Project Employment_Case Digests

Project employment  A project employee is one whose whose employment has been fixed for a specific specific project or undertaking such that the completion or termination of which has been determined at the time of the engagement of the employee.[15] employee.[15] Due care should be observed in project employment. As stated earlier, a project employee is considered a regular employee when the following conditions concur: (a) there is a continuous rehiring of the project employee event after the cessation of a project; and (b) the tasks performed by the alleged proj ect employees is vital, necessary, and indispensable to the usual business or trade of the employer .[16] .[16] ACLATEL Philippines, Philippines, Inc. v. v. Relos G.R. No. 164315, 03 July 2009 Complainant Rene R. Relos field f ield a complaint for illegal dismissal with m onetary claims against defendant Alcatel Philippines. Previously, complainant was repeatedly rehired in various capacities (estimator/draftsman, civil works inspector, civil engineer, etc.) for several projects of defendant from January 1988 to December 1993 (with different periods, from 1 to 11 months). On 31 December 1995, complainant’s last contract terminated. In March 1997, he instituted the labor case claiming that he was illegally dismissed as he was a regular employee. “Alcatel argues that respondent was a project employee because he worked on distinct distin ct projects with the terms of engagement and the specific project made known to him at the time of the engagement.  Alcatel clarifies that [complainant’s] employment employment was coterminous with the project for which he was hired and, therefore, [complainant] was not illegally dismissed but was validly dismissed upon the expiration of the term of his project employment. Alcatel explains that its business relies mainly on the projects it enters into into and thus, it is constrained to hire project employees to meet the demands of specific projects. “On the other hand, [complainant] insists that he is a regular employee because he was assigned by Alcatel on its various projects since 4 January 1988 performing functions desirable or necessary to Alcatel’s business. [Complainant] [Compla inant] adds that his employment contracts were renewed successively successively by Alcatel for seven seven years. [Complainant] contends that, even assuming that he was a project employee, he became a regular employee because he was re-hired every termination of his employment contract and he performed functions necessary to Alcatel’s business. [Complainant] also claims that he was illegally dismissed because he was dismissed during the existence of the project.” HELD: Defendant was not liable; complainant was a project employee.“ employee. “The principal test for determining whether a particular employee is a project employee or a regular employee is whether the project employee was assigned to carry out a specific project or undertaking, the duration and scope of which were specified at the time the employee is engaged for the project. ‘Project’ may refer to a particular job or undertaking that is within the regular or usual business of the employer, but which is distinct and separate and identifiable as such from the undertakings of the company. Such job or undertaking undertaking begins and ends at determined or determinable times.

The complainant was a project employee. “The specific projects for which respondent was hired and the periods of employment were specified in his employment contracts. The services he rendered, the duration and scope of each employment are clear indications that respondent was hired as a project employee. While complainant was continuously rehired by Alcatel and he “performed tasks that were clearly vital, necessary and indispensable to the usual business or trade of Alcatel, respondent was not continuously rehired b y Alcatel after the cessation of every project. Records show that respondent was hired by Alcatel from 1988 to 1995 for three projects, namely the PLDT X-5 project, the PLDT X-4 IOT project and the PLDT 1342 project. On 30 April 1988, upon the expiration of respondent’s contract for the PLDT X-4 IOT project, Alcatel did not rehire respondent until 1 February 1991, or after a lapse of 33 months, for the PLDT 1342 project.  Alcatel’s continuous rehiring of respondent in various capacities from February 1991 to December 1995 was done entirely within the framework of one and the same project ― the PLDT 1342 project. This did not make [complainant] a regular employee of Alcatel as respondent was not continuously rehired after the cessation of a project. [Complainant] remained a project employee of Alcatel working on the PLDT 1342 project. “The employment of a project employee ends on the date specified in the employment contract. Therefore, respondent was not illegally dismissed but his employment terminated upon the expiration of his employment contract…” (Emphasis supplied.)

B est Leg al Practices: Stipulate clearly the paramaters for project or fixed-period employment  – In order to avoid doubts on the status of an employee, the employment contract should clearly stipulate the terms and conditions for the project employment. In particular, the project should be clearly specified. Refrain from continuous rehiring of the same project employee  – While project employment is valid, a continuous rehiring of the same project employee who performs work that is vital, necessary and indispensable to the usual b usiness or trade of the employer, may result in the latter becoming a regular employee by operation of law. D.M. Consunji, Inc. v. Jamin G.R. No. 192514, 18 April 2012 Complainant Estelito L. Jamin initiated an illegal dismissal case against defendant D.M. Consunji, Inc. Prior thereto, defendant repeatedly rehired complainant as a carpenter for several projects. Complainant claimed that he served the company f or almost 31 years making him a regular employee. In its defense, defendant claimed that complainant was hired on a project-to-project basis. HELD: The company was liable. Complainant was a regular employee. For a period of 31 years, “DMCI had repeatedly, continuously and successively engaged Jamin’s services since he was hired on December 17, 1968 or for a total of 38 times — 35 as shown by the schedule of projects submitted by DMCI to the labor arbiter and three more projects or engagements added by Jamin, which he claimed DMCI intentionally did not include in its schedule so as to make it appear that there were wide gaps in his engagements.”

Thus, “while the contracts indeed show that Jamin had been engaged as a project employee, there was an almost unbroken string of Jamin’s rehiring from December 17, 1968 up to the termination of his employment on March 20, 1999.” Moreover, “all the 38 projects where DMCI engaged Jamin’s services, the tasks he perf ormed as a carpenter were indisputably necessary and desirable in D MCI’s construction business.” When a project ends so does the employment of a project employee. As held in the Alcatel case, the termination of the project by which a project employee was engaged does not result in illegal dismissal.[17] With project employment, the issue usually raised in a labor dispute is often whether a particular project or undertaking is valid. That is to say, may an employer create a project or undertaking which is necessary to the business or trade? As the law does not make any limitation on such a project or undertaking, the employer may do so provided it is in compliance with law on project employment and it is not done to circumvent the employee’s security of tenure.