Scribd
Upload
1K views1 page

Bernardo Vs NLRC G.R. No.122917

This case involved deaf-mute workers who were hired by a bank under uniformly worded employment contracts for handicapped workers. The workers filed a complaint claiming they should be considered regular employees. The labor arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack of merit. The Supreme Court ruled that while the workers could be considered regular employees, only those who worked for more than six months and had contract renewals qualified for regular employee status. The Court held that determining regular employment depends on whether the employee's activity is reasonably connected and necessary to the usual business of the employer. In this case, counting and sorting bills was necessary to the bank's business.

Uploaded by

Elerlenne Lim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views1 page

Bernardo Vs NLRC G.R. No.122917

This case involved deaf-mute workers who were hired by a bank under uniformly worded employment contracts for handicapped workers. The workers filed a complaint claiming they should be considered regular employees. The labor arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack of merit. The Supreme Court ruled that while the workers could be considered regular employees, only those who worked for more than six months and had contract renewals qualified for regular employee status. The Court held that determining regular employment depends on whether the employee's activity is reasonably connected and necessary to the usual business of the employer. In this case, counting and sorting bills was necessary to the bank's business.

Uploaded by

Elerlenne Lim
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Bernardo vs NLRC

G.R. No. 122917


July 12, 1999

Facts:
The complainants in this case were deaf-mutes who were hired on various periods 1988 to
1993 by respondent Far East Bank and Trust Co. as Money Sorters and Counters through a
uniformly worded agreement called Employment Contract for Handicapped Workers.

The herein petitioners filed a complaint at the NLRC claiming that they should be
considered as regular employees. The labor arbiter dismissed the petition for lack of merit.

Issue:
Whether or not the petitioners, being deaf-mutes can be considered as regular employees.


Rulings:
Yes. However, only those who worked for more than six months and whose contracts were
renewed are considered as regular employees.

This court in the case of De Leon vs. NLRC held that: The primary standard, therefore, of
determining regular employment is the reasonable connection between the particular
activity performed by the employee in relation to the usual trade or business of the
employer. The test is whether the former is usually necessary or desirable in the usual
business or trade of the employer.

Without a doubt, the task of counting and sorting bills is necessary and desirable to the
business of respondent bank.

You might also like