Labor Refresher 2022

( 1stSem)

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 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 (9th) 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 13th 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 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

1
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.

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

2
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. --PFFALLARJRSept2021--