Scribd
Upload
89 views1 page

ISSUE: Whether or Not MERALCO Is The Employer of The Fired Security Guards

MERALCO contracted with multiple security agencies to provide guards over several years. When one contract expired, the guards were absorbed by the new agency but later not given work. The guards sued MERALCO and the security agencies. While lower courts ruled the second agency must reinstate the guards and MERALCO was jointly liable, the Court of Appeals determined that MERALCO was actually the employer of the guards. The Supreme Court will determine if MERALCO can be considered the employer.

Uploaded by

maanyag6685
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
89 views1 page

ISSUE: Whether or Not MERALCO Is The Employer of The Fired Security Guards

MERALCO contracted with multiple security agencies to provide guards over several years. When one contract expired, the guards were absorbed by the new agency but later not given work. The guards sued MERALCO and the security agencies. While lower courts ruled the second agency must reinstate the guards and MERALCO was jointly liable, the Court of Appeals determined that MERALCO was actually the employer of the guards. The Supreme Court will determine if MERALCO can be considered the employer.

Uploaded by

maanyag6685
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

463 SCRA 331 – Labor Law – Labor Standards – Indirect Employer – Labor Only Agency

Rogelio Benamira et al were security guards who worked for PSI (People’s Security, Inc.). PSI was the security agency contracted by MERALCO (Manila Electric
Company). The contract between PSI and MERALCO expired. MERALCO subsequently contracted ASDAI (Armed Security and Detective Agency, Inc.) as its new
security agency. ASDAI absorbed Benamira et al upon MERALCO’s advice. After two years, the contract between ASDAI and MERALCO expired. MERALCO
subsequently contracted AFSISI (Advance Forces Security and Investigation Services, Inc.). AFSISI did not schedule any work for Benamira et al. It was
interpreted as a constructive dismissal. Benamira sued MERALO, ASDAI, and AFSISI.
The Labor Arbiter ruled that ASDAI should reinstate Benamira et al and that MERALCO is solidarily liable. No liability for AFSISI. NLRC affirmed LA. The CA
reversed the lower courts. The CA ruled that the employer is actually MERALCO.
ISSUE: Whether or not MERALCO is the employer of the fired security guards.

You might also like