Asi

aPaci
fi
cChar
ter
ingI
nc.Vs.Far
olan

G.
R.No.
151370

Thiscaseisa 
Peti
ti
onforRev
iew assai
l
ingtheCA’
sdeci
si
on 
whi
chsetasi
det
he
deci
sionoft
heNLRCrev
ersi
ngt
hatof 
theLA.

Peti
ti
onerAsiaPaci f
icChar t
eri
ng(Phil
s)I
nc.Wast hegener alsal
esagent(GSA)oft
he
Scandi
navian Air
line System (SAS),an off
-l
ine i
nter
nationalairl
i
ne companywi t
h
l
icensetodobusi nessint hePhil
i
ppines.
 AsGSA,petit
ionersoldpassengerandcar
go
spacesforai
rl
inesoper atedbySAS.

RespondentFarolanwashi r
edasSal esManagerofpet it
ionerforit
spassengerand
cargoGSAoper ati
onsf orSAS.Lesli
eMur r
ay,thethenSalesManagerofpet i
ti
oner
,
tal
kedt or
espondenti nt
oaccepti
ngt heposit
ionafter
 ver
bally
 bri
efi
ngheront he
natureoft
heposi ti
on.Soonafterrespondentassumedherpost ,
shepar ti
ci
patedi
na
numberofmeet ings/seminar
sallgearedtowar dsi
mpr ovi
nghermar ket
ingandsal
es
ski
lls.

UponVi cePr esidentBondoc’ srequest, Farolan submi ttedadet ail

edr eportattr
ibut i
ng
thedr opofsal esr ev enuet omar ketf orcesbey ondhercont rol .Consequent l
y,Asi a
dir
ect ed Rober to Zozobr ado toi mpl ementsol utions.Zozobr ado i nformall
yt ook
over Farolan’
smar ket ingandsal esr esponsi bil
itiesbutshecont inuedt oreceiveher
salary.Asi a claims t hatt he increase i n sales r evenue was due t o Zozobr ado’s
management . 
Asi athensental ett
eroft erminat iont o 
Farolan 
ont hegroundofl ossof
confidence,for cing Far olan t
of i
leacompl ai
ntf ori l
legaldismissal .TheLaborAr bit
er
foundt hatthedi smi ssalwasi l
l
egalf orlackofj ustcause, howev er,suchdecisionwas
reversed by t he Nat i
onalLaborRel ations Commi ssi
on (NLRC)st ati
ng t
hatt he
termination ofempl oy mentdue t ol oss ofconf idence i
s wi thi
n management
prerogative.Onappeal ,
t heCour tofAppeal suphel dt helaborarbiter·sdecisi
on.Hence,
thefili
ngoft hispet ition.

I
ssue: Whet
herornot
 Respondent
 Far
olan’
sdi
smi
ssal
wasi
l
legal

Held:Ast atementoft her equisi

tesforav al
iddi smissalofanempl oyeeisthusi n
order,towi t
:(a)theempl oyeemustbeaf f
ordedduepr ocess,i.
e.,hemustbegi ven
opportunit
yt obeheardandt odefendhi mself;and( b)dismissalmustbef orav ali
d
cause.Themannerbywhi chRespondent  
Farolan wasdi smissedv iol
atedthebasi c
preceptsoff air
nessandduepr ocess-Respondent  
Farolan 
wasdi smissed,without
beingaffordedtheoppor t
unitytobehear dandt opr esentev i
denceinherdef ense.She
wasnev ergivenawr i
ttennot i
cest at
ing t
hepar ti
cularact soromi ssionconsti
tuting
thegroundsf orherdi
smi ssalasrequir
edbyl aw.  

Wi
thr
espectt
orankandf
il
eper
sonnel
,lossoft
rustandconf
idenceasgr
oundf
or
vali
ddismissal r
equir
esproofofinvolvementi nt
heal legedev entsinquest
ionandt hat
mereuncor roborat
edasserti
onsandaccusat i
onsbyt heempl oyerwil
lnotbesuf fi
cient
.
Butasr egardsamanager i
alempl oyee,mer eexistenceofabasi sf orbeli
evingt hat
such empl oyee has breached the t r
ustofhi s empl oyerwoul d suffi
ce f orhi s
dismissal
.Loss oft r
ustand conf idence to be a valid ground foran empl oyee·s
dismissalmustbebasedonawi l
lfulbreachandf oundedoncl earl
yestabli
shedf acts.
Abr eachiswill
fuli
fiti
sdonei nt
entionall
y,knowingl
yandpur posely,wit
houtjustif
iable
excuse.

Itisnotdisputedthat Far
olan·sjobdescripti
on,andt hetermsandcondi t
ionsofher
empl oyment,wit
htheexcept i
onofhersal aryandal l
owances,werenev erreducedto
writi
ng.Evenassumi ng,howev er
,that 
Farolan wasamanager ialemployee,thestat
ed
ground( i
nthelett
eroft er
mi nati
on)forherdi smissal
,l
ossof  
confi
dence,shouldhave
abasi sanddeterminati
onthereofcannotbel eftenti
rel
ytotheempl oy
er.

-----

Aut
obusvs.Baut
ist
a
GR156367May16, 2005

Si
nce24May1995,r espondentAntoni
oBautist
ahasbeenempl oyedbypet i
ti
oner
AutoBusTransportSystems,Inc.(
Autobus)
,asdr i
ver
-conduct
or.Respondentwas
pai
doncommi ssi
onbasis,sevenper
cent(7%)ofthetot
algrossi
ncomepert rav
el,on
atwiceamonthbasis.

On03Januar y2000,whi
l
erespondentwasdrivi
ngAutobusNo.114alongSta.Fe,
Nueva Vi
zcaya,t
he bushe wasdr i
vi
ng acci
dental
l
ybumped the r
earpor
ti
on of
AutobusNo.124.

Respondentav erredthatt heaccidenthappenedbecausehewascompel ledbyt he

managementt ogobackt oRoxas,Isabel
a,al thoughhehadnotsl eptf oral most
twent
y -
four(24)hour s,as he had j ustarrived i n Mani
laf r
om Roxas,I sabela.
Respondentf ur
theral l
egedt hathewasnotal lowedt oworkunt i
lhef ull
ypai dt he
amountofP75, 551.50,represent
ingthi
rtypercent( 30%)oft hecostofr epairoft he
damagedbusesandt hatdespi t
erespondent’
spl easforreconsi
derati
on,t hesame
was ignored bymanagement .Aft
era mont h,managementsenthi m al etterof
ter
mination.

I
ssue:WONrespondenti
saf
iel
dper
sonnel
;WON r
espondenti
sent
it
ledt
oser
vice
i
ncenti
vel
eav
e.

Hel
d:

Thedi
sposi
ti
onoft
hef
ir
sti
ssuer
evol
vesar
oundt
hepr
operi
nter
pret
ati
onofAr
ti
cl
e95
oftheLaborCodevi
s-à-
visSect
ion1(D)
,Rul
eV,BookI
IIoft
heI
mpl
ement
ingRul
esand
Regulat
ionsoft
heLaborCodewhi chpr
ovi
des:

Ar
t.95.RI
GHTTOSERVI
CEI
NCENTI
VELEAVE

(
a)Ever
yemployeewhohasrenderedatl
eastoney
earofser
viceshal
lbeent
it
ledt
oa
y
earl
yserv
icei
ncent
ivel
eav
eoff i
vedayswit
hpay.

BookI
II
,Rul
eV:
SERVI
CEI
NCENTI
VELEAVE

SECTI
ON1.Cov
erage.–Thi
srul
eshal
lappl
ytoal
lempl
oyeesexcept
:

(d)Fiel
dper sonnelandot herempl
oyeeswhoseper formanceisunsuperv
isedbythe
employeri ncludi
ng those who are engaged on task orcont r
actbasis,pur
ely
commi ssi
onbasi s,ort hosewhoar epaidinaf ixedamountf orper
formingwork
i
rrespecti
veoft heti
meconsumedi ntheperf
ormancet her
eof;...

Acarefulperusalofsai dprovisionsofl awwi llr esultintheconcl usi

ont hatthegrantof
servi
ceincentiveleavehasbeendel imitedbyt heI mplement i
ngRul esandRegul ations
oftheLaborCodet oappl yonl yt othoseempl oy eesnotexpl ici
tlyexcludedbySect ion
1ofRul eV.Accor di
ngt ot heI mpl ement i
ngRul es,Servi
ceI ncenti
v eLeav eshal lnot
applyto empl oyeescl assif
ied as“ fi
eld per sonnel .”Thephr ase“ otherempl oy ees
whoseper formancei sunsuper visedbyt heempl oyer”mustnotbeunder st
oodasa
separat
ecl assifi
cati
onofempl oyeest owhi chser vi
cei ncentiveleaveshal lnotbe
grant
ed.Rat her,i
tserv esasanampl i
fi
cationoft heinter
pretationoft hedef i
nit
ionof
fi
eldpersonnelundert heLaborCodeast hose“ whoseact ualhour sofwor kinthef iel
d
cannotbedet erminedwi threasonabl ecer t
ainty .”

Thesamei st r
uewi t
hrespectt othephr ase“ thosewhoar eengagedont askor
contractbasis,purelycommi ssionbasis.
”Saidphr aseshouldber elat
edwi t
h“ f
ield
personnel,
”applyingt her
uleonej usdem generisthatgener
alandunl i
mitedter
msar e
restr
ainedandl i
mitedbyt hepar ti
culart
ermst hattheyfoll
ow.9Hence,empl oy
ees
engaged on t askorcont ractbasisorpai d on pur el
ycommi ssion basisar enot
automat i
cal
lyexempt edfr
om t hegr antofser vi
cei ncent
iveleave,unless,theyf al
l
undert hecl
assifi
cationoffi
eldpersonnel.

Whatmustbeascertai
nedinordertoresol
vetheissueofpr
opri
etyofthegr
antof
ser
vicei
ncent
ivel
eav
etorespondenti
swhetherornothei
safi
eldper
sonnel
.

According to Arti
cle 82 of t he Labor Code,“ fi
eld personnel
” shallref
er to
non-agri
cul
turalemployeeswhor egul
arlyperformthei
rdutiesawayfrom thepri
nci
pal
placeofbusinessorbr anchoff
iceoft heempl oy
erandwhoseact ualhoursofworkin
thef i
eldcannotbedet ermi
nedwi t
hr easonablecert
ainty
.Thi sdefi
nit
ionisfurt
her
elaborat
edint heBureauofWor kingCondi ti
ons( BWC),Advisor
yOpiniontoPhil
i
ppine
Techni
cal
-Cl
eri
cal
Commer
cial
Empl
oyeesAssoci
ati
on10whi
chst
atest
hat
:

Asagener alrule,[
fi
eldpersonnel]aret
hosewhoseper formanceofthei
rjob/ser
viceis
notsupervisedbyt heempl oyerorhisrepresentat
ive,t
hewor kpl
acebeingawayf r
om
thepr i
nci
palof fi
ceandwhosehour sandday sofwor kcannotbedet er
minedwi th
reasonabl
ecer taint
y;hence,t heyar epaid specif
icamountf orrenderi
ng specifi
c
servi
ceorper formingspeci f
icwor k.I
frequiredtobeatspeci fi
cplacesatspeci fi
c
ti
mes,empl oy
eesi ncludi
ngdr i
verscannotbesai dt obef i
eldpersonneldespit
et he
factthatt
heyar eperformingworkawayf rom thepri
ncipaloff
iceoftheemployee.

Asobser
vedbyt
heLaborAr
bit
erandconcur
redi
nbyt
heCour
tofAppeal
s:

Itisofj udi
cialnot icethatalongt her outest hatar epliedbyt hesebuscompani es,
therear ei t
si nspect or
sassignedatst rat
egicpl aceswhoboar dt hebusandi nspect
thepassenger s,thepunchedt i
ckets,andt heconduct or’sreports.Ther eisal sot he
mandat oryonce- a- weekcarbar norshopday ,wher ethebusi sr egul ar
lycheckedast o
i
tsmechani cal,el ectri
cal
,andhy dr
aulicaspect s,whet herornott herearepr oblems
thereonasr epor t
edbyt hedriverand/orconduct or.Theyt oo,mustbeatspeci f
icpl ace
as[ si
c]speci f
iedt ime,astheygener all
yobser v epr omptdepar tureandar r
ivalfrom
thei
rpoi ntofor igint othei
rpoi ntofdest i
nation.I neachandev er ydepot,therei s
alwayst heDi spat cherwhosef uncti
oni spreciselyt oseet oi
tthatt hebusandi tscr ew
l
eav et hepr emi sesatspeci fictimesandar r
iveatt heest imatedpr opertime.These,
arepr esenti nt hecaseatbar .Thedr i
v er,
thecompl ainantherei
n, wast her
eforeunder
constantsuper v i
sionwhi l
eint heperformanceoft hiswor k.Hecannotbeconsi dereda
fi
eldper sonnel .

Weagr eeintheabovedisqui
sit
ion.Therefore,ascorr
ectl
yconcludedbytheappell
ate
court
,respondenti
snotaf i
eldpersonnelbutar egul
arempl oy
eewhoper for
mst asks
usual
ly necessary and desi
rabletot he usualt rade of peti
ti
oner’
s busi
ness.
Accordi
ngly,r
espondenti
senti
tledtothegr antofser
vicei
ncenti
veleave.

-----
ARICAETALVS.NLRCETALDIGEST
GR78210 Febr
uary28,
1989

Thiscasestemmedf r
om acompl ai
ntfil
edagai
nstpri
vaterespondentSt
anfi
lcofor
assemblyti
me,mor aldamagesandat tor
ney
’sfees,wit
ht heRegionalArbi
tr
ati
on-
DavaoCity.TheLaborAr bi
terr
enderedadecisi
oni nfavorofpr i
vat
erespondent
STANFILCO,hol
dingthat:

“Wecannotbutagreewit
hrespondentt
hatt hepronouncementi
nthatearl
iercase,i
.e.
thethi
rt
y-mi
nuteassemblyti
mel ongpract
icedcannotbeconsideredwaitingtimeor
workti
meand,ther
efore,
notcompensable,hasbecomet hel
awofthecasewhi chcan
no l
ongerbe dist
urbed wit
houtdoing violence t
ot he ti
me-
honored pr i
nci
ple of
r
esj
udi
cat
a.”

NLRCuphol
dtheLaborAr
bit
ers’
deci
sionanddecl
aredt
hat
:

“Surel
y,t
hecust omaryf
uncti
onsr efer
redt ointheabove-quotedprovi
sionofthe
agreementincl
udesthel
ong-
standingpract
iceandinst
it
uti
onali
zednon-compensabl
e
assemblyti
me.This,
inef
fect
,estoppedcompl ai
nant
sfr
om pursuingt
hiscase.

MRwasdeni edhencet hi
spetit
ionforrevi
ewoncer ti
orar
i.Peti
ti
onerscontendthatt he
prel
iminar
yacti
vit
iesaswor kersofrespondent sSTANFILCOi ntheassemblyar eai s
compensableaswor ki
ngt i
me( fr
om 5: 30am t o6:00am)si ncet hesepreli
mi nary
acti
vit
ies ar
e necessari
ly and pri
mar i
l
yf orpriv
ater espondent
’s benefi
t.These
prel
iminar
yacti
vi
ti
esoft heworkersareasf oll
ows-.

(
a)Fir
stt
herei
sther
ollcal
l
.Fol
l
owedbyget
ti
ngt
hei
rindi
vi
dualwor
kassi
gnment
s
f
rom t
hef
oreman.

(b) Then, they ar

e indi
vi
duall
yr equir
ed t
o accompl
i
sh t
he Labor
er’
s Dail
y
AccomplishmentRepor
tdur i
ngwhicht heyar
eoft
enmadetoexplai
naboutthei
r
repor
tedaccompli
shmentthefol
l
owingday .

(
c)Thent
heygot
othest
ockr
oom t
ogett
hewor
kingmat
eri
als,
tool
sandequi
pment
.

(
d)Lastly
,theyt
rav
elt
othef
iel
d br
ingi
ng wi
tht
hem t
hei
rtool
s,equi
pmentand
mat
eri
als.

Al
ltheseact
ivi
ti
est
ake30mi
nut
est
oaccompl
i
sh.

.Respondentaversthattheinstantcomplai
ntisnotnew becauseiti
sthever
ysame
clai
mt heybroughtagainstrespondentbythesamegroupofr ankandfi
leemployees
i
nt hecaseofAr i
cavs.NationalLaborRel
ati
onsCommi ssionwhichwasfi
l
edbeforein
adiffer
entcase.Thesaidcasei nvol
vedaclai
mf or“
waiti
ngtime”,ast
hecompl
ainants
purport
edlywererequir
edtoassembl e.

I
nt heprevi
ouscase,t
he30-minuteassemblyti
melongpracti
cedandinst
it
uti
onal
ized
bymut ualconsentofthepar
tiesundertheirCBAcannotbeconsideredas‘waiti
ng
ti
me’wi t
hinthepurvi
ew ofSecti
on5,Rule1,BookI I
Ioft heRul
esandRegul at
ions
I
mpl ementi
ngtheLabor.

I
SSUE:
WONt
he“
assembl
yti
me”i
scompensabl
e.

RULI
NG:The 30- mi
nute assembl
yi s a deeply-
rooted,routinar
y pract
ice ofthe
employ
ees,andtheproceedi
ngsat
tendanttheret
oar enotinfectedwithcomplexi
ti
es
astodepri
vetheworkerstheti
metoat t
endt ootherpersonalpursui
ts.Theyarenot
new empl oyeesast or equi rethecompanyt odel i
v erlongbr i
ef i
ngsr egardingt heir
respectiv
ewor kassi gnment s.Theirhousesar esituat edrightont hear eawher ethe
farmsar el ocated,sucht hataf t
erther ollcall
,whi chdoesnotnecessar ilyrequirethe
personal presence, theycangobackt ot heirhousest oat tendt osomechor es.Inshor t
,
theyar enotsubj ectt ot heabsol utecont roloft hecompanydur i
ng t hisper iod,
otherwise,t heirf ail
ur etor eportint heassembl yt i
mewoul dj ustifyt hecompanyt o
i
mpose di sci pl
inar ymeasur es.The ev idence oft he case demonst rates thatt he
30-minuteassembl yt imewasnotpr i
mar i
lyintendedf ortheinter est soft heempl oyer,
butulti
mat elyfort heempl oy eest oindicatetheiravailabil
ityornon- av ai
labi l
it
yforwor k
duringever ywor kingday .
Hereinpet iti
oner sar emer el yrei
teratingthev erysamecl aim whi cht heyf il
edi nAr i
ca
vsNLRCandwhi chr ecordsshow hadal r
eadyl ongbeenconsi der edt er minatedand
closedbyt hisCour t
.Ther ef ore,theNLRCcannotbef aul
tedf orr uli
ngt hatpet i
tioners’
clai
mi sal readybar r
edbyr esjudicata.

Petit
ion isDISMISSED forlackofmer i
tand t
he deci
si
on oft
he Nat
ionalLabor
Relati
onsCommi ssioni
sAFFIRMED.
-----
Phili
ppineAi
rl
inesvsNLRC( 1999)302SCRA582

Fact
s:

Pri
vater espondentwasempl oyedasf l
ightsurgeonatpet i
ti
onercompany .Hewas
assi
gnedatt hePALMedi calCli
nicatNi cholsandwasondut yfrom 4:00i
nt he
aft
ernoonunt il12:
00mi dni
ght.OnFebruary17,1994,atar ound7:00intheeveni
ng,
pri
vaterespondentleftt
heclini
ctohavehi sdinnerathisr
esidence,whi
chwasabout
fi
ve-
mi nutedriveaway.Afewmi nut
eslater,t
heclini
crecei
vedanemer gencycal
lfr
om
thePALCar goServi
ces.

Oneofi tsempl oyees,Mr .ManuelAcost a,hadsuf f

eredahear tatt
ack.Thenur seon
duty,Mr .Mer li
noEusebi o,call
edpr ivaterespondentathomet oi nf
orm him oft he
emer gency .Thepat ientarr
ivedatt heclini
cat7: 50i ntheev eningandMr .Eusebio
i
mmedi atelyrushedhi mtothehospi t
al.Whenpr i
vaterespondentr eachedthecli
nicat
around7: 51int heevening,Mr.Eusebiohadal readyl ef
twi t
hthepat i
ent.Mr.Acosta
diedt hef oll
owi ngday .Uponl earni
ngaboutt hei ncident,PALMedi calDir
ectorDr.
Godof redoB.Banzonor deredt heChiefFlightSur geont oconductani nvesti
gati
on.
TheChi efFli
ghtSur geonr equi
r edpri
v at
er espondentt oexplainwhynodi sci
pli
nary
sanctionshoul dbet akenagainsthim.

Inhisexplanati
on,priv
aterespondentassertedt hathewasent itl
edtoat hir
ty-
minute
mealbr eak;t
hathei mmediatel
ylef
thisr esi
denceuponbei nginformedbyMr .Eusebio
abouttheemer gencyandhear ri
vedatthecl i
nicaf ewmi nuteslater
;thatMr.Eusebi
o
panickedandbr oughtthepatienttot hehospi talwithoutwai ti
ngf orhim.Finding
pri
vater espondent’
s expl
anation unacceptable,t he managementchar ged pri
vate
r
espondentwi
thabandonmentofpostwhi
leondut
y.Hewasgi
vent
enday
stosubmi
t
awri
tt
enanswertotheadmini
str
ati
vechar
ge.

I
nhi sanswer ,pri
vater
espondentr
eit
erat
edtheasser
tionsinhi
sprev
iousexpl
anati
on.
Hef urtherdeniedthatheabandonedhispostonFebr uar
y17,1994.Hesaidthathe
onlyleftthecli
nictohavehisdi
nnerathome.I
nfact,heret
urnedt
othecli
nicat7:
51in
theev eninguponbeinginf
ormedoftheemergency.

I
ssue:WONbei
ngaful
l-
ti
meempl
oyeei
sobl
i
gedt
ost
ayi
nthecompanypr
emi
sesf
or
notl
esst
hanei
ght(
8)hour
s.

Hel d: Empl oyeesarenotpr ohi bi

tedf rom goingoutoft hepremi sesasl ongast hey
returnt ot heirpostsont i
me.Ar ticles83and85oft heLaborCoder ead:Nor malhour s
ofwor k—Thenor malhour sofwor kofanyempl oyeeshal lnotexceedei ght( 8)hour sa
day .Heal t
hper sonnelinci ti
esandmuni ci
pal i
tieswi thapopul ati
onofatl eastone
million( 1,000,000)ori nhospi talsandcl i
nicswi t habedcapaci tyofatl eastone
hundr ed( 100)shal lholdregul arof fi
cehour sf orei ght( 8)hoursaday ,forfi
v e( 5)days
aweek, exclusiv
eoft imef ormeal s,exceptwher et heexigenciesoft heser vicer equir
e
thatsuchper sonnelwor kf orsix( 6)day sorf orty-eight(48)hour s,inwhi chcaset hey
shal lbeent i
tl
edtoanaddi tionalcompensat ionofatl eastthir
typercent( 30%)oft heir
regul arwagef orwor kont hesi xthday .Forpur posesoft hisAr ti
cle,“
healthper sonnel”
shal lincl ude:residentphy sicians,nur ses,nut ri
tionists,dieti
cians,phar maci sts,social
wor ker s, l aboratory t echni cians, par amedi cal t echnici
ans, psy chol ogi
sts,
midwi v es,att
endantsandal lotherhospi talorcl inicper sonnel.

Ar
t.85.Mealperi
ods.
—Subjecttosuchr egul
ati
onsastheSecr
etar
yofLabormay
pr
escri
be,i
tshal
lbethedutyofeveryempl oy
ertogi
vehisempl
oyeesnotl
esst
han
si
xty(
60)minut
esti
me-of
fforthei
rregul
armeals.

Sect
ion7,Rul
eI,BookI
IIoft
heOmni
busRul
esI
mpl
ement
ingt
heLaborCodef
urt
her
st
ates:

Sec.7.MealandRestPeriods.
—Everyemployershal
lgivehisemployees,
regardl
essof
sex,notl
essthanone(1)hourtime-
offforr
egularmeals,excepti
nthefoll
owingcases
whenameal per
iodofnotlesst
hantwenty(20)minutesmaybegi venbytheempl oy
er
provi
dedthatsuchshortermealperiodiscredi
tedascompensabl ehourswor kedof
theemployee;

(a)Wherethewor ki
snon-
manualwor
kinnat
ureordoesnoti
nvol
vest
renuous
physi
cal
exert
ion;

(
b)Wher
etheest
abl
i
shmentr
egul
arl
yoper
atesnotl
esst
hansi
xteenhour
saday
;

(
c)I
n casesofact
ualori
mpendi
ng emer
genci
esort
her
eisur
gentwor
kto be
per
formedonmachiner
ies,equi
pmentori
nst
all
ati
onst
oav
oidser
iousl
osswhi
cht
he
employerwoul
dot
herwi
sesuf f
er;
and

(d)Wher
etheworkisnecessarytoprev
entseri
ousl
ossofperi
shablegoods.Rest
peri
odsorcoff
ee br
eaksr unni
ng f
rom fi
ve(5)totwent
y(20)mi nut
esshallbe
consi
der
edascompensabl
ewor ki
ngti
me.

Thus,theei
ght-
hourwor kper ioddoesnotincludethemealbreak.Nowhereinthelaw
mayitbeinfer
redthatempl oyeesmustt aketheirmeal
swit
hinthecompanypr emises.
Employeesarenotprohi
bitedf r
om goi
ngoutoft hepremi
sesasl ongastheyretur
nto
thei
rpostsontime.Pri
vater espondent
’sactofgoinghometot akehisdi
nnerdoesnot
consti
tut
eabandonment .

-----

NATI
ONALDEVELOPMENTCO.vs.CI
RandNATIONALTEXTI
LEWORKERSUNI
ON
DI
GEST
G.
R.No.L-
15422 November30,
1962

FACTS:Att he Nati
onalDev el
opmentCo. ,a gov er
nment-
owned and control
led
corpor at
ion,ther
eweref ourshift
sofwor k.Oneshiftwasfr
om 8a.m.to4p.m.,whi l
e
thet hreeot hershi
ft
swer efrom 6a.m.t o2p. m;thenfr
om 2p.m.to10p. m.and,
fi
nally,fr
om 10p. m.to6a. m.Ineachshift,t
herewasaone-hourmealt
imeperiod,to
wi t
:From ( 1)11a.m.t o12noonf orthosewor ki
ngbetween6a.m.and2p. m.and
from (2)7p. m.to8p.m.f orthoseworki
ngbet ween2p.m.and10p.m.

(Petit
ionerdoesnotwantt opayf orthe1hourl uncht i
me)Ther ecordsdiscl
osethat
alt
hought herewasaone-hourmeal t
ime,petit
ionernev ert
helesscr edi
tedtheworkers
withei ghthoursofworkforeachshi f
tandpai dt hem forthesamenumberofhour s.
Howev er,
since1953,wheneverworkersinoneshi ftwererequiredtocont i
nueworking
unti
lt henextshift
,peti
ti
onerinst
eadofcr edi
tingt hem witheighthour sofov er
ti
me
work,has been pay i
ng them forsi x hours only ,peti
ti
onert hatt he two hours
corresponding tot he mealti
me per i
ods shoul d notbe i ncl
uded i n computing
compensat i
on.

CI
R:Meal
ti
meshoul
dbecount
edi
nthedet
ermi
nat
ionofov
ert
imewor
k

I
SSUE:
WONmeal
ti
mebr
eaksshoul
dbeconsi
der
edwor
kingt
ime

HELD:
YES

Thelegalworki
ngdayforanyper
sonemploy edbyanot
hershallbeofnotmor ethan
ei
ghthoursdail
y.
Whentheworkisnotcont
inuous,
theti
medur i
ngwhichthelabor
eris
notworkingandcanleavehisworki
ngplaceandcanr estcomplet
elyshal
lnotbe
count
ed.(
Sec.1,
Com.ActNo.444)

I
twi llbenot
edt hat
,underthelaw,theidl
eti
met hatanempl
oyeemayspendfor
rest
ingandduringwhi chhemayl eavethespotorplaceofworkt
houghnotthe
premisesofhisempl oyer
,isnotcount
edaswor ki
ngtimeonl
ywheretheworkis
brokenori
snotconti
nuous.

Inthi
scase,
theCIR’
sfindi
ngt
hatwor kinthepeti
ti
onercompanywascontinuousand
didnotpermitemploy
eesandl aborer
st orestcompletelyisnotwi
thoutbasisin
evi
denceandfol
lowi
ngourear
li
erruli
ngs,shal
lnotdi
stur
bt hesame.

Thetimecar dsshowthattheworkwascont i
nuousandwithouti
nter
rupti
on.Thereis
al
sot heev i
denceadducedbythepetit
ionerthatt
heper
tinentemployeescanf r
eely
l
eavet heirworki
ngplacenorrestcompletel
y.Ther
eisfurther
moret heaspectthat
duri
ngt heperiodcoveredthecomputationtheworkwasona24- hourbasisand
prev
iouslystat
eddiv
idedint
oshif
ts.

From thesefact
s,theCI Rcor
rectl
yconcl
udedthatworki
npetit
ionercompanywas
conti
nuousandt heref
orethemealti
mebreaksshoul
dbecount
edaswor ki
ngti
mefor
purposesofover
t i
mecompensation.

-----

G.
R.No.L-
30452Sept
ember30,
1982
MERCURYDRUGCO. ,
INC.v
sNARDODAYAO,
ETAL.

Ther espondentsfil
edapet it
ionagainstthepet i
ti
onerpr ay i
ng:1)pay mentoft hei
r
unpaidbackwagesf orworkdoneonSunday sandlegalholidaysplus25c/caddi ti
onal
compensat i
onf r
om dat
eoft heiremploymentupt oJune30, 1962;2)paymentofext ra
compensat i
ononwor kdoneatni ght;3)reinst
atementofJanuar i
oRef er
enteand
OscarEchal artot hei
rformerposi tions wit
h back salaries;and,as agai nstt he
respondentunion,f
orit
sdisestabli
shmentandt heref
undofal lmoniesithadcollected
from peti
ti
oners.

Ther
espondentcour
trender
edi
tsdeci
siont
hat
:

1.Theclaim ofthepeti
ti
oner
sf orpaymentofbackwagescorrespodi
ngtot hefir
st
fourhour
swor krender
edonev eryot
herSundayandf
ir
stfourhoursonlegalhol
idays
shouldbedeniedforl
ackofmerit
;

2.RespondentMercur
yDrugCompany ,Inc.isher
ebyorderedtopayt hesixt
y-ni
ne(69)
peti
ti
oners:(
a)Anaddit
ionalsum equi
valentto25%oftheirrespect
ivebasicorregul
ar
sal
ariesforser
vicesr
enderedonSunday sandlegalholi
daysdur i
ngt heperi
odf r
om
March20,1961upt oJune30,1962;and( b)Anotheradditi
onalsum orpr emium
equivalentto25% oft
hei
rrespect
ivebasi
corregularsal
ari
esf
orni
ght
ti
meser
vices
renderedfrom Mar
ch20,1961uptoJune30,1962;and

3.Peti
ti
oners'
peti
tiontoconver
tthem t
omont hlyemployeesshoul
dbe,asitisher
eby,
deni
edf orl
ackofmer it
.Notsat
isfi
edwit
ht hedeci
sion,t
herespondent
sfi
ledamot i
on
fori
tsreconsider
ation.Themot i
onforreconsi
derati
on,washowev er
,deniedbyt he
Courtenbanc.

I
ssues:

a.
Whetherornotpr i
vat
erespondentis ent
it
led to cl
aims for25% addi
ti
onal
compensat
ionper
for
mingworkduri
ngSundayandlegalhol
i
days.

b.Whetherornotthe25% compensat
ionhadal
readybeeni
ncl
udedi
nthepr
ivat
e
respondent
smonthl
ysal
ari
es.

c.Whet
herornotthecontractsofempl
oymentwer
enullandvoidwasnotputi
nissue,
hence,
therespondentcourtpur
suantt
otheRul
esofCourtshoul
dhaveref
rai
nedfrom
rul
ingt
hatsuchcontract
sofempl oy
mentwerenul
landvoi
d.

Hel
d:

TheSupr emeCour tdismissedthepet it

ion.Onthef i
rstissue,basedonSec.4CANo.
444,Noper son,fi
rm orcorpor
ation,businessestabl
ishmentorpl aceofcenteroflabor
shal
lcompelanempl oy eeorl
abor ert
owor kduri
ngSunday sandl egalhol
idaysunless
he is paid an addi
tionalsum ofatl easttwenty-fi
ve percent um ofhi sregular
remunerati
on:PROVI DED,HOWEVER,Thatt hisprohibi
tionshallnotappl ytopubl i
c
uti
li
ti
esper for
mi ngsomepubl i
cser v i
cesuchassuppl yinggas,electr
icit
y,power ,
water,orprovi
dingmeansoft ransportati
onorcommuni cation.

Inthi
scase,thepet
iti
onerdoesnotf al
lonexempt
ions.Onthesecondissue,
thei
r25%
addit
ionalcompensati
onf orwor kdoneonSunday sandLegalHol i
dayswerenot
i
ncluded intheirr
especti
v e monthlysal
ari
es.The pet
it
ionercontenti
on was not
supportedbysubst
anti
alevidence.

Thelastissue,theMercuryDrugCo. ,Inc.
,mai ntai
nsachai nofdr ugstoresthatare
openev er
ydayoft heweekand,f orsomest or
es,uptov er
ylat
eatni ghtbecauseof
thenatureofthepharmaceut
icalret
ailbusiness.Therespondentsknewt hattheyhad
toworkSunday sandholi
daysandatni ght,notasexceptionstotherulebutaspar tof
the regular cour
se of empl oyment . Presented with contracts set t
ing thei
r
compensat i
ononanannualbasi swithanexpr esswaiverofextracompensat i
onfor
workonSunday sandholi
days,theworkersdidnothav emuchchoi ce.T

hepr
ivat
erespondent
swer
eatadi
sadv
ant
agei
nsof
arast
hecont
ract
ualr
elat
ionshi
p
wasconcer
ned.Worker
sinourcountr
ydonothav etheluxuryorf
reedom ofdecl
i
ning
j
ob openi
ngs orfil
ing r
esi
gnati
ons even when some t erms and condi
ti
ons of
empl
oymentarenotonl
yonerousandinequi
tousbuti
ll
egal.

I
tispr ecisel
ybecauseofthissi
tuati
onthatt
heframer
softheConsti
tut
ionembodied
theprovisionsonsoci
aljusti
ce(Secti
on6,Art
icl
e11)andpr
otect
iont
olabor(Sect
ion
9,Art
icleII)int
heDeclar
ationofPri
ncipl
esAndStat
ePoli
ci
es.

-----

PNBVPNBEMPLOYEESASSOCI
ATI
ON
115SCRA507Jul
y30,
1982

PNB andPNB Empl oyeesAssociat

ion(PEMA)hadadi sputeregardingtheproper
computati
onofov erti
mepay .PEMAwant edthecostoflivi
ngallowance( gr
antedin
1958)andl ongevi
typay( gr
antedin1961)tobeincludedint hecomput ati
on.PNB
di
sagreedandt he2parti
eslat
erwentbefor
etheCIRtoresolvethedispute.

CIRdeci dedinf avorofPEMAandhel dthatPNBshouldcomput et heovert

imepayof
i
tsempl oyeesont hebasisoft hesum t ot
aloftheempl oyee’
sbasicsalaryorwage
pluscostofl i
vingal l
owanceandl ongevit
ypay.TheCIRr eli
edontheruli
nginNAWASA
vNAWASAConsol idatedUnions,whichheldthat“f
orpurposesofcomput i
ngov ert
ime
compensat i
on,regularwagei ncl
udesallpaymentswhicht hepar
ti
eshav eagreedshall
ber eceiveddur i
ngt hewor kweek,i ncl
udingdiff
erent
iatedpayment sforwor kingat
undesirabletimes,suchasatni ghtandt heboardandl odgingcustomari
lyfurnished
theempl oyee.”Thispr omptedPNBt oappeal,hencethi
scase.

ISSUE:WONt hecostofl
i
vingal
l
owanceandlongev
itypayshoul
dbei
ncl
udedi
nthe
computat
ionofover
ti
mepayasheldbyt
heCIR

HELD:
NO

Rati
oOv erti
mepayi sforext
raeffor
tbey ondthatcont
emplatedintheemployment
contr
act
; addi
tionalpaygiv
enforanyotherpur
posecannotbeincl
udedinthebasi
sfor
thecomput at
ionofov er
ti
mepay.

–Nor ul
eofuni ver
salappli
cat
iontoot hercasesmaybej usti
fiabl
yextr
actedfrom t
he
NAWASAcase.CI Rreli
esont hepar toft heNAWASAdeci sionwheret heSCci t
ed
Amer i
candecisionswhosel egisl
ati
ononov ert
imeisatv ari
ancewiththelaw inthi
s
j
urisdi
cti
on.TheUSl egisl
ati
onconsi derswor kinexcessoff or
tyhoursaweekas
overti
me;whereas,whati sgeneral
lyconsideredovert
imeint hePhil
i
ppinesisworkin
excess ofthe r egul
ar8 hour s a day.Iti s under
standablymateri
alt oreferto
precedentsi
nt heUSf orpurposesofcomput i
ngweeklywagesundera40- hourweek
r
ule,si
ncetheparti
cul
arissueinv
olvedinNAWASAistheconversi
onofpr
iorweekl
y
r
egularear
ningsi
ntodai
lyrateswi
thoutal
lowi
ngdi
minut
ionoraddi
ti
on.

–Toappl ytheNAWASAcomput ationwoul dr equireadi fferentformul af oreachand

everyemployee.Itwoul dr equirereferencetoandcont inueduseofi ndividualearnings
i
nt hepast,t
husmul t
iplyingt headmi nistr
ati
vedi ff
icult
iesoft heCompany .Itwoul dbe
cumbersomeandt ediousapr ocesst ocomput eov ert
imepayandt hismayagai n
causedelaysinpay ment s,whi chi nturncoul dleadt oser i
ousdi sputes.Toappl yt hi
s
modeofcomput at
ionwoul dr et
ardandst ifl
et hegr owt hofuni onst hemsel vesas
Companieswoul dbei rresistibl
ydrawni nt
odeny ing,newandaddi ti
onal fringebenef it
s,
i
fnott hoseal r
eadyexi sting,forf earofbl oatingt heirov erheadexpensest hrough
overt
imewhi ch,byr easonofbei ngunf i
xed,becomesi nsteadav er i
tabl esourceof
i
rri
tanti
nlaborrelat
ions.

-----
ASIANTRANSMI SSI
ONCORPORATIONVS.CAETAL
G.R.No.144664 March15,
2004

The Depar t
ment of Labor and Empl oyment (DOLE),t hrough Undersecr
etary
Cresenci
anoB.Trajano,i
ssuedanExplanatoryBull
eti
ndatedMar ch11,1993wher ei
n
i
tclari
fi
ed,i
nteral
ia,t
hatemployeesar
eent i
tl
edt o200%oftheirbasi
cwageonApr i
l9,
1993,whetherunworked,whi
ch[,
]apar
tfrom beingGoodFriday[and,t
heref
ore,alegal
holi
day],
isal
soArawngKagi ti
ngan[whi
chi salsoalegal
holi
day ]
.

“Onthecorrectpaymentofhol idaycompensat i
ononApr il9,1993whi chapartf
rom
bei
ngGoodFr i
dayisal soArawngKagi tingan,i.
e.,t
wor egularholidaysfall
i
ngont he
sameday,thisDepar t
menti softheviewt hatthecover
edempl oyeesar eenti
tl
edtoat
l
easttwohundr edpercent(200%)oftheirbasicwageev enifsai dholidayi
sunworked.
Thefir
st100%r epresentsthepay mentofhol i
daypayonApr il9,1993asGoodFr iday
andthesecond100% i sthepay mentofhol i
daypayf orthesamedat easAr aw ng
Kagi
ti
ngan.

Sai
dbull
eti
nwasr epr
oducedonJanuary23,1998,whenApr
il9,1998wasbot
h
MaundyThur
sdayandArawngKagi
ti
nganxxxx

Despitet
heexplanator
ybul l
eti
n,pet
it
ioner[AsianTransmissi
onCor
porat
ion]opt
edt o
payitsdai
lypaidemployeesonly100%oft heirbasi
cpayonApr i
l9,
1998.Respondent
Bisi
gngAsi anTransmissi
onLaborUnion(BATLU)pr otest
ed.

Inaccor dancewi t
hSt ep6oft hegr i
evancepr ocedur
eoft heCol l
ecti
veBar gaini
ng
Agreement( CBA)exi st
ing bet ween petiti
onerand BATLU,t he controver
sy was
submi t
tedf orvol
untar
yar bi
trat
ion.xxxxOnJul y31,1998,t
heOf f
iceoftheVol untary
Arbi
tratorrenderedadecisiondi rect
ingpeti
tionertopayit
scov er
edempl oyees“ 200%
andnotj ust100% oftheirregulardailywagesf ortheunwor kedApril9,1998whi ch
cov
erst
wor
egul
arhol
i
day
s,namel
y,Ar
awngKagi
ti
gnanandMaundyThur
sday
.”

Subj
ectofi
nter
pret
ati
oni
nthecaseatbari
sAr
ti
cl
e94oft
heLaborCodewhi
chr
eads:

ART.94.Righttohol
idaypay .–(a)Everywor
kershallbepai
dhisregulardai
l
ywage
dur
ingregul
arholi
day
s, excepti
nretai
landser
viceest
abli
shment
sregularl
yemploy
ing
l
essthanten(10)workers;

(b)Theempl
oyermayr
equir
eanemployeet
oworkonanyholi
daybutsuchempl
oyee
shall
bepai
dacompensat
ionequi
val
entt
otwi
cehi
sregul
arr
ate;and

(c)Asusedi nt
hisArti
cle,“hol
iday”i
ncludes:NewYear’sDay
,MaundyThur
sday,
Good
Fri
day ,t
henint
hofApr il
,t hefi
rstofMay ,t
hetwelf
thofJune,t
hefour
thofJul
y,the
thi
rt
ieth ofNov ember,t he twenty
-fi
fth and thi
rt
iet
h ofDecemberand the day
designatedbyl
awf orholdingageneralelecti
on,

whi
chwasamendedbyExecut
iveOr
derNo.203i
ssuedonJune30,1987,sucht
hat
t
heregul
arhol
i
day
sar
enow:

NewYear ’
sDayJanuar y1
MaundyThur sdayMov ableDate
GoodFr i
dayMov abl eDate
ArawngKagi ti
nganApr i
l9(BataanandCor regi
dorDay )
LaborDayMay1
IndependenceDayJune12
NationalHer oesDayLastSundayofAugust
BonifacioDayNov ember30
ChristmasDayDecember25
RizalDayDecember30
Indeci di
ngi nf av oroft heBi signgAsi anTr ansmissi
onLaborUni on( BATLU),t he
VoluntaryAr bitr
at orhel dthatArti
cle94oft heLaborCodepr ovidesforholidaypayf or
everyregularhol iday ,thecomput ati
onofwhi chisdeterminedbyal egalf
or mulawhi ch
i
snotchangedbyt hefactthattherearetwohol i
daysfall
i
ngononeday ,l
ikeonApr il9,
1998wheni twasAr aw ngKagi ti
nganandatt hesamet imewasMaundyThur sday;
andt hatt hatt hel aw,asamended,enumer atest enregularhol i
daysforev eryy ear
shouldnotbei nt erpretedasaut horizi
ngareduct i
ontoninet henumberofpai dregular
holi
day s“justbecauseApr il9( Araw ngKagitingan)incer tai
ny ears,l
ike1993and
1998, i
salsoHol yFr i
dayorMaundyThur sday.”

Intheassaileddeci sion,theCour tofAppealsupheldt hefi

ndingsoft heVol untar
y
Arbi
tr
ator,holdingthatt heCollecti
veBargai
ningAgreement(CBA)betweenpet i
ti
oner
andBATLU,t helaw gov erni
ngt herel
ati
onsbetweent hem,clearl
yrecognizest hei
r
i
ntenttoconsi derAr aw ngKagi ti
nganandMaundyThur sday,onwhatev erdatethey
mayf al
linanycal endary ear
,aspai dl
egalholi
daysduringtheeffect
ivi
tyoft heCBA
andthat“[
t]
hereisnocondi
ti
on,qual
if
icat
ionorexcept
ionf
oranyv
ari
ancef
rom t
he
cl
earint
entthatal
lhol
i
day
sshallbecompensat
ed.”
5

TheCour tofAppeal
sfurtherhel
dt hat“i
ntheabsenceofanexpli
ci
tprovi
si
oninlaw
whichpr ovi
desf
or[a]reducti
onofhol i
daypayiftwoholi
dayshappentofal
lonthe
sameday ,anydoubtint heint
erpret
ati
onandi mplement
ati
onoft heLaborCode
provi
sionsonhol
idaypaymustber esolv
edinfav
oroflabor
.”

I
SSUE:

Whet
herdai
l
y-pai
dempl
oyeesar
eent
it
ledt
obepai
dfort
wor
egul
arhol
i
day
swhi
chf
all
ont
hesameday .

HELD:

Thi
sCour
tfi
ndsnogr
oundt
odi
stur
btheassai
l
eddeci
si
on.

Holidaypayi sal egisl

atedbenef i
tenactedaspar toftheConsti
tutionalimperat
ivethat
theSt ateshal laf f
ordpr otectiont olabor.
7I tspur poseisnotmer el
y“ toprevent
diminuti
onoft hemont hlyincomeoft hewor kersonaccountofwor kinterr
upt
ions.In
otherwords, althoughthewor kerisforcedtotakear est,heear
nswhatheshoul dear n,
thatis,hi
shol idaypay .
”8I tisal soint
endedtoenabl et heworkert opartici
pat
eint he
nati
onalcel ebrationshel d dur i
ng theday si denti
fi
ed aswi th greathi st
ori
caland
cult
uralsignif
icance.

IndependenceDay( June12) ,ArawngKagi ti

ngan( Apri
l9),NationalHeroesDay( l
ast
SundayofAugust ),BonifacioDay( November30)andRi zalDay( December30)wer e
declar
ed nat i
onalhol i
day st o afford Fil
i
pinos wi t
har ecurri
ng oppor t
uni
tyt o
commemor atetheher oism oft heFili
pino people,promot enat i
onalidenti
ty,and
deepent hespiri
tofpat r
iotism.LaborDay( May1)i sadayt r
aditi
onal
lyreservedto
celebr
atethecont ri
buti
onsoft heworkingclasst othedev el
opmentoft henation,
whiletherel
igi
oushol i
day sdesignatedinExecutiv
eOr derNo.203al l
owt heworkerto
celebr
atehisfait
hwithhisf ami l
y.

Asr efl
ectedabov e,Art.94oft heLaborCode,asamended,af fordsawor kerthe
enjoymentoft enpaidr egularholi
day s.
9Thepr ovi
sionismandat ory
,10regardlessof
whetheranempl oyeeispaidonamont hlyordail
ybasis.
11Unlikeabonus, whi chi
sa
managementpr erogati
ve,12holidaypayi sast at
utorybenef
itdemandabl eundert he
l
aw.Si nceawor kerisentit
ledtot heenjoymentoft enpaidregularholi
days,thefact
thattwoholidaysf al
lont hesamedat eshouldnotoperatet
or educet oninet heten
holi
daypaybenef i
tsawor kerisentit
ledtorecei
ve.

From t
hepert
inentpr
ovisi
onsoftheCBAent
eredint
obythepar
ti
es,pet
it
ionerhad
obli
gat
edi
tsel
ftopayforthel
egal
holi
day
sasr
equir
edbyl
aw.
Onl
yanempl oy
eewhowor ksonthedayimmedi
atel
ypr
ecedi
ngoraf
terar
egul
ar
hol
i
dayshal
lbeent
it
ledt
othehol
i
daypay.

Apaidlegalholi
dayoccur
ri
ngduri
ngtheschedul
edvacati
onleav
ewil
lresul
tinhol
i
day
paymentinadditi
ontonormalv
acati
onpaybutwil
lnotenti
tl
etheempl
oyeetoanother
vacat
ionleave.

Undersi
mil
arcir
cumstances,t
heCOMPANYwi llgiv
eaday’swagef
orNovember1st
andDecember31stwheneverdecl
aredahol
i
day.Whenrequi
redt
oworkonsai
ddays,
theempl
oyeewil
lbepaidaccordi
ngtoArt
.VI
,Sec.3Bher
eof.
18

WHEREFORE, thepet
it
ionisherebyDI
SMI
SSED.
-----
JoseRizalCol l
egevNat i
onalLaborRel
ati
onsCommi
ssi
onandNat
ionalAl
l
ianceof
Teachers/
Of f
iceWorkers
G.R.No.L-65482December1, 1987

Peti
ti
oneri
sanon-st
ock,
non-prof
iteducat
ionali
nst
it
uti
ondul
yor
gani
zedandexi
sti
ng
underthel
awsoft
hePhil
ippi
nes.

Pri
vaterespondentNationalAll
ianceofTeacher sandOf fi
ceWor kers(NATOW)in
behalfoft
hefacultyandpersonnelofJoseRizalCol
legefil
edacompl ai
ntagai
nstt
he
col
legeforsai
dallegednon-paymentofhol
idaypayfrom 1975to1977.

LaborAr
bit
er:

Thef acultyandper sonneloft her espondentJoseRi zalCol l

egewhoar epai dt hei
r
salarybyt hemont huni f
ormlyinaschooly ear,ir
respectiveofthenumberofwor king
daysi namont h,withoutdeduct i
onf orholidays,arepr esumedt obeal r
eadypai dt he
10pai dlegalhol idaysandar enol ongerent i
tl
edt osepar atepay mentfort hesai d
regularhol idays;
Theper sonneloft her espondentJoseRi zalCol l
egewhoar epaidtheirwagesdai l
yar e
entitl
ed t o be pai dt he 10 unwor ked regularhol i
day saccording tothe pertinent
provisionsoft heRul esandRegul ati
onsI mpl ementingtheLaborCode;
Collegiatef acult
yoft herespondentJoseRi zalCol l
egewhobycont ractar epai d
compensat ionperst udentcontracthourar enotent i
tl
edt ounwor kedregularholiday
payconsi der i
ngt hatt heseregul
arhol i
dayshav ebeenexcl udedi ntheprogrammi ngof
thest udentcont acthour s.
NLRC: Teachi ngper sonnel paidbythehourar eentit
ledtoholidaypay

I
ssue:Whet
herornottheschoolfacul
tywhoaccor
dingt
othei
rcont
ract
sar
epai
dper
l
ectur
ehourar
eenti
tl
edtounwor kedholi
daypay
.
Hel
d:No.Thepr
ovi
sionsi
ntheLaborCodeast
ohol
i
daypaydonotappl
yint
hiscase.

Subj
ecthol
idaypayisprov
idedf
ori
ntheLaborCode(
Presi
dent
ialDecr
eeNo.442,as
amended),
whichreads:

Art
.94.Righttoholi
daypay— ( a)Everyworkershal
lbepai
dhisregulardai
l
ywage
dur
ingregul
arholi
days,excepti
nret
ailandser
viceest
abl
i
shment
sregularl
yemploy
ing
l
essthanten(10)workers;

(b)Theempl
oyermayr
equir
eanemployeet
oworkonanyholi
daybutsuchempl
oyee
shall
bepai
dacompensat
ionequi
val
entt
otwi
cehi
sregul
arr
ate;…“

andi
ntheI
mpl
ement
ingRul
esandRegul
ati
ons,
Rul
eIV,
BookI
II
,whi
chr
eads:

SEC.8.Hol i
daypayofcer t
ainempl
oyees.— (
a)Pri
vateschoolteachers,incl
uding
facult
ymembersofcoll
egesanduniv
ersi
ti
es,maynotbepai
df ortheregularhol
idays
duringsemestr
alvacat
ions.Theyshal
l,however
,bepaidfort heregularholidays
duringChr
ist
masvacati
ons.…

Theaf or
ement i
onedi mplementi
ngruleisnotjust
ifi
edbyt heprovi
si
onsoft helaw
whichafterallissil
entwi t
hrespecttofacult
ymember spaidbyt hehour .Regular
hol
idaysspecifi
edassuchbyl awareknownt obothschoolandfacult
ymember sas
noclassday s;
”cer
tainlyt
helatt
erdonotexpectpaymentforsai
dunwor kedday s,
and
thi
swascl earl
yintheirmi
ndswhent heyent
eredint
otheteachi
ngcontracts.

Ontheot
herhand,bot
hthelawandtheI
mplement
ingRul
esgov
erni
nghol
i
daypayar
e
si
l
entastopaymentonSpecial
Publ
i
cHoli
days.

Itisr eadilyappar entt hatt hedecl ared pur poseoft hehol idaypaywhi ch isthe
prevent i
onofdi minutionoft hemont hlyincomeoft heempl oy eesonaccountofwor k
i
nterrupt i
onsi sdefeatedwhenar egularclassdayi scancelledonaccountofaspeci al
publi
chol i
dayandcl asshour sar ehel donanot herwor ki
ngdayt omakeupf orti
me
l
osti nt heschoolcal endar.Ot herwisest ated,t hefacult
ymember ,alt
houghf orcedto
takear est,doesnotear nwhatheshoul dear nont hatday .Bei tnot edthatwhena
specialpubl i
chol i
dayi sdeclar ed,t
hef acul tymemberpai dbyt hehouri sdeprivedof
expect edincome,andi tdoesnotmat terthatt heschoolcal endari sextendedi nview
oftheday sorhour sl ost,f
ort heiri
ncomet hatcoul dbeear nedf r
om ot hersourcesis
l
ostdur i
ngt heextendedday s.Si mil
ar l
y,whencl assesar ecal ledof forshor t
enedon
accountoft yphoons, fl
oods,ral l
i
es,andt hel ike,thesefacultymember smustl i
kewise
bepai d,whet herornotext ensionsar eorder ed.

SCDeci
sion:

(
a)exempt
ingpet
it
ionerf
rom pay
inghour
lypai
dfacul
tymember
sthei
rpayf
orr
egul
ar
hol
i
days,whet
herthesamebeduri
ngtheregularsemest
ersoft
heschooly
earor
dur
ingsemest
ral
,Chr
ist
mas,
orHol
yWeekvacat
ions;

(b)butorder i
ngpetit
ionertopaysai dfacultymember st heirregularhourlyrateon
daysdeclar ed asspecialhol
idaysorf orsomer eason classesar ecal l
ed offor
short
enedf orthehourstheyaresupposedt ohavetaught,whet herextensi
onsofcl ass
daysbeor deredornot ;i
ncaseofext ensionssai
df acult
ymember sshalll
ikewisebe
paidthei
rhour l
yrat
esshouldtheyteachdur i
ngsaidextensions.
-----

MANSIONPRINTINGandCHENGVS.BI
TARA
G.
R.No.168120Januar
y25,
2012

MansionPri
nti
ngCenterisasingl
epropr
ietor
shipengagedint
hepri
nti
ngofqual
i
ty
sel
f-
adhesi
velabel
s,br
ochur
es,
poster
s,st
icker
s,packagi
ngandt
hel
ike.

Mansionengagedtheserv
icesofBit
araasahel per(
kar
gador).Respondentwaslater
promotedasthecompany’ssoledr
ivertasked,amongother
s,todeli
vertheproducts
tothecli
ent
swithi
nthedel
iver
yschedules.

Petit
ionersaverthatthet i
melydeli
veryofthepr oduct
stothecl i
entsisoneoft he
foremostconsiderat
ionsmat eri
alt
ot heoperati
onoft hebusiness.Itbei
ngso,they
closelymonit
oredtheattendanceofrespondent
.Theynotedhishabitualt
ardi
nessand
absent eei
sm.

Peti
tionersissued a Memor andum requir
ing r
espondent t
o submit a wri
tt
en
expl
anat i
onwhynoadmi ni
str
ativ
esancti
onshouldbeimposedonhimforhishabi
tual
tar
diness,towhichherepl
i
ed.Butdespit
erespondent
’sunder
taki
ngtorepor
tonti
me,
howev er,
hecontinuedt
odisr
egardatt
endancepoli
ci
es.

respondentfi
ledacompl
aintf
ori
l
legaldi
smi
ssalagai
nstt
hepet
it
ioner
sbef
oret
he
LaborArbit
er.

I
SSUE:Wastheregrossandhabi
tualnegl
ectofdut
yont
hepar
tofBi
tar
a,war
rant
ing
hi
sdi
smissal
from ser
vice

HELD:
YES;
ther
eisnoi
l
legal
dismi
ssal

Val
i
aov
.Cour
tofAppeal
sisi
nst
ruct
ive:

xxxItbearsstressingthatpeti
ti
oner’
sabsencesandt ar dinesswer enotisolat
ed
i
ncident
sbutmani fest
edapatter
nofhabitual
i
ty.xxxThet otali
tyofinfr
act
ionsorthe
numberofviol
ati
onscommi tt
eddur i
ngtheperi
odofempl oy mentshallbeconsi
dered
i
ndet er
mini
ngt hepenaltytobei mposeduponaner r
ingempl oyee.Theof f
enses
commi t
tedbyhim shouldnotbet akensingl
yandseparat
elybutintheirtot
ali
ty.
Fi
tness forcont
inued empl
oymentcannotbe compartmental
i
zed i
ntotightli
ttl
e
cubi
clesofaspectsofcharact
er,conduct
,andabi
l
itysepar
ateandindependentof
eachother.

I
nVal i
ao,wedef i
nedgrossnegl i
genceas“wantofcar eintheperformanceofone’ s
duties”
andhabi t
ualnegl
ectas“ r
epeatedfai
l
uretoperfor
m one’
sdut i
esf oraperiodof
ti
me, dependinguponthecircumstances.
”Thesearenotoverl
ytechnicalterms,which,
i
nt hefirstpl
ace,ar
eexpresslysanct
ionedbytheLaborCodeofthePhi l
ippines,
towi t
:

ART.282.Termi
nati
onbyemploy
er.–Anempl
oyermayt
ermi
nat
eanempl
oymentf
or
anyofthefol
l
owingcauses:

xxx

(
b)Gr
ossandhabi
tual
negl
ectbyt
heempl
oyeeofhi
sdut
ies;

xxx

Bit
ara’
sweeklytimerecordforthef
irstquart
eroft hey ear2000r
eveal
edthathecame
l
ate19t i
mesoutoft he47t imesher eport
edf orwor k.Healsoi
ncurr
ed19absences
outofthe66wor kingdaysduringthequar t
er.Hisabsenceswi t
houtpri
ornoticeand
approv
alfrom March11-16,
2000wer econsi
der edtobet hemostseri
ousinf
racti
onof
al
lbecauseofitsadver
seeffectonbusinessoper ati
ons.

Clearl
y ,ev
enint heabsenceofawr i
tt
encompanyr
uledef
ini
nggrossandhabi
tual
neglectofdut i
es,respondent
’somi
ssi
onsqual
i
fyassuchwarrant
inghi
sdi
smissal
fr
om t heserv
ice.
-----

MAYONHOTEL&RESTAURANT,PACI
TAO.POv
s.ROLANDOADANA,
etal
.
G.
R.No.157634May16,
2005

Peti
tionerMay onHotel&Restaur
ant(MHR)hi redherei
n16respondentsasempl oyees
i
nitsbusi nessinLegaspiCit
y.I
tsoperati
onwassuspendedonMar ch31,1997duet o
theexpirati
onandnon- renewalofthel easecontractfort
hespacei trented.Whi l
e
wait
ingf ort hecompleti
onoft heconst ruct
ionofi t
snew site,MHR cont i
nuedits
operati
oni nanothersi
tewi t
h9oft he16empl oy
ees.Whent henewsi t
econst r
ucted
andMHRr esumeditsbusinessoperat
ion,noneoft he16empl oyeeswasr ecal
ledto
work.

MHRal l
egedbusinesslossesast
her easonfornotr
einst
ati
ngtherespondent
s.On
vari
ous dat
es,respondentsfi
l
ed complaint
sforunderpaymentofwages,money
clai
msandill
egaldi
smissal.
I
SSUES:

1.Whetherornotrespondent
swereil
l
egall
ydi
smissedbypet
iti
oner;
2.Whetherornotrespondent
sareenti
tl
edtothei
rmoneycl
aimsduet ounder
payment
ofwages,andnonpay mentofhol
i
daypay,r
estdaypremi
um,SILP,COLA,over
ti
mepay,
andni
ghtshiftdi
ff
erenti
alpay.

HELD:

1.I
ll
egal
Dismi
ssal
:cl
aimf
orsepar
ati
onpay

SinceApr i
l1997unt i
lthetimet heLaborAr bit
errenderedi tsdecisi
oni nJuly2000,or
mor ethant hree( 3)yearsafterthesupposed“ t
empor ary”lay-
off,t
heempl oy
mentof
allt
her espondent swithpetit
ionerhadceased, notwit
hst andingthatthenewpr emises
hadbeencompl etedandt hesamer esumedi tsoperation.Thisiscl ear
lydismissal–
ortheper manentsev eranceorcompl eteseparati
onoft hewor kerfrom theserviceon
theinit
iati
veoft heempl oyerregardlessoft hereasonst herefor
.
Arti
cle286oft heLaborCodei sclear— t her
ei ster
minat ionofempl oymentwhenan
otherwisebonaf idesuspensi onofwor kexceedssi x( 6)mont hs.Thecessat ionof
empl oymentf ormor ethansixmont hswaspat entandt heempl oyerhast heburdenof
provingthatthet ermi
nationwasf oraj ustorauthori
zedcause.

Whilewerecogni zetheri
ghtoft heemployertoterminatet heservicesofanempl oyee
forajustoraut hori
zedcause,t hedismissalofempl oyeesmustbemadewi t
hinthe
parameter
sofl awandpur suanttothetenetsoffairplay.Andint erminati
ondisputes,
theburdenofpr oofisalway sont heempl oyertoprov ethatthedi smissalwasf ora
j
ustoraut hor
izedcause.Wher etherei
snoshowi ngofacl ear,vali
dandl egalcause
forter
minati
onofempl oy
ment ,thelawconsidersthecaseamat t
erofill
egaldi
smissal.

Ifdoubt sexistbetweent heev idencepr esent

edbyt heempl oy
erandt heempl oyee, t
he
scalesofj usti
cemustbet i
ltedinf avorofthelatter—t heempl oyermustaffi
rmat i
vel
y
showr at i
onall
yadequateev idencet hatthedi
smi ssalwasf oraj ust
if
iabl
ecause.I tisa
ti
me- honoredr ulethati ncont r
ov ersi
esbetweenal aborerandhi smast er,doubt s
reasonabl yarisi
ngf rom t heev i
dence,ori nt hei nt
erpr
etati
onofagr eement sand
writ
ingshoul dber esolv
edi nthef ormer '
sfavor
.Thepol i
cyistoextendt hedoct r
ineto
agr eaternumberofempl oyeeswhocanav ai
loft hebenef i
tsunderthelaw,whi chisin
consonancewi ththeav owedpol icyoft heStatet ogivemaxi mum ai dandpr otecti
on
oflabor .

2.Moneycl
aims

TheSupremeCour
trei
nst
atedt
heawar
dofmonet
arycl
aimsgr
ant
edbyt
heLabor
Arbi
ter
.
The costofmeal s and snacks purport
edlypr ovi
ded t or espondents cannotbe
deduct edaspar tofr espondents'mini
mum wage.Asst at edint heLaborAr biter'
s
decisi
on.
Evengr ant
ingt hatmeal sandsnackswer eprov i
dedandi ndeedconst it
utedfacil
ities,
such f acil
iti
es coul d not be deduct ed wi thout compl i
ance wi th cert
ainl egal
requir
ement s.Asst atedi nMabezav .NLRC,t heempl oyersi mplycannotdeductt he
valuef rom theempl oy ee'
swageswi t
houtsatisfyingthefollowing:(a)proofthatsuch
facil
it
ies are cust omar i
lyf ur
nished bythe t rade;(b)t he provision ofdeduct i
ble
facil
it
iesi sv ol
untaril
yaccept edinwr i
ti
ngbyt heempl oyee;and( c)thefacil
it
iesar e
chargedatf ai
randr easonablev al
ue.Thel aw i scleart hatmer eav ail
menti snot
suffi
cienttoal l
owdeduct ionsfr
om employees' wages.

Asforpetit
ionersrepeatedinvocat
ionofseri
ousbusinessl
osses,suf
fi
cetosayt hat
thi
sisnotadef enset opay mentoflaborstandar
dbenefi
ts.Theempl oy
ercannot
exempthi mselffrom li
abili
tyto paymi ni
mum wages because ofpoorf inancial
condi
ti
onoft hecompany .Thepaymentofmi nimum wagesisnotdependentont he
employer
'sabil
it
ytopay .