SC: Blocking workers from workplace without cause is illegal dismissal
Leonen
The Supreme Court (SC) ruled that preventing employees from entering company premises and doing their jobs — without a valid reason — constitutes illegal dismissal.
In a decision penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen dated 19 May 2025, the SC Second Division reinstated the labor arbiter’s ruling that 12 workers from Constant Packaging Corporation (Constant Packaging) were illegally dismissed.
Constant Packaging, which prints packaging materials, hired the workers as sorters and packers on a pakyaw basis (paid per output). The workers raised concerns about below-minimum wages, 12-hour workdays, seven-day workweeks, non-remittance of SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG contributions, and delays in salary releases. In response, they were told to leave if they were unhappy with their working conditions.
After the workers filed a complaint with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), a company security guard prevented them from entering the premises. The workers claimed illegal dismissal, while the company argued there was no dismissal because they could still work anytime under the pakyaw arrangement. The firm added that if entry was truly denied, the workers should have consulted management rather than assuming they were dismissed.
A labor arbiter initially ruled for the workers, finding illegal dismissal, but the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the ruling, saying being barred from the workplace does not constitute dismissal. The Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the NLRC.
The High Court disagreed, clarifying that an employee who is able and willing to work is considered illegally dismissed if prevented from entering the workplace without a valid or lawful reason. In this case, the guard blocked the workers without cause, amounting to dismissal done without due process and therefore unlawful.
The SC ordered Constant Packaging to pay separation pay, back wages, service incentive leave, and holiday pay. However, because the workers were hired on a pakyaw basis, they are not entitled to 13th-month pay.