The Court of Appeals has ordered a local recruiter and its foreign principal to pay an overseas Filipino worker amounting to $8,400 representing her compensation for the unexpired portion of her two-year contract after it found the local and foreign manning companies liable for illegal dismissal.
In a decision, the, CA through Associate Justice Ruben Reynaldo G. Roxas, ordered local recruiter Marinduquena International Manpower Services, Inc. and its foreign principal Ibrahim A. Al-Senea Recruitment Office to pay OFW Mary Ann B. Bancaso US$ 8,400, which is equivalent to her salary for the unexpired portion of her two-year contract and 10 per cent of the monetary award as attorney’s fees.
Bancaso complained that she was forced to work 18 hours daily and seven days a week to serve 13 members of two families in Saudi Arabia, but was still dismissed by her employer for no valid reasons.
The appellate court upheld the September 28, 2018 ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission which found that Bancaso “was constructively dismissed from service as a result of the unbearable and unreasonable working conditions imposed by her employer.”
It also affirmed the NLRC’s findings that “the quitclaim was invalid on the ground that it was not voluntarily executed and the consideration therefor is unreasonable” and that “the settlement agreement dubious.”
After an assiduous study of the case, the Court finds that the NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion because its finding of constructive dismissal is supported by substantial evidence,” the CA ruled.
Court records showed that Bancaso was deployed to Dammam City in Saudi Arabia on June 24, 2017 as a household service worker under a contract that she would work for her employer with only eight family members.
On August 8, 2017, she was repatriated to the Philippines and on September 25, 2017, she filed an illegal dismissal case against her local and foreign recruiters.
In her complaint, Bancaso alleged that she was forced to work for 18 hours a day and seven days a week “to clean rooms, do the laundry, iron clothes, and take care of the children and the mother of my employer.”
The OFW also complained that she “had no time to rest even for a while” because she was serving 13 family members.
She also alleged that she “tried to ask for medical assistance from my employer because my hands suffered numbness due to the heavy work load, but to no avail.”
Likewise, Bancaso said she informed her local recruiter of her “unbearable working conditions” but her complaint, she added, “made my employer more antagonistic.”
However, the complainant said she was asked to sign a document that she would not file a complaint against her recruiters otherwise she would not be able to go home.
Because of this, Bancaso asked the labor arbiter to render a ruling that she was illegally dismissed and be entitled to her salary equivalent to the unexpired portion of her contract. Her pleas were granted by the labor arbiter whose ruling was upheld with modification by the NLRC.
The local recruiter brought the case to the CA which denied the petition and affirmed the NLRC’s ruling.
“Significantly, both the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC found that private respondent was constructively dismissed because she was compelled to forego her employment due to unbearable working conditions,” the appellate court ruled.
“It is worthy to stress the well settled rule that in labor cases, the NLRC’s factual findings are accorded respect and even finality by the Court when they coincide with those of the Labor Arbiter and are supported by substantial evidence,” it said.