Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
Part I : Introductory MaterialsLabor Standards
UP LAW BAROPS 2007ONE UP
1 of 132
SECTION 1 – LABOR LAW IN GENERAL
1.01 LABOR LAW DEFINED
The law governing the rights and duties of theemployer and employees(1)with respect to the terms and conditions of employment and(2)with respect to labor disputes arising fromcollective bargaining respecting such termsand conditions
1.02 LAW CLASSIFICATION
1.Labor StandardsProvide minimum terms and conditions of employment, below which it cannot be allowedto fall.Terms and conditions society deem necessary tomaintain health, safety, and decent living of workersBooks 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6Must be observed in the entirety
Maternity Children’s Hospital v. Sec. of Labor (89)
Labor standards are the minimumrequirements prescribed by existing laws, rulesand regulations relating to wages, hours of work, cost-of-living allowance, and othermonetary and welfare benefits, includingoccupational safety, and health standards.2.Labor RelationsRegulates the institutional relationship betweenthe workers organized into a union and theemployersBook V – Right to Self – Organization and Rightto bargain collectively3.Welfare LawsDesigned to take care of the contingencieswhich may affect the workers, e.g. where thereis loss of income for reasons beyond control,i.e. sickness, death, accident, etc.
Social Security Act of 1997, RA 8282
Government Service Insurance System of 1997, RA 8291
Employment Compensation and StateInsurance Fund
National Health Insurance Act of 1995, RA7875
1.03 BASIS OF ENACTMENT1987 ConstitutionArt II Sec 5
The maintenance of peace and order, the protectionof life, liberty, and property, and the promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoymentby all the people of the blessings of democracy.
Art II Sec 18
The State affirms labor as a primary social economicforce. It shall protect the rights of workers andpromote their welfare.
Art XIII Sec 1
The Congress shall give highest priority to theenactment of measures that protect and enhancethe right of all the people to human dignity, reducesocial, economic, and political inequalities, andremove cultural inequities by equitably diffusingwealth and political power for the common good.To this end, the State shall regulate theacquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of property and its increments.
1.04 LAW AND WORKERCebu Royal Plant v. Deputy Minister of Labor(87)
The SC reaffirmed its concern for the lowlyworker who, often at the mercy of his employermust look up to the law for his protection. Fittingly,the law regards him with tenderness and even favorand always with faith and hope in his capacity tohelp in shaping the nation’s future.
1.05 CASE DECISIONAnino v. NLRC (98)
The Court finds occasion to remind courts andquasi-judicial bodies that “[a] decision shouldfaithfully comply with Section 14, Article VIII of theConstitution which provides that no decision shall berendered by any court [or quasi-judicial body]without expressing therein clearly and distinctly thefacts of the case and the law on which it is based.xxx It is a requirement of due process and fair playthat the parties to a litigation be informed of how itwas decided, with an explanation of the factual andlegal reasons that led to the conclusions of the court[or quasi-judicial body]. A decision that does notclearly and distinctly state the facts and the law onwhich it is based leaves the parties in the dark as tohow it was reached and is especially prejudicial tothe losing party, who is unable to pinpoint thepossible errors of the court [or quasi-judicial body]for review by a higher tribunal.” In the present case, the NLRC was definitelywanting in the observance of the aforesaidconstitutional requirement. Its assailed five-pagedecision consisted of about three pages of quotationfrom the labor arbiter’s decision, including thedispositive portion, and barely a page (two shortparagraphs of two sentences each) of its owndiscussion of its reasons for reversing the arbiter’sfindings.
1.06 MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONR
ECOGNITION
Deles v. NLRC (2000)
However, petitioner loses sight of the fact thatthe right of an employer to regulate all aspects of employment is well settled. This right, aptly calledmanagement prerogative, gives employers thefreedom to regulate, according to their discretionand best judgment, all aspects of employment,including work assignment, working methods,processes to be followed, working regulations,transfer of employees, work supervision, lay-off of workers and the discipline, dismissal and recall of workers. In general, management has theprerogative to discipline its employees and to imposeappropriate penalties on erring workers, pursuant tocompany rules and regulations.
L
IMITATIONS
 
Part I : Introductory MaterialsLabor Standards
UP LAW BAROPS 2007ONE UP
2 of 132
Great Pacific Employees Union v. Great PacificLife Assurance (99)
It bears emphasis that the employer is free toregulate all aspects of employment according to hisown discretion and judgment. This prerogativeflowed from the established rule that labor laws donot authorize substitution of judgment of theemployer in the conduct of his business. Recall f workers clearly falls within the ambit of managementprerogative. The employer can exercise thisprerogative without fear of liability so long as it isdone in good faith for the advancement of hisinterest and not for the purpose of defeating orcircumventing the rights of the employees underspecial laws or valid agreements. It is valid as it isnot performed in a malicious, harsh, oppressive,vindictive or wanton manner or out of malice orspite.
Pantranco North Express, Inc. v. NLRC (99)
The State affords the constitutional blanket of rendering protection to labor, but it must alsoprotect the right of employers to exercise what areclearly management prerogatives, so long as theexercise is without abuse of discretion.
Bontia v. NLRC (96)
The rule is well settled that labor lawsdiscourage interference with an employer's judgment in the conduct of his business. Even as thelaw is solicitous of the welfare of employees, it mustalso protect the right of an employer to exercisewhat are clearly management prerogatives As longas the company' s exercise of the same is in goodfaith in order to advance its interests and not for thepurpose of defeating or circumventing the rights of the employees under the law or valid agreements,such exercise will be upheld.However, management prerogatives are notabsolute but are subject to legal limits, collectivebargaining agreements, or general principles of fairplay and justice. And, while it is the special privilegeof management to dismiss or lay off an employee,the exercise of that prerogative must be madewithout abuse of discretion, for what is at stake isnot only the employee' s position but also his meansof livelihood. Courts may, therefore, look into theemployer' s exercise of a management prerogative if the same is clearly shown to be tainted with graveabuse of discretion, 15 ever mindful that, under theforegoing principles and the policy of the State,doubts should be resolved in favor of thedisadvantaged employee.
1.07 COMPROMISE AND WAIVERArticle 227
Any compromise settlement, including thoseinvolving labor standards law, voluntarily agreedupon by the parties with the assistance of theBureau or the regional office of the Department of Labor, shall be
FINAL and BINDING
upon theparties. The National Labor relations Commission orany court
shall not assume jurisdiction overissues involved therein except in case of non-compliance thereof or if there is prima facieevidence that the settlement was obtainedthrough FRAUD, MISREPRESENTATION, ORCOERCION
.
RulesAsian Alcohol Corp. v. NLRC (99)
It is true that this Court has generally held thatquitclaims and releases are contrary to public policyand therefore, void. Nonetheless, voluntaryagreements that represent a reasonable settlementare binding on the parties and should not later bedisowned. It is only where there is clear proof thatthe waiver was wangled from an unsuspecting orgullible person, or the terms of the settlement areunconscionable, that the law will step in to bail outthe employee. While it is our duty to prevent theexploitation of employees, it also behooves us toprotect the sanctity of contracts that do notcontravene our laws.
More Maritime Agencies, Inc. v. NLRC (99)
In American Home Assurance Co. v. NLRC, thisCourt held:
 “The law does not consider as valid anyagreement to receive less compensation thatwhat a worker is entitled to recover nor preventhim from demanding benefits to which he isentitled. Quitclaims executed by the employeesare thus commonly frowned upon as contrary topublic policy and ineffective to bar claims for thefull measure of the worker’s legal rights,considering the economic disadvantage of theemployee and the inevitable pressure upon himby financial necessity.” 
Thus, it is never enough to assert that the partieshave voluntarily entered into such a quitclaim.
Golden Donuts, Inc. v. NLRC (2000)
A compromise, once approved by final orders of the court has the force of res judicata between theparties and should not be disturbed except for vicesof consent or forgery." A compromise is basically acontract perfected by mere consent. "Consent ismanifested by the meeting of the offer and theacceptance upon the thing and the cause which areto constitute the contract." A compromiseagreement is not valid when a party in the case hasnot signed the same or when someone signs for andin behalf of such party without authority to do so.
1.08 SOURCES OF LAWL
ABOR
C
ODE AND
R
ELATED
S
PECIAL
L
EGISLATION
Article 1305 Civil Code
A contract is a meeting of the minds between twopersons whereby one binds himself, with respect tothe other, to give something or to render someservice.
Article 1306 Civil Code
The contracting parties may establish suchstipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as theymay deem convenient, provided they are notcontrary to law, morals, good customs, public order,or public policy.
C
ONTRACT
Collective Bargaining Agreement
Plastic Town Center Corp. v. NLRC (89)
The subject for interpretation in this petition forreview is not the Labor Code or its implementingrules and regulations but the provisions of thecollective bargaining agreement entered into bymanagement and the labor union. As a contract,
 
Part I : Introductory MaterialsLabor Standards
UP LAW BAROPS 2007ONE UP
3 of 132
it constitutes the law between the parties (Fegurin v.National Labor Relations Commission) and ininterpreting contracts, the rules on contract mustgovern.Contracts which are not ambiguous are to beinterpreted according to their literal meaning andshould not be interpreted beyond their obviousintendment (Herrera v. Petrophil Corp.).
P
AST
P
RACTICES
Davao Fruits Corporation v. Associated LaborUnion (93)
From 1975 to 1981, petitioner had freely,voluntarily and continuously included in thecomputation of its employees' thirteenth month pay,the payments for sick, vacation and maternityleaves, premiums for work done on rest days andspecial holidays, and pay for regular holidays. Theconsiderable length of time the questioned items hadbeen included by petitioner indicates a unilateral andvoluntary act on its part, sufficient in itself to negateany claim of mistake.A company practice favorable to the employeeshad indeed been established and the paymentsmade pursuant thereto, ripened into benefitsenjoyed by them. And any benefit and supplementbeing enjoyed by the employees cannot be reduced,diminished, discontinued or eliminated by theemployer, by virtue of Section 10 of the Rules andRegulations Implementing P.D. No. 851, and Article100 of the Labor Code of the Philippines, whichprohibit the diminution or elimination by theemployer of the employees' existing benefits(Tiangco v. Leogardo, Jr., 122 SCRA 267, [1983]).
SECTION 2 - LABOR AND THECONSTITUTION
2.01 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND/RATIONALEAntamoc Goldfields Mining Co. v. CIR (40)
It should be observed at the outset that ourConstitution was adopted in the midst of surgingunrest and dissatisfaction resulting from economicand social distress which was threatening thestability of governments the world over. Alive to thesocial and economic forces at work, the framers of our Constitution boldly met the problems anddifficulties which faced them and endeavored tocrystallize, with more or less fidelity, the political,social and economic propositions of their age, andthis they did, with the consciousness that thepolitical and philosophical aphorism of theirgeneration will, in the language of a great jurist, 'bedoubted by the next and perhaps entirely discardedby the third.' Embodying the spirit of the presentepoch, general provisions were inserted in theConstitution which are intended to bring about theneeded social and economic equilibrium betweencomponent elements of society through theapplication of what may be termed as the justitiacommunis advocated by Grotius and Leibnits manyyears ago to be secured through thecounterbalancing of economic and social forces andopportunities which should be regulated, if notcontrolled, by the State or placed, as it were, incustodia societatis.
2.02 NATURE OF PROVISIONPhil. Airlines, Inc. v. Santos (93)
It is a fact that the sympathy of the Court is onthe side of the laboring classes, not only because theConstitution imposes such sympathy, but because of the one-sided relation between labor and capital.The purpose is to place the workingman on an equalplane with management — with all its power andinfluence — in negotiating for the advancement of his interests and the defense of his rights. Under thepolicy of social justice, the law bends over backwardto accommodate the interests of the working classon the humane justification that those with lessprivileges in life should have more privileges in law.
Phil. Geothermal, Inc. v. NLRC (94)
The law in protecting the rights of theemployees authorizes neither oppression nor self-destruction of the employer. There may be caseswhere the circumstances warrant favoring labor overthe interests of management but never should thescale be so tilted if the result is an injustice to theemployer. Justitia nemini neganda est (Justice is tobe denied to none).
2.03 1987 CONSTITUTIONL
ABOR
S
ECTOR
-C
HARACTERIZED
Article II Section 18
The State affirms
labor as a primary socialeconomic force
. It shall protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare.
P
ROTECTION OF
L
ABOR
–G
UARANTEES
Article XIII, Sec. 3
The State shall afford full protection to labor,local and overseas, organized and unorganized, andpromote full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all.It shall guarantee the rights of all workers toself-organization, collective bargaining andnegotiations, and peaceful concerted activities,including the right to strike in accordance with law.They shall be entitled to security of tenure, humaneconditions of work, and a living wage. They shallalso participate in policy and decision-makingprocesses affecting their rights and benefits as maybe provided by law.The State shall promote the principle of sharedresponsibility between workers and employers andthe preferential use of voluntary modes in settlingdisputes, including conciliation, and shall enforcetheir mutual compliance therewith to fosterindustrial peace.
7 Cardinal Rights of Workers
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more