Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Time
RADA vs. NLRC
G.R. No. 96078. January 9,1992
FACTS:
Petitioner was hired as a ‘Driver’ by respondent for the extension
project of the Manila North Expressway wherein his contract was
extended several times until the project was completed
After such, petitioner filed a Complaint before the NLRC, National
Capital Region, Department of Labor and Employment for
nonpayment of separation pay and overtime pay
Philnor argues that petitioner did not render overtime services
and had signed a quitclaim
Petitioner filed an amended complaint for illegal dismissal and
non-payment of overtime pay although he was made to render 3
hours overtime work from Monday to Saturday for a period of
three years
Respondents argue that that petitioner was allowed to use a
project vehicle which he used drop off some ten employees along
EDSA, on his way home to Marikina and that the time used by
petitioner to and from his residence to the project site from 5:30
A.M. to 7:00 A.M. and from 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M., or about three
hours daily, was not overtime work as he was merely enjoying the
benefit and convenience of free transportation provided by
Philnor
LA ruled that petitioner was entitled to the overtime pay
NLRC reversed the decision