Republic of the Philippines

Department of Labor and Employment

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
REGIONAL ARBITRATION BRANCH NO. IV
3 Floor, Hectan Commercial Bldg., National Highway corner
RD

Chipeco Ave., Brgy. Halang, Calamba City

JOANNA LACAMBRA, ET. AL,

Complainant,

-versus- NLRC CASE NO. RAB IV 12-

01479-21-L

EVERYDAY FRAYCHEUR
CORP.
Respondents,
x------------------------------------------x

Republic of the Philippines)

_____________________) S.S.

AFFIDAVIT

I, NANETTE ANN T. TAMONDONG, of legal age, Filipino and

resident of Block 16 Lot 4, Phase I, Eureka Lane Park Spring Ville, Brgy.
San Antonio, San Pedro, Laguna, under oath, hereby depose and say, that:

1. I am the incumbent Human Resource Supervisor of Everyday

Fraycheur Corp., the respondent company in the above-captioned
case (hereafter “respondent EFC” for brevity). Before executing
this Affidavit, I was duly authorized by respondent EFC to execute
this instant Affidavit. Attached as Annex “A” is the copy of the
Secretary’s Certificate dated 8 July 2022.

2. As the Human Resource Supervisor, I am in custody of all records

relating to the employment of herein complainants of this instant
case. I also obtained personal knowledge about the nature and
facts of this instant case through my own and independent
investigation of this case and based on my personal
communications with the current HR Supervisor, Ms. Sherilyn
Viacruses, who is currently on maternity leave beginning third
week of April 20201 and to whom this case was endorsed by
former HR Supervisor Mr. Edmer Tatlonghari before he suddenly

1
Attached is a photocopy of the Social Security System (SSS) Maternity Leave Form of Ms. Sherilyn Viacruses and
made integral part hereof as Annex “B –B1.”
1
 resigned from his employment sometime in the third week of June
2021.

3. Based on the conduct of my investigation and my personal

communications with Mr. Edmer Tatlonghari and Ms. Sherilyn
Viacruses, I discovered the following:

3.1 That complainants Joanna Lacambra, Benedick

Rocaport, and Felip Ivan Moreno were initially placed by
respondent EFC under temporary retrenchment for a
period of three (3) months year due to severe financial
business losses brought about by the negative impact of
Covid-19 pandemic on the country’s economy.

3.1.1 On May 15 and May 22, 2020 (date), EFC sent

Notices of Temporary Lay Off to some of its
employees at least one (1) month before the
effective date of lay off. The decision to lay off
employees included the four (4) complainants.

3.1.2 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Temporary

Retrenchment to complainant Joanna Lacambra
dated 15 May 2020 effective 15 June 2020 and
made integral part hereof as Annex “C.”

3.1.3 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Temporary

Retrenchment to complainant Benedick Rocaport
dated 15 May 2020 effective 15 June 2020 and
made integral part hereof as Annexes “D” to
“D1.”

3.1.4 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Temporary

Retrenchment to complainant Felip Ivan Moreno
dated 15 May 2020 effective 15 June 2020 and
made integral part hereof as Annexes “E” to “E-
1.”

3.1.5 Attached is a photocopy of the Establishment

Report that respondent EFC sent to the
Department of Labor and Employment on 01 June
2020 (date) and made integral part hereof as
Annexes “F” to “F-6.”

2
3.2 That, respondent EFC had to extend the temporary layoff
of its employees for another three (3) months which
included the three (3) complainants when former
President Rodrigo Roa Duterte approved the extension of
the enhanced community quarantine (ECQ) until 15 May
2020 for Metro Manila, Central Luzon and Calabarzon in
order to curb the rapid widespread of the Covid 19 virus
in the country.

3.2.1 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Extension

of Temporary Retrenchment to complainant
Lacambra dated August 10, 2020 and effective for
another three (3) months or until 15 December
2020 and made integral part hereof as Annexes
“G” to “G-1.”

3.2.2 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Extension

of Temporary Retrenchment to complainant
Rocaport dated August 10, 2020 and effective for
another three (3) months or until 15 December
2020 and made integral part hereof as Annexes
“H” to “H-1.”

3.2.3 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Extension

of Temporary Retrenchment to complainant
Moreno dated August 10, 2020 for another three
(3) months or until 20 December 2020 and made
integral part hereof as Annexes “I” to “I-1.”

3.3 That, the respondent EFC applied for the additional

extension of six (6) months from the Department of Labor
Employment (DOLE), to lay off its employees or suspend
their employment due to the pandemic and in accordance
with Department Order No. 215 issued by the
Department of Labor and Employment on 20 November
2020, as respondent EFC had yet to recover from the
financial losses it incurred and the sales and demand for
bread and parties had not yet picked up during that time.

3.4 That, on 01 December 2020, Respondent EFC received

a letter from the Honorable Regional Director Henry John
Jalbuena of DOLE Region IV, approved the request of
the respondent company to extend the suspension of
employment of respondent company employee of for
3
 another six (6) months, subject to the following
conditions:

1. Period of extension not exceeding six (6) months;

2. Notification to DOLE ten (10) days prior to the
effectivity of the extension of suspension of
employment;
3. Retention of employment even if employees find
alternative jobs, except in cases of resignation;
4. Entitlement to separation pay should
retrenchment be necessary before or after the
expiration of the extension of suspension of
employment; and,
5. Priority in the rehiring of retrench employees.

3.5 Due to the foregoing, respondent EFC sent another

written notice extending the temporary retrenchment of
its employees, including the complainants herein to six
(6) months.

3.5.1 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Extension

of Temporary Retrenchment to complainant
Lacambra dated 4 December 2020 and effective for
another six (6) months or until 17 June 2021 and
made integral part hereof as Annexes “J” to “J-
2.”

3.5.2 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Extension

of Temporary Retrenchment to complainant
Rocaport dated 4 December 2020 and effective for
another six (6) months or until 17 June 2021 and
made integral part hereof as Annexes “K” to “K-
1.”

3.5.3 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Extension

of Temporary Retrenchment to complainant
Moreno dated December 4, 2020 and effective for
another six (6) months or until 17 June 2021 and
made integral part hereof as Annexes “L” to “L-
2.”

3.5.4 Attached is a photocopy of the Establishment

Report which respondent EFC sent to the
Department of Labor and Employment on 4
December 2020 for the extension of temporary
retrenchment of respondent’s employees and made
integral part hereof as Annexes “M” to “M-3.”

4
3.6 That, notwithstanding the foregoing, complainants herein,
on 6 December 2021, filed with the Honorable
Commission a labor case entitled, “Jessa Llanes, et.al vs.
Everyday Fraycheur Corp., et.al,” docketed as NLRC-
RAB No. IV Case No. 10-00639-20-L, filed with the
National Labor Relations Commission, Quezon City. The
aforesaid case was filed by the complainants herein
against respondent EFC assailing the validity of the
exercise of the latter of its management prerogative to
place herein complainants on temporary retrenchment.

3.7 Subsequently, thereafter, the foregoing case was

dismissed by virtue of the issued Decision, dated 26
February 2021, of the Hon. Labor Arbiter Randy F. Pablo
for lack of cause of action. The Hon. Labor Arbiter Randy
F. Pablo, in his Decision, ruled that the said case was
filed prematurely by herein complainants, as well as
upheld the validity of respondent EFC’s exercise of its
management prerogative to place the complainants
herein on temporary lay-off.

3.8 That, prior to the filing of the above-mentioned case,

complainants Lacambra and Benedick Rocaport were
recalled to work on 8 September 2020. Upon instruction
of respondent EFC, former HR Manager, Ms. Zaire
Navarro sent a Notice of Recall to Joanna Lacambra and
Benedick Rocaport, requiring them to report to work on
14 September 2020. However, both of the said
complainants did not show up on the date given in the
said Notices of Recall.

3.8.1 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Recall

sent to Benedick Rocaport and made integral part
hereof as Annexes “N” to “N-1.”

3.8.2 Attached is a photocopy of the Notice of Recall

sent to complainant Joanna Lacambra and made
integral part hereof as Annexes “O” to “O-1”.

3.9 That, instead of permanently retrenching the temporary

retrenched employees which included herein
complainants, respondent EFC decided to recall all of its
temporary retrenched employees including the
5
complainants herein to employment starting June 2021 in
accordance with the conditions prescribed by Honorable
Regional Director Henry John Jalbuena of DOLE Region
IV.

3.9.1 For complainant Lacambra, she was again recalled

to work by respondent EFC on 14 June 2021.
Despite due notice to complainant Lacambra, for
the second time, complainant Lacambra did not
report to work on the date prescribed in the Notice
of Recall dated 4 June 2021, which was sent by
respondent EFC via registered mail. Attached
hereto is a photocopy of the Notice of Recall dated
4 June 2021 sent to complainant Lacambra and
made integral part hereof as Annexes “P” to “P-
1.”

3.9.2 For complainant Benedick Rocaport, he was

recalled to employment, on 14 June 2021, by
respondent EFC, this time for a new position, as
Bread Specialist, and was required to report on 14
June 2021. However, complainant Benedick
Rocaport, for the second time, did not report to
work on the date prescribed in the Notice of Recall
dated 4 June 2021 which was sent by respondent
EFC via registered mail on 8 June 2021. Attached
hereto is a photocopy of the Notice of Recall dated
4 June 2021 sent to complainant Rocaport and
made integral part hereof as Annexes “Q” to “Q-
1.”

3.9.3 For complainant Felip Ivan Moreno, he was

recalled to employment by respondent EFC for a
new position as Delivery Helper because the
position he was holding at that time was not
urgently necessary. However, similar with the other
two (2) complainants earlier said, complainant
Moreno did not also report to work on the date
prescribed in the Notice of Recall dated 26 May
2021, which was sent by respondent EFC via
registered mail on 27 May 2021. Attached hereto is
a photocopy of the Notice of Recall dated 26 May
2021 to complainant Moreno and made integral
part hereof as Annexes “R” to “R-1.”
6
3.9.4 That, Mr. Edmer Tatlonghari made efforts to reach
out to complainants and to speak with them, but to
no avail. The purpose as to why he wanted to
speak with the complainants back then was for him
to be able to explain that their working
arrangements such as they will temporarily work
under reduced work scheme since the respondent
company’s business is not in full operations at that
time and also for the purpose of cutting business
expenses, as well as, to inform the two (2)
complainants who were recalled to employment but
for a new position, that respondent EFC will
reinstate them back to their former positions once
its business is able to recover from the severe
financial losses it sustained due to the pandemic.

3.9.5 That, after that, complainants, except for Benedick

Rocaport, did not bother to reach out to Mr. Edmer
Tatlonghari regarding the details of their recall to
work. All three (3) complainants did not report back
to work without informing the respondent company
of their reason as to why they cannot return to work
in EFC.

3.9.6 That, despite the fact that complainants under the

Company’s Rules and Regulations can be
considered to have abandoned their employments
with respondent EFC, the HR Department was not
instructed to send any notices of abandonment of
work to herein complainants which would, as a
result thereof, trigger the formal termination of
complainants’s employment on the ground of
abandonment of work. Instead, we were only
advised to just wait for the complainants’ formal
resignation should they have found another
employment.

3.9.7 That, much to our surprise, after six (6) months

from the date that complainants herein were
recalled to employment by herein respondent EFC,
on 6 December 2021, we received a copy of the
Summons from the Honorable Office informing us

7
 that a case for illegal (constructive) dismissal was
filed against herein respondent EFC.

3.9.8 That, after we advised the management that this

instant complaint was filed by herein complainants,
the management of respondent EFC expressed
their intention and willingness to reinstate the
complainants back to their former positions since
the positions they previously held are already
necessary now that the business is currently full
operations.

3.9.9 That, surprisingly, on 10 June 2022, Respondents

received a copy of the Order, dated May 18, 2022,
of the Hon. Labor Arbiter Maria Ana T. Advento, 2
which informed the Respondents that the above-
captioned case was re-filed by herein Complainant
on 9 December 2021 and that the parties are
directed to file their respective Position Paper
within ten (10) days upon receipt of the aforesaid
Order, and that parties, at their option, may submit
their respective Reply within ten (10) days upon
receipt of the Position Paper of the other party.

3.9.10That, in view thereof, respondents in this case were

able to file their Position Paper with the Honorable
Office on 23 June 2022. Thereafter, we received,
on 01 July 2022, a copy of the Complainants’ Joint
Position Paper filed with this Court, but without
copies of the Annexes indicated and attached to
said the Position Paper.

4. I hereby execute this affidavit to attest to the truth of the foregoing

statement of facts in support of respondent EFC’s Reply to
Complainants’ Position Paper in connection with the above-
captioned labor case filed with this Honorable Office.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this

________ day of __________ 2022 in San Pedro, Laguna, Philippines

2
Attached hereto and made integral part hereof as Annex “S” is a copy of the Order, dated May 18, 2022, of the
Hon. Labor Arbiter Maria Ana T. Advento.
8
 NANETTE ANN T. TAMONDONG
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this

_________________ at______________, Philippines; the above-named
affiant _____________ exhibiting to me __ Government issued
___________ with no. ______________, as competent evidence of her
identity in pursuance to the 2004 Rules of Notarial Practice.

Doc. No. ____;

Page No.____;
Book No. ____;
Series of 2022.