Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 75 views

    Ameer Overseas Placement Agency

    Uploaded by

    Jessy Francis
    1) Joy Cabiles was hired by Ameer Overseas Placement Agency to work in Taiwan for one year as quality control, but was instead asked to work as a cutter. She was terminated after just 18 days of work. 2) Cabiles filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against the agency and her Taiwan employer. The NLRC ruled in her favor and awarded her three months' salary as required by law. 3) The Supreme Court upheld the NLRC ruling but increased the award to the full amount remaining in her one-year employment contract, as the "three months' salary" clause had previously been ruled unconstitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Ameer Overseas Placement Agency

    Uploaded by

    Jessy Francis
    75 views2 pages
    1) Joy Cabiles was hired by Ameer Overseas Placement Agency to work in Taiwan for one year as quality control, but was instead asked to work as a cutter. She was terminated after just 18 days of work. 2) Cabiles filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against the agency and her Taiwan employer. The NLRC ruled in her favor and awarded her three months' salary as required by law. 3) The Supreme Court upheld the NLRC ruling but increased the award to the full amount remaining in her one-year employment contract, as the "three months' salary" clause had previously been ruled unconstitutional.

    Original Title

    AMEER OVERSEAS PLACEMENT AGENCY

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Joy Cabiles was hired by Ameer Overseas Placement Agency to work in Taiwan for one year as quality control, but was instead asked to work as a cutter. She was terminated after just 18 days of work. 2) Cabiles filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against the agency and her Taiwan employer. The NLRC ruled in her favor and awarded her three months' salary as required by law. 3) The Supreme Court upheld the NLRC ruling but increased the award to the full amount remaining in her one-year employment contract, as the "three months' salary" clause had previously been ruled unconstitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    75 views2 pages

    Ameer Overseas Placement Agency

    Uploaded by

    Jessy Francis
    1) Joy Cabiles was hired by Ameer Overseas Placement Agency to work in Taiwan for one year as quality control, but was instead asked to work as a cutter. She was terminated after just 18 days of work. 2) Cabiles filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against the agency and her Taiwan employer. The NLRC ruled in her favor and awarded her three months' salary as required by law. 3) The Supreme Court upheld the NLRC ruling but increased the award to the full amount remaining in her one-year employment contract, as the "three months' salary" clause had previously been ruled unconstitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    AMEER OVERSEAS PLACEMENT AGENCY, INC., vs. JOY C.

    CABILES,
    G.R. No. 170139; August 5, 2014

    Leonen, J.:

    FACTS:
    Petitioner, Sameer Overseas Placement Agency, Inc., is a
    recruitment and placement agency.

    Respondent Joy Cabiles was hired thus signed a one-year


    employment contract for a monthly salary of NT$15,360.00. Joy was
    deployed to work for Taiwan Wacoal, Co. Ltd. (Wacoal) on June 26,
    1997. She alleged that in her employment contract, she agreed to
    work as quality control for one year. In Taiwan, she was asked to
    work as a cutter.

    Sameer claims that on July 14, 1997, a certain Mr. Huwang


    from Wacoal informed Joy, without prior notice, that she was
    terminated and that “she should immediately report to their office to
    get her salary and passport.” She was asked to “prepare for
    immediate repatriation.” Joy claims that she was told that from June
    26 to July 14, 1997, she only earned a total of NT$9,000.15
    According to her, Wacoal deducted NT$3,000 to cover her plane
    ticket to Manila.

    On October 15, 1997, Joy filed a complaint for illegal


    dismissal with the NLRC against petitioner and Wacoal. LA dismissed
    the complaint. NLRC reversed LA’s decision. CA affirmed the ruling
    of the National Labor Relations Commission finding respondent
    illegally dismissed and awarding her three months’ worth of salary,
    the reimbursement of the cost of her repatriation, and attorney’s fees

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not Cabiles was entitled to the unexpired


    portion of her salary due to illegal dismissal.
    HELD:

    YES. The Court held that the award of the three-month


    equivalent of respondent’s salary should be increased to the amount
    equivalent to the unexpired term of the employment contract.

    In Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc. and Marlow


    Navigation Co., Inc., this court ruled that the clause “or for three (3)
    months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less” is
    unconstitutional for violating the equal protection clause and
    substantive due process.

    A statute or provision which was declared unconstitutional


    is not a law. It “confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no
    protection; it creates no office; it is inoperative as if it has not been
    passed at all.”

    The Court said that they are aware that the clause “or for
    three (3) months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is
    less” was reinstated in Republic Act No. 8042 upon promulgation of
    Republic Act No. 10022 in 2010.

    You might also like