- BULGAR
- Apr 2, 2024
ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | Abril 2, 2024
Dear Chief Acosta,
Ako ay dapat na ipapadala ng aking ahensya sa Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Sa araw ng aking pag-alis, nagulat ako dahil ang ticket na inabot sa akin ay para sa Jeddah.
Pagkarating ko sa nasabing bansa ay nagulat ako na ang aking employer ay nagpapagawa sa akin ng mga bagay gaya ng pagmamasahe at iba pang mga bastos na bagay. Agad akong nakipag-ugnayan sa aking ahensya upang ako ay mailipat ng trabaho. Ako ay inalok ng ibang trabaho, ngunit ito ay sa ibang lugar kaya ito ay tinanggihan ko at ninais ko na umuwi na lang sa Pilipinas. Bago ako pauwiin ay pinapirma ako ng isang sulat kung saan ipinasaad sa akin na wala nang pagkukulang ang ahensya at ako mismo ang nagnanais na umuwi ng Pilipinas. Pinirmahan ko ang nasabing sulat upang ako ay makauwi na ng Pilipinas. Pagkauwi sa Pilipinas ay nag-file ako ng constructive dismissal case. Inilalaban ng aking ahensya na kusang loob diumano akong nag-resign sa trabaho kaya wala na akong maaari pang habulin sa kanila. Tama ba ang aking ahensya? -- Bien Oliver
Dear Bien Oliver,
Ang iyong katanungan ay sinagot ng Korte Suprema sa kasong Ascent Skills Human Resources, Inc. vs. Alma Tacda Manuel, G.R. No. 249843, 06 October 2021, na sinulat ni Kagalang-galang na Kasamang Mahistrado Rodil V. Zalameda. Sang-ayon sa Korte Suprema:
“Assuming that it was petitioner who refused to be transferred to UPC, her work in Abha, Saudi Arabia, to begin with, was not shown to have been processed through the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA). It can be recalled that petitioner was originally deployed to work in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia but was surprised to see her plane ticket indicating that she was going to Abha. Such fact, again, was not denied by private respondents and was corroborated by her own employment contract with Silver.
x x x
Petitioner’s assignment as domestic helper in Abha, Saudi Arabia instead of Riyadh as stated in her contract with Silver, was a breach of the original contract approved by the government. Hence, petitioner’s refusal to accept another work from UPC was proper under the circumstances. The Court cannot tolerate this practice as it will open floodgates to even more abuse of our overseas workers in the hands of their foreign employers and recruiters.
Sang-ayon din sa Korte Suprema, ang pagsulat ng isang liham na nagpapahayag ng resignation o waiver ay hindi agarang nangangahulugan na boluntaryo ang paglisan ng empleyado. Maaaring ikonsidera ang totality ng circumstances upang madetermina ang katotohanan:
“The CA correctly held that the letter alone is not sufficient proof that respondent voluntarily quit from her employment. To be sure, quitclaims, waivers, or releases are looked upon with disfavor. They are commonly frowned upon as contrary to public policy and ineffective to bar claims for the measure of a worker's legal rights. The reason for this rule is that the employer and the employee do not stand on the same footing, such that quit claims usually take the form of contracts of adherence, not of choice.
Given that resignation is a formal pronouncement of relinquishment of an office, it must be concurrent with the intent and the act. Again, the Court must take into consideration the totality of the circumstances to determine the voluntariness of respondent’s action.
The attendant circumstances herein disprove petitioners’ assertion. Contrary to what petitioners try to impress upon this Court, respondent was very willing to continue with her employment. That is precisely why she stayed in KSA despite the abrupt end of her first employment. However, Silver Contract reneged on its obligation to find work for respondent in Riyadh and unduly presented her with options to work elsewhere. When she refused, Silver Contract brought her to a place unknown to her. There, she was locked up and neglected.
Respondent’s traumatic situation at UPC pushed her into a desperate position. With her future abroad getting bleaker and the situation more insufferable by the day, she was left with no other option but to seek refuge in her own country. These circumstances paint a clear picture of utter hopelessness on the part of respondent and coercion by Silver Contract.
xxx
Notably, to bolster its finding in favor of petitioner, the NLRC lifted this excerpt from respondent's position paper: Bago po ako umuwi ay may ipinasulat po sila sa aking na wala po akong habol sa agency ko po. Ginawa ko na rin po iyon kasi gusto ko na makauwi mula sa mga masamang naranasan ko doon.
The NLRC construed this explanation as sufficient evidence of the voluntariness of respondent’s action. However, the tenor of such a statement can also show the helplessness of respondent’s situation - that she acceded to what Silver Contract told her to do so she can finally end her agony abroad. Given the totality of the circumstances, the scales of justice must be tilted in favor of the latter interpretation.”
Gaya sa nasabing kaso, ang sulat na nagpapahayag na ikaw ay wala nang hahabulin sa ahensya at ikaw ay kusang loob na nagnanais na umuwi ay dapat ikonsidera na kasama ng mga pangyayari na nagbunsod sa iyo na pumirma sa nasabing sulat. Dito ay makikita na hindi naging boluntaryo ang iyong pag-execute ng sulat dahil ito ay ginawa mo lamang upang matakasan ang iyong masamang kalagayan sa ibang bansa, matapos na biglaang ibahin ang iyong lugar ng deployment at pagawain ng ‘di katanggap-tanggap na gawain, na tila wala naman sa iyong orihinal na kontrata.
Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.
Maraming salamat sa iyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.