DAVAO INTEGRATED PORT STEVEDORING SERVICES, petitioner, vs. RUBEN V. ABARQUEZ (GR No. 1!1"!

, #$r%& 1', 1''"(

)ACTS*
O%to+er 1,, 1'-.
o A CBA was entered by petitioner and private respondent ATU-TUCP
(Union) which provided for sick leave with payment benefits each year to
its employees who have rendered at least one (1) year of service with the
company
Apri/ 1., 1'-'
o The CBA was renewed which reprodced the provisions for sick leave
with pay benefits nder !ections and "# Article $%%% of the new CBA# bt
the covera&e of the said benefits was e'panded to inclde the (present
)e&lar *'tra +abor Pool as of the si&nin& of this A&reement,(
-rin& the effectivity of the CBA for " years and . months (/ctober 10# 1.12 to "
months after its renewal on April 12# 1.1.) all the field workers of petitioner who are
members of the re&lar labor pool and the present re&lar e'tra labor pool 0&o &$1
ren1ere1 $t /e$st 2. &o3rs 3p to 1,. &o3rs 0ere e4ten1e1 si%5 /e$ve 0it&
p$6 +ene7its, Any 3nen8o6e1 portion t&ereo7 $t t&e en1 o7 t&e %3rrent 6e$r 0$s
%onverte1 to %$s& $n1 p$i1 $t t&e en1 o7 t&e s$i1 one96e$r perio1 p3rs3$nt to
Se%tions 1 $n1 ", Arti%/e VIII o7 t&e CBA.
o The nmber of days of their sick leave per year depends on the nmber
of hors of service per calendar year in accordance with the schedle
provided in !ection "# Article $%%% of the CBA,
Bt nder a new assistant mana&er# Ben3amin 4ar5o# the petitioner stopped the
conversion of the nen3oyed portion of the sick leave with pay benefits of the
intermittent workers into cash becase they are not entitled to said benefits nder
!ections 1 and " of the 1.1. CBA,
The respondent Union ob3ected contendin& that it is different from the intention of
the parties who ne&otiated the CBA, %t wold also violate the principle in labor laws
that benefits already e'tended shall not be taken away and that it wold reslt in
discrimination between the non-intermittent and the intermittent workers of the
petitioner-company,
The Union bro&ht the matter for volntary arbitration before the 6ational
Conciliation and 4ediation Board# )e&ional Arbitration Branch 7% at -avao City by
way of complaint for enforcement of the CBA, The parties mtally desi&nated
pblic respondent )ben Abar8e5# 9r, to act as volntary arbitrator,
!eptember 1:# 1..1
o An Award in favor of the Union rlin& that the intermittent workers are
entitled to commtation of their nen3oyed sick leave with pay benefits
nder !ections 1 and " of the 1.1. CBA,
ISSUE* ;hether or not intermittent (irre&lar) workers are entitle to commtation of their
nen3oyed sick leave with pay benefits,
DECSION* <es, Petition dismissed, The award (decision) of pblic respondent dated
!eptember 1:# 1..1 is hereby A==%)4*-,
RATIO*
Definition of Sick Leave in the CBA
!ick leave benefits# like other economic benefits stiplated in the CBA sch as
maternity leave and vacation leave benefits# amon& others# are by their natre#
intended to be replacements for re&lar income which otherwise wold not be
earned becase an employee is not workin& drin& the period of said leaves, They
are non-contribtory in natre# in the sense that the employees contribte nothin& to
the operation of the benefits, By their natre# pon a&reement of the parties# they
are intended to alleviate the economic condition of the workers,
Interpretation of the CBA provisions
%t is not dispted that both classes of workers are entitled to sick leave with pay
benefits provided they comply with the conditions set forth nder !ection 1 in
relation to the last para&raph of !ection "# to wit> (1) the employee-applicant mst
be re&lar or mst have rendered at least one year of service with the company?
and (@) the application mst be accompanied by a certification from a company-
desi&nated physician,
o It 0$s 0ron: 7or t&e petitioner to iso/$te Se%tion 1 o7 t&e CBA 7ro;
ot&er provisions re:$r1in: si%5 /e$ve 0it& p$6 +ene7itrs in or1er to
83sti76 t&eir $%tion. T&eir $%tion 0$s 1is%ri;in$tor6 in n$t3re.
%t mst be noted that the 1.1. CBA has @ sections on sick leave with pay benefits
which apply to @ distinct classes of workers in petitionerAs company# namely>
1, the re:3/$r non9inter;ittent 0or5ers
a, those workers who render a daily ei&ht-hor service to the company
and are &overned by !ection 1# Article $%%% of the 1.1. CBA? and
@, intermittent field workers
a. who are members of the re&lar labor pool and the present re&lar
e'tra labor pool as of the si&nin& of the a&reement on April 12# 1.1.
or those workers who have irre&lar workin& days and are &overned
by !ection "# Article $%%% of the 1.1. CBA,
%t is not dispted that both classes of workers are entitled to sick leave with pay
benefits provided they comply with the conditions set forth nder !ection 1 in
relation to the last para&raph of !ection "# to wit> (1) the employee-applicant mst
be re&lar or mst have rendered at least one year of service with the company?
and (@) the application mst be accompanied by a certification from a company-
desi&nated physician,
=or the phrase (herein sick leave privile&e#( as sed in the last sentence of !ection
1# refers to the privile&e of havin& a fi'ed 12-day sick leave with pay which# as
mandated by !ection 1# only the non-intermittent workers are entitled to, This fi'ed
12-day sick leave with pay benefit shold be distin&ished from the variable nmber
of days of sick leave# not to e'ceed 12 days# e'tended to intermittent workers nder
!ection " dependin& on the nmber of hors of service rendered to the company#
incldin& overtime prsant to the schedle provided therein, %t is only fair and
reasonable for petitioner-company not to stiplate a fi'ed 12-day sick leave with pay
for its re&lar intermittent workers since# as the term (intermittent( implies# there is
irre&larity in their work-days,