ANGELES ELECTRIC CORPORATION AND GEROMIN NEPOMUCENO, JR., PETITIONERS, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (SECOND DIVISION), AND PATRICK L. OSTONAL, JAYCEE S. ADONA, ALLEN …
Even then, Our Decision sufficiently and exhaustively explained why private respondents can hardly be treated as regular employees of petitioners and there were cogent indicators on record to the effect that private respondents were employees of CCS and CRUDIMAR as legitimate job contractors. Thus, to clarify once more the disquisition on the parties’ arguments thereon will be an ad infinitum exercise. Verily, Our invocation of Atok, San Miguel Jeepney Sevice and Alviado cases[3] were not squarely addressed by movants on the subject Motion.
Accordingly, We hereby DENY counsel for private respondents’ Motion for Reconsideration from the assailed Decision.
SO ORDERED.
De Leon, M. M., Chairperson, and Cruz, S. C., JJ., concur.
[1] Dated September 1, 2014, Rollo, pp. 1520-1521.
[2] Pp. 1-5, petitioners’ Comment, Rollo, pp. 1492-1495.
[3] Decision, pp. 15-16, Rollo, pp. 1459-1460.