LABOR LAW

20 questions
Oct. 24, 2020

Clarito, an employee of Juan, was dismissed for allegedly stealing Juan’s wristwatch. In
the illegal dismissal case instituted by Clarito, the Labor Arbiter, citing Article 4 of the
Labor Code, ruled in favor of Clarito upon finding Juan’s testimony doubtful. On
appeal, the NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter holding that Article 4 applies only when
the doubt involves “implementation and interpretation” of the Labor Code provisions.
The NLRC explained that the doubt may not necessarily be resolved in favor of labor
since this case involves the application of the Rules on Evidence, not the Labor Code. Is
the NLRC correct? Reasons.

II

Amaya was employed as a staff nurse by St. Francis Hospital (SFH) on July 08 2014 on a
probationary status for six months. Her probationary contract required, among others,
strict compliance with SFH’s Code of Discipline.

On October 16, 2014, Dr. Ligaya, filed a complaint with the SFH Board of Trustees
against Amaya for uttering slanderous remarks against the former. Attached to the
complaint was a letter of Minda, mother of a patient, who confirmed the following
remarks against Dr. Ligaya:

“Bakit si Dr. Ligaya pa ang napili mong ‘pedia’ eh ang tanda tanda na n’un? E
makakalimutin na yun x x x Alam mob a, kahit wala naming diperensya yung baby,
ipinapa- isolate niya?”

The SFH President asks you, being the hospital’s counsel, which of these two (2) options
is the legal and proper way of terminating Amaya: (a) terminate her for a just cause
under Art. 228 of the Labor Code (termination by Employer); or (b) terminate her for
violating her probationary contract. Explain.

III

Company C, a toy manufacturer, decided to ban the use of cell phones in the factory
premises. In the pertinent Memorandum, management explained that too much texting
and phone-calling by employees disrupted company operations. Two employees-
members of Union X were terminated from employment due to violation of the
memorandum-policy. The union countered with a prohibitory injunction case (with
prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order) filed with the Regional Trial
Court, challenging the validity and constitutionality of the cell phone ban. The company
filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the case should be referred to the grievance
machinery pursuant to an existing Collective Bargaining Agreement with Union X, and
eventually to Voluntary Arbitration. Is the company correct?

Explain.

IV
Nayon Federation issued a charter certificate creating a rank-and-file Neuman
Employees Union. On the same day, New Neuman Employees Union filed a petition
for certification election with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)
Regional Office, attaching the appropriate charter certificate.

(a) The employer, Neuman Corporation, filed a motion to dismiss the petition
for lack of legal personality on the part of the petitioner union. Should the
motion be granted?
(b) The employer likewise filed a petition for cancellation of union registration
against New Neuman Employees Union, alleging that Nayon Federation
already had a chartered local rank-and-file union, Neuman Employees
Union, pertaining to the same bargaining unit within the establishment.
Should the petition for cancellation prosper?

Due to his employer's dire financial situation, Nicanor was prevailed upon by his
employer to voluntarily resign. In exchange, he demanded payment of salary
differentials, 13th month pay, and financial assistance, as promised by his employer.
Management promised to pay him as soon as it is able to pay off all retrenched rank-
and-file employees. Five years later, and before management was able to pay Nicanor
the amount promised to him, Nicanor died of a heart attack. His widow, Norie. filed a
money claim against the company before the National Labor Relations Commission
(NLRC), including interest on the amount of the unpaid claim. She also claimed
additional damages arguing that the supposed resignation letter was obtained from her
spouse through undue pressure and influence. The employer filed a motion to dismiss
on the ground that (A) the NLRC did not have jurisdiction over money claims, and (8)
the action has prescribed.

(a) Does the NLRC have jurisdiction to award money claims including
interest on the amount unpaid?

(b) Assuming that the NLRC has jurisdiction, has the action prescribed?(2.5%)
 VI

Harbor View Hotel has an existing Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) with the
union of rank-and-file employees consisting, among others, of bartenders, waiters,
roomboys, housemen and stewards. During the lifetime of the CBA, Harbor View
Hotel, for reasons of economy and efficiency, decided to abolish the position of
housemen and stewards who do the cleaning of the hotel’s public areas. Over the
protest of the Union, the Hotel contracted out the aforementioned job to the City Service
Janitorial Company, a bona fide independent contractor which has a substantial capital
in the form of janitorial tools, equipment, machineries and competent manpower. Is the
action of the Harbor View Hotel legal and valid?

VII

Discuss briefly the instances when noncompliance by the employer with a

reinstatement order of an illegally dismissed employee is allowed.

VIII

Alfredo was dismissed by management for serious misconduct. He filed suit for illegal
dismissal, alleging that although there may be just cause, he was not afforded due
process by management prior to his termination. He demands reinstatement with full
backwages.

What are the twin-requirements of due process which the employer must observe in
terminating or dismissing an employee? Explain.

IX

The rank-and-file union staged a strike in the company premises which caused the
disruption of business operations. The supervisors union of the same company filed a
money claim for unpaid salaries for the duration of the strike, arguing that the
supervisors' failure to report for work was not attributable to them. The company
contended that it was equally faultless, for the strike was not the direct consequence of
any lockout or unfair labor practice. May the company be held liable for the salaries of
the supervisor? Decide.

X
As a tireman in a gasoline station, open twenty four (24) hours a day with only five (5)
employees, Goma worked from 10:00 P.M. until 7:00 A.M. of the following day. He
claims he is entitled to night shift differential. Is he correct? Explain briefly

XI

The Ang Sarap Kainan Workers Union appointed Juan Javier, a law student, as
bargaining representative. Mr. Javier is neither an employee of Ang Sarap Kainan
Company nor a member of the union. Is the appointment of Mr. Javier as a bargaining
representative in accord with law? Explain.

XII
Upon compliance with the legal requirements on the conduct of a strike, Navarra
Union staged a strike against Newfound Corporation on account of a collective
bargaining deadlock. During the strike, some members of Navarra Union broke the
windows and punctured the tires of the company-owned buses. The Secretary of Labor
and Employment assumed jurisdiction over the dispute.

(a) Should all striking employees be admitted back to work upon the
assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary of Labor and Employment?
Will these include striking employees who damaged company properties?

(b) May the company readmit strikers only by restoring them to the payroll?

XIII

Martillo and other similarly-situated project workers demanded that the increases be
extended to them, inasmuch as they should now be considered regular employees and
members of the bargaining unit. If you were ABC's legal counsel, how would you
respond to this demand?

XIV

Lanz was a strict and unpopular Vice- President for Sales of Lobinsons Land. One day,
Lanz shouted invectives against Lee, a poor performing sales associate, calling him,
among others, a “brown monkey.” Hurt, Lee decided to file a criminal complaint for
grave defamation against Lanz. The prosecutor found probable cause and filed an
information in court. Lobinsons decided to terminate Lanz for committing a potential
crime and other illegal acts prejudicial to business. Can Lanz be legally terminated by
the company on these grounds?

XV

Nathaniel has been a salesman assigned by Newmark Enterprises (Newmark) for

nearly two years at the Manila office of Nutrition City, Inc. (Nutrition City). He was
deployed pursuant to a service agreement between Newmark and Nutrition City, the
salient provisions of which were as follows:

(a) the Contractor (Newmark) agrees to perform and provide the Client
(Nutrition City), on a non-exclusive basis, such tasks or activities that are
considered contractible under existing laws, as may be needed by the
Client from time to time;

(b) the Contractor shall employ the necessary personnel like helpers,
salesmen, and drivers who are determined by the Contractor to be
efficiently trained;

(c) the Client may request replacement of the Contractor's personnel if

quality of the desired result is not achieved;

(d) the Contractor's personnel will comply with the Client's policies, rules,
and regulations; and

(e) the Contractor's two service vehicles and necessary equipment will be
utilized in carrying out the provisions of this Agreement.

When Newmark fired Nathaniel, he filed an illegal dismissal case against the
wealthier company, Nutrition City, Inc., alleging that he was a regular employee of the
same. Is Nathaniel correct?

XVI

Your favorite relative, Tita Nilda, approaches you and seeks your advice on her
treatment of her kasambahay, Noray. Tita Nilda shows you a document called a
"Contract of Engagement" for your review. Under the Contract of Engagement, Noray
shall be entitled to a rest day every week, provided that she may be requested to work
on a rest day if Tita Nilda should need her services that day. Tita Nilda also claims that
this Contract of Engagement should embody all terms and conditions of Noray's work
as the engagement of a kasambahay is a private matter and should not be regulated by
the State.

(a) Is Tita Nilda correct in saying that this is a private matter and should not
be regulated by the State?

(b) Is the stipulation that she may be requested to work on a rest day legal?

(c) Are stay-in family drivers included under the Kasambahay Law?

XVII

Nicodemus asserted that wearing shorts and sneakers made him more productive, and
cited his above-average output. When he came to work still in violation of the uniform
policy, the company sent him a letter of termination of employment. Nicodemus filed
an illegal dismissal case. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Nicodemus and ordered
his reinstatement with backwages. Network Corporation, however, refused to reinstate
him. The NLRC 1st Division sustained the Labor Arbiter's judgment. Network
Corporation still refused to reinstate Nicodemus. Eventually, the Court of Appeals
reversed the decision of the NLRC and ruled that the dismissal was valid. Despite the
reversal, Nicodemus still filed a motion forexecution with respect to his accrued
backwages.

(a) Were there valid legal grounds to dismiss Nicodemus from his
employment?

(b) Should Nicodemus' motion for execution be granted?

XVIII

Socorro is a clerk-typist in the Hospicio de San Jose, a charitable institution dependent

for its existence on contributions and donations from well wishers. She renders work
eleven (11) hours a day but has not been given overtime pay since her place of work is a
charitable institution. Is Socorro entitled to overtime pay? Explain briefly.

XIX

Gabriela Liwanag has been working as a bookkeeper at Great Foods, Inc. which
operates a chain of high-end restaurants throughout the country, since 1970 when it was
still a small eatery at Binondo. In the early part of the year 2003, Gabriela, who was
already 50 years old, reported for work after a week-long vacation in her province. It
was the height of the SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) scare, and
management learned that the first confirmed SARS death case in the Philippines, a
“balikbayan” nurse from Canada, is a townmate of Gabriela. Immediately, a
memorandum was issued by management terminating the services of Gabriela on the
ground that she is a probable carrier of SARS virus and that her continued employment
is prejudicial to the health of her co-employees. Is the action taken by the employer
justified?

XX

Arnaldo, President of “Bisig” Union in Femwear Company, readied himself to leave

exactly at 5:00 p.m. which was the end of his normal shift to be able to send off his wife
who was scheduled to leave for overseas. However, the General Manager required him
to render overtime work to meet the company's export quota. Arnaldo begged off,
explaining to the General Manager that he had to see off his wife who was leaving to
work abroad. The company dismissed Arnaldo for insubordination. He filed a case for
illegal dismissal. Decide.

-END-
 LABOR LAW
20 questions
Oct. 25, 2020

Jose and Erica, former sweethearts, both worked as sales representatives for Magna, a
multinational firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical products.
Although the couple had already broken off their relationship, Jose continued to have
special feelings for Erica.

One afternoon, Jose chanced upon Erica riding in the car of Paolo, a co-employee and
Erica's ardent suitor; the two were on their way back to the office from a sales call on
Silver Drug, a major drug retailer. In a fit of extreme jealousy, Jose rammed Paolo's car,
causing severe injuries to Paolo and Erica. Jose's flare up also caused heavy damage to
the two company-owned cars they were driving.

a. ) As lawyer for Magna, advise the company on whether just and valid grounds exist
to dismiss Jose.

b.) Assuming this time that Magna dismissed Jose from employment for cause and you
are the the lawyer of Jose, how would you argue the position that Jose's dismissal was
illegal?

II

Samahang East Gate Enterprises (SEGE) is a labor organization composed of the rank-
and-file employees of East Gate Enterprises (EGE), the leading manufacturer of all types
of gloves and aprons. EGE was later requested by SEGE to bargain collectively for
better terms and conditions of employment of all the rank- and-file employees of EGE.
Consequently, EGE filed a petition for certification election before the Bureau of Labor
Relations (BLR).

During the proceedings, EGE insisted that it should participate in the certification
process. EGE reasoned that since it was the one who filed the petition and considering
that the employees concerned were its own rank-and-file employees, it should be
allowed to take an active part in the certification process. Is the contention of EGE
proper? Explain.

III

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Libra Films and its union, Libra
Films Employees' Union (LFEU), contains the following standard clauses:

1. Maintenance of membership;
2. Check off for union dues and agency fees; and
3. No strike, no lock-out.

While Libra Films and LFEU are in re- negotiations for an extension of the CBA, LFEU
discovers that some of its members have resigned from the union, citing their
constitutional right to organize (which includes the right NOT to organize). LFEU
demands that Libra Films institute administrative proceedings to terminate those union
members who resigned in violation of the CBA's maintenance of membership clause.
Libra Films refuses, citing its obligation to remain a neutral party. As a result, LFEU
declares a strike and after filing a notice of strike and taking a strike vote, goes on strike.
The union claims that Libra Films grossly violated the terms of the CBA and engaged in
unfair labor practice. Are LFEU's claims correct? Explain.

IV

A division manager of a company taunted a union officer two days after the union
submitted to the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) the result of the strike
vote. The division manager said: “Your union threat of an unfair labor practice strike is
phony or a bluff. Not even ten percent (10%) of your members will join the strike.’' To
prove union member support for the strike, the union officer immediately instructed its
members to cease working and walk out. Two hours after the walkout, the workers
voluntarily returned to work.

a.) Was the walkout a strike? And if so, was it a valid activity?

b) Can the union officer who led the short walk-out, but who likewise voluntarily
led the workers back to work, be disciplined by the employer? (2000 Bar)
 V

Is a corporation, seventy percent (70%) of the authorized and voting capital of which is
owned and controlled by Filipino citizens, allowed to engage in the recruitment and
placement of workers, locally or overseas? Explain briefly.

VI

Can the Bureau of Labor Relations certify a union as the exclusive bargaining
representative after showing proof of majority representation thru union membership
cards without conducting an election?

VII

Clarito, an employee of Juan, was dismissed for allegedly stealing Juan’s wristwatch. In
the illegal dismissal case instituted by Clarito, the Labor Arbiter, citing Article 4 of the
Labor Code, ruled in favor of Clarito upon finding Juan’s testimony doubtful. On
appeal, the NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter holding that Article 4 applies only when
the doubt involves “implementation and interpretation” of the Labor Code provisions.
The NLRC explained that the doubt may not necessarily be resolved in favor of labor
since this case involves the application of the Rules on Evidence, not the Labor Code. Is
the NLRC correct? Reasons.

VIII

Under what conditions may a "compressed work week" schedule be legally authorized
as an exception to the "eight-hour a day" requirement under the Labor Code?

IX

Natasha Shoe Company adopted an organizational streamlining program that

resulted in the retrenchment of 550 employees in its main plant. After having been paid
their separation benefits, the retrenched workers demanded payment of retirement
benefits under a CBA between their union and management. Natasha Shoe Company
denied the workers' demand.

(a) What is the most procedurally peaceful means to resolve this dispute?

(b) Can the workers claim both separation pay and retirement benefits?

Sgt. Nemesis was a detachment non-commissioned officer of the Armed Forces

of the Philippines in Nueva Ecija. He and some other members of his detachment
sought permission from their Company Commander for an overnight pass to Nueva
Vizcaya to settle some important matters. The Company Commander orally approved
their request and allowed them to carry their firearms as the place they were going to
was classified as a "critical place." They arrived at the place past midnight; and as they
were alighting from a tricycle, one of his companions accidentally dropped his rifle,
which fired a single shot, and in the process hit Sgt. Nemesis fatally. The shooting was
purely accidental. At the time of his death, he was still legally married to Nelda, but
had been separated de facto from her for 17 years. For the last 15 years of his life, he was
living in with Narda, with whom he has two minor children. Since Narda works as a
kasambahay, the two children lived with their grandparents, who provided their daily
support. Sgt. Nemesis and Narda only sent money to them every year to pay for their
school tuition.

Nelda and Narda, both for themselves and the latter, also on behalf of her minor
children, separately filed claims for compensation as a result of the death of Sgt.
Nemesis. The line of Duty Board of the AFP declared Sgt. Nemesis' death to have been
"in line of duty", and recommended that all benefits due to Sgt. Nemesis be given to his
dependents. However, the claims were denied by GSIS because Sgt. Nemesis was not in
his workplace nor performing his duty as a soldier of the Philippine Army when he
died.

(a) Are the dependents of Sgt. Nemesis entitled to compensation as a result of

his death?

(b) As between Nelda and Narda, who should be entitled to the benefits?

(c) Are the minor children entitled to the benefits considering that they were
not fully dependent on Sgt. Nemesis for support?
 XI

The day following the workers' voluntary return to work, the Company Production
Manager discovered an unusual and sharp drop in workers' output. It was evidently
clear that the workers are engaged in a work slowdown activity. Is the work slowdown
a valid form of strike activity?

XII

Philippine News Network (PNN) engages the services of Anya, a prominent news
anchor from a rival station, National News Network (NNN). NNN objects to the
transfer of Anya claiming that she is barred from working in a competing company for
a period of three years from the expiration of her contract. Anya proceeds to sign with
PNN which then asks her to anchor their nightly newscast. NNN sues Anya and PNN
before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), asking for a labor injunction.
Anya and PNN object claiming that it is a matter cognizable by a regular court and not
the NLRC.

a. Is NNN's remedy correct? Why or why not?

b. What are the grounds for a labor injunction to issue?

XIII

Johnny is the duly elected President and principal union organizer of the Nagkakaisang
Manggagawa ng Manila Restaurant (NMMR), a legitimate labor organization. He was
unceremoniously dismissed by management for spending virtually 95% of his working
hours in union activities. On the same day Johnny received the notice of termination,
the labor union went on strike. Management filed an action to declare the strike illegal,
contending that:

a. The union did not observe the “cooling-off period” mandated by the Labor Code; and

b. The union went on strike without complying with the strike-vote requirement under
the Labor Code.

Rule on the foregoing contentions with reasons.

 XIV

The projected bonus for the employees of Suerte Co. was 50% of their monthly
compensation. Unfortunately, due to the slump in the business, the president reduced
the bonus to 5% of their compensation. Can the company unilaterally reduce the
amount of bonus? Explain briefly.

XV

“A”, an employee of Company “B” was found to have been illegally dismissed and was
ordered to be reinstated and paid backwages from the time of dismissal until actual
reinstatement. The case was elevated all the way to the Supreme Court. By the time the
Supreme Court’s decision became final and executory, B had closed down and was in
the process of winding up. Nonetheless, B paid A his backwages and separation pay. A
complained that B’s computation was erroneous in that A’s allowances was not
included. Is A correct in his claim? For what reasons?

XVI

Distinguish between the substantive and the procedural requirements for the dismissal
of an employee.

XVII

Determine whether the following minors should be prohibited from being hired and
from performing their respective duties indicated hereunder:

a. A 17-year old boy working as a miner at the Walwaldi Mining Corporation.

b. An 11-year old boy who is an accomplished singer and performer in different

parts of the country.
c. A 15-year old girl working as a library assistant in a girls’ high school.
d. A 16-year old girl working as model promoting alcoholic beverages.
e. A 17 -year old boy working as dealer in a casino

XVIII
 Nexturn Corporation employed Nini and Nono, whose tasks involved directing
and supervising rank-and-file employees engaged in company operations. Nini and
Nono are required to ensure that such employees obey company rules and regulations,
and recommend to the company's Human Resources Department any required
disciplinary action against erring employees. In Nexturn Corporation, there are two
independent unions, representing rank-and-file and supervisory employees,
respectively.

(a) May Nini and Nono join a union?

(b) May the two unions be affiliated with the same Union Federation?

XIX

D, one of the sales representatives of OP, Inc., was receiving a basic pay of P50,000.00 a
month, plus a 1 % overriding commission on his actual sales transactions. In addition,
beginning three (3) months ago, or in August 2019, D was able to receive a monthly gas
and transportation allowance of P5,000.00 despite the lack of any company policy
therefor.

In November 2019, D approached his manager and asked for his gas and transportation
allowance for the month. The manager declined his request, saying that the company
had decided to discontinue the aforementioned allowance considering the increased
costs of its overhead expenses. In response, D argued that OP, Inc.' s removal of the gas
and transportation allowance amounted to a violation of the rule on non- diminution of
benefits.

Is the argument of D tenable? Explain.

XX

Nagrab Union and Nagrab Corporation have an existing CBA which contains the
following provision: "New employees within the coverage of the bargaining unit who
may be regularly employed shall become members of Nagrab Union. Membership in
good standing with the Nagrab Union is a requirement for continued employment with
Nagrab Corporation." Nagrab Corporation subsequently acquired all the assets and
rights of Nuber Corporation and absorbed all of the latter's employees. Nagrab Union
immediately demanded enforcement of the above-stated CBA provision with respect to
the absorbed employees. Nagrab Corporation refused on the ground that this should
not apply to the absorbed employees who were former employees of another
corporation whose assets and rights it had acquired.

(a) Was Nagrab Corporation correct in refusing to enforce the CBA provision
with respect to the absorbed employees? (
 May a newly-regularized employee of Nagrab Corporation (who is not
part of the absorbed employees) refuse to join Nagrab Union?

(b) How would you advise the human resources manager of Nagrab
Corporation to proceed?

-END-