Seatwork 2

1. Identify and state the ten (10) general guarantees declared by the State in the
enactment of the Labor Code of the Philippines.
a. Protection to labor
b. Full employment
c. Equal work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed
d. Regulate the relations between workers and employers
e. Rights of workers to self-organization
f. Collective bargaining
g. Security of Tenure
h. Just and humane conditions of work
i. Construction in favor of labor
j. (?)

2. Among your answers under Question #1 above, which one directly relate to Labor
Standards Law?
- full employment, equal work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed, and just
and humane conditions of work (?)

3. Among your answers under Question #1 above, which one directly relate to Labor
Relations Law?
- rights of workers to self-organization, collective bargaining, and security of tenure (?)

4. In the case of Antamok Goldfields v. CIR, what is the justification for labor laws?
- Police power. Labor Code was not yet effective during that time.

5. In Calalang v. Williams, the Supreme Court is correct in construing labor laws in favor of
the workers as mandated under Article 4 of the Labor Code of the Philippines.
- False. The Court held therein that the prohibition on animal-drawn vehicles is valid,
as such is for promotion of public welfare, and its adoption of such measures insures
economic stability of all the competent elements of society.

6. State why is Article III, Section 1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution relevant to labor
law?
- Employment = property

7. What is your basis/authority for your answer under Question #6 above.

- In the case of Philippine Movie Pictures Workers' Association vs Premiere
Productions, Inc. GR NO. L-5621, March 25, 1953, the Court held that the right of a
person to his labor is deemed to be property within the meaning of constitutional
guarantees; hence, he cannot be deprived of his labor or work without due process
of law. 

8. The case of Phil. Span Asia Carriers v. Pelayo was assigned to be read under the
subject matter indicated as "General Principles" involved in labor law. What general
principle of labor law did you learn from this case, if any?
 - While it is true that the State must afford full protection to labor, labor laws are not to
be construed in a manner that undermines valid exercise of management
prerogatives.

9. Laws, granting rights to the employees are presumed to be applicable prospectively,

unless otherwise so provided therein.
- False.

10. What is your basis/authority for your answer under Question #9 above.
- In the case of Oro Enterprises, Inc. vs NLRC, GR No. 110861, November 14, 1994,
the Court held that there should be little doubt about the fact that the law can apply
to labor contracts still existing at the time the statute has taken effect and its benefits
can be reckoned not only from the date of the law’s enactment but retroactively to
the time said employment contracts have started.

Others:
- Construction of Labor Code Provisions
o In favor of labor
o Purpose of the law – consistent with social justice
 To achieve the purpose (social justice), it must be construed in favor o
labor
 Q: Should it always be in favor of labor
 A: No.
o Who can construe?
- Managerial prerogatives
o Limitations
o Sterling paper case
 Must be a valid exercise of managerial prerogative
o Must be compliant with the law
o Must be exercised in good faith
 Must be in pursuit of legitimate business purpose/interest
 Must not be in circumvention of the law
o 4 powers
o Q: What law gives managerial prerogatives?
o A: No law. Inherent. Once a person assumes to be an employer, the
prerogatives automatically accrue to them.
o Labor laws limit the exercise of these prerogatives
- Paredes Case:
o Employee is a national director
o Protection to labor will not be provided if not needed by the employee
because of her position