SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 244736. March 18, 2019.]
RICHARD T. PALO, petitioner, vs.BW SHIPPING PHILIPPINES, INC., REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER, ROSALINDA G. CRUZ, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated18 March 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 244736 (Richard T. Palo v. BW Shipping Philippines, Inc., represented by its President and General Manager, Rosalinda G. Cruz)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the August 2, 2018 Decision 2 and the January 11, 2019 Resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 141764 for failure of petitioner Richard T. Palo (petitioner) to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in affirming the National Labor Relations Commission's (NLRC) ruling 4 that he was a contractual employee whose contract term merely expired, hence, not illegally dismissed by respondent BW Shipping Philippines, Inc. (BW Philippines). ATICcS
As correctly ruled by the CA, petitioner's separation from employment was the result of the expiration of his contract term. 5 It has long been settled that seamen and overseas contract workers, such as petitioner, are mere contractual employees. 6 Their employment is governed by the contracts they sign every time they are rehired and their employment is terminated when the contracts expire. The exigencies of their work necessitate that they be employed on a contractual basis. 7 Petitioner's repeated rehiring does not serve as basis for regularization but should be seen as sanctioned contract renewals. 8 Considering that his last contract expired upon his repatriation in November 2013, 9 he cannot be deemed to have been illegally dismissed. Consequently, his other claims cannot be granted. Settled is the rule that the factual findings of the NLRC, when affirmed by the CA, are generally conclusive on this Court. 10 Although there are exceptions to this rule, 11 none of which are applicable in this case.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 3-29.
2.Id. at 32-42. Penned by Associate Justice Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob with Associate Justices Celia C. Librea-Leagogo and Samuel H. Gaerlan, concurring.
3.Id. at 44-45.
4.Id. at 47-55. Penned by Commissioner Dolores M. Peralta-Beley with Presiding Commissioner Grace E. Maniquiz-Tan and Commissioner Mercedes R. Posada-Lacap, concurring.
5. See rollo, pp. 38-39.
6. See Millares v. NLRC, 434 Phil. 524, 537-538 (2002).
7.Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc., 554 Phil. 63, 77 (2007).
8. See Gu-Miro v. Adorable, 480 Phil. 597, 608 (2004).
9. See rollo, p. 35.
10.Career Philippines Shipmanagement, Inc. v. Serna, 700 Phil. 1, 10 (2012).
11.Id.