Bargaining unit
PONENTE: Brion, J.
FACTS:
1.) REGULARIZATION CASE
Petitioners Fulache et. al. filed two separate complaints for regularization, unfair labor practices, and severa
money claims (regularization case) against ABS-CBM Broadcasting Corporation-Cebu
Petitioners alleged that ABS-CBN and ABS-CBN Rank-and-File Employees Union executed a collectiv
bargaining agreement, they only became aware of it upon obtaining copied of the agreement
The petitioners learned that they were excluded from its coverage as ABS-CBN considered them temporar
and not regular employees
They claim that they had already rendered more than a year service and should be recognized as regula
employees entitled to security of tenure and to the privileges and benefits enjoyed by regular employees
ABS-CBN claims Fulache et. al. are mere talents and are considered independent contractors, contracted on
case-to-case basis, contracts are terminated once program, production, or segment is completed. They are pai
a pre-arranged consideration called talent fee
LABOR ARBITER: It held that the petitioners are regular employees and are entitled to the benefit
privileges of regular employee
ABS-CBN appealed the ruling to the NLRC contending that the petitioner are independent contractors and no
regular employees

2.) ILLEGAL DISMISSAL CASE

Pending appeal of the Regularization case, ABS-CBN dismissed the petitioners for their refusal to sign u
contracts of employment with service contractor Able Services
The petitioners then filed a complaint for illegal dismissal
LABOR ARBITER: It held that the petitioners were dismissed due to redundancy, an authorized cause unde
the law and awarded them separation pay of 1 months salary for every year of service
ABS-CBN appealed to NLRC, and it held that there was an employer-employee relationship betwee
petitioners and ABS-CBN as the company exercised control over the petitioners in the performance of the
work, they were engaged in the performance of activities usually necessary or desirable in ABS-CBNs trad
or business, they cant be considered contractual employees as they were not paid for the result of their wor
but on a monthly basis and were required to do their work in accordance with the companys schedule
NLRC reversed the LAs ruling and found the petitioners were illegally dismissed and awarded them
backwages and separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, they were also awarded CBA benefits
The petitioners and ABS-CBN both moved for reconsideration and NLRC resolved these motions b
reinstating the LAs decision

NLRC ruling: As for the regularization case, it held that the petitioners were regular employees entitled to th
benefits and privileges of regular employees. As for the illegal dismissal case, the petitioners while recognized a
regular employees, they were declared dismissed due to redundancy.

The petitioners moved for a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 charging the NLRC with grave abuse o
discretion, the CA resolved this by ruling that the petitioners were not illegally dismissed as they were dismisse
due to redundancy

Petitioners moved for reconsideration, but the CA denied this motion hence the petition
ISSUE(S):
1.) Are the petitioners regular employees?
2.) Are the petitioners entitled to CBA benefits?
3.) Were the petitioners illegally dismissed?

HELD:
1. YES.
2. YES.
3. YES.

RATIO:

1.) The petitioners are regular employees; the company exercised control over the petitioners in the performance o
their work, they were engaged in the performance of activities usually necessary or desirable in ABS-CBNs trad
or business, they cant be considered contractual employees as they were not paid for the result of their work bu
on a monthly basis and were required to do their work in accordance with the companys schedule

2.) As regular employees, the petitioners fall within the coverage of the bargaining unit are entitled to benefits as
matter of law. The petitioners are members of the appropriate bargaining unit because they are rank-and-fil
employees and do not belong to any of the excluded categories.

3.) The dismissal of the petitioners were found to be attended with bad faith. ABS-CBN took matters on their ow
hands and terminated the petitioners services pending its own appeal. ABS-CBN intended to transfer th
petitioner and their services to a service contractor, and dismissed them when they refused to sign with the servic
contractor. ABS-CBN forgot that by claiming redundancy; they impliedly admitted that the petitioners wer
regular employees and can only be terminated by authorized causes defined under the Labor Code.

CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE:

DISSENTING/CONCURRING OPINION(S):