This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2009-02-04 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Petitioner cites International Hardware, Inc. v. NLRC [19] as its authority in disputing its obligation to prove losses. In that case, we held that:...if an employee consented to his retrenchment or voluntarily applied for retrenchment with the employer due to the installation of labor-saving devices, redundancy, closure or cessation of operation or to prevent financial losses to the business of the employer, the required previous notice to the DOLE is not necessary as the employee thereby acknowledged the existence of a valid cause for termination of his employment. [20] | |||||
|
2007-10-19 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Moreover, even if we were to grant that respondent JB Line was on the brink of closing down at that time, the reduction of petitioners' workload and/or the "floating" of their employment was still not warranted. Petitioners' plight had persisted for months which only meant that they were already constructively dismissed. In International Hardware, Inc. v. NLRC,[37] we declared that an employee is constructively dismissed when his working days are substantially cut for more than six months due to the employer's financial losses. | |||||
|
2001-07-05 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| On appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the ruling of the Labor Arbiter. However, in its Decision[5] dated 5 March 1999 it found that the Establishment Termination Report was submitted to the DOLE only on 5 April 1995 or two (2) months after the termination had already taken place[6] and thus effectively reversing the finding of the Labor Arbiter that the required one (1)-month notice prior to termination was complied with. Nonetheless, the NLRC dismissed the appeal, citing International Hardware, Inc. v. NLRC,[7] which held - | |||||