POSITION PAPER

Complainant, through counsel and unto this Honorable Office mostrespectfully

submits this Position Paper, thus:

THE PARTIES

Complainant is an American, of legal age, married and a resident ofSapang

Biabas, Mabalacat, Pampanga, where he may be served with theprocesses of
this Honorable office.Respondent OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC, is
corporationexisting under the laws with principal office address at Sarita
Street, Balibago,Angeles City, and the respondents NORMAN HAYNES,
HUNTER HAYNES, andMATILDE HAYNES are the Financier, Managing Director
and Operating Partnerof said corporation at the same address where they may
be served withprocesses of this Honorable Office.

STATEMENT OF FACTS/CASE

Complainant was employed on September 15, 2006 as an AdministrationOfficer

of the respondent company and the nature of his work cashdisbursement. The
Complainant was on a four hour daily work schedule until hewas terminated
and dismissed on October 25, 2008, without justifiable cause andwithout due
process. His salary at the time of his dismissal was $1,200.00 permonth for a
20 hour work week (Monday through Friday, 8:00am to 12:00 noon).Initially,
the complainant was hired for a Monday through Friday workschedule. When
employed by OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC., Mr. Hornentered an
agreement that he would work daily schedule Monday through Fridaybetween
the hours of 8:00 am to 12:00 noon (four hours per day, twenty hours

per week). His salary was to be $500.00 per month or $5.77 (Five Dollars
andSeventy Seven five cents) per regular work hour and $8.66 (Eight Dollars
andsixty six cents) per hour of overtime. From September 15, 2006 to January
1,2008 Mr. Horn worked a total of Sixty Eight (68) weeks and averaged 46
hours ofovertime per week. Beginning January 1, 2008 the company decided to
give Mr.Horn a pay increase to $1200.00 per month which would result in a
regularhourly rate of $13.85 (Thirteen Dollars and Eighty Five Cents) per hour
and anincrease in overtime wage to $22.50 (Twenty Two Dollars and Fifty
Cents) perhour of overtime worked. He was told that the pay raise was due to
the fact thatall foreign employees got benefits such as rent, utilities, food
allowance and allexpenses paid. Mr. Horn had worked for the company over a
year and a half andhad never utilized company funds entrusted to him for any
such benefits,therefore they gave him a raise in pay for his prudence and
trustworthiness.During the period of January 1 2008 to October 13, 2008 Mr.
Horn worked Forty(40) work weeks and averaged 46 hours of overtime per
week. Also, Mr. Hornwas not paid at all for services rendered in the Month of
October 2008 in whichhe had worked nearly two weeks.Although Mr. Horn was
a permanent employee, he, like all OPSECemployees, never received any
benefits afforded him by the Philippine Law, toinclude, retirement, health
insurance, holiday pay, vacation pay or 13 month pay.On October 13, 2008 Mr.
Horn departed for Jerusalem on a companyauthorized vacation without pay
and upon his return was phoned by Mr. NormanHaynes and was told not to
return to work on Monday 27 October 2008. Mr. Hornasked, Why? and Mr.
Haynes told him just dont return back to work cause if hewere in the Monday
meeting, nothing good could come out of it. When Mr. Hornattempted to enter
the compound to get his personal belongings he was refusedentry in the
company premises.Approximately two weeks after Mr. Haynes illegally
dismissed Mr. Horn,Mr. Haynes called Mr. Horn and asked if he had company
backup files and if Mr.Horn could come and reinstall the lost files on the
OPSEC administrationcomputers due to the fact that they had lost all company
data and needed help.Mr. Horn and another former OPSEC former admin
employee, Neal Cortez,graciously returned and gave the backup files to Miss
Ann, the newadministration officer hired in the place of Mr. Horn, and asked
the new officestaff if there were any questions that they could help them with
and the newoffice personnel had no further questions. MR. Horn and Mr.
Cortez were onlyadmitted into the compound under an armed guard status in
which the armedguard had continual surveillance on them for the duration of
the visit, fromentrance to exit

During his employment with OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC. Mr.Horn

was never reprimanded for his work performance whether by verbal orwritten
statement and was illegally dismissed by Mr. Norman Haynes.

ISSUES

WHETHER OR NOT THE COMPLAINANT WASILLEGALLY DISMISSED FROM

EMPLOYMENTWHETHER OR NOT THE COMPLAINANT ISENTITLED TO HIS
MONETARY CLAIMS ANDDAMAGES.
DISCUSSION/ARGUMENTS

We respectfully submit that the respondents are liable for illegal dismissal,for
dismissing herein Complainant without due process of law. It is a
basicrequirement that before an employee could be dismissed by an employer,
heshould first be accorded due process. Furthermore, said employee should
onlybe dismissed for just cause or after it is proven in a formal
investigationparticipated in by the employee concerned, that the accusation is
true and thathe is guilty thereof.In the instant case, there were no
explanations given to the complainantfor reason of dismissal or any prior write-
ups for neither substandard jobperformance or any other company violations.
On the contrary, the complainantwas praised many times for his work habits
which resulted in a 120% salaryincrease since the inception of his employment.
This salary increase alone givesinsight to the impeccable job performance of
Mr. Horn. No company would givesuch a reward to an average employee and
many would not give this type ofSalary increase to a good employee. Therefore,
His work performance musthave been commendable and praiseworthy. The
respondent company seemed tofind no justifiable reason for the employees
dismissal. The respondent companystill has never given the complainant due
cause and reason of why the he wasdismissed.This is undoubtedly a violation
to the right to security of tenure. More so,the imposition of a penalty of
dismissal for absolutely no offense rendered by Mr.Horn is not only improper
but inhuman as well.It can further be gleaned that the ulterior motive of the
respondentcompany in dismissing the complainant is to get rid of an employee
who hadverbalized his opposition to their lack of providing benefits for their
Filipino

workers, which included SSS, Phil-Health, 13 Month Pay, Overtime Pay,

HolidayPay and Pag-Ibig.On account of the wanton, unjustifiable and illegal
acts of the respondentin illegally dismissing the complainant without just
cause and without him dueprocess, the complainant suffered serious anxiety,
sleepless nights and mentalanguish for which the respondents should be held
liable to pay in the amount ofnot less than $20,000.00. In order to serve as an
example so as to deter thecommission of similar acts, respondent should be
made to pay the complainantexemplary damages of not less than $10,000.00.
As the complainant wasconstrained to litigate on account of the wanton,
unjustifiable and illegal actsperpetrated by the respondents, the latter should
be adjudged legally bound toreimburse the complainant for Attorneys fees in
the amount equivalent to 10 %of the monetary award that may be adjudged in
this case as well as theexpenses for litigation.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed from

thisHonorable Office that judgment be rendered in favor of the Complainant
with thefollowing terms:1. Finding the respondents liable/guilty for illegally
dismissing thecomplainant;2. Ordering the respondent to pay the complainant
separation pay inthe equivalent of one month pay for every year of service;3.
Ordering the respondents to pay the complainant the following:a. Overtime pay,
holiday pay; SSS, Philhealth; PAGIBIGb. Attorneys fees equivalent to 10% of
the monetary award andother legal expenses incurred in the prosecution of
this case tobe determined thru the sound discretion of this HonorableOffice;c.
Moral damages of not less than $20,000.00;d. Exemplary damages of not less
than $10,000.00;Other reliefs just and equitable under the circumstances also
prayed for.City of San Fernando, Pampanga, May 12, 2009.

ESTRABILLO-FLORES & ASSOCIATES

LAW OFFICES

B. Mendoza St., City of San Fernando (P)Counsel for the ComplainantBY:

SYLVIA Q. ALFONSO-FLORES

IBP No. 731468 (01-05-09)PTR No. 6350969 (01-05-09)City of San Fernando,

PampangaROLL NO. 35857MCLE Compliance No. 0002470

VERIFICATION

I, TONY B. HORN, after having been duly sworn to in accordance withlaw,

hereby depose and state:1. That I am the complainant in the above-entitled
case;2. That I caused the preparation of the foregoing Position Paper;3. That all
the allegations therein contained are true and correct to thebest of our
knowledge;IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this
12

th
 day of May, 2009 at the City of San Fernando, Pampanga.TONY B.
HORNAffiant