Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Vengco vs Trajano

Vengco vs Trajano

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1|Likes:
Published by Gerald Suarez

More info:

Published by: Gerald Suarez on Sep 08, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/08/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Vengco vs TrajanoFacts:1.Sometime in the latter part of 1981, the Management of the Anglo-American Tobacco Corporation and the Kapisanan ng Manggagawa sa Anglo-American Tobacco Corporation (FOITAF) entered into a compromise agreement wherebythe company will pay to the union members the sum of P150,000.00 for theirclaims arising from the unpaid emergency cost of living allowance (ECOLA)2.Respondent Emmanuel Timbungco who is the union president received themoney which was paid in installments. Thereafter, he distributed the amountamong the union members. Petitioners Ambrocio Vengco, Ramon Moises,Rafael Wagas and 80 others (Vengco, et al., for short) who are union membersnoted that Timbungco was not authorized by the union workers to get themoney; and that ten percent (10%) of the P150,000.00 had been deducted topay for attorney's fees without their written authorization in violation of Article242(o) of the Labor Code.3.Vengco, et al. filed a complaint with the Ministry of Labor praying for: "(1) theexpulsion of Emmanuel Timbungco as president of the union for violation of (the) union constitution and by-laws and the rights and conditions of unionmembers under the Labor Code; (2) an order to require Timbungco to renderan accounting of how the P150,000.00 was distributed; and (3) an order torequire private respondent to publish in the bulletin board the list of themembers and the corresponding amount they each received from theP150,000.00."4.Timbungco alleged among others, that he was authorized by a resolutionsigned by the majority of the union members to receive and distribute theP150,000.00 among the workers; that the computation of the benefits wasbased on the payroll of the company; that the ten percent (10%) attorney'sfees was in relation to the claim of the local union for payment of emergencycost of living allowance before the Ministry of Labor which is totally distinct andseparate from the negotiation of the CBA5.Timbungco was found guilty by the BLR and expelled as president of theorganization.Issue: Whether Respondent is guilty of illegally deducting 10% attorneys fees frompetitioner?Held:
 Article 241 (o) of the Labor Code provides:

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->