ERWIN N.

DAVID
JD 1-1

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

Department of Labor and Employment
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
National Capital Region
Quezon City

JUAN DELA CRUZ,

Complainant,
NLRC-NCR CASE NO.VI-07-51494-17
For: Illegal Dismissal/ Money Claims
and Damages
-versus-

FIRST CLASS JANITORIAL SERVICES,

Respondents,

x-----------------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINANT POSITION PAPER

COME NOW, COMPLAINANT, by counsel and unto this

Honorable Office in compliance with the mandatory requirement of this
office respectfully submit this Position Paper in support of him
complaint as follows;

PREFATORY STATEMENT

Security of tenure is a constitutionally guaranteed right.

Employees may not be terminated from their regular employment
except for just or authorized causes under the Labor Code and other
pertinent laws. To protect the labor from the employers oppressions,
our Labor laws as well as the present Constitution provide rigid
parameter to cause a valid and legitimate dismissal and severance of
employment contract.
The present case is groundless, unwarranted so to speak as there
is no dismissal happened at the first place, its all conducted with
malice intent to the complainant.
ERWIN N. DAVID
JD 1-1

THE PARTIES

1. JUAN DELA CRUZ, of legal age and Filipino, is the

complainant and was a regular employee of the respondent, as
represented by David, Rocamora and Associates where process and
notice from this court may be served Building 130 Aurora Blvd, Quezon
City who

2. FIRST CLASS JANITOR SERVICES is a corporation

engages in outsourcing janitorial services, owned by Erick Fabella,
being impleaded herein in his capacity as an Officer thereof, with an
office address at 3 rd Floor EXO Building, Arguelles Street, Jaro, Quezon
City.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

3. Complainant is a Janitor of the respondents company who

was hired on November 1, 2015, and not receiving minimum wage, and
later on the month May 1, 2016 he was regularized as an employee
entitled with minimum wage and meal allowances;

4. Starting November 2016, complainant was not able to

receive his meal allowance and at the end of the same year, his 13 th
month pay was not received by him as well;

5. On January 2017, respondent promise to the complainant

that the unpaid meal allowances and the 13 th month will be paid before
the end of the same month;

6. On March 2017, no payment was made by the respondent

and no response was made to the follow ups and inquiries of the
complainant regarding the said matter;

7. On July 31 2017, complainant received a letter from the

human resource department of the respondent informing him that his
employment will be terminated due to excessive absences and tardiness
and no wages was given to the complainant starting the said date;

8. During the whole year of 2017, complainant has been absent

only for 5 days, 4 of which is properly filed with prior notice of leave of
ERWIN N. DAVID
JD 1-1

absence and with only 6 instances of tardiness, relatively lower than

other regular employees who are not dismiss of employment;

9. Despite the letter and petition of the complainant and his

efforts to maintain his employment, it was ignored and the management
send a letter of dismissal of employment to the complainant as signed by
the owner respondent on September 15, 2017;

10. This case was set for mediation but parties failed to come up
with reasonable Compromised Agreement, hence, they were directed to
file their respective Position Paper.

ISSUES

I. WHETHER OR NOT COMPLAINANT WAS

ILLEGALLY DISMISSED FROM WORK

II. WHETHER OR NOT COMPLAINANT WAS ENTITLE

TO AND ENTITLED WITH FULL BACK AND THE
UNPAID MEAL ALLOWANCES, 13 th MONTH PAY,
and OTHER WAGES?

III. WHETHER OR NOT COMPLAINANT IS ENTITLED

TO MORAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES AND
TENPERCENT (10%) ATTORNEYS FEES FROM
THE TOTALMONETARY AWARD

ARGUMENTS

1. COMPLAINANT WAS ILLEGALLY DISMISSED FROM

THE SERVICE AND WAS ENTITLED WITH FULL
BACKWAGES;

11. Evident in the statement of facts that the complainant was

dismissed from employment without legal cause and basis. Our laws
and Constitutions sets out a parameter, i.e. legal grounds for dismissal
and two notice rule to suffice due process before an employment can be
terminated.

12. As provided by our Labor Code, employees can only be

terminated due to the following reasons:
ERWIN N. DAVID
JD 1-1

Art. 282. Termination by employer. An employer may

terminate an employment for any of the following causes:
1. Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee
of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in
connection with his work;
2. Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties;
3. Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in
him by his employer or duly authorized representative;
4. Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the
person of his employer or any immediate member of his
family or his duly authorized representatives; and
5. Other causes analogous to the foregoing.

13. As shown in the statement of facts, the complainant was

singled out from the rest of the regular employees who have worse
attendance and tardiness records. No records of the HR Department
were also shown that complainant has made misconducts and
disobedience. The respondents also failed to explain to the complainant
why his unpaid allowances and 13 th month pay was not received in due
time. It is clear that respondent dismissed the complainant without legal
basis.

2. COMPLAINANT IS ENTITLED TO MONETARY CLAIMS.

14. Full backwages refer to all compensations, including

allowances and other benefits with monetary equivalent, that should
have been earned by the employee but was not collected by him or her
because of unjust dismissal. It includes all the amounts he or she could
have earned starting from the date of dismissal up to the time of
reinstatement. Full backwages is a form of penalty imposed by law on
an employer who illegally dismisses his or her employee. Complainant
is also entitled to back wages as stated by our Labor Code:
Art. 279. Security of tenure. In cases of regular
employment, the employer shall not terminate the services of an
employee except for a just cause or when authorized by this Title.
An employee who is unjustly dismissed from work shall be
entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other
privileges and to his full backwages, inclusive of allowances, and
to his other benefits or their monetary equivalent computed from
the time his compensation was withheld from him up to the time
of his actual reinstatement. (As amended by Section 34, Republic
Act No. 6715, March 21, 1989)
ERWIN N. DAVID
JD 1-1

15. As complainant has served the corporate respondent in

more than a year, the former is entitled to such monetary claims
especially mandatory wages set up by the laws including those not paid
in time. The meal allowances, the 2016 13 th month pay and the unpaid
wages from Aug 2017 until the date of termination should be paid by
the respondent in addition to 13 th month pay accumulated for 2017.

3. COMPLANANT IS ENTITLED TO ATORNEYS FEES AND

COST OF LITIGATION

16. Complainant was compelled to hire the service of counsel to

espouse this instant case, incurring expenses connected with litigation. To
compensate these expenses, the award of attorneys fees which is ten
(10%) percent on top of the award and cost of litigation is proper and just.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the complainant respectfully prays that this

Honorable Office to order the respondents the follows;

1. To declare the respondent to be liable for the unpaid 2016 13 th

month pay, unpaid meal allowances, unpaid wages of days worked
by the complainant in addition to last pay in the form of 2017 13 th
month pay;
2. To pay the complainant for him full backwages computed
pursuant to the Labor Code;
3. To compensate the complainant in the amount of Php 100,000.00
by way of actual, moral and exemplary damages; and
4. 5. To pay ten (10%) percent attorneys fees on top of the
amount of the award due the complainant and cost of litigation.

Other reliefs as may be just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

September 03, 2017.

ERWIN N. DAVID
JD 1-1

ERWIN N. DAVID
Counsel for Accused-Appellant
IBP Lifetime NO. 015413
Roll No. 66893
MCLE II Compliance No. 0001587
David, Rocamora and Associates
Building 130 Aurora Blvd, Quezon City
ERWIN N. DAVID
JD 1-1

VERIFICATION/CERTIFICATION

I, JUAN DELA CRUZ, of legal age, Filipino and a resident of

Barangay San Roque, Marikina City, after having been duly
sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby depose and say:

l. I am the accused-appellant in the foregoing Brief;

2.I caused the preparation of the foregoing pleading;

3. I have read the same and the allegations therein are true and
correct of my personal knowledge or based on authentic
records.

4. I have not commenced any other action involving the same

issues in the Supreme Court or different divisions thereof or
any other tribunal or agency.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed my signature this

day of September 2017 at Quezon City.

JUAN DELA CRUZ

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2nd day of September

2010 at Quezon City,Philippines. Affiant exhibited to me his
Community Tax Certificate No. CC 125466 issued at San Roque,
Marikina City on January 04, 2017.

Atty. Jacinto dela Cruz

Notary Public

Doc. No.: 17
Page no.:8
Book no.:I
Series of 2017