This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2008-10-08 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Based on the foregoing criteria, the factual findings of the labor arbiter on the regular nature of private respondents' employment, juxtaposed with ETS' failure to support its "project-workers theory," impel us to dismiss the instant petition. This is as it should be for, to paraphrase Asuncion v. NLRC, if doubt exists between the evidence of the employers and the employees, the scales of justice must be tilted in favor of the latter--the employers must adequately show rationally adequate evidence that their case is preponderantly superior.[20] | |||||