You are on page 1of 10

Wednesday, 10 July 2019

Notes in Workspace:

Excerpt: while the Constitution mandates a bias in favor of Filipino goods, services, labor and
enterprises, at the same time, it recognizes the need for business exchange with the rest of
the world on the bases of equality and reciprocity and limits protection of Filipino
enterprises only against foreign competition and trade practices that are unfair. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.2)

Excerpt: The only limitation provided by law is that the closure must be "bona fide in character and
not impelled by a motive to defeat or circumvent the tenurial rights of employees."Thus,
when an employer complies with the foregoing conditions, the Court cannot prohibit
closure "just because the business is not suffering from any loss or because of the desire
to provide the workers continued employment." 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.4)

Object Group

Excerpt: management is free to regulate, according to its own discretion and judgment, all
aspects of employment, including hiring, work assignments, working methods, time,
place and manner of work, processes to be followed, supervision of workers,
working regulations, transfer of employees, work supervision, layoff of workers and
discipline, dismissal, and recall of workers.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.6)

Excerpt: Management has exclusive prerogatives to determine the qualifications and fitness
of workers f

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.23)

Excerpt: the employer's exercise of management prerogatives, with or without reason, does
not per se constitute unjust discrimination, unless there is a showing of grave abuse
of discretion.It is only in instances of unlawful discrimination, limitations imposed by
law and collective bargaining agreement can the prerogative of management be
reviewed. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.23)

Excerpt: the employer’s exercise of its management prerogative is subject to the caveat that
it should not performed in violation of any law and that it is not tainted by any
arbitrary or malicious motive on the part of the employer.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.24)

Excerpt: set the required fair and reasonable criteria in the termination of the petitioners’
employment

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.24)

Excerpt: The first level, based on Asian Alcohol case, is to recognized distinctions on a per
position basis.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.24)

1
Wednesday, 10 July 2019

Excerpt: The second level, derived from Golden Thread case, is where the distinction narrows
down to particular employees occupying the same positions which were declared to
be redundant. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.24)

Object Group

Excerpt: labor relations system in the Philippines has extra-territorial jurisdiction



(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.7)

Excerpt: NLRC shall have the original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide all claims
arising out of employer-employee relationship or by virtue of any law or contract
involving Filipino workers for overseas deployment

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.7)

Excerpt: . The provisions of the Constitution as well as the Labor Code which afford
protection to labor apply to Filipino employees whether working within the
Philippines or abroad. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.26)

Excerpt: Moreover, the principle of lex loci contractus governs in this jurisdiction. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.26)

Excerpt: the Contract of Employment between petitioners and private respondent was
executed here in the Philippines with the approval of POEA. Hence, Labor Code and
other laws affecting labor apply in this case. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.26)

Excerpt: Whether employed locally or overseas, all Filipino workers enjoy the protective mantle
of Philippine labor and social legislation, contract stipulations to the contrary
notwithstanding

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.7)

Excerpt: the employer should strictly comply with the twin requirements of notice and hearing
without regard to the nature and situs of employment or the nationality of the
employer. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.26)

Object Group

Excerpt: It is a basic fundamental rule in the interpretation of a contract that if the terms
thereof are clear and leave no doubt upon the intention of the contracting parties the
literal meaning of the stipulation shall control, but when the words appear to be
contrary to the evident intention of the parties, the latter shall prevail over the former 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.9)

2
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
Excerpt: The real nature of a contract may be determined from the express terms of the written
agreement and from the contemporaneous and subsequent acts of the contracting
parties

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.10)

Excerpt: when the words and language of documents are clear and plain or readily
understandable by an ordinary reader thereof, there is absolutely no room for
interpretation or construction

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.11)

Object Group

Excerpt: Art. 106 of the Labor Code provides that there is "labor-only" contracting where (1)
the person supplying workers to an employer does not have substantial capital or
investment in the form of tools, equipment, machineries, work premises, among
others, and (2) the workers recruited and placed by such person are performing
activities which are directly related to the principal business of such employer. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.12)

Excerpt: In labor-only contracting, it is the law which creates an employer-employee


relationship between the principal and the workers of the labor-only contractor.I

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.22)

Excerpt: Thus, a finding that a contractor is a labor-only contractor is equivalent to a


declaration that there is an employer-employee relationship between the principal,
and the workers of the labor-only contractor; the labor-only contractor is deemed
only as the agent of the principal.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.22)

Excerpt: As a general rule, a contractor is presumed to be a labor-only contractor, unless


such contractor overcomes the burden of proving that it has the substantial capital,
investment, tools and the like

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.22)

Object Group

Excerpt: provision classifies employees into regular, project, seasonal, and casual. It further
classifies regular employees into two kinds: (I) those "engaged to perform activities
which are usually necessary or desirable in the usual business or trade of the
employer"; and (2) casual employees who have "rendered at least one year of
service, whether such service is continuous or broken." 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.13)

Excerpt: A regular employment, whether it is one or not, is aptly gauged from the concurrence,
or the non- concurrence, of the following factors (a) the manner of selection and
engagement of the putative employee; (b) the mode of payment of wages; (c) the
presence or absence of the power of dismissal; and (d) the presence or absence of
the power to control the conduct of the putative employee or the power to control the
employee with respect to the means or methods by which his work is to be

3
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
accomplished.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.14)

Excerpt: The application of the four-fold test in this case proves that an employer-employee
relationship did exist

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.16)

Excerpt: the fact that petitioner had registered the respondents with SSS is proof that they
were indeed his employees. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.19)

Excerpt: As regular employees, respondents were entitled to security of tenure and could be
dismissed only for just or authorized causes and after the observance of due
process. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.14)

Excerpt: nature of complainants' work is one where services are needed only when scrap
metals are delivered 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.27)

Excerpt: The irregular nature of work, stoppage of work and then work again depending on the
supply

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.27)

Excerpt: mandates the policy of social justice so as to strike a balance between an avowed
predilection for labor, on the one hand, and the maintenance of the legal rights of
capital, the proverbial hen that lays the golden egg, on the other. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.27)

Excerpt: State policy is to afford full protection to labor. When conflictinginterests of labor and
capital are weighed on the scales of social justice, the heavier influenceof capital
should be counterbalanced by the compassion that the law accords the less,
privileged workingman. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.28)

Excerpt: The law, in protecting the rights of the employee, authorizes neither oppression nor
self-destruction of the employer.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.31)

Excerpt: Security of tenure is indeed constitutionally guaranteed. However, this should not
beindiscriminately invoked to deprive an employer of its management prerogatives
and right toshield itself from incompetence, inefficiency and disobedience displayed
by its employees. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.32)

Object Group

4
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
Excerpt: determine the existence of employer-employee relationship is to adopt a two-tiered
test involving: (1) the putative employer's power to control the employee with
respect to the means and methods by which the work is to be accomplished; and (2)
the underlying economic realities of the activity or relationship

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.17)

Excerpt: Under the broader economic reality test, apparent that petitioner is economically
dependent on respondent corporation for her continued employment in the latter's
line of business. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.17)

Excerpt: This is especially appropriate in this case where there is no written agreement or
terms of reference to base the relationship on; and due to the complexity of the
relationship based on the various positions and responsibilities given to the worker
over the period of the latter's employment.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.17)

Excerpt: the control test merely calls for the existence of the right to control, and not
necessarily the exercise thereof. It is not essential that the employer actually
supervises the performance of duties by the employee. It is enough that the former
has a right to wield the power

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.14)

Excerpt: The "control test" assumes primacy in the overall consideration. Under this test, an
employment relation obtains where work is performed or services are rendered
under the control and supervision of the party contracting for the service, not only
as to the result of the work but also as to the manner and details of the performance
desired.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.14)

Excerpt: the control test, an employer-employee relationship exists where the person for
whom the services are performed reserves the right to control not only the end
achieved, but also the manner and means to be used in reaching that end

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.15)

Object Group

Excerpt: Execution of a judgment can only be issued against one who is a party to the action,
and not against one who, not being a party to the action, has not yet had his day in
court.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.20)

Excerpt: respondents were never mentioned in the illegal dismissal proceedings



(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.20)

Excerpt: LA never acquired jurisdiction over them as to order the piercing of the veil of
corporate fiction, and to make them jointly and severally liable

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.20)

5
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
Excerpt: essence of due process in administrative proceedings is the opportunity to explain
one's side or a chance to seek reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.31)

Excerpt: automatic disqualification of officers and directors of herein petitioner, without


specifically impleading the parties concerned

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.41)

Excerpt: Indispensable to the DOLE' s exercise of such power is theexistence of an actual


employer-employee relationship between the parties. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.29)

Excerpt: One of the roles of the POEA is the regulation and adjudication of private sector
participation in the recruitment and placement of overseas workers.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.41)

Excerpt: The law and rules implementing the same unequivocally state that once a recruitment
license of an entity is cancelled, its officers and directors are automatically
prohibited from engaging in such activity.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.41)

Excerpt: In labor cases, it has been held that due process is simply an opportunity to be
heard and not that an actual hearing

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.31)

Excerpt: However, when such a formal hearing is allowed but a party is not informed thereof,
as a consequence of which he is unable to attend

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.31)

Excerpt: such failure to attend should not be taken against him. 



(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.31)

Object Group

Excerpt: Constructive dismissal has often been defined as a "dismissal in disguise" or "an act
amounting to dismissal but made to appear as if it were not." 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.23)

Excerpt: In this case, petitioners were neither demoted nor did they receive a diminution in
pay and benefits. Petitioners also failed to show that employment is rendered
impossible, unreasonable or unlikely.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.23)

Excerpt: We stressthat the circumstances contemplated in constructive dismissal cases are


clear acts of discrimination, insensibility or disdain which necessarily precedes the
apparent "voluntary" separation from work. can be found.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.23)

6
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
Object Group

Excerpt: Under the disparate treatment analysis, the plaintiff must prove that an employment
policy is discriminatory on its face. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Excerpt: No- spouse employment policies requiring an employee of a particular sex to either
quit,

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Excerpt: For example, an employment policy prohibiting the employer from hiring wives of
male employees, but not husbands of female employees, is discriminatory on its
face

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Excerpt: On the other hand, to establish disparate impact, the complainants must prove that a
facially neutral policy has a disproportionate effect on a particular class.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Excerpt: two theories of employment discrimination: the disparate treatment and the
disparate impact. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Excerpt: For example, although most employment policies do not expressly indicate which
spouse will be required to transfer or leave the company, the policy often
disproportionately affects one sex.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Object Group

Excerpt: These courts also find the no-spouse employment policy invalid for failure of the
employer to present any evidence of business necessity other than the general
perception that spouses in the same workplace might adversely affect the business.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Excerpt: unless the employer can prove that the reasonable demands of the business require
a distinction based on marital status and there is no better available or acceptable
policy which would better accomplish the business purpose. This is known as the
bona fide occupational qualification exception

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Excerpt: To justify a bona fide occupational qualification, the employer must prove two factors:
(1) that the employment qualification is reasonably related to the essential operation
of the job involved; and, (2) that there is a factual basis for believing that all or
substantially all persons meeting the qualification would be unable to properly
perform the duties of the job. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.35)

7
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
Excerpt: a bona fide occupational qualification justifies an employer's no-spouse rule, the
exception is interpreted strictly and narrowly by these state courts. There must be a
compelling business necessity for which no alternative exists other than the
discriminatory practice.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.35)

Excerpt: absence of such a bona fide occupational qualification invalidates a rule denying
employment to one spouse due to the current employment of the other spous

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.34)

Object Group

Excerpt: whether a conduct is disgraceful or immoral involves a two-step process: first, a


consideration of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the conduct; and
second, an assessment of the said circumstances vis-à-visthe prevailing norms of
conduct

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.36)

Excerpt: pregnancy out of wedlock cannot be considered as disgraceful or immoral



(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.37)

Excerpt: provides for “disgraceful or immoral conduct” as a ground for dismissal in addition
to the just causes for termination of employment

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.36)

Object Group

Excerpt: disclose to management any existing or future relationship by consanguinity or


affinity with co-employees or employees of competing drug companies and should
management find that such relationship poses a possible conflict of interest, to resign
from the company

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: prohibition against personal or marital relationships with employees of competitor


companies upon Glaxo’s employees is reasonable under the circumstances

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: Glaxo possesses the right to protect its economic interests 



(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: Constitution recognizes the right of enterprises to adopt and enforce such a policy to
protect its right to reasonable returns on investments and to expansion and growth

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: Indeed, while our laws endeavor to give life to the constitutional policy on social
justice and the protection of labor, it does not mean that every labor dispute will be
decided in favor of the workers. The law also recognizes that management has rights

8
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
which are also entitled to respect and enforcement in the interest of fair play. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: aims to protect its interests against the possibility that a competitor company will
gain access to its secrets and procedures. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: because relationships of that nature might compromise the interests of the company

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: Tecson’s superiors informed him that his marriage to Bettsy gave rise to a conflict of
interest. Tecson’s superiors reminded him that he and Bettsy should decide which
one of them would resign

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: from the wordings of the contractual provision and the policy 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: company merely seeks to avoid is a conflict of interest between the employee and
the company that may arise out of such relationships. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Excerpt: An employee of the company remains free to marry anyone of his or her choosing.
The policy is not aimed at restricting a personal prerogative that belongs only to the
individual. However, an employee’s personal decision does not detract the employer
from exercising management prerogatives to ensure maximum profit and business
success. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.38)

Object Group

Excerpt: a woman employee must remain unmarried could be justified as a "bona fide
occupational qualification," or BFOQ, where the particular requirements of the job
would justify the same, but not on the ground of a general principle, such as the
desirability of spreading work in the workplace. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: A requirement of that nature would be valid provided it reflects an inherent quality
reasonably necessary for satisfactory job performance

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: parties to a contract may establish any agreements, terms, and conditions that they
may deem convenient, the same should not be contrary to law, morals, good
customs, public order, or public policy.

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: likewise assaults good morals and public policy, tending as it does to deprive a
woman of the freedom to choose her status, a privilege that by all accounts inheres

9
Wednesday, 10 July 2019
in the individual as an intangible and inalienable right

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: in derogation of the provisions of Article 136 of the Labor Code on the right of a
woman to be free from any kind of stipulation against marriage in connection with her
employment

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: employer discriminates against married women, but not against married men, the
variable is sex and the discrimination is unlawfu

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: reminded about the company’s policy of not accepting married women

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: no-marriage rule applicable to both male and female flight attendants, was regarded
as unlawful since the restriction was not related to the job performance of the flight
attendants

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.39)

Excerpt: employer-employee relationship in the public sector is primarily determined by special


laws, civil service laws, rules and regulations. While the four-fold test and other standards
set forth in the labor code may aid in ascertaining the relationship between the
government and its purported employees, they cannot be overriding factors over the
conditions and requirements for public employment as provided for by civil service laws,
rules and regulations. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.8)

Excerpt: overtime pay does not fall within the definition of benefits under Article 100 of the Labor
Code on prohibition against elimination or diminution of benefits. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.6)

Excerpt: the basic principle in termination cases is that the burden of proof rests upon the employer
to show that the dismissal is for just and valid cause 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.5)

Object Group

Excerpt: quitclaims are frowned upon for beingcontrary to public policy, the Court has,
likewise, recognized legitimate waivers thatrepresent a voluntary and reasonable
settlement of a worker's claim which should berespected as the law between the
parties

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.30)

Excerpt: Where the person making the waiver has done sovoluntarily, with a full
understanding thereof, and the consideration for the quitclaim iscredible and
reasonable, the transaction must be recognized as being a valid and
bindingundertaking. 

(LABOR-CASE-DIGESTS, p.30)

10

You might also like