Doctrine
The Supreme Court held that an employment contract, like any other contract, is perfected at the moment the parties come to agree upon its terms and conditions, and thereafter, concur in the essential elements thereof. Here, July 1, 2016, which is the commencement date agreed upon by the parties, is a suspensive period that merely deferred the demandability of their respective obligations as employer and employee, namely, the employee’s obligation to render services and the employer’s obligation to pay wages.
Facts
Aragones was offered the position of Swine Technical Manager – Pacific (STMP) by Alltech Biotechnology Corporation (Alltech). Aragones signed the Offer Letter on April 18, 2016, which outlined the terms and conditions for the position, including the commencement date of his employment, which is July 1, 2016.
A few days after, Aragones resigned from and severed his employment with Cargill Philippines, Inc. (Cargill). In the meantime, Alltech’s Head Office allegedly implemented a global restructuring program the following month, or in May 2016. As a result, the position of STMP was abolished for being allegedly redundant, which was made known to Aragones through a letter. As a gesture of goodwill, Aragones was offered P140,000.00, which is equivalent to his one-month salary.
Consequently, Aragones filed a complaint for non-payment of wages, moral and exemplary damages, attorney’s fees, other causes of action, interest, expenses, money claims, and backwages, without replying to Alltech.
ISSUE: Is there an employer-employee relationship between the parties, considering that only the Offer Letter was signed by the Aragones?
Ruling
YES, there is an employer-employee relationship between the parties. The Supreme Court held that an employment contract, like any other contract, is perfected at the moment the parties come to agree upon its terms and conditions, and thereafter, concur in the essential elements thereof.
Based on these requirements, the Supreme Court found that an employment contract between Aragones and Alltech was perfected on April 18, 2016. This conclusion is supported by the following undisputed facts: (a) Alltech made an offer that is certain through the Job Offer; (b) Aragones unequivocally accepted this offer by affixing his signature thereon on April 18, 2016; and (c) he informed Alltech of his acceptance by sending a copy of the signed Job Offer to respondent Octavio Eckhardt (Eckhardt) via e-mail on the same day. Thus, Alltech cannot claim that it validly withdrew its job offer in view of the general rule that an offer, once accepted, cannot be withdrawn.
The Supreme Court held that in certain instances, the perfection of the employment contract and the commencement of the employment relationship may not coincide. The contract between Aragones and Alltech is subject to a term or a period – a specific date agreed upon by the parties, July 1, 2016.
A period refers to a “day certain … which must necessarily come, although it may not be known when.” The Civil Code provides that: “Obligations for whose fulfillment a day certain has been fixed, shall be demandable only when that day comes.” Unlike a condition, which may or may not happen, a period must necessarily come. Thus, a period does not affect the existence of the obligation, it merely dictates the time when the obligation is demandable.
Here, the July 1, 2016, commencement date agreed upon by the parties is a suspensive period that merely deferred the demandability of their respective obligations as employer and employee-namely, the employee’s obligation to render services and the employer’s obligation to pay wages. It did not affect the existence or birth of those obligations. In other words, while the employer-employee relationship was already established when the contract was entered into on April 18, 2016, the demandability of their respective obligations as employer and employee was deferred until July 1, 2016.