Republic of the Philippines

Bulacan State University

City of Malolos, Bulacan

Tel/Fax (044) 791-0153

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER CASES

Submitted by:

CARLOS, Ryan Cholo P.

BSEd 3-J Social Studies

Submitted to:

Ma’am Dolorita Del Rosario

Recruitment

Before the Court is an ordinary appeal 1 filed by accused-appellant Erlinda Racho y Somera
(Racho) assailing the Decision2 dated October 15, 2015 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-
G.R. CR-HC No. 06932, which affirmed the Decision 3 dated May 28, 2014 of the Regional Trial
Court of Makati City, Branch 62 (RTC) in Criminal Case Nos. 05-1935, 05-1938, 05-1941, 05-
1943, 05-1945, 05-1948, 05-1949, and 05-1951 convicting Racho of Illegal Recruitment in Large
Scale, as defined and penalized under Section 6 (l) and (m), in relation to Section 7 (b) of
Republic Act No. (RA) 8042,4 otherwise known as the Migrant Workers Overseas Filipino Act
of 1995, and six (6) counts of Estafa under Article 315 paragraph 2 (a) of the Revised Penal
Code.

The Facts

This case stemmed from, among others, an Information5 dated August 19, 2005 charging Radio
for the crime of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale, docketed as Criminal Case No. 05-1935, the
accusatory portion of which reads:

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 05-1935

That in or about during [sic] the period from November, 2004 up to February 07, 2005 or prior
thereto, in the City of Makati, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, did then and there without first obtaining a license or authority to recruit
workers for overseas employment from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration,
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously recruit and promise employment/job placement and collect
fee[s] from complainants Bernardo Pena, Arsenio N. Sevania, Maximo V. Gambon, Simeon
Adame Filarca, Vincent B. Baidoz. Odelio C. Gasmen, Cirilo A. Arruejo, Romeo E. Torres,
Renato P. Velasco, Rex D. Villaruz,Celso V. Doctolero, Renato L. Pescador, Rodolfo C. Pagal,
William D. Villaruz, Franklin B. Delizo[,] and Dominador S. Pena as contract workers, without
any license/authority from the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) or by
the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) to recruit workers for overseas employment.

CONTRARY TO LAW.
Racho was also charged with sixteen (16) counts6 of Estafa, of which only six (6) cases
prospered and eventually, were appealed before the Court. The Informations for these six (6)
cases are similarly worded, except for the details pertaining to the date of commission of the
offense, name of the complainant, job recruited for, and the amount involved. Among others, the
accusatory portion of the Information7 for Criminal Case No. 05-1938 involving the complainant
Odelio C. Gasmen (Odelio) reads:

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 05-1938

That on or about the 26th of November, 2004 or prior thereto, in Makati, The Philippines, the
above-named accused, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously defraud one
Odelio C. Gasmen in the following manner, to wit: The said accused by false pretenses or
fraudulent acts committed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud, to the
effect that she can recruit workers for overseas employment and deploy complainant as
construction worker in East Timor for a fee of Php100,000.00, which representation [she] well
knew to be false and was only made to induce the aforementioned complainant to give and
deliver, as in fact the said complainant gave and delivered, to her the said amount of
[Php100,000.00], to the damage and prejudice of the said Odelio C. Gasmen in the
aforementioned amount of Php100,000.00.

Selection
The Four-Fifths Rule

The four-fifths rule is a way of measuring adverse impact in selection processes of organizations.
It works like this: assume your organization requires a cognitive test for employment. You set a
test score of 70 as the required pass rate for the candidate to be considered for an interview.
Based on our numbers, if 50 percent of men passed this test with a score of 70, then four-fifths or
40 percent of women should also be able to pass the test. You might calculate it like this:

Gender Total who scored 70 or above Total who took the test Percent

Male 52 62 83.8 or 84% passed

Female 36 58 62.07 or 62%

If you divide the total of who scored above 70 by the total number who took the test, it shows the
percentage of 84 percent passed the test. If you divide the number of women who passed by the
total number of women who took the test, you come up with 62 percent. Then divide 62 percent
by 84 percent (62/84 = 73.8%). The resulting 74 percent means that it is below the 80 percent or
the four-fifths rule, and this test could be considered to have disparate impact.

52/62 = 84% of men who took the test passed the test
36/58 = 62% of women who took the test passed the test
62/84 = 73.8%, less than 80%, which could show disparate impact

This is only an indicator as to how the selection process works for the organization, and other
factors, such as sample size, can impact the reliability of this test. Using the tables below, please
calculate possible disparate impact and then answer the questions that follow.
 Total Number Taking the
National Origin Passing Test Score Percent
Test

Caucasians 56 89

Minority groups 48 62

Age Passing Test Score Total Number Taking the Test Percent

People under
28 52
40

People over 40 23 61

Gende
Passing Test Score Total Number Taking the Test Percent
r

Male 71 82

Female 64 85

1. Please calculate the above numbers using the four-fifths rule. Based on your
calculation:
1. Which group or groups might be affected negatively by this test?
 2. What would be your considerations before changing any selection tools based
on this data?
3. How might you change your selection process to ensure disparate impact isn’t
occurring at your organization?

Compensation and Benefits

Before us is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court seeking to
set aside the June 30, 1997 Decision 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) 2 in CA-GR SP No. 41257.
The dispositive portion of the challenged CA Decision reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"WHEREFORE, the decision of the Employees’ Compensation Commission is AFFIRMED, and

the petition DISMISSED." 3

The Decision of the Employees’ Compensation Commission (ECC) affirmed by the CA disposed
as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Based on the foregoing medical findings, it would appear that the etiology of deceased’s
ailment which caused his death is not attributable to his employment. Since the ailment is not
deemed work-connected, the instant claim for death benefits cannot be given due course.

"WHEREFORE, the decision of the respondent Social Security System appealed from is hereby
AFFIRMED, and the instant case is dismissed for want of merit." 4

Petitioner also assails the January 29, 1998 Resolution 5 of the appellate court denying
reconsideration.

The Facts

Virgilio T. Riño Sr., husband of herein petitioner, was employed by Allied Port Services Inc. as
stevedore since July, 1982. His duties included: (1) handling of steel cargoes; (2) loading and
unloading of silica sand; (3) handling, loading and unloading of lumber products; (4) supervising
other stevedores; and (5) performing other related work. 6

On July 19, 1992, Virgilio Riño collapsed while working at the South Harbor, Manila. He was
rushed to the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) because of "melena, fever, chills and abdominal
pains 8 days [prior to confinement] . . ." He died three days later. According to the Medical
Certificate issued by Fe B. Bais, chief of the PGH Medical Records Division, the cause of death
was "uremia [secondary] to chronic renal failure. Chronic glomerulonephritis. . . ." 7

Petitioner Beberisa Riño, his spouse, filed a claim for death benefits before the Social Security
System (SSS). However, the SSS denied the claim in this wise: 8

"The cause of death of your husband cannot be considered work-connected because based on the
clinical abstract you submitted, your husband had already on and off attack of edema and
hypertension which are signs of kidney disease even before his employment with the company."
9

On appeal, the ECC affirmed the findings of the SSS. 10 Ruling that petitioner failed to present
relevant evidence to establish the causal connection between the deceased’s ailment and his work
as stevedore, the ECC held:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Moreover, medical evaluation suggests that Uremia is the sine qua non of chronic renal failure.
It results from the retention in the blood of urea and other end products of metabolism normally
excreted into the urine. Chronic Renal Failure on the other hand, is a toxic clinical condition
associated with renal insufficiency and retention in the blood of nitrogenous waste products. It
may be due to the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

a) nephritis

b) congestive heart failure

c) couch syndrome

d) poison

(Reference: Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, 11th Edition p. 1155).

"Based on the foregoing medical findings, it would appear that the etiology of deceased’s
ailment which caused his death is not attributable to his employment. Since the ailment is not
deemed work-connected, the instant claim for death benefits cannot be given due course." 11

After the ECC denied the Motion for Reconsideration, 12 petitioner appealed to the CA.

Retention and Motivation

Turnover Analysis
You recently completed your company’s new compensation plan. You are happy with the results
but know there is more to retaining the employees than just pay, and you don’t currently have a
retention plan. Your organization is a large staffing firm, consisting of several offices on the
West Coast. The majority of employees are staffing recruiters, and they fill full-time and
temporary positions for a variety of clients. One of the challenges you face is a difference in
geographical areas, and as a result, there are differences in what may motivate employees.

As you initially look at turnover numbers, you have the sense that turnover has increased over
the last six months. Your initial thoughts are the need for a better retention strategy, utilizing a
bonus structure as well as other methods of retention. Currently, your organization pays a
straight salary to employees, does not offer flextime or telecommuting options, focuses on
individual performance (number of staffing placements) rather than team performance, and
provides five days of vacation for every two years with the organization.

Mont Total Number of Employees

Separated Employees
h Midmonth

March 12 552

April 14 541

May 16 539

June 20 548

July 22 545

1. Calculate monthly turnover for the past six months.

2. What are the possible reasons for turnover in your organization and other
organizations?
3. What steps would you take to remedy the situation?
Training and Development
New on the Job

JoAnn Michaels just started her job as human resources manager at In the Dog House, a retail
chain specializing in dog apparel and accessories. She is a good friend of yours you met in
college.

The organization has 35 stores with 250 employees in Washington, Idaho, and Oregon. As the
chain has grown, the training programs have been conducted somewhat piecemeal. Upon visiting
some of the stores in a three-week tour, JoAnn has realized that all the stores seem to have
different ways of training their in-store employees.

When she digs further, she realizes even the corporate offices, which employ seventy-five
people, have no formal training program. In the past, they have done informal and optional
brown bag lunch training to keep employees up to date. As a result, JoAnn develops a survey
using SurveyMonkey and sends it to all seventy-five corporate employees. She created a rating
system, with 1 meaning strongly disagree and 5 meaning strongly agree. Employees were not
required to answer all questions, hence the variation in the number of responses column. After
this task, JoAnn creates a slightly different survey and sends it to all store managers, asking them
to encourage their retail employees to take the survey. The results are shown here.

In the Dog House Corporate Employee Survey Results

Number of Average
Question
Responses Rating

I am paid fairly. 73 3.9

I feel my group works well as a team. 69 2.63

In the Dog House Corporate Employee Survey Results

I appreciate the amount of soft skills training offered at In

74 2.1
the Dog House.

I can see myself growing professionally here. 69 1.95

I feel I am paid fairly. 74 3.8

I have all the tools and equipment I need to do my job. 67 4.2

I feel confident if there were an emergency at the office, I

73 2.67
would know what to do and could help others.

I think my direct supervisor is an excellent manager. 55 2.41

The orientation training I received was helpful in

75 3.1
understanding the expectations of the job.

I would take training related to my job knowing there would

71 4.24
be a reward offered for doing so.
In the Dog House Retail Employee Survey Results

Number of Average
Question
Responses Rating

I am content with the benefits I am receiving. 143 1.2

I feel my store works well as a team. 190 4.1

I appreciate the amount of product training and information

182 2.34
offered at In the Dog House.

I can see myself growing professionally here. 158 1.99

I feel I am paid fairly. 182 3.2

My supervisor works with my schedule, so I work at times

172 3.67
that are convenient for me.

I feel confident if I had to evacuate the store, I would know

179 2.88
what to do and could help customers.
 In the Dog House Retail Employee Survey Results

I think my store manager is a great manager. 139 3.34

The orientation training I received was helpful in

183 4.3
understanding the expectations of the job.

I am interested in developing my career at In the Dog

174 1.69
House.

Based on the information JoAnn received from her survey, she decided some changes need to be
made. JoAnn asks you to meet for coffee and take a look at the results. After you review them,
JoAnn asks you the following questions. How would you respond to each?

1. “Obviously, I need to start working on some training programs. Which topics do you
think I should start with?”
2. “How do I go about developing a training program that will be really useful and make
people excited? What are the steps I need to take?”
3. “How should I communicate the training program to the corporate and retail
employees? Should the new training I develop be communicated in the same way?”
4. “Do you think that we should look at changing pay and benefits? Why or why not?”
5. “Can you please help me draft a training program framework for what we have
discussed? Do you think I should design one for both the corporate offices and one for
the retail stores?” (Hint: Look at Figure 8.8 for guidelines.)

REFERENCES
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2000maydecisions.php?id=568

https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2017octoberdecisions.php?id=845

https://open.lib.umn.edu/humanresourcemanagement/chapter/5-6-cases-and-problems/

http://textbooks.whatcom.edu/bus230/chapter/7-4-cases-and-problems/

https://open.lib.umn.edu/humanresourcemanagement/chapter/8-5-cases-and-problems/