Labor Review 2020-21

( 2nd Sem)

Atty. Paciano F. Fallar Jr.

SSCR-CoL

BAR QUESTIONS ON

EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP
and
JURISDICTION

Part 1

Q1. Benito is the owner of an eponymous clothing brand that is a top seller. He maintains a
pool of male and female models who wear his o's clothes in promotional shoots and videos. His
deal with the models is that he will pay them with 3 sets of free clothes per week. Is this
arrangement allowed?

Q2.Ms. A is a volleyball coach with five (5) years of experience in her field. Before the start of
the volleyball season of 2015, she was hired for the sole purpose of overseeing the training and
coaching of the University’s volleyball team. During her hiring, the Vice-President for Sports
expressed to Ms. A the University’s expectation that she would bring the University a
championship at the end of the year.

In her first volleyball season, the University placed ninth (9 th) our of 10 participating teams.
Soon after the end of the season, the Vice-President for Sports informed Ms. A that she was a
mere probationary employee and hence, she need not come back for the next season because
of the poor performance of the team. In any case, the Vice-President for Sports claimed that
Ms. A was a fixed-term employee who contract has ended at the close of the year.

Is Ms. A a probationary, fixed-term, or regular employee? Explain your reasons

Q3.TRX, a local shipping firm, maintains a fleet of motorized boats plying the island barangays
of AP, a coastal town. At day’s end the boat operators/crew members turn over to the boat
owner their cash collections from cargo fees and passengers’ fares, less the expenses for diesel
fuel, food landing fees and spare parts. Fifty percent (50%) of the monthly income or earnings
derived from the operations of the boats are given to the boatmen by way of compensation.
Deducted from the individual shares of the boatmen are their cash advance and peso value of
their absences, if any. Are these boatmen entitled to overtime pay, holiday pay and 13 th month
pay?

Q4. Jim is the holder of a certificate of public convenience for a jeepney. He entered into a
contract of lease with Nick, whereby they agreed that the lease period is for one (1) year unless
sooner terminated by Jim for any of the causes laid down in the contract. The rental is
P30,000.00 monthly. All the expenses for the repair of the jeepney, together with expenses for
diesel, oil and service, shall be for the account of Nick. Nick is required to make a deposit of
three (3) months to answer for the restoration of the vehicle to its good operating condition
when the contract ends. It is stipulated that Nick is not an employee of Jim and he holds the
latter free and harmless from all suits or claims which may arise from the implementation of the
contract. Nick has the right to use the jeepney at any hour of the day provided it is operated on
the approved line of operation.

After five (5) months of the lease and payment of the rentals, Nick became delinquent in the
payment of the rentals for two (2) months. Jim rescinded the contract and asked for the
arrearages. Nick responded by filing a complaint with the NLRC for illegal dismissal, claiming

1
that the contract is illegal and he was just forced by Jim to sign it so he can drive. He claims he
is really a driver of Jim on a boundary system and the reason he was removed is because he
failed to pay the complete daily boundary , of one thousand (P1,000.00) for 2 months due to
the increase in the number of tricycles.

Jim files a motion to dismiss the NLRC case on the ground that the regular court has
jurisdiction since the agreement is a lease contract. Rule on the motion and explain.

Q5. Pandoy, an electronics technician, worked within the premises of Perfect Triangle, an auto
accessory shop. He filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, overtime pay and other benefits
against Perfect Triangle, which refused to pay his claims on the ground that Pandoy was not its
employee but was an independent contractor. It was common practice for shops like Perfect
Triangle to collect the service fees from customers and pay the same to the independent
contractors at the end of each week. The auto shop explained that Pandoy was like a partner
who worked within its premises, using parts provided by the shop, but otherwise Pandoy was
free to render service in the other auto shops. On the other hand, Pandoy insisted that he still
was entitled to the benefits because he was loyal to Perfect Triangle, it being a fact that he did
not perform work for anyone else. Is Pandoy correct? Explain briefly.

Q6. Pablo was a farm-hand, in a plantation owned by ABC & Co., working approximately 6
days a week for a good 15 years. Upon Pablo’s death, his widow filed a claim for burial grant
and pension benefits with the Social Security System (SSS). The claim was denied on the
ground that Pablo had not been a registered member-employee. Pablo’s widow filed a petition
before the SSS asking that ABC & Co. be directed to pay the premium contributions of Pablo
and that his name be reported for SSS coverage. ABC & Co. countered that Pablo was hired to
plow, harrow and burrow, using his own carabao and other implements and following his own
schedule of work hours, without any supervision from the company. If proven, would this
factual setting advanced by ABC & Co. be a valid defense against the petition?

Q7. Luningning Foods engaged the services of Lamitan Manpower, Inc., a bona fide
independent contractor, to provide "tasters" that will check on food quality. Subsequently, these
"tasters" joined the union of rank -and-file employees of Luningning and demanded that they
be made regular employees of the latter as they are performing functions necessary and
desirable to operate the company’s business. Luningning rejected the demand for
regularization. On behalf of the "tasters", the union then filed a notice of strike with the
Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). In response, Luningning sought a restraining
order from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) arguing that the DOLE does not have jurisdiction over
the case since it does not have an employer-employee relationship with the employees of an
independent contractor. If you were the RTC judge, would you issue a restraining order against
the union?

Q8. Betty had worked five (5) years as waitresses in a cocktail lounge. She and her fellow
waitresses did not receive any salary directly from the lounge but shared in all service charges
collected for food and drinks to the extent of 75%. With the lounge owner's prior permission,
they could sit with and entertain guest inside the establishment and appropriate for themselves
the tips given by guests. After five (5) years, their individual shares in the collected service
charges dipped to below minimum wage level as a consequence of the lounge's marked
business decline. Thereupon, Betty and her group asked the lnge owner to increase their share
in the service charges to 85% or the minimun wage level, whichever is higher. The owner
terminated their services. They filed a complaint for unlawful dismissal, with prayer for 85%
of the collected services or the minimum wage for the appropriate periods, whichever is higher.
Decide.

2
Q9.Marcel was the Vice President for Finance and Administration and a member of the Board of
Directors of Mercedes Corporation. He brought a complaint for illegal suspension and illegal
dismissal against Mercedes Corporation, which moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground
that the complaint pertained to the jurisdiction of the RTC due to the controversy being intra-
corporate based on his positions in the corporation. Marcel countered that he had only been
removed as Vice President for Finance and Administration, not as a member of the Board of
Directors. He also argued that his position is not listed as among the corporate officers in
Mercedes Corporation’s by-laws. Is the argument of Marcel correct? Explain your answer.

Q10. Richie, a driver-mechanic, was recruited by Supreme Recruiters (SR) and its principal,
Mideast Recruitment Agency (MRA), to work in Qatar for a period of two (2) years. However,
soon after the contract was approved by POEA, MRA advised SR to forego Richie’s deployment
because it had already hired another Filipino driver-mechanic, who had just completed his
contract in Qatar. Aggrieved, Richie filed with the NLRC a complaint against SR and MRA for
damages corresponding to his two years’ salary under the POEA-approved contract.

SR and MRA traversed Richie’s complaint, raising the following argument: Because Richie was
not able to leave for Qatar, no employer-employee relationship was established between them.
Hence, the Labor Arbiter has no jurisdiction over the subject matter.

Q11-12 Gregorio was hired as an insurance underwriter by the Guaranteed Insurance

Corporation (Guaranteed). He does not receive any salary but solely relies on commissions
earned for every insurance policy approved by the company. He hires and pays his own
secretary but is provided free office space in the office of the company. He is, however,
required to meet a monthly quota of twenty (20) insurance policies, otherwise, he may be
terminated. He was made to agree to a Code of Conduct for underwriters and is supervised by
a Unit Manager.

[a]Is Gregorio an employee of Guaranteed? Explain.

[b] Suppose Gregorio is appointed as Unit Manager and assigned to supervise several
underwriters. He holds office in the company premises, receives an overriding commission on
the commissions of his underwriters, as well as a monthly allowance from the company, and is
supervised by a branch manager. He is governed by the Code of Conduct for Unit Managers. Is
he an employee of Guaranteed? Explain. --PFFALLARJRFEB2021--