FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 241897. January 7, 2019.]
PHILSTEEL WORKERS UNION-OLALIA-KMU, petitioner, vs. PHILIPPINE STEEL COATING CORPORATION AND ABETO A. UY, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated January 7, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 241897 — PhilSteel Workers Union-Olalia-KMU, Petitioner, v. Philippine Steel Coating Corporation and Abeto A. Uy, Respondents.
The Court resolves to GRANT petitioner's Motion for Extension of Time of thirty (30) days from the expiration of the reglementary period within which to file its Petition for Review on Certiorari.
This Court has carefully reviewed the allegations, issues, and arguments adduced in the instant Petition for Review on Certiorari and accordingly further resolves to DENY the same for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals (CA), in CA-G.R. SP No. 146728, committed any reversible error in dismissing the Petition for Certiorari filed before it, thereby affirming the January 25, 2016 Order and May 19, 2016 Resolution of the Secretary of Labor and Employment (SOLE).
The CA correctly ruled that petitioner was estopped from questioning the validity of the compromise agreement entered into by the parties. Petitioner would like this Court to nullify the compromise agreement due to a supposed lack of authority on the part of the illegally dismissed employees' representative but simultaneously, albeit indirectly, recognized respondents' payment of P4,152,870.36, in accordance with the same compromise agreement. A perusal of the instant petition shows that petitioner merely prays for the payment of "additional backwages from August 3, 2012 up to the closure of the plant on May 8, 2013." By doing so, petitioner, in effect, recognizes the validity of the compromise agreement by accepting the payment of P4,152,870.36. aDSIHc
In any event, petitioner's claim that the judgment award should include the period after the closure of the Continuous Galvanizing Line (CGL) department until the closure of respondent Philippine Steel Coating Corporation's (PhilSteel) entire business, lacks merit.
It should be noted that petitioner never questioned the validity of the closure of PhilSteel's CGL department. It only insists that the closure of the CGL department does not affect the computation of the period for the purpose of determining the retrenched employees' monetary award because PhilSteel continued to operate until May 8, 2013.
Petitioner should be reminded that an illegally dismissed employees' entitlement to backwages and separation pay should be computed only up to the time that the said employee would have been expected to work with his/her employer had he/she not been illegally dismissed. Given that the validity of the CGL department's closure is not disputed, the ten (10) retrenched employees assigned to the CGL department could not have been presumed to continue working for PhilSteel despite the valid closure of PhilSteel's CGL department. There is nothing in the petition to show that the retrenched employees' employments were not dependent on the operation of the CGL department in order to justify their claim of entitlement to backwages and separation pay until PhilSteel's total closure on May 8, 2013. On the contrary, the retrenched employees were specifically referred to as "workers of the CGL line," 1 thereby showing that their employment was contingent on the existence of the CGL department. As such, the backwages and separation pay were properly computed only until the closure of the CGL department, or until August 2, 2012.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolves to AFFIRM the Decision dated February 23, 2018 and the Resolution dated August 23, 2018 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 146728. ATICcS
SO ORDERED." Bersamin, C.J., on official leave; Del Castillo, J., designated as Acting Chairperson per Special Order No. 2632 dated December 28, 2018.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. See Rollo, p. 69.