Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COURT OF APPEALS
Cebu City
NINETEENTH DIVISION
SM SHOEMART EMPLOYEES UNION UMP,
JUANA PAGAPONG, WARLITA BRAGAT, and
JOSEFINA SITOY,
Petitioners,
-versus- C.A.
SP
UDK-
No.
_____________
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION,
SM SHOEMART INCORPORATED and JERRY
PAGS,
Respondents.
X----------------------------------------/
MEMORANDUM
(For the Respondents)
COMES NOW RESPONDENTS, through undersigned
counsels most respectfully unto this Honorable Court state:
Prefatory Statement:
By way of reminder, let it be echoed:
The law does not prohibit contractualization perse.
What it prohibits is the evils of LABOR ONLY
CONTRACTING.
has
(a)
The contractor or subcontractor does not
have substantial capital or investment to actually
perform the job, work or service under its own account
and responsibility; and
(b) The employees recruited, supplied or placed
by such contractor or subcontractor are performing
activities which are directly related to the main
business of the principal. Sasan, Sr. v. National
Labor Relations Commission 4th Division, G.R.
No. 176240, October 17, 2008, 569 SCRA 670.
I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE:
This is an action for Petition for Certiorari Under Rule 65
filed by the Petitioners assailing that the National Labor
Relations Commission Seventh (7th) Division gravely abuse
its discretion on finding that the Respondents are not guilty
of illegal dismissal, unfair labor practice and non-payment of
money claims.
The action stems from the decision of SM Inc., in not
renewing the contract between JP Manpower wherein the
latter supplied work force for the former. The petitioners are
employees of JP Manpower and assigned at SM Inc.
On March 27, 2016, the Honorable Labor Arbiter
rendered decision in the foregoing case dismissing the
complaint with the following fallo:
"WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered: (1)
finding
the
respondents
SM
SHOEMART
INCORPORATION AND JERRY and PAGS and JP
Manpower Agency not guilty of illegal dismissal.
SO ORDERED.