I.

What is the concept of liberal approach in interpreting the labor code

and its implementing rules?

ANSWER.
This concept of liberal approach is enshrined both in the Labor Code and
the Civil Code. More specifically, the Labor Code declares that all doubts in
the implementation and interpretation of the provisions of the Code,
including its implementing rules and regulations, shall be resolved in favor
of labor. The Civil Code likewise pronounces that “in case of doubt, all labor
legislation and all labor contracts shall be construed in favor of the safety
and decent living for the laborer.” (See Article 4, Labor Code; Article 1702,
Civil Code). This concept, however, should not apply where the pertinent
provisions of the Labor Code leave no room for doubt either in their
interpretation or application. (Bonifacio vs. Government Service Insurance
System, 146 SCRA 276).

II
Aside from being contractual give other essential feature of er-ee
relationship?

ANSWER.

Once an employer-employee relationship is established, such

employment is treated, under our constitutional framework, as a property
right. When a person has no property, his job may possibly be his only
possession or means of livelihood and those of his dependents. When a
person loses his job, his dependents suffer as well. The worker should,
therefore, be protected and insulated against any arbitrary deprivation of his
job. (Philips Semiconductors [Phils.], Inc. vs. Fadriquela, G. R. No. 141717,
April 14, 2004; Philippine Geothermal, Inc. vs. NLRC, 189 SCRA 211 [1990]).
 III.
Is there any citizenship qualification for a person or entity engaged in
recruitment?

ANSWER.
Article 27. Citizenship Requirement. Only Filipino citizens or
corporations, partnerships or entities at least seventy-five percent (75%) of
the authorized and voting capital stock of which is owned and controlled by
Filipino Citizens shall be permitted to participate in the recruitment and
placement of workers, locally or overseas.

IV.a
How the provision of the law interrelates, if at all, with the provision
pertaining to labor standards –

IV. b
if the worker has his right to labor does the er have property rights?

ANSWER

"While the Constitution provides that the "the State x x x shall protect
the rights of workers and promote their welfare," that constitutional policy of
providing full protection to labor is not intended to oppress or destroy capital
and management. Thus, the capital and management sectors must also be
protected under a regime of justice and the rule of law."

V.a
May compensation benefits be awarded to a Filipino seaman or his
heir if the ailment was contracted prior to his employment.

ANSWER

The rule is that the pre-existence of an illness does not irrevocably bar
compensability because disability laws still grant the same provided the
seafarer’s working conditions bear causal connection with his
illness. However, this rule cannot be asserted by the claimant as it is
incumbent upon him to prove, by substantial evidence, as to how and why
the nature of his work and working conditions contributed to and/or
aggravated his illness. The claimant failed to discharge this burden of proof
in this case.

However, a seafarer who knowingly conceals and does not disclose

past medical condition, disability and history in the pre-employment medical
examination constitutes fraudulent misrepresentation and shall disqualify
him from any compensation and benefits. This may also be a valid ground
for termination of employment and imposition of the appropriate
administrative and legal sanctions.

V.b

ANSWER
Art 13 sec 3.
The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, organized
and unorganized, and promote full employment and equality of employment
opportunities for all.

It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization, collective

bargaining and negotiations, and peaceful concerted activities, including the
right to strike in accordance with law. They shall be entitled to security of
tenure, humane conditions of work, and a living wage. They shall also
participate in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and
benefits as may be provided by law.

The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between

workers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in
settling disputes, including conciliation, and shall enforce their mutual
compliance therewith to foster industrial peace.

The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers,
recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and
the right of enterprises to reasonable returns to investments, and to
expansion and growth.
 V.c
-can the er adopt measures to maximize profit –

ANSWER

Yes. Settled is the rule in this regard that an employer, except when
cited by special laws, has the right to regulate, according to his own
discretion and judgment, all aspects of employment, which includes, among
others, hiring, work assignments, place and manner of work, working
regulations and transfer of employees in accordance with his operational
demands and requirements. This right flows from ownership and from the
established rule that labor law does not authorize the substitution of
judgment of the employer in the conduct of his business, unless it is shown
to be contrary to law, morals or public policy (NLU vs. Insular-Yebana
Tobacco Corp., 2 SCRA 924, 931; and Republic Savings Bank vs. Court of
Industrial Relations, 21 SCRA 226, 235).

VI.b

to ensure safety for women employee what facilities should be

provided?

ANSWER

Art. 132. Facilities for women. The Secretary of Labor and Employment
shall establish standards that will ensure the safety and health of women
employees. In appropriate cases, he shall, by regulations, require any
employer to:

a. Provide seats proper for women and permit them to use such seats
when they are free from work and during working hours, provided
they can perform their duties in this position without detriment to
efficiency;

b. To establish separate toilet rooms and lavatories for men and women
and provide at least a dressing room for women;
 c. To establish a nursery in a workplace for the benefit of the women
employees therein; and

d. To determine appropriate minimum age and other standards for

retirement or termination in special occupations such as those of
flight attendants and the like.

VII.
Is the death of the seaman after termination of the contract
compensable?

ANSWER

Applying the rule on liberal construction, the Court is thus brought to

the recognition that medical repatriation cases should be considered as an
exception to Section 20 of the 2000 POEA-SEC. Accordingly, the phrase
"work-related death of the seafarer, during the term of his employment
contract" under Part A (1) of the said provision should not be strictly and
literally construed to mean that the seafarer’s work-related death should
have precisely occurred during the term of his employment. Rather, it is
enough that the seafarer’s work-related injury or illness which eventually
causes his death should have occurred during the term of his employment.
Taking all things into account, the Court reckons that it is by this method of
construction that undue prejudice to the laborer and his heirs may be
obviated and the State policy on labor protection be championed. For if the
laborer’s death was brought about (whether fully or partially) by the work he
had harbored for his master’s profit, then it is but proper that his demise be
compensated. Here, since it has been established that (a) the seafarer had
been suffering from a work-related injury or illness during the term of his
employment, (b) his injury or illness was the cause for his medical
repatriation, and (c) it was later determined that the injury or illness for which
he was medically repatriated was the proximate cause of his actual death
although the same occurred after the term of his employment, the above-
mentioned rule should squarely apply. Perforce, the present claim for death
benefits should be granted.
 The employer is liable to pay the heirs of the deceased seafarer for death benefits once
it is established that he died during the effectivity of his employment contract. However, the
employer may be exempt from liability if it can successfully prove that the seafarer’s death
was caused by an injury directly attributable to his deliberate or willful act, including killing
himself by committing suicide.

VIII.
before female ee should be accepted in a job, does the signing of
undertaking legal

ANSWER

Art. 136. Stipulation against marriage. It shall be unlawful for an

employer to require as a condition of employment or continuation of
employment that a woman employee shall not get married, or to stipulate
expressly or tacitly that upon getting married, a woman employee shall be
deemed resigned or separated, or to actually dismiss, discharge,
discriminate or otherwise prejudice a woman employee merely by reason of
her marriage.

Art. 137. Prohibited acts.

a. It shall be unlawful for any employer:

1. To deny any woman employee the benefits provided for in this

Chapter or to discharge any woman employed by him for the
purpose of preventing her from enjoying any of the benefits
provided under this Code.

2. To discharge such woman on account of her pregnancy, or

while on leave or in confinement due to her pregnancy;

3. To discharge or refuse the admission of such woman upon

returning to her work for fear that she may again be pregnant.

IX.a
Qualification of apprentice.
 ANSWER

Art. 59. Qualifications of apprentice. To qualify as an apprentice, a person

shall:
a. Be at least fourteen (14) years of age;

b. Possess vocational aptitude and capacity for appropriate tests; and

c. Possess the ability to comprehend and follow oral and written

instructions.

Trade and industry associations may recommend to the Secretary of Labor

appropriate educational requirements for different occupations.

IX.b

-are the maids consider house helper?

ANSWER

The law defines a kasambahay as one of the following:

• General househelp, otherwise known as katulong

• Nursemaid or yaya
• Cook
• Gardener
• Laundry person
• Any working children or domestic workers 15 years or older but
not over the age of 18
 • Anyone who regularly performs domestic work in one
household on an occupational basis, also known as a live-
out arrangement

The following, however, are not considered as kasambahay:

• Service providers
• Family drivers
• Children under foster family management
• Anyone who performs work occasionally or sporadically and not
on an occupational or regular basis (i.e. sideline)

House helper is synonymous to the term “domestic servant” and shall

refer to any person whether male or female who renders service in and about
the employer’s home and which services are usually necessary or desirable
for the maintenance and enjoyment thereof and includes ministering to the
personal comfort and convenience of the members of the employer’s
household, including services of family drivers. (See Art. 141 Labor Code
and Implementing Rules).

X.
Discuss the theory of increase risk

ANSWER

The theory of increased risk under Section 1 (b) Rule III of PD 626
which states that:
For the sickness and the resulting disability or death to be
compensable, the sickness must be the result of an occupational
disease listed under Annex 'A' of these Rules with the conditions
set therein satisfied; otherwise, proof must be shown that the risk
 of contracting the disease is increased by the working
conditions (Emphasis supplied).

XI.
a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s labor, explain.

ANSWER.

Under the principle of a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s labor, the
petitioners were not entitled to the wages during the period of the strike
(even if the strike might be legal), because they performed no work during
the strike. Verily, it was neither fair nor just that the dismissed employees
should litigate against their employer on the latter’s time. (Philippine
Diamond Hotel and Resort, Inc. (Manila Diamond Hotel) v. Manila Diamond
Hotel Employees Union,26 considering that the striking employees did not
render work for the employer during the strike.

XII.
wage distortion

ANSWER.
Under the law, there is wage distortion if there is a situation where an
increase in prescribed wage rates results in the elimination or severe
contraction of intentional quantitative differences in wage or salary rates
between and among employee groups in an establishment as to effectively
obliterate the distinctions embodied in such wage structure based on skills,
length of service, or other logical bases of differentiation.

XIII.
How should a wage distortion be settled?

ANSWER.

A wage distortion may be settled unilaterally by the employer or through

voluntary negotiations or arbitration.
 In organized establishments, where the application of any prescribed
wage increase

1. by virtue of a Wage Order issued by the Regional

Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board results in
distortions of the wage structure within an
establishment, the employer and the union are
required to negotiate to correct the distortions.

2. Any dispute arising from wage distortions should be

resolved through the grievance procedure under
their collective bargaining agreement and, if it
remains unresolved, through voluntary arbitration.

3. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties in writing,

such dispute shall be decided by the voluntary
arbitrator or panel of voluntary arbitrators within ten
(10) days from the time said dispute was referred to
voluntary arbitration.

 The rule is different in unorganized establishments.

1. In cases where there are no collective agreements or
recognized labor unions, the employers and workers are
required to endeavor to correct such distortions.
2. Any dispute arising therefrom should be settled through the
National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) and,
3. if it remains unresolved after ten (10) days of conciliation,
should be referred to the appropriate branch of the National
Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). (Paragraph 2, Section
1, Rule VII, Revised Rules of Procedure on Minimum Wage
Fixing dated Nov. 29, 1995; Article 124, Labor Code; Section
7, Chapter III, Rules Implementing Republic Act No. 6727).
 XIV.

what property right is compared upon an employee?

ANSWER.

Once an employer-employee relationship is established, such

employment is treated, under our constitutional framework, as a property
right. When a person has no property, his job may possibly be his only
possession or means of livelihood and those of his dependents. When a
person loses his job, his dependents suffer as well. The worker should,
therefore, be protected and insulated against any arbitrary deprivation of his
job. (Philips Semiconductors [Phils.], Inc. vs. Fadriquela, G. R. No. 141717,
April 14, 2004; Philippine Geothermal, Inc. vs. NLRC, 189 SCRA 211 [1990]).