FACTS: Petitioners are members of the NFL, employed by private respondents in the Patalon Coconut Estate in Zamboanga City. Pursuant to RA 6657, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, the Patalon Coconut Estate was warded to the Patalon Estate Reform Association, of which petitioners are members and co-owners. As a result of this acquisition, the Patalon Estate shut down operations and the employment of the petitioners were severed. Petitioners did not receive separation pay. Petitioners became co-owners of the land and subsequently filed complaints for illegal dismissal. The Regional Arbitration Branch of the NLRC dismissed the charge for illegal dismissal but ordered the payment of separation pay. The NLRC reversed the decision.
ISSUE: W/N an employer that was compelled to cease its operation because of compulsory acquisition by the government of its land purposes of agrarian reform is liable to pay separation pay its affected employees.
HELD: No. The peculiar circumstance in the case at bar involves neither the closure of an establishment nor a reduction in personnel as contemplated in Article 283. The closure contemplated in 283 is a voluntary act on the part of the employer as may be gleaned for the wording, “the employer MAY also terminate,” denoting that it is directory in nature. The Labor Code does not contemplate a situation where the closure is forced upon the employer. As such, petitioners are not entitled to separation pay as private respondents did not voluntary shut down operation as they even sought to be exempted from the coverage of RA 6657.
0 comments:
Post a Comment