LABOR AND CONSTITUTION

PRELIMINARY TITLE
ARTICLES 1-5

ARTICLE 6
EER

When EER had already been established in a case for illegal

dismissal before the NLRC, there is no longer a need for the RTC, in a
separate criminal action, to make an independent finding of EER
pursuant to the doctrine of conclusiveness of judgment. [Nely Co vs.
People, G.R. No. 160265, July 13, 2009, Corona, J.]

PRE-EMPLOYMENT

HUMAN RESOURCES

BOOK III
CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT

BOOK V
LABOR RELATIONS PROPER

Registration of Unions
Certificate of Registration

The Labor Code and its implementing rules do not require that
the number of members appearing on the documents in question
should completely dovetail, so long as the documents and signatures
are shown to be genuine and regular, and the constitution and by-laws
democratically ratified, the union is deemed to have complied with
registration requirements. [The Heritage Hotel Manila vs. PIGLAS-
HERITAGE, G.R No. 177024, October 30, 2009, Abad, J.]
Cancellation

For fraud and misrepresentation to be grounds for the

cancellation of union registration under the Labor Code, the nature of
the fraud and misrepresentation must be grave and compelling enough
to vitiate the consent of a majority of union members. [Mariwasa Siam
Ceramics, Inc. vs. Secretary, G.R. No. 183317, December 21, 2009,
Nachura, J.]

It is not misrepresentation nor concealment in its application for

registration to admit new members after the submission of the minutes
of the organizational meetings and the list of workers who participated
in the meetings, if the new members joined before registration but not
until after the organizational meeting, for as long as such fact is borne
by the records. [Eagle Ridge Golf & Country Club vs. CA, G.R. No.
178989, March 18, 2010, Velasco, J.]

Rights of Unions

The union's members should realize that in joining the

organization, they have surrendered a portion of their individual
freedom for the benefit of all the other members; that they submit to
the will of the majority of the members in order that they may derive
the advantages to be gained from the concerted action. [University of
Santo Tomas vs. Samahang Manggagawa ng UST, G.R. No. 169940,
September 14, 2009, Ynares-Santiago, J.]

Union Security

The right of an employee to be informed of the charges against

him and to reasonable opportunity to present his side in a controversy
with either the company or his own Union is not wiped away by a union
security clause or a union shop clause. An employee is entitled to be
protected not only from a company which disregards his right but also
from his own union, the leadership of which could yield to the
temptation of swift and arbitrary expulsion from membership and mere
dismissal from his job. [Herminigildo Inguillo vs. First Philippine Scales,
Inc., G.R. No. 165407, June 5, 2009, Peralta, J.]

Check-off

Although the law does not prescribe a particular form for the
written authorization for the levy or check-off of special assessments,
the authorization must, at the very least, embody the genuine
consent of the union member. Thus, a union member’s consent in
ratifying an MOA cannot be considered also as his written authorization
for the levy or check-off of special assessments included in said MOA.
[Eduardo Mariño, Jr. vs. Gil Gamilla, G.R. No. 149763, July 7, 2009,
Chico-Nazario, J.]

Attorney’s fees, negotiation fees, and other similar charges may

only be collected from union funds, NOT from the amounts that pertain
to individual members, UNLESS there is proper authorization for its
levy by the individual employees. [Eduardo Mariño, Jr. vs. Gil Gamilla,
G.R. No. 149763, July 7, 2009, Chico-Nazario, J.]

Certification Election
PCE

A certification proceeding, even though initiated by a “petition”

is not litigation, but an investigation of a non-adversarial and fact-
finding character. Thus, the requirement for a certificate of non-forum
shopping is not necessary for said petition to prosper. Besides, the
possibility of filing multiple suits which said certification seeks to
prevent is highly unlikely, as the rules provide that where two or ore
petitions involving the same bargaining unit are filed in one Regional
Office, these petitions shall automatically be consolidated. [Samahan
ng mga Manggagawa sa Samma-LIKHA vs. Samma Corporation, G.R.
No. 167141, March 13, 2009, Corona, J.]

Even if there were less than the required percentage of minimum

membership of the employees asking for a certification election, that
of itself would not be a bar for the conduct of an election. [Eagle Ridge
Golf & Country Club vs. CA, G.R. No. 178989, March 18, 2010, Velasco,
J.]

Representative Status

The representative status of an exclusive bargaining union is

only for five (5) years, and may not be extended by agreement of
parties in a CBA, even if such extension is meant to coincide with the
agreed life of said CBA. Article 253-A of the Labor Code is clear that
the exclusive bargaining status of a union cannot go beyond five (5)
years, and can be challenged within 60 days prior to the expiration of
the CBA’s first five years. [FVC Labor Union-PTGWO vs. Sama-Samang
Nagkakaisang Manggagawa sa FVC-SIGLO, G.R. No. 176249, November
27, 2009, Brion, J.]
Voting List

Probationary employees have the right to vote in a certification

election. A provision in the CBA disqualifying probationary employees
from voting cannot override the constitutionally-protected right of
workers to self-organization. [NUWHRAIN, Manila Pavilion Hotel
Chapter vs. Secretary, G.R. No. 181531, July 31, 2009, Carpio Morales,
J.]

The filing of an appeal to SOLE from the Med-Arbiter’s Order

stays its execution, in accordance with Section 21, Rule XI, DO 40-03,
and rationally, the Med-Arbiter cannot direct the employer to furnish
him/her with the list of eligible voters pending resolution of the appeal.
[NUWHRAIN, Manila Pavilion Hotel Chapter vs. Secretary, G.R. No.
181531, July 31, 2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

Election Process

The true essence of determining the number of valid votes cast

is to ascertain the will of the members of the bargaining unit as to
whether they want to be represented, and which union they want to
represent them. [NUWHRAIN, Manila Pavilion Hotel Chapter vs.
Secretary, G.R. No. 181531, July 31, 2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

CBA

Christmas bonus becomes a demandable obligation when

incorporated in the CBA. [Lepanto Ceramics, Inc. vs. Lepanto Ceramics
Employees Association, G.R. No. 180866, March 2, 2010, Perez, J.]

While union and its members were granted union leave

privileges under the CBA, nothing therein removes from the company
its right to prescribe reasonable rules and regulations to govern the
manner of availing said union leaves, particularly the prerogative to
require a prior approval. [Malayan Employees Association-FFW vs.
Malayan Insurance Company, Inc., G.R. No. 181357, February 2, 2010,
Brion, J.]

Duration/Period of Effectivity

The parties may agree to extend the CBA’s original 5-year term
together with all other CBA provisions, EXCEPT any provision
extending the life of the union’s exclusive bargaining status beyond
five (5) years. [FVC Labor Union-PTGWO vs. Sama-Samang
Nagkakaisang Manggagawa sa FVC-SIGLO, G.R. No. 176249, November
27, 2009, Brion, J.]

ULP

Strike
Assumption Jurisdiction

The power of the Secretary of Labor under Article 263(g) is not

limited to the grounds cited in the notice of strike/lockout that may
have preceded the strike/lockout; nor is it limited to the incidents of
the strike/lockout that have taken place. [Bagong Pagkakaisa ng
Manggagawa ng Triumph International vs. Secretary, G.R. Nos. 167401
and 167407, July 5, 2010, Brion, J.]

The term “assume jurisdiction” includes and extends to all

questions and controversies arising from or related to the dispute,
including cases over which the labor arbiter has exclusive jurisdiction.
[Bagong Pagkakaisa ng Manggagawa ng Triumph International vs.
Secretary, G.R. Nos. 167401 and 167407, July 5, 2010, Brion, J.]

Return-to-Work Order

The return-to-work order of the Secretary of Labor includes the

retrenched employees, retrenchment of which was made reason for
staging the strike. [YSS Employees Union-PTGWO vs. YSS Laboratories,
Inc., G.R. No. 155125, December 4, 2009, Chico-Nazario, J.]

BOOK V
DISPUTE SETTLEMENT

Jurisdiction

AFPCES is an agency in charge of the operations and

management of all commissary facilities in military establishments all
over the country. It is under the direct control and supervision of the
AFP, and all its personnel are classified as government employees
governed by appropriate civil service laws and procedures. [Hidalgo
vs. Republic, G.R. No. 179793, July 5, 2010, Villarama, J.]

A party actively participating in a proceeding before a court

allegedly without jurisdiction will estop such party from assailing the
lack of it. [Philippine Veterans Bank vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 188882, March
30, 2010, Brion, J.] BUT, the rule on estoppel in pais is not
applicable even if AFPCES created an impression upon its employees
that they fall within the coverage of the labor laws. [Hidalgo vs.
Republic, G.R. No. 179793, July 5, 2010, Villarama, J.]

If a person was appointed during a special meeting of the

corporation’s Board of Director in an appointment to a non-existent
corporate office, and not under the disciplinary control of said Board,
that person is not a corporate officer, but a mere employee of the
corporation. [WPP Marketing Communications, Inc. vs. Galera, G.R.
Nos. 169207 and 169239, March 29, 2010, Carpio, J.]

If an employee, after being considered retired due to cessation of

personality of a corporation as GOCC, and all benefits accruing from
the date of employment until retirement had been paid, was later on
rehired by said corporation, now a private juridical entity, all the
benefits accruing said employee from the date of re-employment until
separation shall then be governed by the Labor Code. [Ang vs. PNB,
G.R. No. 178762, June 16, 2010, Abad, J.]

Violation of Labor Standards Law

Contesting only the jurisdiction of the labor regulations officer

over its establishment is not the “contest” contemplated by the
exception clause. The employer must contest the findings of said
officer during the hearing or after receipt of the notice of inspection
results. [Victor Meteoro vs. Creative Creatures, Inc., G.R. No. 171275,
July 13, 2009, Nachura, J.]

Secretary of Labor

The Secretary of Labor, under Art. 106, LC, exercises quasi-

judicial power, at least to the extent necessary to determine violations
of labor standards provisions of the Code. He, or the regional
directors, can issue compliance orders and writs of execution for the
execution thereof. [Jethro Intelligence & Security Corporation vs.
Secretary of Labor and Employment, G.R. No. 172537, August 14,
2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

The Secretary of Labor's determination of employer-employee

relationship is merely preliminary to its function of enforcing labor
standards provision. There must be prima facie showing of the absence
of such relationship to preclude DOLE from the exercise of its power.
[People's Broadcasting vs. Secretary, G.R. No. 179652, May 8, 2009,
Tinga, J.]

A complaint for illegal dismissal filed by employees who were

covered by the bargaining unit represented by a union that has a
pending labor dispute with the company, which the Secretary of Labor
assumed jurisdiction and thereafter resolved with finality, is not a
simple case of illegal dismissal, when the issues raised by said
employees pertain to submit matters in the labor dispute. [Santuyo vs.
Remerco Garments Manufacturing, Inc., G.R. No. 174420, March 22,
2010, Corona, J.]

BLR

Controversy surrounding a shop steward's recall from his position

as such is a dispute within the union. [Teodorico Miranda, Jr. vs. Asian
Terminals, Inc., G.R. No. 174316, June 23, 2009, Puno, C.J.]

NCMB

NCMB does not perform quasi-judicial functions. [Juanito Tabigue

vs. International Copra Export Corporation, G.R. No. 183335, December
23, 2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

Voluntary Arbitrator

The voluntary arbitrator has no jurisdiction over matters

affecting third persons in a given submission, and therefore is not
binding on these third persons. [Temic Automotive Philippines, Inc. vs.
Temic Automotive Philippines, Inc. Employees Union-FFW, G.R. No.
186965, December 23, 2009, Brion, J.]

POEA

The charges of non-issuance of receipt and misrepresentation

against a placement agency could not possibly prosper for failure of
the worker to adduce evidence of payment made, or that the agency
referred or endorsed the worker for employment abroad to another
agency on account of worker’s voluntary withdrawal of its application
with the placement agency. [LNS International Manpower Services vs.
Padua, Jr., G.R. No. 179792, March 5, 2010, Del Castillo, J.]
Administrative Proceedings

For expeditious and inexpensive filing of complaints by

employees, the Regional Arbitration Branch of the NLRC provides pro-
forma complaint forms to facilitate the exercise and protection of
employees’ rights by the convenient assertion of their claims against
employers. To comply with the certification against forum shopping
requirement, a simple question embodied in the complaint form
answerable by “yes” or “no” suffices. Employee-complainants are not
even required to have a counsel before they can file their complaint.
An officer of the RAB are duly authorized to administer oaths, and is
readily available to execute the required subscription of the complaint.
[Oriental Shipmanagement Co., Inc. vs. Bastol, G.R. No. 186289, June
29, 2010, Velasco, J.]

Liberal Interpretation

The belated submission of additional documentary evidence after

the case was already submitted for decision does not make the
proceedings before the labor arbiter improper as technical rules of
procedure are not binding in labor cases. [Oriental Shipmanagement
Co., Inc. vs. Bastol, G.R. No. 186289, June 29, 2010, Velasco, J.] In fact,
the NLRC is not precluded from receiving evidence on appeal, provided
due process is observed. [Plantation Bay Resort and Spa vs. Romel
Dubrico, G.R. No. 182216, December 4, 2009, Carpio Morales, J.] and
the delay in the submission of such evidence must be clearly
explained and should adequately prove the party's allegations.
[Virgilio Anabe vs. Asian Construction, G.R. No. 183233, December 23,
2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

Unintended lapses are disregarded so as to give due course to

appeals filed beyond the reglementary period based on strong and
compelling reasons. [Republic Cement Corporation vs. Peter
Guinmapang, G.R. No. 168910, August 24, 2009, Carpio, J.] However,
this liberal application must be accompanied with at least an
explanation from the party invoking liberality why it failed to comply
with the rules. [Hilario Ramirez vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 182626,
December 4, 2009, Chico-Nazario, J.]

HOWEVER, while NLRC has appellate jurisdiction over decisions and

resolutions of the labor arbiter, it may not dictate to the latter how to
conduct the labor case before him. The labor arbiter is given full
discretion to determine, motu proprio on whether to conduct hearings
or not. [Oriental Shipmanagement Co., Inc. vs. Bastol, G.R. No. 186289,
June 29, 2010, Velasco, J.]
Money claims
Disability benefits

Disability benefits should be understood less on its medical

significance, but more on the loss of earning capacity of the seafarer.
He is not compensated for the injury he sustained, but for his inability
to work resulting in the impairment of his earning capacity. [Rizaldy M.
Quitoriano v. Jebsens Maritime, Inc., G.R. No. 179868, January 21,
2010, Carpio Morales, J.]

It is the company-designated physician who must certify that the

seafarer has suffered a permanent disability, whether total or partial,
due to either injury or illness, during the term of his employment.
[Leonis Navigation v. Catalino U. Villamater, G.R. No. 179169, March 3,
2010, Nachura, J.]

Prescription of Actions

The time for prescription for all kinds of actions, when no special
provision which ordains otherwise, shall be counted from the day they
may be brought, or the day a claim started as a legal possibility.
[Virgilio Anabe vs. Asian Construction, G.R. No. 183233, December 23,
2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

Article 291 covers all money claims from EER, and is broader in
scope than claims arising from a specific law. This provision applies
also to claims of overseas contract workers. [LWV Construction
Corporation vs. Marcelo Dupo, G.R. No. 172342, July 13, 2009,
Quisumbing, J.]

Arising from Different Source of Obligation

Not every controversy or money claim by an employee against

the employer and vice-versa is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the
labor arbiter. If the cause of action proceeds from a different
source of obligation, and EER is merely incidental to the cause, the
jurisdiction is with the regular courts. Such as in a controversy
involving the intrinsic validity of the “compulsory retirement of flight
attendants” in the CBA. [Patricia Halagueña vs. Philippine Airlines,
Inc., G.R. No. 172013, October 2, 2009, Peralta, J.]

Appeal
Appeal Bond
 When the accreditation of a bonding company was subsequently
revoked or otherwise not renewed by the Supreme Court, all appeal
bonds issued by said bonding company prior to revocation of its
accreditation should not prejudice parties who relied on the bonding
company's authority. But the party benefited must post a new bond by
a duly-accredited bonding company. [Cesario del Rosario vs.
Philippine Journalists, Inc., G.R. No. 181516, August 19, 2009, Nachura,
J.]

One instance when appeal bond in the form of a “Deed of

Assignment” was recognized by the Supreme Court, as a valid form of
appeal bond for purposes of appeal before the NLRC. [People's
Broadcasting vs. Secretary, G.R. No. 179652, May 8, 2009, Tinga, J.]

Execution
Reinstatement Pending Appeal

Prior to Genuino vs. NLRC, there had been no known similar case
where the employee was required to refund the salaries received on
payroll reinstatement despite a subsequent reversal of the
reinstatement order. [Juanito Garcia vs. Philippine Airlines, Inc., G.R.
No. 164856, January 20, 2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

An order of reinstatement is immediately executory and the

employer has to either re-admit the dismissed employees, or reinstate
them in the payroll, and if he fails to exercise the options, the
employer must pay the employee's salaries. However, the employee
may be barred from collecting the accrued wages if: (1) there was an
actual delay; and (2) the delay was not due to the employer's
unjustified act or omission, such as when the employer was placed
under rehabilitation. [Juanito Garcia vs. Philippine Airlines, Inc., G.R.
No. 164856, January 20, 2009, Carpio Morales, J.]

Immutability of Judgments

A judgment should be implemented according to the terms of the

dispositive portion, where each of the parties' rights and obligations
are stated. [Session Delights Ice Cream and Fast Foods vs. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 172149, February 8, 2010, Brion, J.]

Final Amount of Liability

 For the guidance of the labor arbiter, the following yardsticks in
the computation of the final amount of liability of the employer to each
and every employee shall be:

(1) Employees who have been re-employed without loss of

seniority rights shall be paid backwages but only up to actual
reinstatement;
(2) Employees who have been re-employed as new hires shall be
restored their seniority and other preferential rights.
However, their backwages shall be computed only to date of
actual re-hiring;
(3) Employees who have reached compulsory age of retirement
shall receive backwages up to their retirement only; same is
true as regards the heirs of those employees who have passed
away;
(4) Employees who have not been re-employed, plus those who
executed quitclaims and received separation pay or
financial assistance, shall be reinstated without loss of seniority
rights, and paid full backwages, after deduction of whatever
amounts already received; AND
(5) Employees who had obtained substantially equivalent or
even more lucrative employment elsewhere are deemed to
have severed their employment with their previous
employer, and shall be entitled to full backwages from date of
retrenchment up to the date they found employment
elsewhere. [Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the
Philippines (FASAP) vs. Philippine Airlines, Inc., G.R. No. 178083,
October 2, 2009, Ynares-Santiago, J.]

Injunction

The execution of the final and executory decision or resolution of

the NLRC shall proceed despite pendency of a petition for certiorari,
unless it is restrained by the proper court. [Leonis Navigation Co., Inc.
vs. Catalino Villamater, G.R. No. 179169, March 3, 2010, Nachura, J.]

The RTC can validly issue a TRO and later a writ of preliminary
injunction to prevent enforcement of a writ of execution issued by a
labor tribunal on the basis of a third-party's claim of ownership over
properties levied upon (in an execution of awards made in a labor
case), since said action neither involves nor grows out of labor dispute
insofar as third persons are concerned. [“G” Holdings, Inc. vs. National
Mines and Allied Workers Union Local 103, G.R. No. 160236, October
16, 2009, Nachura, J.]
Compromise Agreement

A true offer of compromise does not involve an admission of

respondent's liability or a complainant's groundless claim. To this end,
communications made toward a settlement of labor disputes are
regarded as privileged, and thus inadmissible as evidence in any
proceeding. The law favors such settlements out of court without any
prejudice to the parties in case efforts to settle fail. [Pentagon Steel
Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 174141, June 26, 2009,
Brion, J.]

BOOK VI
POST EMPLOYMENT

282
Serious Misconduct

Workers' refusal to follow the new working hours imposed by the

employer does not amount to serious misconduct or willful
disobedience. [Union Carbide Labor union vs. Union Carbide, 215 SCRA
554, 558 (92)]

Analogous Causes

Theft committed by an employee against a person other than the

employer, if proven by substantial evidence, is a cause analogous to
serious misconduct, hence, a valid cause for employee's separation.
[John Hancock Life Insurance vs. Davis, G.R. No. 169549, September 3,
2008]

BUT,
Malversation of personnel funds, not sanctioned by the
employer, does not constitute serious misconduct. [Villamor Golf Club
vs. Pehid, G.R. No. 166152, October 4, 2005]

BOOK VII
PRESCRIPTION OF ACTIONS

SEXUAL HARASSMENT ACT

 GSIS

Benefits

To be entitled to compensation, a claimant must show that the

sickness is either: (1) a result of an occupational disease listed under
Annex A of the Amended Rules on Employee's Compensation; or (2) if
not so listed, that the risk of contracting the disease is increased by
the working conditions. [GSIS vs. Jean E. Raoet, G.R. No. 157038,
December 23, 2009, Brion, J.]

Peptic ulcer is a compensable cause of death, pursuant to ECC

Resolution No. 1676, provided that claimant is in an occupation that
involves prolonged emotional or physical stress, as among professional
people, transport workers, and the like. [GSIS vs. Jean E. Raoet, G.R.
No. 157038, December 23, 2009, Brion, J.]

GSIS cannot avoid payment of compensation even if the State

Insurance Fund lacks the financial capacity to pay. It is the clear
mandate of Art. 184, LC for the State to ensure the solvency of the
State Insurance Fund. [GSIS vs. Jean E. Raoet, G.R. No. 157038,
December 23, 2009, Brion, J.]

SSS

PD 851
13TH MONTH PAY