SanMiguelCorporation.A.E.Azogue.M.E.Linga.L.D.Marfil.M.A.Mendoza.E.R.

Ronario

Lecture 04

Meal Period Case

Sime Darby Pilipinas V. NLRC

Sime Darby is an automotive tire manufacturer tapos nag issue sya ng memo sa mga factory workers
nya, kasi before yung set up nila is 30 minutes lang yung lunch break pero on call, it means bayad. Don
sa new memo nag bigay si Sime Darby ng 1 hour lunch break na hindi on call. Nag reklamo yung union
sabi nila unfair labor practice daw. ( pero for today you just have to know unfair labor practices are
these which are committed by the company or the employees na against s the right to self-organization
na gumawa ng sariling group and collective bargaining.)

Sabi nila may unfair labor practice daw nung tinaggal yung 30 mins na paid lunch break, pinalitan ng 1
hour na hindi bayad. Pero what happened here was sabi ng Supreme Court discretion ng company yung
mag ayos ng work schedule so if the company removes the 30 mins paid lunch break at binigyan nya ng
1 hour na unpaid lunch break this is still within the discretion of the company so hindi sya considered as
unfair labor practice. Ang nag aayos ng schedule ay si employer and since yung 1 hour lunch break na
nakalagay sa btas na pwedeng ibigay ng walang bayad, hindi kailangan bayaran yung 1 hour lunch break
kasi they can do anything they want during that 1 hour lunch break that’s it. Walang prejudice to the
right to self-organization, its not considered an act of unfair labor practice.

Overtime Pay Cases

Robina Farms Cebu V. Vila

Si Vila was a sales clerk of RFC, tapos pinakuha sya ng special early retirement, tapos isnuspend sya at
pag balik nya after nyang ma suspend na approved yung special early retirement nya pero later on na dis
approved naman daw pala instead pinag resign na lang sya. So Vila filed a case for illegal dismissal, yung
case for illegall dismissal nya humingi sya ng overtime pay.

For overtime to be paid there must be proof that it was actually performed ang ginawa ng NLRC dito,
nag base lang sila sa daily time record ni Vila and lumabas na more than 8 hours sya don sa work place
sabi ni NLRC, nag overtime sya pero sabi ng Supreme Court di ka pwedenmg mag rely sa daily time
record (DTR) alone. There must be proof of actual work performed and also there must be authorization
from the employer to conduct or to perform overtime so kung walang proof of actual work performed
and walang authorization from the employer para mag overtime hindi sila pwedeng mag render ng
overtime work.

Bisig ng Manggagawa V. Philippine Refining Co.

Meron silang collective bargaining agreement, yung union ng mga workers and yung management na
nakalagay don overtime pay is based on basic wage excluding Christmas bonus and other benefits pero
yung rate instead yung usual na 25% nakalagay 50%. May pinag uusapan dito na NAWAS rulling where it
was stated in computing the overtime pay ang kinukuha is yung regular pay lang plus ang differential like
yung night sshift differential and kung nagtrabaho sya on restday or holiday so when you will compute
your overtime pay it is based on the basic wage lang excluded ang bonuses and other benefits and it is
dependent on other differential and holiday pay and rest day pay pero ang hindi kasama ay Christmas
bonuses and other benefits, tapos yung 50% naman na increase kahit walang differential sabi ng
Supreme Court that is about contractually agreed upon the parties don sa CBA mila so since they agreed
on the 50% instead of the ordinary 25% they are bound by that agreement.

Engineering Equipment V. Minister of Labor

Aspera the employee was a mechanical engineer in Saudi, binabayaran sya ng 750 per day for 6 days
work per week of 10 working hours per day pero itong si Aspera humihingi pa sya ng additional overtime
pay don sa 2 hours ng 10 working hours. 10 hours yung nakalagay sa contract sabi nya yung 2 hours
don na sobra sa 8 hours dapat may overtime pay, pero ang sabi ng Supreme Court in this case he cannot
ask for that additional overtime pay because precisely the contract already considered that the working
hours will be 10 hours and the 750 includes the ovetime pay for those 2 additional hours na nakalagay
sa contract nila, so what Engineering Equipment says is that when the contract already reflects the
increase salary to go inside longer work hours the employee can no longer demand for additional
overtime pay kasi nakalagay na sa kontrata eh kaya nagging 750 yon is kasi 10 hours yung nakalagay sa
kontrata so in that case hindi na pwedeng humingi ng additional overtime pay si Aspera.

Service Incentive Leave

Serrano v. Severino Santos Transit

*talks about service incentive leave

SIL – 5 days of paid leave na ibinibigay sa employees who have already rendered at least 1 years of
service to the company.

Ang hindi lang applicable ang service incentive leave are those who have already the same benefits
given by the employer, like vacation leave na nakalagay sa kontrata and the employees of establishment
who are employed of less than 10 workers.

In this case, si Serrano was a bus conductor, humihingi sya ng service incentive leave don sa retirement
benefits nya. Diba ang field personnel are usually not also entitled to service incentive leave pero here
the Supreme Court consider the driver and conductors not to be field personnel when we discussed field
personnel before sabi natin they are those who are working outside the principal place of business so
itong drivers and conductors hindi naman sila sa principal place of business nagta trabaho they should
not be entitled to SIL pero they made an exception for drivers and conductors na even if they are not
working inside the principal place of business they are not considered as field personnel and they are
entitled to SIL kasi the nature of their work requires them to be present in a different place designated
by the employer so hindi pwedeng sabihin ni employer na since wala ka sa opisina ay hindi kana entiled
sa SIL, eh yun yong trabaho nya e so wala syang magagawa in that case, the drivers and conductors like
Serrano are still entitled to SIL.

Wages

- Are the earnings of an employee however designated, capable of being express in terms of
money, wether fixed na or ika calculate palang wether payable to the employee under the
written contract or an unwritten contract including care and reasonable value of facilities.

- As long it is the compensation being paid to the employee for a work done yun yung wages na
tinatawag, as long as it is capable of being express in terms of money dapat may monetary value
sya.

- When we say it is capable of being express in terms of money hindi ibig sabihin na pwedeng
ibang bagay na yung ibigay as required in the labor code dapat the wages to be given as being
legal tender.

- When we say legal tender in Philippine Peso

- Dika pwedeng bayadan in any other kind way except in legal tender dapat pera

- Pwedeng ibawas sa wages ay facilities.

The rules on wages apply to all employees except from tenants, domestic service workers, cottage
industries and cooperatives – dinagdag lang ng PD 175.

Cottage – those are the establishment where the product are done primarily at homes, requiring manual
and craftmanship mga ginagawa sa bahay.

Cooperative – mga organization na binubuo ng isang group of persons na sila sila rin yung bumibili or
nakikipag transact don sa business na yon.

While wages are paid generally for work performed based don sa definition nya, pwede pa din
mabayadan ang wages ng isang tao kahit hindi sya nagta trabaho. ( ex. restday, holiday pay na if you
don’t go to work on a holiday you are at least entitled to 100% of your wages for that day also SIL pag
naka 1 year kana you are entitled to 5 days of paid leave.

Company practice can be basis for payment of employees even if that employee does not go to work.

Also, companies practice. Company practice na FOR EXAMPLE nagpaparty yung company wyo every
20th of december so parang it's already a tradition in the company na wlaang papasok ng 21. In that
case, as long as you establish that the practice has already been observed regularly by the company
hindi ka na kelangang pumasok ng 21 and you will still be paid. So COMPANY PRACTICE, can be a basis
for paying an employee even that employee does not go to work. What we will have to distinguish here
is that the failure to report to work must not be due to the employers fault. So if it is not due to the
employers fault, kunware yung example sa book is if you are a driver, driver ka ng bus company.
Papasok ka monday to Saturday pero nag expire yung lisensya mo.

What we will have distinguish here is that the failure to report to work. So if it is not due to the
employees fault. (ex. driver ka ng bus company papasok ka ng Monday to Saturday pero nag expire yung
lisensya mo, di mona ma renew and since dika makapag drive dika makakapag work in that case, nung
driver hindi sya makapag renew hindi babayadan yung driver unless it is the employer itself yung may
cause kung bakit di ka nakapagtrabaho hindi ka mababayadan for work na hindi mo naman ginwa.

Facilities

ito yung isa sa exemption sa wages na pwedeng ikonsider as part of your wages na mga benefits na
binibigay sa isang employee. These are articles and services that are of the benefit of the employee or
his/ her family and not for the benefit or convenient of the employer. So itong mga facilities na ito if
they are regularly furnished by the employer can be considered as a facility deductible from wages.
EXAMPLE, yung workplace mo ay sa factory na Malayo and wala kang mabibilhan ng food mo don sa 30
minutes mo na lunch break. Eh binibigyan ka ng food ng employer mo, yung food na yun or lunch can
considered as facility kase kung there were no other places to eat magbabayad ka pa din ng food eh or
magpprepare ka pa din sa bahay para dalhin mo don so gagastos ka pa din. Kaya this facilities are
deductable from wages. So instead of you paying from them the company will be paying them for your
benefit. Kaya they can be deductive from wages.

Under the labor code walang distinction ang wages and salaries. So when we say wages it also means
salaries and vice versa. There's only one exemption where wages and salaries are not considered as the
same. This difference was discussed in the case of GAA VS. CA.

Gaa v. CA

Gaa was then the building administrator. Europhil filed an action for damages against Gaa alleging that
the latter perpetrated certain acts that can be considered a trespass upon its rights namely, cutting of its
electricity and removing its name from the building directory and gate passes of its officials and
employees. Tapos kinasuhan ni EUROPIL si GAA kase nagtress pass daw siya don sa property nila and
nanalo si EUROPIL ang sabi ng Court kay GAA bigyan mo sila ng 20k na danyos. Yung nangyare
is.ginarnish or inexecute ng Court yung sweldo ni GAA sa hotel na pinapasukan niya. Sabi ni Court
kukunin ko yung sweldo mo pambayad don sa danyos na natalo mo don sa court. So sabi ni GAA,
nakalagay sa article 1708 ng civil code na wages are not subject to garnishment or execution, what the
supreme court said was that yung nakalagay sa 1708 na exemption from garnishment or execution ng
wages only pertains to wages paid to manually laborers. So, if you are not a manual laborer kase itong si
GAA is actually a managerial employee don sa hotel. Hindi siya pasok don sa exemption from
garnishment of wages kase salaries yung tinatanggap niya. So while wages and salaries are practically
interchangeable when it comes to garnishment of salaries. Saláries/can be garnish but wages is cannot
be garnish if those are wages of manual laborers.
By contrast, the term “wages” indicates considerable pay for a lower and less responsible character of
employment, while “salary” is suggestive of a larger and more important service

Mabeza v. NLRC

this talks about the requirements, paano maging deductible ang facilities from wages. Kase parang
instead na pera yung nakukuha ng employee, benefits na hindi niya pwedeng gastusin kase they are
given not in cash and even in a separate form like food or something else. Si Mabeza kase employee din
siya sa hotel pinapapirma siya ng something nong hotel niya kase nasilip yung hotel na hindi daw
sumusunod sa mga labor requirements. Pero ayaw pa notaryo ni Mabeza, ayaw niyang pasumpaan
iyung pinapapirmahan sa kanya. Sa what happened was nong pagleave siya pagbalik niya sinabihan siya
na huwag ka na bumalik. So what she did was nagfile siya ng complaint for illegal dismissal. What
happened here was si mabesa even she was illegally dismissed kinampihan ng Labor arbiter and NLRC
yung hotel kase apparently may finile na complaint yung hotel against Mabesa for theft kase may kinuha
daw siyang gamit don sa hotel. We will not talk. about the illegal dismissal aspect of this case, we will
talk about the damages which she was supposed to receive. Kase aside from illegally dismissed hindi din
binabayaran ng tama si Mabesa. Ang depensa nong hotel dito, meron kase siyang facilities so itong
facilities na to yung alternative kaya mababa yung wages na tinatanggap niya. Sabi ng supreme court for
facilities to become deductible this requirements must be present :

1. It must be customarily furnish – it means practice na ng company ng nagbibigay ng mga

facilities na ganon.
2. the facilities must be voluntarily accepted by the employee in writing.
3. there must be fair and reasonable value of the deductions of the facilities.
Kase ang nangyare dito si Mabeza dahil employee siya don siya natutulog. So sabi ng hotel yung
kuryente na ginagamit mo don sa kwarto na binigay namin sayo, yung tubig na ginagamit mo don
babawas namin sa sweldo mo. Sabi ng Supreme Court wrong yun, since yung second requirement is
clearly absent kase hindi naman pumayag yung employee na bayaran siya ng facilities. Hindi siya
binabayaran ng facilities so hindi pwedeng paltan yung wages niya ng facilities na supposedly na
binibigay nong employer. May counterpart kase si facilities yung tinatawag na "SUPPLEMENTS". The
important tule of the nondemonotion of benefits, in this ARTICLE 100 of the labor code sabi yung mga
naibigay na or mga binibigay na mga benefits sa mga empleyado ay hindi pwedeng tanggalin. If base on
contract or established practice, so kung binibigay ito regularly sa isang empleyado the employer cannot
unilaterally withdraw the benefits already given to the employee. Kase there's already rights they
become rights of the employees, so this benefits was given voluntarily without condition will be a right,
which be can be demanded by the employee.

More significantly, the food and lodging, or the electricity and water consumed by the petitioner were
not facilities but supplements. A benefit or privilege granted to an employee for the convenience of the
employer is not a facility. The criterion in making a distinction between the two not so much lies in the
kind (food, lodging) but the purpose.
Considering, therefore, that hotel workers are required to work different shifts and are expected to be
available at various odd hours, their ready availability is a necessary matter in the operations of a small
hotel, such as the private respondent’s hotel.

It is therefore evident that petitioner is entitled to the payment of the deficiency in her wages
equivalent to the full wage applicable from May 13, 1988 up to the date of her illegal dismissal.

Supplements – are extra remunerations or special privileges or benefits given to employees over and
above their ordinary earnings or wages.

Now SUPPLEMENTS, supplements yung counterpart ng facilities. Kase facilities was the benefits given to
the employee they Are deductible in wages. Si SUPPLEMENTS naman ay hindi part ng wages so hindi siya
deductible. They are also a benefits granted to employees about their wages but hindi sila deductible
like facilities. To determine whether something is a facility or a benefit you will look at the purpose kung
bakit siya binibigay. If it is given as a benefit to the worker it is considered as facility. If it is given for the
convenience of the employer it is a SUPPLEMENT. So dapat for the benefit of the worker siya binibigay,
benefit of the employee.

Now yung non diminution, principle of non-diminution applies to supplements kasi once benefits are
given under the non-diminution principle dina sya pwedeng bawiin. Supplements are benefits once the
supplements are given over and above of the wages dina sya pwedeng bawiin pero first the
supplements must be shown to have comply with this requirements:

1. the benefits became company practice over a long period of time.

2. This consistent and deliberately given by the employer
3. If it is not due to any error in apply without full or difficult provision of law.

1. Una dapat maging company practice na sya for a long period of time ( ex. Company Christmas party
on December 20 kunwari 10 years na nila ginagawa yon na walang pumapasok ng December 21 because
of the party if also that is consistent and deliberate na ginagawa nung employer then that 1 day leave
will be considered as benefit as supplement in favor of the employees.

2.Consistent and deliberate ibig sabihin alam nung employer na binibigay nya yon and hindi required na
ibigay sa kanya under the law pero binibigay nya pa rin so generous pa din si employer. Given the
generousity of the employer and hindi sya napipilitan kasi required ng batas

Asis v. Minister of Labor

Sabi don while supplement which have become regularly given can no longer be withdrawn, pwede daw
syang ma withdraw if it is that place by something of equal or greater value yung nangyari dito may gas
allowance yata yung mga employees tapos instead of giving them gas allowance what they ask to the
employee to do e sila yung magbayad ng gas ibigay nalang nila yung resibo tapos ire reimburse nila so
hindi Nawala yung benefits ng gas allowance dito but instead it was replace something of equal value
yung reimbursement nung gas payments .

Another thing in the withdrawal of the supplements. Supplements can be withdrawn if the purpose their
grant no longer exist for example employee ka yung principal place of business is sa Metro Manila na
assign ka maging officer sa Cebu Office so binigyan ka ng plane ticket allowance pero nung natapos yung
trabaho mo with the cebu office and fulltime kana ulit sa Manila hindi mo pwedeng hingin ulit yung
plane ticket allowance mo kasi the only reason why it is given to you was due to your job as officer for
the Cebu office kung hindi kana ganon hindi na kailangan ibigay yung benefit because it was clearly given
only for specific purpose ayon one of the requirements kanina is consistent and deliberate and it is not
due to error in apply without full or difficult provison of law.

Samahang Manggagawa sa Top Form Manufacturing -United Workers of the Philippines v. NLRC

May lumabas na batas si R.A. No. 6727 na nagbibigay ng wage increase. Don RA 6727 yung wage
increase nya is one time pay, so isang beses lang na increase yung wages nila pero itong mga employees
they want it to happened it again so the fact that their wages increase once will not make that increases
benefits which will be demandable by the employees.

Don ulit sa third requirement.

Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. v. NLRC

Kung hindi lang naintindihan nung company kung pano I apply yung batas and nagbigay sya ng benefits
sa employees nya tapos nung nalaman nyang mali pala yung ginagawa nya binawi nya, yung mga
benefits na yon na binawi cannot be demandable by the employee kasi they were given due to a mistake
of the interpretation, the law require in that benefit this is also part it relates to the principle of solutio
indebiti na kung binigay yung benefit na yon eh hindi ka naman entitled don dapat mong ibalik.

Supplement Case

Arco Metal Products v. SAMARCO (GR 170734)

In this case it talks about ilang taon ba dapat bago maging establish company practice ang pagbibigay ng
benefit. Dito kasi may talong empleyado si Arco na nagrereklamo kasi less than a year lang sila
nagtrabaho tapos naka pro rate yung 13 th month pay nila as we will see later on pwede naman talaga I
pro rate ang 13th month pay for example you only work for 10 months in a year you’ll only get 5 th 6th or
10th 12th of your 13th month pay so sabi nung tatlong employees bat yung samin pro rated eh yung iba
hindi, yung iba na yon are the 7 other employees out of 170 employees na hindi na pro rate yung mga
13th month benefit nila so itong 7 employees nato were given 13 th month pay na hindi pro-rated for
seven years so sabi ng Supreme Court in this case since clearly binigay sya don sa seven employees
previously for seven years before it shows that its already a company practice not to pro-rate, yung
binigay sa mga 7 employees nato are not pro-rated 13 th month pay so kahit 7 months lang sila pumasok
or 8 months lang sila pumasok they were given the entire 1 month 13 th month pay . The supreme court
said here nag site sya ng ibang kaso, na meron nga yung iba 3 years or 2 years lang kinonsider lang as
company practice so the bottom line is walang minimum period for something to be considered as
company practice probably even if it is short as a year kung consistent talaga ginagawa ng employer can
already considered as company practice. Additionally in this case of Arco marami naman daw pwedeng
ilabas na evidence si Arco na proof na mistake lang yung pagbibigay don sa 7 employees ng non pro-
rated na 13th month pay nila pero wala silang nilabas so it appears that the non-pro rating is already ay
company practice since ginagawa na nila to for the past 7 years before nagreklamo tong mga tatlong
employees nato.
Petitioner cannot shirk away from its responsibility by merely claiming that it was a mistake or an error,   supported
only by an affidavit of its manufacturing group head.

In cases involving money claims of employees, the employer has the burden of proving that  the  employees  did 
receive  the  wages   and  benefits  and  that  the  same  were paid in accordance with law.

Petition denied

Petitioner is a company engaged in the manufacture of metal products, whereas respondent is the labor union of
petitioner's rank and file employees. Sometime in December 2003, petitioner paid the 13th month pay, bonus, and
leave encashment of three union... members in amounts proportional to the service they actually rendered in a year,
which is less than a full twelve (12) months.

Respondent protested the prorated scheme, claiming that on several occasions petitioner did not prorate the payment
of the same benefits to seven (7) employees who had not served for the full 12 months.

violates the rule against diminution of benefits under Article 100 of the Labor Code. Thus, they filed a complaint
before the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB). The parties submitted the case for voluntary...
arbitration.

The voluntary arbitrator, Apron M. Mangabat, ruled in favor of petitioner and found that the giving of the contested
benefits in full, irrespective of the actual service rendered within one year has not ripened into a practice.

respondent filed a Petition for Review[6] under Rule 43 before the Court of Appeals, imputing serious error to
Mangabat's conclusion.

the instant petition is hereby GRANTED

Issues:

Petitioner submits that the Court of Appeals erred when it ruled that the grant of 13th month pay, bonus, and leave
encashment in full regardless of actual service rendered constitutes voluntary employer practice and, consequently,
the prorated payment of... the said benefits does not constitute diminution of benefits under Article 100 of the Labor
Code. (Prohibition against elimination or diminution of benefits. Nothing in this Book shall be construed to
eliminate or in any way diminish supplements, or other employee benefits being enjoyed at the time of promulgation
of this Code.)

Ruling:

Any benefit and supplement being enjoyed by employees cannot be reduced, diminished, discontinued or eliminated
by the employer.[14] The principle of non-diminution of benefits is founded on the Constitutional mandate to
"protect the rights of workers and... promote their welfare,"[15] and "to afford labor full protection."[16]... petitioner
had adopted a policy of freely, voluntarily and consistently granting full benefits to its employees regardless of the
length of service rendered. True, there were only a total of seven employees who benefited from... such a practice,
but it was an established practice nonetheless.

the petition is DENIED.

National Sugar Refineries Corporation v. NLRC (GR 101761)

Talks about also the length of the time period for the practice to be for something to be considered as
company practice.

Kasi what happened here was si National Sugar Refineries Corporation nag establish sya ng program
called the Job Evaluation Program or the JE Program. So itong JE Program na ito nag re-organize sila ng
buong company nila so yung ibang rank and file employees before naging supervisory, we talked about
before na rank and file employees are entitled to overtime, restday, holiday pay unlike managerial
employees and supervisor employees na hindi so itong mga naging supervisory employees nagreklamo
sila kasi dati silang rank and file may ot sila holiday pay nung naging supervisory sila Nawala na sabi ng
NLRC they ____ into practice yung pagbibigay ng mga ot pay to supervisory employees so dapat ibigay
daw but it was reversed kasi sabi ng supreme court bago yung position e, the company re organized the
entire ___ of workers since may bago ng posisyon hindi mo masasabi that this benefits were withdrawn
from the supervisory employees since they were actually promoted from being rank and file na may
holiday pay and ot to supervisory employee na kahit wala silang ot at holiday pay and rest day mas
mataas naman yung sweldo nila the benefits here were given according to function and not due to
employes generosity, so since you are rank and file meron kang gantong benefits and ngayong
supervisory kana wala ka ng ganitong benefits so it was given based on junction and not based on any
kind of company practice so hindi sya naging supplement na subject to non-diminution. Under the facts
obtaining in this case, the union members should be considered as officers and members of the
managerial staff and are, therefore, exempt from the coverage of Article 82 hence they are not entitled
to overtime, rest day and holiday.

Bonuses

- are amount granted by the employer out of his generosity. Generally, ang bonuses, since
bonuses lang sila they are not demandable obligations kase binibigay lang sila ng employer
which are not considered as covered by non-diminution principle pero pwede siyang maging
demandable if it is given without any condition to it's grant or even though may condition, the
condition has been materialize. FOR EXAMPLE, may kontrata kayo, nakalagay don perfect
attendance bonus na kung wala kang absent sa 1 month may 1k ka. So in that case, the
condition of perfect attendance has materialized so you are in titled to thw bonus pero kung
 may absent kang isa hindi na materialize yung condition, so hindi ka intitled sa bonus. If it is
given unconditionally, it can considered as part of an employee wages.

13TH MONTH PAY is a payment to employees which is equivalent to 1/ 12 of the salaries of employee
for a year.

WHO ARE GIVEN 13TH MONTH PAY:

-all employees in the private sector, pag government wala agad 13th month pay. Meron kase siyang
alternative,mga mid year bonus nila. Bonuses in the government sector which are equivalent to 13th
month pay, kaya hindi sila kasama sa 13th month pay law. So kelangang ibigay sa lahat ng private
employees except those na mayroon ng ibinibigay na equivalent. So if you entered in the company at
may CBA don, COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT ng union and ng management. Ang sabi instead
giving you 13th month pay, bibigyan namin kayo ng Christmas bonus worth of 1 month salary. In that
case, pagkasabi ng ganon edi hindi na niya kayo bibigyan ng 13th month pay kase it is already converted
in to a Christmas bonus. -Also, employees persons in personal service of another, household workers,
drivers. bodyguards, employees paid you through commission tasks basis and not also entitled to 13th
month pay. And those paid for a fix amount for specific work regardless of time consume. This kinds of
employees are those who are not entitled to 13th month pay. BASIS OF THE 13TH MONTH PAY ARE THE:

-basic wage excluding allowances, profit sharing payments, benefits, overtime and authorize leaves. So,
yung pinaka basic wage lang ang basis ng 13th month pay. -yung nabanggit ko kanina about don sa
EXAMPLE na Christmas bonus na alternative sa 13th month pay is called the "EXCLUSIONARY RULE" or
the "NO DOUBLE BURDEN PRINCIPLE" na pag may binibigay ng isang klaseng benefit intended as an
alternative to 13th month pay hindi na niya kelangang binigay yung 13th month pay. Tapos if it is
intended as an alternative to 13th month pay pero hindi siya equivalent sa 1 month salary yung
difference na lang ang ibibigay ng employer. FOR EXAMPLE, ang nakalagay sa CBA niyo, wala na tayong
13th month pay pero the company will give you 75% of your monthly salary as Christmas bonus. So the
difference na 25% iyun na lang yung macconsider na kailangang ibigay ng employer para makompleto
yung mandatory na kailangang ibigay na 13th month pay.

SAMARCO FARMS VS MINISTER OF LABOR

In the case of SAMARCO FARMS VS MINISTER VS LABOR, non monetary benefits cannot be considered
as an alternative to 13th month pay. So while pwede kang magbigay ng althernative sa 13th month pay
should always be in cash kase yung binigay ata dito, like the other case kanina libreng pakuryente,
libreng patubig sabi nila "13th month pay yan" it is the alternative to your 13th month pay, Sabi ng
Supreme Court, you cannot give alternatives to 13th month pay which are not monetary in nature.

SAINT MICHAEL ACADEMY VS. NLRC

This case of SAINT MICHAEL ACADEMY VS. NLRC, proportional 13th month pay na binibigay. So if, FOR
EXAMPLE, you are in the company for 2 years and 8 months. Yung 8 months mo you are still intitled to
13th month pay, in a proportion of 8 out of 12 months. So makakatanggap ka pa din ng 13th month pay
mo.

PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WORKERS UNION VS NLRC

This case also of PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WORKERS UNION VS NLRC,
this also a case about drivers and conductors ksse nagcclaim yung mga drivers and conductors ng 13th
month pay from their employer which is MALACART TRANSIT Ang sabi lang ng Supreme Court dito this
case talks about employees, regularly paid employees vs commission base employees. The Supreme
Court said is simply as long as may nareceived na guarantee wage in addition to commissions you are
entitled to 13th month pay. So if you are paid minimum wage tapos your commission is less than the
minimum wage or you are paid commission tapos your commission exceed the minimum wage. As long
as merong fix or guarantee wages na binibigay sayo in a month you will be intitled to 13th month pay.
Regardless if you are earning commissions primarily or the wages primarily as long as may wages fix
every month you will be entitled to 13th month pay. -This is in contrast to purely commission paid
employees na since they are commission paid wala silang ganon.

Ruling:

13th month pay of the bus drivers and conductors who are paid a fixed or guaranteed minimum wage in
case their commissions be less than the statutory minimum, and commissions only in case where the
same is over and above the statutory minimum, must be equivalent to... one-twelfth (1/12) of their total
earnings during the calendar year.

GRANTED.

REVERSED and SET ASIDE.  The case is remanded to the Labor Arbiter for the proper computation of
13th month pay.

PAL VS. NLRC

This next case of PAL VS. NLRC. What happened here was si PAL marami yang unions ng mga employees
nila kalaban ng PAL dito yung mga union nong mga pilots. Kase don sa CBA nila collective bargaining
agreement nila ni PAL at nong union nong pilots na bibigyan sila ng Christmas bonus ang problema don
sa CBA hindi nabanggit na itong Christmas bonus na ito ay kapalit ng 13th month pay. So itong mga
pilots, sabi nila pwera don sa Christmas bonus natin sa CBA, kelangan niyo pa kaming bigyan ng 13th
month. What happened here was, the Supreme Court sided in favored of pilots kase itong CBA na ito it
was entered into on 1988, so nong 1988 ginawa yung CBA andon yung Christmas bonus provision kahit
1986 pa lang ang binibigyan na ng 13th month ang employees. The pilots here was considered as rank
and file. The Supreme Court said na if PAL had the intent to equate the CBA provision with the grant of
13th month pay dapat sinabi niya yun don sa CBA na "itong Christmas bonus na to kapalit ng 13th
month pay" pero walang nakalagay na ganon. The other option was to delect the Christmas bonus
provision entire to the CBA. Hindi ginawa ng PAL yun, so lumalabas base on the existence of that
provision in the CBA na hindi naman sinabi na kapalit siya ng 13th month pay. What the supreme court
decided was that balak niya ibigay pareho yung Christmas bonus and 13th month pay as separate
payments to the pilots. And yung napagkasunduan ng Supreme Court dito was that the with the other
unions of PAL like yung mga ano nila. flight attendants nila meron din silang CBA don na may binibigay
na benefit na kung yung pilots Tang yung hindi binibigyan ng 13th month pay eh discrimination yun. So
dapat bigyan bigyan yung mga pilots ng bonuses nila in addition to the 13th month pay.
HOW WAGES ARE PAID

-as the form of the payment sabi natin it must be in legal tender. Legal tender dapat pera. Hindi
pwedeng, kunware empleyado ka Miguel ay babarayan ka ng redhorse, pera dapat ang ibabayad sayo.
For sime, she work from a company making paper products hindi pwedeng bayaran ka ng mga karton. It
must be in legal tender Pero the exemption is pwede by icheck pero may requirement. Para mabayaran
ka by check: -first of all dapat pumayag yung employee either pumayag siya don sa contract niya merong
CBA na nagsasabi na pwedeng magbayad si company ng check. -Second, dapat may malapit na bangko
or any other similar facility kung saan pwede mag incash yung mga employee. -Third, wala dapat benefit
na makukuha yung mga employer sa gantong klaseng transaction or sa gantong klaseng set-up. And
kung mag iincash yung mga employees during work hours dapat bigyan sila ng time within the day na
mag incash and bayad yung oras nila sa pagpunta at pagpila.

GENERAL RULE NI LEGAL TENDER -pwedeng by check subject to those requirements as to time and
frequency. -once every 2 weeks or twice a month at intervals of not more than 15 days. So, dapat within
15 days makatanggap ka ng sweldo or atleast twice a month. FOR EXAMPLE, pano kung biglang
bumagyo. February 14 ngayon, pay day bukas kaso pagdating ng 15 bumagyo ng malakas, hindi nakapag
bigay si employer ng sweldo. What happen is the payment must be made immediately after the
calamities ends. So paglagpas ng bagyo dapat agad ibigay ni employer yung bayad niya on the 15.

THERE'S ANOTHER SPECIAL RULE FOR PROJECT BASED EMPLOYEES -na kunware yung project mo ay
hindi matatapos within the period of 2 weeks. Dapat merong proportional na binibigay every 2 weeks
for atleast 16 days na bayad. Kunware, mag aassemble ng something, communications tower na
matatapos in 2 months. What they do is dapat merong progress payments na every 2 weeks not
exceeding intervals of 16 days ay may ibinibigay based on completion tas pag nakompleto na ying
project tskaa magkakaroon ng final settlements na kung may kulang na mas malaki don sa actual na
binibigay magsesettlement don sa after the end of the project. -as to place of payments dapat GENERAL
RULE yung place of business. Kung san nagttrabaho or malapit sa place of business.

EXEMPTIONS

first there are unfavorable peace in order conditions or actual or pending emergencies cause by a
calamity. FOR EXAMPLE, in your principal base business biglang yung kabilang union nagwilga at
namamato sila ng mga bato sa building niyo pwedeng sa ibang lugar magbayad si employer or if
nagkabagyo ulit hindi naman nirerequire na pumunta sa lugar na may bagyo para lang mabayaran kayo.
So, pwedeng exemption yung calamity or peace in order conditions.

Second, pwede ding sa ibang lugar as long as bayaran ni employer yung pamasahe mo and pabalik.

Third, another analogous circumstances. Like don sa payment by check the time spend by the
employees collecting their wages will be considered as compensable hours. So, 3 ka umalis papunta don
sa place na pagbabayaran ka. Nakabalik ka ng 5, yung 3 - 5m na yung will be considered as compensable
work hours. -Ang bawal is bayaran ka ng sweido mo sa bar, bawal kang bayaran sa night club, bawla
kang bayaran sa inuman place, sa massage clinic, sa casino, sa tugstogs. Bawal kang bayaran sa mga
place na ganon. In gambling places unless you are an employee of that establishment. The reason is,
obviously para dika matempt na pagbigay ng sweldo mo gastusin mo lahat yun sa places na yun.
AS TO WHOM PAYMENT WAS MADE -it talks about as to form dapat legal tender generally -second, as
to time or frequency. Dapat ever 2 weeks not exceeding 16 days na difference. -as to place, dapat sa
place of work or dapat malapit sa place of work -fourth, as to home payment is made, kung kanino ba
ibinibigay yung sweldo. GENERAL RULE, dapat binibigay sa employee himself of herself.

2 EXEMPTIONS

First, is pag may calamity ulit or circumstance na hindi pwedw Eng ibigay don sa employee directly na in
which case pwedeng ibigay to a representative who is authorized in writing. So pag, binabantaan kayo
ng nanay or tatay niyo na dederetso siya sa place of work niyo at sila ang kukuha ng sweldo niyo as long
as long as hindi niyo sila bigyan ng written authority, the employer cannot be compelled to give it to
anyone else. So thats the first exemption in case of force mature or any other circumstance na hindi
kayang ibigay directly sa employee himself or herself. –

Second, pag namatay na yung employee. Pag namatay na yung employee hindi na maiibigay sa kanya
directly. Instead it can be made to the heirs of the employee. Hindi na kailangang dumaan ss korte para
lang matanggap yung sweldo as long as gumawa ng affidavit yung mga heirs na to na tatanggap ng
sweldo na sila lang talaga yung heirs nong employee and wala na siyang ibang heirs. So, ayun pag
nagbayad si employer based on that representation, based on the affidavit wala na siyang liability for
that particular sweldo na binigay niya don sa heirs.

Lecture 05

Contracting out of Labor – it is when the principal or the indirect employer agrees to give to a
contractor a performance of a specific work within a pre-determine period regardless of the place where
the work is to be done.

Basically meron isang indirect employer called the principal who engages the services of a contractor
tapos yung contractor may employees na gagawa ng trabaho para don sa principal.

So may tatlong parties na involved dito the principal or the indirect employer, the contractor or the
direct employer and the contractor’s employees.

Ang pagko contract out of labor is a management prerogative so it would depend on sound discretion or
judgement of the management of the principal or indirect employer kung magko contract sya out of
labor just a side note under the rules on labor relations particularly Article 259 paragraph C of the Labor
Code pag nag contract out ka ng functions na ginagawa ng members ng isang union within your
organization unfair labor practice yon if it will interfere with the right to self-organization. So while the
management has the right to contract out labor this must be done without infringing on the employees
or a union members right to self-organization.

Now what are the rules on contracting out of labor?

The General Rule is:

If the contractor or the direct employer fails to pay the wages of its employees, the principal or the
indirect employer will become solidary liable with the contractor para don sa wages which should due to
the employees para don sa work na ginawa nila as if it worth, they worthy ____ principal’s employees.
Illustration:

May security agency ako tapos I transacted with BSU Nasugbu na akong yung magpo provide ng mga
security guards nila don so in that case BSU is the principal or the indirect employer, ako yung contractor
or the direct employer and yung mga security guards ko yung mga employees. In case of that kind of
scenario where there is contracting out of labor kung hindi ako makapag bayad ng sweldo ng mga
security guards ko BSU Nasugbu will be solidary liable with me for the payment of their wages.

Now to regulate the contracting out of labor ang DOLE secretary binigyan sya ng authority na mag
restrict or mag prohibit ng contracting out of labor so sa restriction na ito sa prohibitions na ito pwede
nya I distinguish kung ano ba yung mga pwedeng klase ng labor contracting na pwedeng gawin or job
contracting na pwedeng gawin and yung mga difference ng dalawang klase na yon.

These are the two main kinds of contracting out of labor pala:

1. The labor only contracting - arrangement where the contractor or subcontractor merely
recruits, supplies or places workers to perform a job or work for a principal
2. Job contracting - an arrangement whereby a principal outsources a job, work, or service to the
contractor who performs these through its deployed personnel, otherwise known as the
contractor's workers.

Now in this circumstance the principal or the indirect employer which is BSU in this case pwede nya
akong I require na mag post ng bond which is equal to the cost nung wages ng mga workers just in case
hindi ko mabayaran yung mga sweldo nila kasi nga diba in contracting out of labor what happens is the
employer or the contractor will be solidary liable with principal for the payment of the wages of the
workers. So si principal para maprotektahan sya, kasi si contractor naman dapat talaga yung kailangan
magbayad ng sweldo kasi empleyado nya yon e at protection of the principal, before the principal will
agree to engaging the contractor services pwede mag require si principal ng bond, yung bond na ito its
like a promise to pay na kung hindi makabayad yung contractor ng sweldo ng mga employees nya yung
bond yung sasagot para hindi maging liable si principal which is BSU in this case.

So incase of violation on the rules of contracting out of labor the principal shall be held responsible with
contractor for violation of as to payment of wages.

Yung responsibility nato will be considered to determine kung magkano yung extend nung liabilities nila
to each other merong case mamaya which will show us kung ano ba talaga yung extent ng liability ng
isang principal with respect don sa mga kailangan nyang bayaran sa mga employees ni contractor.

So yun nga sabi kanina violation of the labor code in case of contracting out of labor merong solidary
liability between the principal and the contractor.

Two kinds of contracting out of labor:

1. Labor only contracting – pag may ganito ang lumabalabas sa ganito si principal will be liable for
all the benefits which should be due to the contractor’s employees and in that case the principal
will also be solidary liable for the acts of the employees like don sa case ni Filamer yung may
scholar where the scholar was considerd as an employee so the employer or the school was
 made liable for the acts of employee. In case of labor only contracting the principal will become
liable ___ for the acts of employee kahit hindi naman nya employee talaga yon. (walang
distinction and the principal will be directly liable as if it worthy employer of the wokers.)
2. Job contracting – eto yung valid na may distinction between the principal and the contractor.
Para magkaroon ng isang valid na job contracting first kelangan mag require ng mga contractor
na mag register with the DOLE na independent contractors talaga sila don sa registration nila
lalabas na kaya nila mag perform nung work or nung service na binibigay nila based on its own
capital and investments and without control ng principal over the performance of the
contractor’s employees that’s what makes principal different from the contractors the
relationship with the principal with the contractor is a contractual relationship only there is no
employment relationship between the principal and the contractor. The employment
relationship exists between the contractor and its employees so if the contracting out of labor is
valid and it is called job contracting the principal will not be liable as an employer to the
contractor’s employees. Ang requirement for there to be a valid job contracting dapat yung
contractor mas substantial capital or investment in tools, equipment machineries and there
must be service agreement which ensures compliance with all the rights and benefits given to
employees under the Labor Code.

Neri V. NLRC

- This talks about the requirement of substantial capital or investment.

- Before we go on to Neri merong department order na inissue si DOLE nung 2011 na nagsasabi
na para maging maconsider na may substantial capital or investment ang isang independent
contractor dapat yung net worth nya or yung capital nya is at least ₱3 million, so for you to be
considered as an independent contractor, a job contractor kailangan yung capital mo or yung
net worth ng business mo is at least ₱3 million.
- In the case of Neri may contractor, the name of contractor is Building Care Corporation. Itong si
BCC ay nagpo provide ng maraming services like technical services, security services,
housekeeping services.

- Neri and Cabelin are employees of BCC. Si Neri was hired as radio operator and Cabelin naman
as janitor they were both assigned to work in Far East Bank don sa Cagayan De Oro branch ng
Far East Bank so ayon matagal silang na assigned don, matagal silang ini assign ni BCC sa FEB.

- So, after six years I think pareho silang nag file ng complaint against FEB for them to be
considered as regular employees, kasi sobrang tagal na nila don magkaiba yung bayad ni BCC sa
kanila compared sa bayad ni FEB sa iba nyang employees na gusto nila mangyari since matagal
na nga sila don at least ipantay don sa ibang employees ni FEB na si FEB ang nag e employ

- Kasi in this case Cabelin and si Neri were employees of BCC. Sabi ni Neri at Cabelin dito na dapat,
ang pinakita lang daw ni BCC ay meron syang sufficient capital pero wala daw pinakita na
substantial investment so, sabi ni Cabelin and ni Neri dapat as required by the labor code meron
kang substantial capital saka substantial investment para maconsider ka as an independent
contractor.
 - Sabi ng Supreme Court dito hindi kailangan na you have substantial capital as well as investment
in tools, equipment machineries kasi ang nakalagay sa batas ay ‘or’ kahit isa lang you are only
required to have substantial capital for investment in tools, equipment and machineries.

- In this case this was decided in 1993 pa yata so dipa lumalabas yung department order 18A in
this case BCC was considered as a job contractor kasi daw substantial capital na daw yung ₱1
Million at that time and kahit wala syang investment in tool, equipment and machineries since
alternative requirement ito yung capital and investment as long as meron syang substantial
capital hindi na required na meron din syang investment of the same amount kasi its an
alternative requirement.

- Pero now the controlling amount is the one in department order 18-a saying na for job
contractor to be considered as having sufficient capital or investment it must have at least ₱3
Million net worth or capital.

 Babas v. Lorenzo Shipping

- Yung requirement naman ng registration yung pinag usapan dito.

- In this case si Lorenzo Shipping or si LSC Lorenzo Shipping Corporation meron syang equipment
maintenance and repair agreement with Best Manpower Services Inc. or BMSI tapos in their
agreement si BMSI magre render ng maintenance and repair services to LSC don sa agreement
nila nakalagay na si LSC will list its equipment to BMSI so may list of equipment to BMSI.
- Si BMSI hinire nya si Babas the petitioner in this case along with 8 other persons tapos nag file
sila complaint for regularization against LSC and BMSI after a few years of service kasi
matagal na silang nagta trabaho for LSC through BMSI.
- One of the main contentions of LSC here na hindi sya liable as an employer is that si BMSI daw
ay merong certificate of registration from the DOLE na nagsasabi na job contractor sya sabi ng
supreme court dito yung certificate of registration is not sufficient proof na independent
contractor talaga ang isang contractor it only prevent the presumption of labor only contracting
from arising when we say only prevent the presumption of labor from arising it means if you
have certification of registration with the DOLE you cannot be presumed to be engaged in labor
only contracting so you have presumed to be a valid job contractor yung presumption na yon
can still be rebated by evidence like what happened here.
- As found by NLRC in Court of Appeals si BMSI walang sariling gamit kasi ni list nya nga lang for
LSC wala syang sariling opisina, wala syang sufficient capital or investment tapos yung business
nya is not independent kaya lumalabas yung client lang ni BMSI isa lang si LSC lang tapos yung
ginagawa ng mga function nina Babas and yung mga kasama nya are similar to the functions
being performed by LSC actual employees.
- So in this case while meron syang certificate of registration which presumes that BMSI is a valid
job contractor this presumption was overthrown by the findings ng NLRC na hindi talaga sya job
contractor kasi wala syang capital, wala syang investment nanghihram lang sya ng gamit sa LSC,
wala syang equipment so in that case what Supreme Court emphasize in that case was that
 given if you have certification from the DOLE that you are a job contractor hindi ibig sabihin non
job contractor kana talaga.
- The CA erred in considering BMSI’s Certificate of Registration as sufficient proof that it is an
independent contractor. Jurisprudence states that a Certificate of Registration issued by the
Department of Labor and Employment is not conclusive evidence of such status. The fact of
registration simply prevents the legal presumption of being a mere labor-only contractor from
arising.
-
- *LSC is ordered to reinstate the petitioners to their former positions. Petitioners are declared
as regular employees of LSC.
- So what happened here was Babas and the rest were considered as employees of LSC.
- Nabanggit na natin kanina yung relationships na there are two relationship here, two separate
relationships the first one is:
1. Between the contractor and the employees an employment relationship
2. Between the principal and the contractor which a contractual relationship.
- There’s an employment relationship between the contractor and the employees if there is valid
job contracting, if there’s no valid job contracting it becomes labor only contracting and the
principal will be directly liable to the employees of the contractor as if the principal were the
employer.
- As compared to when there is valid job contracting na the principal will only be solidary liable
with the contractor with any unpaid wages.

- There are only two kinds of labor only contracting:

1. Is when the contractor does not have substantial capital or investment and the
employees which the contractor recruited are performing activities directly related to
the principal’s main business.
2. Is when the contractor does not exercise the right of control over the performance of
the work of its employees.
- So first no sufficient capital or investment and the contractor’s employee are performing
functions directly related to the principal’s main business.
- The second is when the contractor does not exercise control over the performance of the work
of its employees.
- So don sa first yung no substantial capital or investment, if there is no substantial capital or
investment lumalabas si contractor tiga hanap lang sya ng tao kasi if it has no investment or
capital it has nothing to pay the persons na kinuha nya so since wala naman syang kakayanan
na magpa sweldo ng ganong karaming tao lumalabas the contractor is in fact just an agent of
the principal na pinahanap nya lang ng tao na pwedeng gamitin for his particular function sa first
one.
- The second one is when the contractor does not have exercise control over the performance of
the work of the employees, here since the employment relationship should exist between the
employees and the contractor dapat the control is between them. If si principal ang nag e
exercise ng control over the contractor’s employee it would appear na si principal ang employer
 nya kasi when we talk about four fold test before in control test ang nakalagay don is that one of
the grounds or the basis for the test to determine if an employment relationship exist is the
control test na nagsasabi kung meron kang control over the manner of performance and the
result to be achieve muka kang employer so if the contractor does not have control over its own
employees and that control is vested instead with the principal as if the principal is the employer
agent lang ulit si contractor in this case. Those two cases the principal will be diretcly liable as if
it were the employer.

Traders Royal Bank v. NLRC

- This talks about the effects ___ documents in proving the existence of job contracting or
labor only contracting.
- Kasi ang nangyari dito merong janitor si Española he appears to be an employee of Agro -
Commercial Security Services tapos si Agro ini assign sya sa Iloilo branch ni Traders Royal
Bank so since ini assign ni Agro si Española sa TRB it would appear that there is service
agreement between Agro and TRB for the supply of janitors so it appears that merong valid
job contracting.
- Now what happened was natapos yung service agreement ni Agro and ni TRB tapos na
terminate ni Agro si Española and hindi na sya binigyan ng additional assignments after that.
- What happened here was Española was considered as an employee of TRB na kino contest
ni TRB kasi sabi nya meron silang service agreement with Agro and merong mga pay slip na
nilabas si TRB na nakalagay na nagbabayd ng sweldo ni Española ay si Agro.
- SAbi ng Supreme Court dito the existence of employment relationship is not established by
the service agreement or the pay slips what establishes an employment relationship is the
four fold test here kasi what happened was aside from the janitorial services ginagamit pa si
Española for other functions like pinagda drive sya, ginagawa syang messenger na ginagawa
nyo so it would appear that TRB has direct control over the functions being performed by
Española, so pasok sya don sa second kind of labor only contracting where the contractor
does not have exercise the right to control over the employee but instead it is the principal
who exercise such control.
- Kahit na may payslip, kahit na may service agreement if the right of control or the exercise
of control is being exercise not by the contractor but the principal that is labor only
contracting and the principal will be liable as if it were the employer.
- Since Española was illegally dismissed, he is entitled to reinstatement with full back
wages, but with the modification that petitioner should pay private respondent full back
wages from 16 March 1994 up to his actual reinstatement. Costs against petitioner.

 Meralco Industrial Engineering Services v. NLRC

- This talks about kung ano ba talaga ang pasok don sa solidary liability ni principal and the
contractor.
- Diba we were saying kanina that in a valid job contracting kung hindi makapagbayad si
contractor sa mga employees nya magiging liable si principal para don.
 - This case of Meralco Industrial Engineering Services v. NLRC specifies kung ano lang yung mga
liabilities ni principal in case of valid job contracting.
- Here si Meralco Industrial Engineering Services Corporation ay merong service agreement with
Landrito para mag supply ng janitorial services don kay Meralco.
- Here merong complaint for monetary claims against Landrito filed by its employees, so what
happened was nung nagka problema ng ganito, what Meralco did was tinerminate nya yung services
agreement nya with Landrito so sinama nung employees si Meralco don sa kaso and dinagdagan nila
ng illegal dismissal.
- What happened in the end was si Meralco and Landrito were found solidary liable in the end I mean
in sa NLRC in ca levels na solidary liable daw si Meralco at Landrito for all the claims na under
payment, separation pay and overtime pay.
- So kinontest ni Landrito ito at ni Meralco what happened was sabi ng Supreme Court ang liability ni
Landrito cannot be extended to separation pay pwede lang syang maging solidary liable with
Meralco for under payment and overtime pay.
- In reaching this conclusion as Supreme Court said the principal can only be held liable for the
contractor for the payment of wages, since separation pay is a different kind of benefit from wages
the principal’s liability cannot extend to separation pay pero under payment and overtime pay are
directly related to wages sa bianabayad to for hours work ito lang yung pwedeng I imposed sa
principal.
- So there still a distinction between the liability of the principal and the liability of the contractor, the
contractor is liable for all claims of an employee against his/her employer, an employee can only
make principal liable for wages and related benefits so since there is no employment relationship
between Meralco and the employees si Meralco cannot be held liable for the separation pay kasi
hindi naman sya yung nag terminate eh because in this case it is Landrito who is the employer of the
employees here and not Meralco.
- So Meralco could not have terminated them kasi hindi nga naman empleyado yung mga yon,
empleyado yon ni Landrito. So it was Landrito who terminated them so in that case the liability of
the principal is limited only into wages and related benefits excluded ang benefits which only belong
to the actual employer which is separation pay so yung mga wages, under payment of wages,
overtime pay this kinds of monetary claim yun lang yung pweeng I impose kay Meralco so may limit
ang solidary liability only pertains to the wages which the contractor should have paid to its
employees.
- Now what happens when there’s solidary liability eh kung kasalanan naman talaga ni contractor kung
bakit hindi sya nagbayad.

Manila Electric Company v. Benamira

- What happened here was Benamira (marami sila dito e). Benamira and his companions were
previously employed by PSI Philippine Security Inc. and naka assign sila as guards sa head office
ng Meralco tapos si Meralco tsaka si PSI meron silang service agreement kaya na assign si
Benamira doon pero afterwards na terminate yung agreement between PSI and Meralco
entered into different service agreement with Armed Security & Detective Agency, Inc., (ASDAI)
also another security agency tapos after ni ASDAI si AFSISI naman yung pumalit na security
service provider ni Meralco hanggang kay ASDAI lang inabsorb sina Benamira pero kay AFSISI
hindi na sila na absorb so in this case after magpalit palit si Meralco ng security service provider
 nag file ng complaint itong mga guards against ASDAI the second one who absorb them and
Meralco kasi gusto nila maging regular what happened here was Supreme Court said that there
was proper job contracting because Benamira and his companions were not subject to the
control of Meralco ayon since there is no control it cannot be said that Meralco became their
direct employer pero since ayon nga hindi binayaran ni ASDAI yung mga sweldo nila under the
rules on job contracting even if there’s valid job contracting the principal Meralco in this case is
still liable to Benamira and his companions for their wages.
- The take away from this case is that kahit na ang Meralco ay solidary liable with ASDAI since
original liability ito ni ASDAI even if Meralco is compeled to pay being solidary liable pwede
syang mag demand ng reimbursement from ASDAI under Article of 1217 of the Civil Code kasi
ayon nga Article 1217 talks about solidary liability when one of the party when there are two or
more payors when there are two more debtors who will be paid by the creditor in that case
there are two debtors si Meralco and si ASDAI solidary liable and if Meralco pay Meralco will
have the right of reimbursement against ASDAI kasi solidary liable pwedeng humingi ng share si
Meralco kay ASDAI para don sa mga danyos na binayadan nya. 36:09

Worker Preference

- What is worker preference?

- Worker preference under 110 of the Labor Code talks about the preference of a workers pag na
bankrupt or na liquidate ang isang kumpanya, under 110 the preference of workers for
payment of their wages is higher than all other claims against the company.
- So kunwari may makasangla yung properties ng company and may mga taxes sya na di
nababayadan sa gobyerno and hindi nya nabayaran yung employees nya in that case ang pinaka
unang babayaran even before the government and even ____ creditors like the mortgagor
walang babayaran si employees that is the reason for the worker’s preference it is the basis for
worker’s preference.
- Remember worker’s preference talks about scenarios where the employer is already bankrupt
or being liquidated the related case here is Development Bank v. NLRC na nagsasabi.

Development Bank v. NLRC

- What happened here was si Ang is a secretary, executive secretary in Tropical Philippines Wood
Industries, Inc. (TPWII). Tapos si DVP was a mortgagee of TPW’s facilities so nung di nakabayad TPW
don sa utang nya kay DVP niremata ni DVP yung mga properties nya, since na remate yung
properties ni TPW nag stop na sya ng operations and since nag stop na sya ng operations they
dismiss Ang from it service so nag file ng complaint si Ang for illegal dismissal, nanalo si Ang kasi
dinismiss naman talaga sya sabi ng NLRC dapat unahing bayaran yung mga utang ni TPW kay Ang
over sa utang ni TPW kay DVP kahit na walang. Kasi nag stop lang sya ng operations dito e hindi sya
na considers as, walang declaration of bankruptcy and there were no proceedings for liquidation
which were instituted so umabot sa Supreme Court with the question na pwede bang I-enforce ni
Ang yung preference nya under Article 110 if there still no declaration of bankruptcy or judicial
liquidation proceedings sabi ng supreme court hindi pa daw applicable yung workers preference ng
empleyado dito si Ang before daw makapag enforce ng wokers preference ang isang empleyado
kelangan daw meron munang declaration of bankruptcy muna or liquidation proceedings kasi
without the liquidation proceedings or without the bankruptcy declaration walang wokers
 preference na pwedeng lumitaw so sabi ni DVP before wokers preference can be enforce there must
first be a declaration of bankruptcy or judicial liquidation.
- Merong dissent (ACCORDINGLY, I vote to DISMISS the petition and to AFFIRM the decision of public
respondent NLRC affirming the decision of the Labor Arbiter insofar as it holds petitioner DBP liable
for the monetary claims of private respondent Leonor A. Ang.) sa kaso nato one of the justices of
supreme court did not agree with the decision of the majority sabi nung nag decent hindi daw dapat
maging requirement yung declaration of bankruptcy or yung judicial liquidation proceedings bago
makapag enforce ng workers preference ang isang employee kasi sabi ni decent this is not the main
decision sabi ni main decision kelangan daw ng bankruptcy or liquidation sabi ni decent bakit
kailangan ang nakalagay sa 110 preference of workers is unconditional and walang qualifications don
na nilagay for the worker to become entitled to preference also this preference is given above all
other credits so kahit namay utang yan sa gobyerno, kahit may hindi sya nabayarang tax kahit
nakasangla yung properties nya nakalagy sa 110 uunahin ang workers so sabi ni decent si Padilla yata
to bakit kailangann hintayin yung declaration eh kahit ano naming mangyari una pa ring babayaran si
employee pero we will have to stick with the decision of majority na kailangan muna daw ng ano ng
declaration of bankruptcy or meron na dapat liquidation proceedings bago makapag claim ng
preference ang isang employee.
- In the present case, there is as yet no declaration of bankruptcy nor judicial liquidation of TPWII.
Hence, it would be premature to enforce the worker's preference.
- Another case for worker preference Rubberworld v. NLRC.

Rubberworld v. NLRC

- What happened here was Rubberworld namo mroblema na din sya nag file sya with the
securities and exchange commission or SEC ng petition for suspension of payments.
- A petition for suspension of payments is a sought by a company pag hindi na nya kaya brayan
yung mga liabilities nya as they come due in case of suspension of payments what happens is
lahat ng liabilities ng company na pending, na mga due isu suspend so wala munang babayaran
si company don sa mga utang nya and may I a-appoint si SEC na management committee o isang
receiver na tinatawag na susubukang buhayin ulit yung company so that is the purpose of
receivership and suspension of payments para the company kahit naghihingalo na sya
susubukan ni receiver or ni management company na buhayin sya ulit.
- So ayon nag file si Rubberworld ng petition for suspension of payment sabi ni SEC sige oh eto na
yung management committee mo, eto naq yung receiver mo ayusin mo yung sarili mo, so since
nag stop na nga ng operation si rubberworld yung mga employees nya including Arellano nag file
sila na complaint for illegal dismissal sabi nila hindi na nag o operate yan so we were practically
dismiss from the service so bayaran mo kami ng mga sweldo namin sabi nina Arellano.
- This was filed by Arellano before the labor arbiter under the NLRC, si arbiter sabi nya oo nga
walang kwenta yang suspension of payment nayan may wokers preference tayo dapat bayaran
muna agad yung mga employees bago gawin yang pagre-revive sa company ni rubberworld.
- So inakyat ni Rubberworld sa Supreme Court, pag akyat sa supreme court the supreme court
rulling in favor of rubberworld sabi nya kasi this suspension of payment and appointment of
receivers and management committee to revive the company is under PD 902-a yun yung
specific na batas na nagbibigay ng procedure para subukang buhayin ang company na malapit
 ng ma bankrupt, so hindi pa sya bankrupt malapit palang sabi ni Supreme Court walang
nakalagay na qualifications sa PD 902-a kung ano yung actions na masu suspend when there is a
petition for suspension which is granted by SEC kasi titingnan mo yung purpose ng suspension of
payment and receivership ang purpose nito ay rehabilitation para mabuhay ulit yung company
kung I enforce mo yung mga claims ng mga employees nya, pending the rehabilitation wala ng
mangyayari don sa company instead of the receiver focusing on the revival of the company
Rubberworld in this case yung claims ng mga employees yung aasikasuhin nya so instead of
focusing his energies on reviving the company itong mga employees ang kinakalaban nya which
is counter productive and if you allowed the employees to pursue their claim despite the
suspension of payment it would defeat the purpose of rehabilitation paano mo ma I irehabilitate
ang isnag company kung may ganyang klaseng problema na hindi napigil nung suspension order
so walang exceptions sa order of suspension while a company is undergoing rehabilitation.
- Sabi ng Supreme Court kahit na may ganyang provisions sa Labor Code dimo dapat basahin yung
provision nay an in isolation of all other laws we also have this PD 902-a na nagsasabi kung
paano ang gagawin para marehabilitate ang isang company in that case to give a company a
chance to revive itself and again take back the employees kailangan ma rehabilitate muna sya it
also re___ to the benefit of the employees e pag nabuhay sya ulit pwede na ulit syang mag
operate makapag bigay ulit sya ng sweldo.
- One thing to note here is that the suspension of payments has no time limit sabi ng Supreme
Court kahit gaano katagal kailangan ng receiver para mabuhay nya yung company ganon katagal
yung suspension of payments.
- As the suspension of the payments will continue the remaining force as long as necessary to
accomplish the purposes of the suspension order.
- So yon may limits din pala ang woker’s preference.

Attorney’s Fees

- Attorney’s fees are paid in cases na when there are cases filed for unlawful withholding of
wages.
- So kung may complaint for the payment of wages pwedeng magdagdag ng attorney’s fees yung
arbiter sa award.
- Kunwari isang employee di sya binabayaran ng tama sa sweldo nya for the past 20 years and
umabot ng 1 million yung difference na dapat ibayad sa kanya and yung binayad sa kanya na
actual so nag file sya ng complaint na compute yung award na sa 1 million in addition to the 1
million pwedeng mag award ang arbiter ng attorney’s fees not to exceed 10% of the amount
recovered so when we say not to exceed hanggang 10% lang yung pwedeng I award ng arbiter
pero pwedeng mas mababa depende on the circumstances if hindi naman ganon kalala yung
ginawa ni employer pwedeng less than 10% yung pwedeng I award ni arbiter na attorney’s fees.
- The only requirement for the payment of attorney’s fees is that the employeer acted in bad
faith, so if there is no bad faith on the part of the employer the award of attorney’s fees is not
proper and since it is called attorney’s fees, it is to be paid if the employee is represented by a
lawyer in the proceedings kung hindi lawyer yung nag represent sa employee or ni represent
 nya yung sarili nya in case he is not a lawyer or she is not lawyer and then hindi pwedeng mag
claim ng attorney’s fees yung employee.
- There’s this distinction because under article 228 of the Labor Code a non-lawyer may appear
before the NLRC or the arbiters in cases where they represent themselves or they represent
their organization or the union or they are member of that union which is part of the case.
- So representation in labor cases is not limited to lawyer as long as you are representing yourself,
representing your organization or your union or you are acting as a member of that union or
organization pero it you’re doing that dika entitled to attorney’s fees.

Prohibition on Wages

- There are several things which an employer cannot do pagdating sa pagbibigay ng wages nya sa
mga employees nya.
- General Rule the employer cannot interfere or limit the way by which an employee will dispose
of his/her wages.
- So si employer hindi nya pwedeng diktahan si employee kung paano nya gagastusin yung sweldo
nya, hindi sya pwedeng diktahan ng employer na dito ka lang pwedeng bumili ng gamit, sa kanya
ka lang pwede mag engage ng services.
- Other prohibitions are wage deductions generally an employer cannot deduct yung wages na
binibigay nya sa employee nya pero this is subject to exceptions, pwedeng mag deduct kapag
merong premium payments na may insurance na kinuha si employer para sa kanyang employee
with the employees consent and the premium payment for this insurance is agreed upon to be
taken out of the employees wages or salaries.
- If you have a boss na mabait sabi nya makakakuha ako ng insurance for you at a low price gusto
mob a? tapos sabi ni employee yes sige since this is for your benefits ibawas na tin sa sweldo mo
in that case there is valid deduction from wages.
- Second there can be valid deductions in case of payment union dues pag nag agree yung
employee through a written authority or when there is a right of the employee or the union to
check off.
- Check off ito yung pagbabayad ng union dues to the union from the employee’s wages.
- And another cases where the employer is authorize by law and what are this cases authorize by
law facilities, pag may mga utang si employee kay employer mga taxes like withholding tax,
mandatory contributions like sss, philhealth, pag-ibig na a portion of the contribution is shoulder
by the employee so pwede tong I deduct ni employer sa binibigay nyang sweldo, if there is a
cooperative and may membership syang cooperative this can be directly deducted from the
employees wages, pag umabsent ng walang authority so the time that you did not report for
work can be deducted from your wages and when there is indebtedness by an employee to a
third person which an employee authorize the employer to deduct from his wages dito sa
exception na ito may requirement na dapat the employer will not benefit from such payment, so
if the payment of the third person will benefit the employer such as when an the third person is
actually a corporation being also operated by the employer there is an indirect benefit to the
employer.
- So bawal mag deduct ng debt to a third person pag ganon, pag merong benefit wether directly
or indirectly which the employer will gain from such payment to a third person.
DEPOSIT FOR LOSS OR DAMAGE - generally bawal magkaltas sa suweldo for deposit for loss or damage.

EXCEPTION: - When the employers engaged in business where such practices recognized or when it is
otherwise determined by the secretary of labor as necessary don sa klase ng trabaho nung employee.

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEDUCTIONS DUE TO LOSS OR DAMAGE WILL BE VALID

1. Kailangan the employees clearly responsible for that loss or damage.

2. Even if he is clearly responsible for the loss or damage the employee must be given the
opportunity to be heard on that deduction para macontext nya.
3. The amount of the deduction must not exceed 20% of the employees weekly wages. - so if
malaki yung nasira nya, hindi naman pwedeng for a whole month wala syang tatanggapin na
suweldo , dapat his weekly wages must will be given to him and deduction cannot exceed 20%
those weekly wages. Babawasan sya ng 20% hanggang matapos yung payment para don sa loss
or damage kung nskadeposit yung payments na yun, kailangang ibalik sa employee yung sobra
pag nagresign na sya or tinanggal sa trabaho kasi sobra na nga. The employee still invited to this
portion of his wages kasi if no longer use you pay for the loss or damage.
GENERAL RULE:
-Interference which deduction are not also allowed subject to exceptions deposit for loss or
damage. Also not allowed subject to exceptions and withholding of wages without the workers
consent whether by force or by other means.

- so Hindi dapat mabawasan yung what the employee must received under his contract.

- bawal din madeduct ng wages as consideration for employment or retention of employment.

Ibigsabihin Hindi pwedeng sabihin ni employer na hindi kita tatanggalin sa trabaho basta yung
25% ng suweldo mo ay hindi ko ibibigay sayo, not allowed.

REFUSAL OR REDUCTION OF PAYMENT UPON THE FILING OF A COMPLAIN FOR PAYMENT OF

WAGES OR BY TESTIFYING IN A COMPLAIN FOR THE PAYMENT OF WAGES.
-So if may complaint Yung si employee kasi hindi sya nababayaran ng tama, Hindi pwedeng
gamitin ni employer Yung reduction or deduction of wages para gumanti don sa pagfile nung
kaso na iyon or sa pagtetestify sa isang kaso.
- this is also considered as an act of unfair labor practice under Article 259 of the labor code,
under labor relation. So, bawal bawasan ang suweldo, bawal pilitin ang employee kung paano
nya gagastusin yung suweldo nya, bawal magpadeposit for loss or damage, bawal mag withhold
ng wages through all those means as an enumerated under the code.

MINIMUM WAGE RATES

-Minimum Wage rate deferred across regions and across industries, so for example yung
Region 4A for non-agricultural retail services merong particular minimum wage rate for those
kind of businesses tapos meron ding pang agriculture.

-Ang nagseset ng minimum wage rate ay ang Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board
(RTWPB) or the Regional Boards, itong mga wage orders na nilalabas ng mga Regional Boards
mandatory ito kasi nga minimum wage e, so minimum na yun hindi na pwedeng bumaba don.
 -If you are paid below minimum you are entitled to the difference between minimum and the
actual wages you have received.

-Mandatory ito it cannot be waived kahit sabihin ni employee na "sige, okay lang na huwag mo
akong bayaran ng minimum." Those statements cannot be given forced kasi they are against
public policy, kaya nga may minimum yun ang pinakamababang pwedeng ibigay sa employee.

THERE ARE TWO AGENCIES WHO CONTROL THE SETTING OF THE MINIMUM WAGE RATES:

1. National Wage and Productivity Commission (NWPC) - is the national consultative and
advisory body to the President and to Congress about matters related to wages, income
and productivity, so itong NWPC ang mismong kausap ng Presidente and ng Congress kapag
ang usapan ay sweldo, as the national consultative and advisory body to both the President
and Congress. Siya rin yung gumagawa ng mga policies and guidelines tungkol sa wages,
income, productivity and improvement ng mga 'to base on enterprise or industry siya yung
nagbibigay ng guidelines sa mga Regional Boards kung paano idetermine ang magiging
minimum wage na lalabas sa mga wage orders na ilalabas naman ng Regional Boards,
nirereview niya rin yung mga wage rates na inilalabas ng regional boards para icheck kung
tugma ang mga yun doon sa mga guidelines na pinalabas niya. So in order to do this
kailangan niyang gumawa ng mga studies, ng mga research para malaman, in order to set
the proper minimum wages, so as the national body it will review the programs of the
Regional Boards para malaman if the plans of the Regional Boards are consistent with the
national plan. It has technical and administrative supervision over the regional boards. Siya
rin yung nagpapatawag ng mga tripartite conferences.
2. Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards - Ang Tripartite conferences are those
between the government, the management sector or the employer sector, the workers or
the employer sector, para sa pag-seset ng minimum wages. So, that is the NWPC. The
NWPC compose of the DOLE secretary as the chairman, the NEDA director general as ex-
official chairman and then meron siyang 2 members each from the workers sector and the
employer sector na inaappoint ng presidente as recommended by the DOLE secretary. So
itong mga worker sector at employer sector na ito, gagawa sila ng listahan ibibigay nila kay
DOLE secretary. From there, si DOLE secretary magrerecommend kay president ng
magiging members ng NWPC.

Aside from these persons, yung executive director ni NWPC is also a member of the NWPC board. Ang
members ng NWPC ay si DOLE secretary, si NEDA director general, si executive director ni NWPC and 2
representative each from the workers and employer sectors. So they are 7 members para kapag
nagbotohan laging may mananalo. The NWPC is supported by a secretary headed by the executive
director of the NWPC. Tapos meron siyang dalawang deputy directors. All of these directors are also
appointed by the president up on the recommendation by the DOLE secretary. So,that is the NWPC siya
yung nag sa set ng guidelines na susundin ng mga regional boards in determining the proper ways orders
for the respective regions for industries. Pag nag labas naman si regional board ng wage orders
nirereview din ito ni NWPC.

What about the regional tripartite wages and product boards naman? So there are regional boards in all
regions also the autonomous regions as established by law at the ARMM. So, in each region (kasi it
cannot compare or directly make it similar you wages in a particular regions against a different one).
Example: you live in a relatively poor region compared to national capital region, siyempre there are
considerations in these places na hindi pareho. So it is possible that the wages in NCR, the minimum
wages in NCR are higher than the minimum wages in region 10 because there are different
considerations for the setting of minimum wages across regions.

So, what does the regional board do? First, the regional boards develops the plans, programs and
projects relative to wages, income and productivity improvement within its respective regions. So, the
regional boards has a priority when it comes to the plans, programs, and projects within its own region.
While these plans, programs, and projects are implemented by the DOLE regional office, original boards
is still has technical supervision toward this implementation. Ang pinaka importanteng function ng
regional board ay mag fixed na ang minimum wages rates in the regions. This fixing of minimum wage
rates is done by the regional boards through the issuances of wage orders. Ang wage order ang basehan
kung magkano yung magiging minimum wage sa isang lugar and in order for regional board to do this,
kailangan niya rin mag-underdate ng mga study, survey, and research para malaman niya kung saan niya
ba ise-set yung minimum wage nung sa region niya. In order to do this, the regional board must
coordinate with other regional boards para malaman nila yung mga consideration na dapat nilang
gamitin in arriving at the wage orders which include the minimum wage rate for the regions. Si regional
board din ang nagde-determine if a particular industry or business can be exempt from the application
of the wage order. So while there is a minimum wage as indicated by the wage order, pwede ka paring
mag-apply the regional board ng exemption if you are qualified for the exemption. The other functions
which will enable the regional board to complete its objectives.

Si regional board naman as compared to the NWPC, is composed of the regional director of the DOLE as
chairman, the regional director of the NEDA, and the DTI as vice chairman and 2 members each them
from the workers and employers sectors. They are also appointed by the president upon
recommendation of the DOLE secretary based on a list of nominees which are submitted by the sectors.
So the difference in composition of the regional board is the national wages and productivity
commission. The national wage and the productivity commission, both have the DOLE secretary or the
regional director as the chairman.

The difference is, the DTI secretary is not the member of NWPC. Ang kapalit niya kasi sa regional board
it's the video director of the NEDA and regional director of the DTI tapos 2 members each from the
workers and employers sectors.
Lecture 06
Nasipit Lumber Company V NWPC
Remember the NWPC is National Wages and Productivity Commission na may hawak sa mga
regional boards in the case of Nasipit Lumber Company what happened was yung regional
board ng Region 10 nag issue ng wage order increasing the minimum wages ngayon itong si
Philippine Wallboard isang company sa Region 10 humingi sya ng exemption don sa wage order
sabi nya distressed industry daw sila and hindi ganon kalaki yung mg akita nila in fact meron
silang mga losses, meron kasing guidelines si NWPC na pwede kang ma exempt if there is at
least 25% capital impairment ibig sabihin if 25% of your capital is going to losses pwede kang
ma exempt sa bagong wage order, so yun yong ginagamit ni Philippine Wallboard in this case ni
grant naman ni Regional Board yung exemption pero kinontest ito nung mga employees ni
Philippine Wallboard , yung basis kasi ni Regional Board in the exemption is that merong mga
capital impairment talaga yung mga businesses pero it’s only around 8%, below the 25%
threshold pero sabi ni Regional Board pwede na yon for exemption so when the case was
elevated in the Supreme Court, sabi ng Supreme Court this exemption should not be given kasi
the guidelines of the Regional Board saying na pwede na yung below 25% cannot be given
effect kasi this guidelines given by the Regional Board should comply or should be approved by
the NWPC bago sya ma grant, since hindi binigay ni NWPC yung approval nya don sa lower
capital impairment percentage threshold ibig sabihin hindi valid yung binigay ni Regional Board
na exemption so what this case tell us is that yung mga guidelines na inissue ng Regional Board
must have the approval of the NWPC or must not be contrary to the guidelines of the NWPC,
otherwise void itong mga guidelines ni Regional Board and they cannot be the source of rights
and privileges.
WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DISMISSED.

Employers Confederation V NWPC

- Talks about the authority of the Regional Boards to fix wage rate.
- Here it’s the NCR Regional Board which is involved, ang nangyari dito si NCR Regional
Board nag wage order giving an across the board wage increase even those already
being paid above minimum wage, so the businesses particularly ECOP sabi nila hindi
daw pwede yung across the board increase na yon kasi ginamit ni Regional Board sa pag
compute nung wage increase is not the floor method, ceiling method yung ginamit nya
basically the difference between in these two methods is that sa floor method nagba-
base sila sa kung ano yung pinaka minimum na pwedeng ibigay while sa ceiling method
they graduate it base on prevailing minimum wage rate so yon that’s basically the
question na umabot sa Supreme Court na kung pwede ba yung ginawa ni NCR Regional
Board in using the ceiling method as the basis for the wage order.
- Sabi ng Supreme Court pwede actually mas preferred nga daw na yung ceiling method
yung gamitin para wala masyadong wage distortion na mangyari.
- Ang requirement lang naman daw sa Article 124 ay it should be base on the guildeline
provided by the NWPC and if compliant with the guidelines and then pwedeng I set ni
Regional Board yung wage order regardless kung anong method yung gagamitin nya.
- Sabi ng Supreme Court pa dito kaya may mga full time Regional Boards dito kasi they
devote their time into researching kung ano ba yung tamang wage rates na ibibigay per
region so since this is a thinking group na may sariling discretion and maysariling basis
sila sa pag se-set ng wage orders as long as they comply with the standards laid down
by law and the standards by the NWPC this wage orders will be valid so it’s not
important what method they use as long as they comply to the guidelines under the law
and issued by the NWPC.
- WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED.  No
pronouncement as to cost.

Metrobank V NWPC
- Interregional na kasi yung problema dito sa Metrobank V NWPC.
- What happened was the Region 2, the Regional Board in this case nag issue sya ng
across the board wage increase ulit tapos nag sulat si Metrobank sa Region 2 Regional
Board tinatanong nya kung, since yung head office nila is nasa NCR kasama pa rin ba
yung mga employees nila sa Region 2 don sa increase kasi meron na silang binibigyan
din nila yung mga employees nila sa Region 2 ng above minimum wage.
- So ayon it was not a ground for exemption daw yung fact na their head office is outside
Region 2 and that they were already being given above minimum wage, the Supreme
Court cited another case here, case of ____ v Delapaz basically what the Supreme Court
said in Metrobank was that when the application of a wage order modifies existing laws
or exceeds the intended scope yung issuance na yon the wage order becomes void kasi
it becomes already outside of the scope of the authority of the Regional Board and
already holds unreasonable, so since the scope of the wage order already exceeds yung
supposed coverage nya it should not be given effect that’s basically what Metrobank
talks about.
- There are several rules provided by the NWPC and the Labor Code kung paano mag set
ng wage rates per region the first is that:
1. The wages prescribe will be the standard prevailing minimum wage in every region,
so bawat region may sariling minimum wages, so since regions has its own regional
board they may vary among regions, they may also vary among industries so if
you’re on the agricultural industry pwedeng iba yung minimum wage don kumpara
sa minimum wage for example sa manufacturing it will all depend on the regional
board’s discretion as explain in employers confederation as long as within the bound
of law and the guidelines of the NWPC, now if a Regional wage order is issued hindi
sya pwedeng palitan within the next 12 months from its effectivity unless sabi ni
NWPC na kailangan i adjust base on the Regional Boards recommendation pag
merong supervening conditions for example nag set ng wage order ng April 1 tapos
pagdating ng May 1 biglang nagka gera kasama yung pilipinas and tumaas lahat ng
presyo ng bilihin in that case since there is supervening conditions which is the war
which increases the price of goods pwedeng I revise ito ni Regional Board upon the
approval of the NWPC pero in general rule within 12 months hindi pwedeng palitan.
As an additional requirement lahat daw ng businesses kelangan nag re register sila
sa mga Regional Boards nila sa NWPC sa NSO yung mga listahan ng mga employees
nila specifying their level and kung anong klaseng employees sila itong listahan nato
is being used by the regional boards to determine kung ano yung dapat na magiging
minimum wages for particular industry or locality.
This wage rate will also affect apprentice and learners diba when we talk apprentices
and learners before sabi natin yung lowest wages na pwedeng ibigay sa apprentice
or learner is 75% of the minimum wage so lumalabas yung minimum na pwedeng
ibigay sa isang apprentice or sa isang learner will be based on the minimum wages in
the region, so apektado sila ng wage orders and if merong wage order na lumabas
automatic this will also affect automatically the apprentice and the learners, while
merong wage orders prescribing minimum wages this does not mean na ito na yung
highest na pwedeng ibigay ng isang employer, the existence of wage orders will not
prevent the employers from giving or the employees from asking for wages higher
than minimum wage it will be based on their agreement nalang don sa CBA.
Now the importance of a wage order is such that hindi sya pwedeng ma TRO or ma
enjoin, so pag may lumabas na wage rate the general rule is effective na agad sya
upon publication and hindi sya pwedeng I suspend yung effectivity nya that’s a
general rule. The authority to fix wages is primarily with congress, if may wages na
binigay si congress yun yung magiging minimum hindi pwedeng bumaba don yung
bigay ni Regional Board pero since the congress already delegated his power to the
regional board si regional boards na ang may authority to fix the wage rate.

The wage orders take effect, 15 days after publication in at least one newspaper of
the general circulation under region. So, magkakaroon ng mga hearing, iseset yung
minimum wages tapos pag na finalize na, ipapublish yun sa diyaryo. 15 days after
publication of the wage order doon sa dyaryo within the region that is become
effective. This wage rates or wage orders are arise upon after public hearings or
consultations. Dito sa public hearings nato binibigyan ng notice yung mga employers
at mga employees at iyong mga municipal, provincial, and city officers para sumali
sila doon sa public consultations, para kung may suggestions sila how the regional
board should decide, dun nila gagawin. Pag may lumabas na wage order and may
isang sektor which is unsatisfied with the wage order, For example, nag-uusap, there
will be a wage increase of 15 pesos across-the-board if merong ayaw noon like an
 employer for example, pwede niyang i-appeal yon to the NWPC within 10 days from
publication. So, the NWPC will decide if pwedeng i-modify yung nilabas ng wage
rates.

CAGAYAN SUGAR MILLING v. SECRETARY

(PINAG USAPAN DITO YUNG REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VALIDITY OF A WAGE ORDER)

- Ang nangyari kasi dito, si cagayan sugar milling ininspect sya ni DOLE, tapos na kita na
hindi daw niya binibigay yung mga wage increases na lumabas doon sa previous wage
order. Pero yung fact, ay binibigay. So what happened was, the regional board ay nag-
issue sya ng order amending the previous wage order para i-clarify yung wage order na
yon. Ngayon, the question here is, which the supreme court is kung ano yung validity
nung amendatory wage order na yon?
- Sabi ng supreme court, even if it is an amendatory which order dapat dumaan pa rin
siya sa public hearing and publication requirements. Now, since itong amendatory wage
order na ito ay hindi dumaan sa public hearings and hindi na a published, it is invalid. It
is void. Hindi limited ang public hearing and publication requirements to new wage
orders even amendatory which orders are included doon sa requirements for public
hearing and publications.
- In sum, we hold that RO2-02-A is invalid for lack of public consultations and hearings
and non-publication in a newspaper of general circulation, in violation of Article 123 of
the Labor Code. We likewise find that public respondent Secretary of Labor committed
grave abuse of discretion in upholding the findings of Regional Director Ricardo S.
Martinez, Sr. that petitioner violated Wage Order RO2-02.
- IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision of the Secretary of Labor,
dated October 8, 1996, is set aside for lack of merit.
- Now, there are several standards na tinitingnan ng regional boards kapag nag-seset ng
minimum wages. First, DEMAND FOR LEADING WAGES - kung magkano ang kailangan ng
isang pamilya para mabuhay for a particular. Yung CONSUMER PRICE INDEX na
tinatawag, which is the least of the prices of basic commodities kasi dapat the wages
must be able to buy this commodities or a standard size family. COST OF LIVING,
changes or increases to the cost of living, the needs of the workers, the need to induce
industries to invest in the country cite. So, para ikalat yung employment across the
philippines and not have been focus in the major cities of the country, kino-consider dito
para kumalat yung labor force. IMPROVEMENTS IN STANDARD OF LIVING, para tumaas
yung standard of living ng mga tao.
- Yung setting ng wage rate is not limited to the needs of employees. In setting the
minimum wages it also talks about to consider the return of capital of the employers to
 pay. So, kung hindi nila kayang mag bigay ng ganong kataas, hindi ganun yung ilalagay ni
regional boards sa bagong wage orders kaya kasali ang management sector, ang
employer sector sa public hearings and consultations para madinig din ng regional board
yung side nila.
- May equitable distribution of income in wealth para kumalat ang wealth to fix the
inequalities to rich and the poor. Now there is provision called the “CREDITABILITY
PROVISION” sa mga wage orders.
- Itong “creditability provision” sa wage orders, this talks about increases given by
companies even without them being forced to give such increase under a wage order.
APEX MINING v. NLRC
- Itong si apex mining may CBA with the union. Binigyan ni apex ng two pesos increase
ang lahat ng employees niya sa CBA. This increase mass hearing in February 01, 1984
tapos (after this increases) after the CBA nung Feb. 01, naglabas si regional board ng
wage order. Guarantying increase of another increase of 17 pesos. This was issued on
November 01, (so, a few months as silent with apex mining, because in that particular
wage order may nakalagay na credibility provision.
- So what apex mining did was nagbigay na sya ng 2 pesos increase before, yung binigay
nya nalang is 15 pesos additional para mag comply don sa 17 pesos sa wage order nag
reklamo yung mga workers.
- Sabi ng mga workers since ang wage order talks about 17 pesos dapat 17 pesos yung
binigay and not 15 lang dapat daw di sinama yung 2 pesos na voluntarily na binigay ni
apex mining don sa pag compute ng bagong minimum wage.
- Pero in this case the Supreme Court sided with apex mining because in that particular
wage order may nakalagay na creditability provision so nakalagay don expressly na
increases granted to employees are creditable to the minimum wage as adjusted by the
wage order.
- So, nakalagay doon expressly na “increases granted to employees are creditable to the
minimum wage as adjusted by the which order.” so this voluntary increase should not
be taken against employers kasi voluntary nan ga nila ibinigay yung increase eh and then
they will still be penalized for this voluntary increases.
- So, since it's a form of benefit for the employers which are given voluntarily, they should
be considered especially, since specifically sinabi na these are creditable increases na
hindi dapat pilitin or i-require yung mga employers na magbigay nang previous increases
na pumantay doon sa wage order.
- Kasi they are already gave an increase before that which is considered creditable sa
bagong wage order. (Now let's talk about wage distortion.) - Wage distortion is when
there is a hierarchy of positions in an industry or in an establishment and disposition
have their own respective salary rates. For example; messenger, head clerk, executive
assistant, manager. So these ranks have their own salary rates. Now, Wage Distortion
 happens when there is a change in the rates of the lower classes na, walang increase sa
mga higher classes and because of this change, nawawala yung distinction ng levels nila.

Nawawala yung distinction nung levels nila. Example: the messenger receives the minimum
wage and for example 450 ang minimum wage . If the minimum wage is 450 and nag across
ng board si regional board sabi nya plus 150 lahat. So, si messenger 450 ang binibigay and si
clerk na 500 yung binibigay is nag across ng board ng 150, 600 and 650 na yung suweldo
nila. So, the difference in the pay rates of 2 clases will be contracted. So, nawawalan na
halos ng distinction between the two levels of employment.
- wage distortion must pertain to this kind of contraction in pay rates within the specific
region, Hindi ka pwedeng magkaroon ng wage distortion if the changes will happen
across multiple regions , kasi nga each regions assist on regional board and they are
equal naman in rank. So, they should not affecting each other. Wage distortion only
happen within the same region.
- So those are the elements of wage distortion.
1. An existing hierarchy of positions with a corresponding salary rates.
2. A significant change in rates for those in a lower paid class without an increase for
those in a higher paid class.
3. The limitations of the distinction between those classes.
4. Distortion happens in the same region.
Wage “distortion” occurs when the usual differentials in wage rates between groups
of employees in an establishment are drastically reduced or eliminated due to
mandated wage increases.

The case of Metrobank EU Vs. NLRC

- it talks about wage distortion. What happened here was the metrobank and yung union
nya nag negotiate sila ng bagong wage increases which is yung bibigay nila. Itong wage
increases na it where to affect only regular employee and not provisionally employee.
So, after nila magnegotiate ng wage increase sa CBA , after 1 month may ipinasa na
batas na nagbibigay ng 25 pesos increase sa lahat ng employees who are earning upto
100 pesos above minimum wage and provides crediting provision for increases. So kung
may mga increases before na ginawa it will be credited don sa RA 6727. So, what
Metrobank did, since lumabas yung batas na iyon, binigay nya lang yung 25 increase don
sa provisionally employees and those who are receiving 100 pesos and below. Hindi nya
binigay yung increase don sa mga nagrereceive na ng atleast 100 pesos above minimum
wage . So, nagreklamo sila kasi when this happened there were contractions in the
stages of the salaries of the rates na yung mga masmababang salary rates because of
this changes halos pareho na sila nung salary rates nung mas mataas sa kanila. So ang
pinipilit ni metrobank dito na there is no wage distortion kasi the difference was not
 completely removed. Ang difference lang naman daw ay nabawasan ng 83% so since
may 17% pa na natitira walang wage distortion. Sabi ng supreme court this is wrong. The
extent of the distortion need not be complete. So, as long as Theres a practical
elimination of the wage differences even the contraction is not complete but it is still
Severe there is already wage distortion here. So, Hindi kailangang mawala yung actual
difference in pay. So kung lumiit lalo Yung difference in pay to the point they practically
receiving the same amount for different kind of work so there's a wage distortion there.
- the wage differences need not be eliminated, severe contraction of this wage
differences Is sufficient for wafe distribution to appear .
- -now, what happens kung merong wage distortion . The difference lies don sa if the
wage distortion happens in an organized establishment or in an unorganized
establishment. If there's a union or CBA ibig sabihin Organized yung employees and if
there is no union or CBA ay unorganized sila. If there's a union or CBA magnenegotiate
muna yung employer or yung union para Icorrect yung distortion kung hindi maresolve
yung Differences nila through the 3 months procedure na nakalagay sa CBA, they will go
under the process of voluntary arbitration.
- First step: Grievance procedure under the CBA and after that voluntary arbitration. So,
kung may union or CBA ay Grievance procedure and kung Hindi pa rin maresolve ay
voluntary arbitration. Kung walang union or CBA ay negotiations pa rin pero kung Hindi
maresolve sa negotiations sa NCNB sila pupunta National Conciliation and Mediation
board. If Hindi pa rin naresolve sa NCNB pag walang union and CBA ay iaakyat sa NLRC
and si NLRC magkaconduct ng continues hearing Hanggang maresolve yung wage
distortion.
- the important thing to note the resolution Of the wage distortion is that kahit na
mayroong wage distortion na existing It will not suspend the payments made or the
obligation of the employer to pay base on the wage order. So, even if there's a wage
order which cause a wage distortion, habang nireresolve nila yung issues nila tuloy pa
rin yung bayad based on the wage orders
- if there's a union or CBA, the employer and the union there first go through Grievance
procedure under the CBA and kung hindi nila maayos they will go through voluntary
arbitration . Pag walang union or CBA They will fist talk between themselves and kung
Hindi maresolve iaakyat sa NCMB and kung Hindi maresolve sa NCMB ay sa NLRC
iaakyat.
- The difference here is because if there's a CBA, mas formal and mas mabilis ang process
under Grievance procedure kasi there's Grievance procedure na nakalagay sa CBA na
mga union which provides a methods kung paaano nireresolba ang mga disputes
between the management and the union among union members. Incase an company or
an employer does not comply in a wage meron syang possible penalties of a
imprisonment and fine. And in addition don sa imprisonment and fine ay bibigyan pa
yung mga affected employees ng double the amount due base on the wage order.
 - Visitorial and Enforcement Power of the DOLE This is article 128 and 129, the labor
code talking about the enforcement and visitorial powers that DOLE to the Secretary, so
ano yung kasali dito sa powers na 'to. First, access to the employers records and
premises at any time when work is being conducted in such premises to copy the
records to question employees and to investigate matters necessary to determine if
there are violations of the labor standards laws this is the visitorial aspect, the power.
The enforcement aspect is the issuance of the compliance orders to give effect to __
provisions based on the findings of the labor officers or the safety engineers making the
course of the inspection. Itong compliance orders the biggest issue here sa visitorial and
enforcement powers is yung amounts involved, pwede siyang mag-issue ng compliance
orders to enforce labor standards laws regarding to the amount involved and issue risk
of execution unless contested by the employer with documentary proof. So pwedeng
maghatak ang DOLE ng mga properties kung meron mga nakitang violations of the labor
standards laws to satisfy amounts which have not been given if it is based on sa findings
ng mga labor officers.
When compliance order is issued it maybe appeal to the DOLE Secretary if the order is issued by
the DOLE secretary’s representative, pwedeng i-appeal yung order if there is monetary award
involved of bond disposed an amount equivalent to the award in ____if the suspension of
operations and basis is eminent danger to the health and safety of the workers in the
workplace, the left thing of order in _____ or suspension of the operations is to be heard
within 24 hours from its issuance so if there’s a business for example na binisita ng labor
officers nakita nila na dangerous yung working conditions dun pwede nyang I- stop automatic
yung operations then the stoppage or suspension will be heard within 24 hours para I
determine if need to be continue or not. Tapos if the stoppage was due to violations by the
employer, yung mga wages nung mga employee na ibibigay which would have given for work
done during the suspension of work or stoppage of work ay ibibigay padin ng employer. There
are two cases regarding the visitorial and enforcement powers

-  Meteoro v. Creative Creatures (GR 171275)

- This talks about a jurisdiction of the DOLE regional director and the jurisdiction of NLRC
kasi if you file a case in a wrong quorum kuwari It’s a case properly compensable by the
NLRC tapos finile mo sa DOLE and the DOLE will have nothing to do but to dismiss your
complain kasi mali yung pinag- filan mo, same with the NLRC if you file in the NLRC but
the case you file is should be on the DOLE ididismiss din ng NLRC yung file mo, now in
the case si Creative Creatures he is a company na gumagawa ng mga set designs tapos
sina meteyoro there are 32 petitioners here sina metereo employees sila ni Creative
Creatures nagfile sila ng complaint ng non- payment of benefits sa DOLE nag file din sila
ng complaint sa NLRC ng illegal dismissal so now sa DOLE case nanalo sila and sabi
naman ng DOLE regional director ibigay yung benefits pero nung cinomplaint ni Creative
Creatures yung desisyon ni DOLE ay nireverse nung court of appeals and ang pinanigan
 ni Supreme Court sa dalawa is si court of appeals and hindi si DOLE regional director. So
now the discussion in this case is about the jurisdiction of the DOLE regional director
particularly on money claims , sabi ng Supreme Court dito while the DOLE has the
jurisdiction to enforce compliance in labor standards loss merong exception which
called the exceptions flaws, itong jurisdiction na ito to enforce compliance in labor
standard loss can apply to those cases even the claims exceed Php 5,000 because if you
read on article 129 may limitations dun sa money claims before the DOLE that sinasabi
dun na money claims file by the DOLE not be exceed an amount of 5,000 per employee
pero base on 128 as amended may jurisdiction padin si DOLE over claims exceeding
5,000 depende sa circumstances of each case ,
- The DOLE will not have jurisdiction if the following are present 1) the employer contest
the findings of the labor officer and recent issues on such findings (2) there’s a need to
examine the evidentially matters to resolve those issues and (3) such matters cannot
verified in the normal course of inspection so pasok dun yung complaint or yung
defense nung employer it will not be the DOLE who will have the jurisdiction . So ayun
ang nasa 128 ay visitorial and enforcement power of the DOLE and sa 129 ay simple
money claims under the jurisdiction parin ng DOLE , a money claims na may jurisdiction
ng DOLE mas arise from employment relationship there must be no claims and the
claims must not be exceed 5,000 kung may nawawala sa tatlong requirements nato si
NLRC ang may jurisdiction at hindi si DOLE . So if this three (3) circumstances are present
the money claims should not be filed with the DOLE but with the NLRC, so the NLRC will
have the jurisdiction from the money claims if there’s no employment relation, there’s a
claim free statement ,the claims exceed 5,000 and that is 129.
- Facts:
-
- Respondent is a domestic corporation engaged in the business of producing, providing,
or procuring the production of set designs and set construction services
-
- On the other hand, petitioners were hired by respondent on various dates as artists,
carpenters and welders.
-
- petitioners filed their respective complaints for non-payment of night shift differential
pay, overtime pay, holiday pay, 13th month pay, premium pay for Sundays and/or rest
days, service incentive leave pay, paternity... leave pay, educational assistance, rice
benefits, and illegal and/or unauthorized deductions from salaries against respondent,
before the Department of Labor and Employment
-
- In its position paper, respondent argued that the DOLE-NCR had no jurisdiction over the
complaint of the petitioners because of the absence of an employer-employee
relationship. It added that petitioners were free-lance individuals, performing special
services with skills and... expertise
-
- DOLE Regional Director Maximo Baguyot Lim issued an Order... directing respondent to
pay petitioners
-
- The Regional Director sustained petitioners' claim on the existence of an employer-
employee relationship using the determinants set forth by the Labor Code, specifically,
the elements of control and supervision, power of dismissal, payment of wages, and the
selection and... engagement of employees. He added that since the petitioners had
worked for more than one year doing the same routine work, they were regular
employees with respect to the activity in which they were employed.
-
- respondent elevated the matter to the Court of Appeal... s... the instant petition is
GRANTED. For lack of jurisdiction... the Orders... issued by respondent Secretary are
hereby declared NULL and VOID.
-
- Issues:
-
- Whether or not the Court of Appeals committed an error when it ruled that the instant
case falls within the exception clause of Article 128 (b) of the Labor Code... whether or
not petitioners were independent contractors/project employees/free lance workers
-
- Ruling:
-
- We sustain the appellate court's conclusion that the instant case falls within the
exclusive jurisdiction of the NLRC.
-
- The DOLE Secretary and her authorized representatives, such as the DOLE-NCR Regional
Director, have jurisdiction to enforce compliance with labor standards laws under the
broad visitorial and enforcement powers conferred by Article 128 of the Labor Code
-
- The last sentence of Article 128 (b) of the Labor Code, otherwise known as the
"exception clause," provides an instance when the Regional Director or his...
representatives may be divested of jurisdiction over a labor standards case.
-
- Under prevailing jurisprudence, the so-called "exception clause" has the following
elements, all of which must concur:
-
- (a) that the employer contests the findings of the labor regulations officer and raises
issues thereon;
-
- (b) that in order to resolve such issues, there is a need to examine evidentiary matters;
and
-
- (c) that such matters are not verifiable in the normal course of inspection.
-
- In the present case, the CA aptly applied the "exception clause."
-
- To resolve the issue raised by respondent, that is, the existence of an employer-
employee relationship, there is need to examine evidentiary matters.
-
- Some businessmen, however, try to avoid an employer-employee relationship from
arising in their enterprises, because that juridical relation spawns obligations connected
with workmen's compensation, social security, medicare, termination pay, and
unionism.
-
- The most important index of an... employer-employee relationship is the so-called
"control test," that is, whether the employer controls or has reserved the right to
control the employee, not only as to the result of the work to be done, but also as to the
means and methods by which the same is to be... accomplished.
-
- the petition is DENIED for lack of merit.

People Broadcasting v. Secretary

- In the case of People Broadcasting namàn this a specifically target and distinguishes the
distinction ng jurisdiction between the DOLE and NLRC, what happened here was the
employee of People Broadcasting file the complaint for non paymet of the benefits sa
DOLE, I mean nagfile sya sa DOLE and nanalo sya but the Supreme Court reverse this
decision pero sabi nya there’s no employment relationship kasi diba nga sabi sa 129 may
jurisdiction lang ang DOLE if arises from employment relationship and claims must not
be exceed 5,000 if hindi pasok dun si NLRC ang may jurisdiction, so actually dun na
natapos yung kaso this case is basically clarification nga kasi nagfile yung abogado to
clarify the order and clinarify ng supreme court kung kelan ba pupunta sa DOLE and
kelan pupunta sa NLRC , so ito yung sabi ng Supreme Court (1) if finile mo sya sa DOLE
and merong existing employment relationship ididismiss ni DOLE yung complaint kasi
there is existing employment relationship and , this finding of employment relationship
can still be contested kasi it is the DOLE who will determine kung may employment
relationship ba o wala. So yun, if wlaang employment relationship si NLRC ang may
jurisdiction.
If walang employment relationship si NLRC ang may jurisdiction. If the complaint include sa
claim for reinstatement NLRC pa din ang may jurisdiction. So, lyun yung basic rule If there's an
existing employment relationships sa DOLE mo ipafile. Si DOLE ang magdedetermine if an
employment relationship actually exist or not. If there's nk employment relationship ididismis ni
DOLE yung kaso. Pero if meron ihehear niya, if walang employment relationship si NLRC ang
may jurisdiction or kung may employment relationship pero there's a claim for reinstatement
don sa complaint si NLRC pa rin ang may jurisdiction. So, in the exercise of the visitorial and
inforcement powers under Article 129, si DOLE nga ang may discretion to determine kung may
employment relationship ba talaga or wala. This determination by the dole can be contested
later op with the CA or Court of the appeals and the Supreme Court. Those are the rules to
determine kung kanino ka magfifile ng kaso. You just need to. remember that ang jurisdiction
ng DOLE under 128 talks about the reinforcement of labor standard laws. So kung hindi ka
binabayaran ng overtime, if there's an existing employment relationship it's always the DOLE
for enforcement of labor standard laws. If there's no employment relationship or naputol na
yung employment relationship or naputol man and there's a claim for reinstatement na gusto
niyang bumalik sa trabaho si NLRC na ang may jurisdiction. Under article 129, si 129 iyun nga
yung simple money claims before the DOLE. This talks about the recovery of wages and other
money claims arising from an employment relationship. There must be an employment
relationship and and the claim, the money claim must not exceed 5, 000 pesos and it must not
include the claim for reinstatement para pumasok sa 129 and the jurisdiction of the DOLE. So,
iyun si DOLE Regional Director ang magdedecide through summary proceedings. Summary
proceedings meaning mabilisang hearing. Tas kung may marerecover na amount si DOLE, the
DOLE will hold that on behalf of the employee tapos ibabayad niya don sa emoloyee
afterwards. Kung hindi niya mahanap yung employee na entitled don sa money claim, yung mga
claims na ito na hindi naibigay sa mga employee na nagreklamo will be use as a special fund for
the DOLE para sa mga benefit ng mga workers. The decisions of the Regional Director or the
hearing officer of the DOLE is appeal to the NLRC within 5 calendar days from decisions na
nireresolve ng NLRC within 10 calendar days from the submission of the last meeting. Bleeding
yung mga papel na sinusubmit sa NLRC and sa courts.
What's important in 128 and 129 s kung kelan papasok sa jurisdiction ng DOLE yung complaints
under Article 128 the DOLE through it's secretary or through it's regional directors can inforce
labor standards laws even if there's a claim which exceed 5,000 pesos. So, as long as there's a
labor standard provision which not compiled with nagkakaroon ng jurisdiction si DOLE,
inforcement jurisdiction as long as pasok siya don sa violation of labor standard provisions
that's 128. Ang 129 ay yung simple money claims, simple money claims before the DOLE, tatlo
yung requirements. It must arise from an employment relationship, there must be an
employment relationship. Second, there must be no claim for reinstatement. Third, the
aggregate money claims or the total money claims for each employee must not exceed 5,000
pesos. Kung wala ng employment relationship or may claim for reinstatement or lagpas 5, 000
yung claim kay NLRC ka pupunta except when the money claim is based on the enforcement of
labor standard provisions. Pinakaissue sa Meteyoro is talks about the jurisdiction of the DOLE
under 128. So, DOLE ang jurisdiction to inforce compliant labor standard laws even if the
amount claimed exceed 5,000 pesos except when the employer contest the findings of the
labor officers and raises issues such findings. Second, there's a need to examine evidential
matter to resolve issues and third such issues cannot be verified in the normal course of
inspection. A point of Meteyoro is that simula nong nagfile sila sa DOLE ng complaint, sina
Meteyoro hanggang umakyat sa CA at sa SC kinocontest lagi ni Creative Creatures yung existing
ng employment relationship. So since there's a continuing question on the existing of an
employment relationship papasok yung exemption clause and lalabas na siya sa jurisdiction ng
DOLE Kase there's an issue of the existing of an employment relationship which cannot be
verified in the normal course of inspection. So in that case, in the case of Meteyoro since
there's an issue on the existing of employment relationship which cannot be resolve don sa
initial inspection ng DOLE and labor officers that fact removes the case from the jurisdiction of
the DOLE pero since there's also a parallel complaint file by Meteyoro and his companions with
the NLRC ididismis to, yung DOLE case pero yung NLRC case tuloy

Lecture 07
There are five kinds of special employees:
1. Women
2. Minors
3. Domestic Workers
4. Home Workers
5. Night Workersk
*Women Workers
Dito sa Labor Code merong mga particular provisions which grants women workers additional
benefits. First benefits given to women workers are special facilities for women as required by
the DOLE Secretary, this facility includes seats na pwede nilang gamitin na hindi makaka apekto
sa efficiency nila sa pagta trabaho. Second, separate wash rooms or toilets for men and women
and dressing room for women also tapos in addition to this facility kelangan din mag provide si
employer ng nursery tapos meron pang additional benefit provided to a specific class of women
workers, like with special occupations, for women workers with special occupations kelangan
may provision ang isang establishment for proper minimum age and retirement or termination
standards this special occupations pertain to a flight attendants and similar occupations kasi
there are flight attendants as we know ay hindi na nakakapagtrabaho until at the age of
retirement mas maaga ng di hamak ang mga retirement age ng mga flight attendants, so as
required by the Labor Code there must be appropriate minimum age and retirement or
termination standards for these kinds of women workers.
Facilities
1. Seats
2. Separate washrooms
3. Dressing room
4. Nursery
5. For special occupations, appropriate minimum age and retirement or termination
standards
Aside from facility binibigyan din ng Labor Code ng family planning services and incentives sa
mga women workers these are required in establishments na mandated by law to provide clinic
or infirmary services. So, if the establishment required to have clinic or infirmary in the business
mandatory ang family planning services. This family planning services are promoted by the
DOLE, developed and prescribes also by the DOLE in coordination with other government
agencies. DIto sa mga development and prescriptions ng DOLE na ito are for incentive bonuses
and schemes sa mga women workers to encourage family planning.
Another special provision for women workers is the prohibition against gender discrimination,
we all know na wala namang difference mostly ang performance ng women workers compared
to male workers, so this is reflected under this portion of the Labor Code dapat walang
discrimination based on gender first anong bawal.
Mas mababang bayad sa babae compared sa lalaki for work or equal value so if a male worker
can produce 10 items in one day hindi dapat mas mababa ang sweldo ng isang woman worker
kung sya ay nag produce ng 10 items of the same quality in the same day kasi they both did
work of equal value so dapat equal din ang bayad sa kanila.
Second prohibition is preference to male workers for promotions, training opportunities,
scholarship grant for no reason other than the gender so, kung gender lang ang reason kung
bakit binigay ang isang benefit like promotion or scholarship to a male worker that is
considered as gender discrimination and pwedeng maging liable yung employer criminally. This
criminal liability for gender discrimination is separate from what other liabilities na pwedeng I
incur ng employer na yon like for damages or some other kind of claim, so pwede na syang
maging liable if there is gender discrimination pwedeng maging liable yung employer for gender
discrimination as well as some other case like a case for damages na pwedeng I file nung
woman worker independent of that case for gender discrimination.
Another important provision in favor of women workers is yung stipulations against marriage,
dito sa stipulation against marriage it prohibits an employer from requiring a woman employee
not to get married as a condition for employment or for continuation of employment also yung
provisions upon getting married the woman worker will be considered as resigned or actually
terminate a woman worker or prejudice her employment merely by reason of marriage. May
case dito yung
PT&T v NLRC
Simpleng kaso lang to
Ang sinabi lang dito ay itong si Grace De Guzman who is a reliever for PT&T, she was
actually married nung hinare(na hire) sya tapos nung nalaman ng PT&T tinerminate sya
ayon umabot sa Supreme Court, nireverse yung termination nya kasi nga you cannot
terminate woman employee base solely on the fact that she is married or that she have
married during the cost/cause of her employment. Any provision which prevents a
woman from being employed by reason of her marital status is prohibited hindi pwedeng
gawing basehan para tanggalin ang isang babaeng empleyado dahil lang kasal sya.
Another prohibited acts include the denial of women employees the benefits provided
under the Labor Code or to discharge a woman employee to prevent her from enjoying
such benefits for example maternity leave, kunwari nalaman mong buntis yung isang
employee mo para hindi sya mag leave ng matagal idi dismiss mo sya that is prohibited,
essentially it talks about any kind of discrimination or termination or prohibiton against a
woman which only affect women like yung marriage nila and yung pregnancy and this
should not be use as basis in terminating a woman employee or denying a benefits under
the Labor Code just because woman sya.
Bawal din mag dismiss or hindi pabalikin sa trabaho ang isang woman worker after giving
birth for fear na mabubuntis ulit sya or to discharge her on account of pregnancy or while
that woman is on leave due to confinement for the pregnancy these are all prohibitions,
they are not actually benefits kasi I think this should be a basic rule granted to women
employees.
By the way don sa book ang discussion don about sa maternity leave is limited to up to RA
7322 and RA 8282 hindi na tong dalawang to yung current na batas sa maternity leave
kasi nung 2018 may pinasa na bagong batas expanded maternity leave act RA 11210
which is the current law on maternity benefits.
Dito sa RA 11210 its coverage includes female workers in the public sector, private sector,
informal sector, voluntary sss contributors, and even female national athlete. Ang
maternity leave kasi is related to sss law kasi one of the requirements for availing of
maternity leave is a sss membership. For child birth pag nanganak ang isang female
employee ang maternity leave nya is 105 days tapos pwede tong dagdagan ng additional
15 days if that female employee also qualifies as a solo parent.
For child birth wether by it is cs or normal delivery 105 days ang binibigay sa isang female
employee. Itong 105 or 120 days na ito can be extended for another 30 days pero this 30
days extension ay wala ng bayad yung first 105 or 120 days lang ang with pay.
There was a distinction before if the child birth was normal delivery or cs pero now under
the expanded maternity leave law wala ng distinction kung cs man yan or normal delivery.
 The existing distinction is it is not a live child birth or if it is miscarriage. If it is a
miscarriage the maternity leave granted to the female employee is 60 days.

This 105 days on 120 days can be divided before the delivery and after the delivery pero dapat
there must be at least 60 days of the maternity leave after the delivery postnatal na sinasabi.
- pre natal is up to 45 days, Hindi pwedeng magexceed don kasi kung mag exceed don
mababawasan na yung 60 or the postnatal period tapos Wala na ring limit kung ilang beses
mag-avail ng maternity leave ang isang female employee kahit every year sya manganak, every
year sya pwede mag-avail ng maternity leave and Hindi na rin issue yung legitimacy nung bata.
So, even if the father is not the actual husband, they're not married the woman will be entitled
to maternity leave. So, maximum of 45 days pre-natal period, minimum of 60 days postnatal
period Yung division ng 105 days of 120 days whichever apply.
Qualification: for a woman or a female employee to be a qualified to avail of maternity leave
kailangan at least nakapagbayad sya ng at least 3 months contribution in a 12 months period
immediately before the semester childbirth. So, 3 months before childbirth dapat
nakapagbayad ka ng at least 3 months contribution in the 12 month period before that 3
months before childbirth. So, kunwari April 1 sya manganganak, if April 1 sya manganganak
dapat. ( The semester childbirth is 9 months) dapat the period immediately before the
semester childbirth is the start of the combination of the 12 month period at babalik ka ng 12
months don sa 12 months na yun. Here, sa 12 month period dapat nakapagbayad ng at least 3
months of contribution Yung female employee para ma-avail nya yung maternity leave benefits
nya tapos kailangan din na notified din ang employer na mag avail sya ng maternity leave. Yung
employer yung may duty na inotify Yung SSS na meron syang empleyado na nag-avail ng
maternity leave . Now, sa pagbabayad ng maternity leave si SSS talaga Yung nagbabayad nun
pero what happened is the employer, first real issues the maternity leave benefits to the
worker tapos Upon whose na binayaran yun ni employer kay worker ay irereimburse ni
employer Yung SSS.
When a female employee receives benefits under the maternity leave law ay Hindi sya
pwedeng kumuha ng benefits, ng sickness benefits sa SSS law. So, Hindi pwedeng
pagsabayin ang sickness benefits sa SSS law and yung maternity benefits under the
maternity leave law. Now, going back don sa 105 or 120 days dito may option Yung babae
na ibigay yung 7 days doon, up to 7 days doon sa tatay. So the woman kunware 105 days
Hindi sya solo parents may 105 days sya and Yung 7 days don pwede nyang ibigay sa tatay
para may leave rin yung tatay. So, yung 105 days nya magiging 98 and since may paternity
leave law din giving the father 7 days pwedeng maging 14 days yung leave nung tatay
pero remember for paternity leave yung 7 days na binibigyan sa paternity leave is given
only to a husband who is cohabiting with his wife so if Hindi nya asawa kunware boyfriend
 nya lang yung tatay. The boyfriend is not invited to paternity leave pero he can be given a
7 day leave kung bibigyan sya nung babae don sa 105 days na ibibigay sa kanya.
Now there's a provision also in the maternity leave which give a national athletes. The
benefits of maternity leave . What happened here is the athletes is referred to a
physician, doctor na magdedetermine if that athlete is fit to continue training, kung
pwede syang magtrain pwede syang if the physician clears that athlete for training edi
pwede sya magtrain kung dhindi edi hindi sya pwede. Tapos yung maternity leave nya.
Yung laps nung maternity leave nya pagtapos nung maternity leave will be based on a
clearance issue by the physician . So, Hindi sya maaaring bumalik sa training after nya mag
maternity leave unless may clearance sya from a doctor. While the national athletes is
availing maternity benefits of maternity leave she shall continue received allowances and
will be invited on the same benefits habang nasa maternity leave nya and up to 6 months
later unless pabalikin sya earlier nung physician . The only limitation to national athletes is
that is they are employee in public sector Hindi sila pwedeng makareceive ng double
compensation . So, if they're already receiving this kind of benefits upto national athletes
under the maternity leave law they cannot enjoy a similar benefits granted by a contract
by a different law so mamimili lang sya kung sa maternity leave sya mag-aavail or kung
don sa kabilang law na iyon.

CASE: DELMONTE VS VELASCO

what happened here was si DELMONTE - is the gumagawa / nagbebenta ng fruits VELASCO- is
employee of delmonte. Velasco is a seasonal employee and a field worker of delmonte tapos
lagi syang umaabsent kasi nagka UTI sya arising from her pregnancy. So, puro absent tinanggal
sya ng delmonte sa trabaho. Sabi ni delmonte it's not the pregnancy naman ang cause ng
kanyang dismissal but the absences pero simula sa hanggang umakyat sa supreme court they'll
sided with velasco saying that even if the cause of the absences was the UTI, itong UTI na ito
aroused as a complication of her pregnancy. So, since the absences where due to a pregnancy
related sickness Hindi pwedeng gamitin ni employer yun as basis para tanggalin sya sa trabaho.
An employer cannot terminate an employee for absences inter which are due to pregnancy
related sickness . So, kung nagkasakit Yung isang Employee and nafindout nung employer na
this sickness was due to is related to the pregnancy of the employee, Hindi nya pwedeng
gamitin yun as basis para tanggalin sya.anti-sexual harassment act- it is committed by a person
with authority influence or moral ascendancy over another either in a work or training or
expansional environment and that person requires a sexual favor from another regardless of
whether that sexual favor is given or accepted by the victim. So, from that definition we will see
that there are 2 circumstances when there can be sexual harassment
 1. Is a worker related or employment environment - there is sexual harassment if
the favor is made as a condition for hiring or for continued employment or for
granting privileges or when the refusal will resolve a discrimination or with
otherwise adversely affect the employee.
There is a sexual harassment in the workplace if a sexual favor is made as a requirement for
hiring or for continued employment, or sa paggagrant ng mga benefits or privileges , or when
refusal will resolve the discrimination. There also sexual harassment in a workplace when the
favor would impair employees rights under existing labor laws or when it results in an
intimidating hostal or otherwise offensive environment for the worker. So, kunware may boss
lagi nyang sinisipulan Yung Employee nya pagdumadaan and this made the feel not the
environment is intimidating hostal or offensive it is already considered as sexual harassment.
There's another case in a book wherein the boss is looking to his employee hinahawakan nya sa
batok, that was already considered as sexual harassment in that case.it does not apply merely
to employers kasi nakalagay sa definition committed by a person with authority influence or
moral ascendancy or another.
So sexual harassment in the work environment can be committed by a senior Employee who
against a junior Employee. Basta merong authority, influence or moral ascendancy Yung
offender or yung victim and meron nung conditions na yun there's already a sexual harassment
in the workplace.
2. Sexual Harassment in an education or training environment - Yung definitions
dito sa education environment focuses on other relationship ng offender and
the victim. Sa education or training environment it is committed by one under
the care custody or supervision of offender or when the victims education
training apprenticeship or tutorship is in trusted to the offender. If the offender
has under his or her care or custody or supervision yung victim or when the
objective education training, apprenticeship or tutorship of the victim is in
trusted to the offender. There is a sexual harassment in an educational
environment when the favor is made as a condition for giving a passing grade,
for the grant of honors, scholarship or the payment of allowances, sign pens or
other considerations. Also, when it result in an intimidating cause style or
offensive environment for the student or a trainee or apprentice meron ding
sexual harassment don.
This is Republic act 7877, anti sexual harassment act. Dito sa sexual harassment is not only the
offender who can be held liable. Pwede ding maging liable dito yung employer mismo or yung
head of the office who will be solidarily liable with the offender if alam nong head of office or
nong employer na may ganong klaseng harassment na nangyare pero wala siyang ginagawa. In
sexual harassment like in discrimination , the penalties under the anti sexual and harassment
law are independent from any other complaints or cases na pwedeng ifile yung victim. So, if
there's sexual harassment committed in the workplace for example in an educational
environment aside from being a held liable for violation of anti sexual harassment act pwede
ding maging liable yung offender for a criminal case like act of abusiveness or for a child abuse
or sexual abuse. So, the filing of a complaint for sexual harassment can proceed independently
from all other kinds of cases. For example, administrative complaints against the offender or
ayun administrative complaints or professional complaints pwede siyang magproceed
separately from the sexual harassment complaint. Merong mga imprisonment provisions and
fine provisions dito sa batas na to na it includes the possible imprisonment from between 1-6
months and a fine of 10,000-20,000 pesos or both fine and imprisonment depende sa court
kung ano iyung ibibigay niya. So, since sabi depende sa court, this is not a labor case and it is file
in a regular court. May limit lang sa pagfifile ng anti-harassment complaints kase it must be filed
within 3 years from what it was committed. After 3 years at hindi pa din finifile yung complaint
EDI prescribe na, bawal na ifile. So,it should be filed within 3 years from the commission of the
offense. That's it for Women worker and sa sexual harassment.
Next is MINOR WORKERS, nakalagay sa labor code the minimum employable age is 15 years old
except when the minor is working directly under a parent or a guardian and his or her schooling
or education is not affected. Merong isa pang batas Yung RA 1231 special protection for
children act with similar definition pero expanded. So, pwede daw mag-employ ng below 15
under RA 1231 when the child is working directly under the sole responsibility of the parent or
legal guardian and were only family members are employed. So, dinagdag ito sa RA 1231and
since it's more specific law than the labor code ito na ang mag aapply.
So, there is the requirements under RA 1231:
1. pwede ka mag employ ng workers below 14 if they are working directly under the
parent or a legal guardian and the only other employees there are family members.
2. The employment shall not endanger the life, safety, health, morals of the child and
will not impair his or her normal development.
3. Kelangang bigyan yung child nong primary and secondary education.

That's for below 15 years old na mga children na minor employees.

Between 15 and 18 years of age naman, iba yung rules. This is found in the omnibus rules,
implementing the labor code and the labor code itself. Nalagay don pwede silang
magtrabaho pero the work must be non hazard in nature. Kelangan walang exposure yung
minor employee to imminent danger to his or her safety and health. So, bawal siyang
maggawa ng paputok or magtimpla ng mga poisons and mga explosive or drugs. So, while
mas magaan yung restrictions to minor employees between 15-18 years of age. Meron pa
ring restrictions in the terms that they must not be employed in hazardous work and
there must be no exposure to imminent danger to their safety and health. I think the
more important portions of RA 1231 is with respect to children working in the
entertainment industry, mga artista, singers, etc. For this kind of children in the
 entertainment industry there must always be an employment contract which is signed by
the parent or legal guardian and kung pwede or kayang magbigay ng consent nong bata
with the consent of the child. Tapos this contract must also be approved by the DOLE
muna bago magstart yung employment. Aside from this contract this DOLE approved
contract, the child employee must also secure a work permit from the DOLE.
- 2 requirements para makapagstart makapagtrabaho sa entertainment industry ang
isang employee below 18 years of age:
1. DOLE approved contract
2. A DOLE issued work permit
- WORKING HOURS working hours of child workers is limited. Actually only for those 15,
pag below 15 ang child worker in an entertainment industry hindi Siya pwedeng
magtrabaho for more than 4 hours a day. Hindi siya pwedeng magtrabaho for more than
20 hours in a week and hindi siya pwedeng magtrabaho between 8 pm to 6 am. Pag
between 15 and 18 years naman hindi siya pwede magtrabaho for more than 8 hours a
day, for 40 hours a week and hindi siya pwede magtrabaho between 10 pm to 6 am. So,
pag below 15 4 hours a day, 20 hours a week bawal 8pm to 6am. Between 15 and 18, 8
hours a day, 40 hours a week bawal magtrabaho 10pm to 6am.

Domestic Worker
- Domestic Worker yung provisions niya sa labor code is completely repealed na so hindi
na effective yung mga labor code provisions sa Domestic worker kasi pinalitan na siya ng
RA 10361 na Batas Kasambahay Law. These are the provisions na naggogovern ng rights
and obligation ng isang household employer and yung kasambahay na employee.
- There are several rights provided for Domestic Worker under RA 10361:
1. The right against abuse and physical violence.
2. The right to at least 3 adequate meals a day and safe and __ sleeping condition.
3. The right to rest and assistance in case of illness and injuries during service without
loss of benefits.
4. The right to respect of for privacy of communication and personal __.
5. The right to access to outside communication during free time and even during
work hours in case of emergency.
- Yung mga costs for outside communication, pwede itong singilin ng employer if yung
mga devices nila ang ginagamit nung kasambahay unless iwaived ng employer yun. For
example: the kasambahay uses the internet ng employer para makapag-chat sa mga
anak niya sa ibang lugar, the employer can charge for that access the employer wage
shift.
- Another right of the kasambahay is to education and training. If the kasambahay wishes
to acquire education and training kailangan iadjust ng employer yung work schedule
niya para may access yung kasambahay doon sa education and training na yan but this
work schedule must not be in conflict doon sa pagbibigay ng kasambahay ng services
niya.
- This respect for privacy and communication and personal __. What the phrase itself
mean, yung relation doon sa safe and __ sleeping arrangements the kasambahay must
be granted a sleeping arrangements kung may sarili siyang kama, place where he can
rest tapos in relation doon sa right of privacy of communication and personal effect the
employer cannot just enter the kasambahay let us say na may room siya hindi niya
pwedeng pasukin yun because the kasambahay nstill has the right to privacy not only for
his personal effects pero pati yung communication niya so hindi pwedeng kunin ng
employer yung phone niya to check kung sino yung mga kausap niya because this is a
violation to the Kasambahay right of privacy.
- These rights are meron ding obligations yung kasambahay. The obligation of the
kasambahay primarily is to hold what communication and information pertaining to the
employer as confidential. It should be treated as __ and evidence except when the suit
involved the employer or any member of his household in a crime against person's
property or person's liberty, security and justity.
- So the kasambahay as the member, as a donn sa household kung siya nagtatrabaho
kailangan yung mga information na nasasagap niya doon sa bahay, the kasambahay
must hold that in confidence meaning hindi niya pwedeng ipagkalat kung ano yung
nalalaman niya sa bahay na yun. If nakita niyabg nag-aaway yung boss niya at ang asawa
nito hindi niya pwedeng ishare yun kung kani-kanino yung naririnig niya kasi ayun nga,
all communication which the kasambahay acquires or learn about during his/her stay
doon sa employment niya are confidential information. The only exemption is when the
information involves the employer or any member of the household in a crime against
person's, property, liberty, security and justity. It's practically 80% of the offenses under
the revised penal code, so ayun if there's information which the kasambahay learn
during his ay hindi niya ito pwedeng ipagsabi kahit kanino except when that information
is relevant in a criminal case. So, if it is not relevant to a criminal case hindi niya
pwedeng ishare yun kahit kanino that is privilege or confidential information.
- So, if I have a kasambahay and I ask the kasambahay kung gusto niya magtrabaho dun
sa bahay ng kapatid ko, for example; he/she said Yes, The work done by the kasambahay
duon sa kabilang household should be paid the minimum wage. Tapos if may liabilities
na ma-incur yung kasambahay dun sa extended household na yon, it will be the regional
(I will be liable for the kasambahay's liabilities). The minimum wages for kasambahay
are also determined by regional boards. May separate classification yung regional
boards when they come up with wage orders, stating kung ano yung mga existing na
wage rates for kasambahay depende sa location. Ang distinctions, the regional boards
ay, if the place is city or first class municipality ang nasa loob ng NCR or wala, and if the
 city or municipality is s class or below. So ,there are the considerations ng regional
board pag nagse-set ng mga minimum wages ng mga kasambahay.
- How are their wages paid?
- Ang wages ng kasambahay ay dapat binabayaran sa kanila directly and in-cash at least
once a month unlike sa regular employees na at least twice a month. Sa kasambahay
pwedeng at least once a month pero naging dapat “In cash”. Hindi rin siya pwedeng i-
subject to deductions except those mandated by law like for contributions to SSS and
PhilHealth. Entitled din sa 13 month pay ang mga kasambahay, also when the
kasambahay is being paid kailangan mayroong payslip na binibigay sa employer and the
employer must keep those payslip for 3 years. So dapat hawak ni employer yung payslip
ng mga kasambahay for 3years bago niya i-dispose. In the disposal of the kasambahay of
his or her wages, the employer cannot interfere duon sa disposal niya. So for example si
kasambahay hindi niya ginagalaw yung sweldo nya for a few months, tapos afterwards
nakayise na yung kasambahay hindi na pwede mag interfere doon yung employer or
nakaipon hindi pwedeng mag interfering floor as to how the kasambahay will dispose of
his or her wages.
- If the domestic workers or the kasambahay leave, the place of work without any
justifiable reason, pwedeng ma-forfeit yung and paid salary for a period not exceeding
15 days. So if umalis si kasambahay ng april 01 di na bumalik, eh hindi pa natatanggap
yung bayad niya for march, ang mafo-forfeit lang doon is yung half for 15 days lang. The
employer must still pay the kasambahay, the remaining amounts unpaid. Ang pwede
lang ma-forfeit is up to 15 days salary. Kasambahay are also entitled to service incentive
leave of 5days if they have already render at least 1 year of service. Ang SIL ng mga
kasambahay pag hindi ginamit ay hindi pwedeng i-accumulate at hindi rin pwede i-carry
over at hindi rin pwedeng convert into cash. So, the kasambahay must avail of the
service incentive leave otherwise, mafo-forfeit siya. Bawal kasi ang accumulation, bawal
ang carry over, bawal ang convertion into cash. So dapat nya gamitin.
- Entitled na ang kasambahay to SSS, PhilHealth, and PAG-IBIG ang membership after 1
month of service. Yung payments for contributions and premiums binabayaran ng
employer unless the kasambahay is receiving at least 5,000 per month. In that case,
kapag nakakatanggap ng at least 5,000 per month yung kasambahay, ay kailangan na
niyang mag share noong kontribusyon niya if it's only below 5,000 completely
shouldered by the employer otherwise, kailangan na magshare ni kasambahay. Other
than that, the benefits under the kasambahay law, entitled din siya sa other benefits
which are not otherwise excluded to kasambahay and if the kasambahay must list
through a private employment agency if mayroong liability yung employer, ay solidary
liable din si private employment agency along with the employer.

PAUSE EMPLOYMENT NG KASAMBAHAY

- Sa PAUSE EMPLOYMENT, this talks about the termination for services. There's no
provision na kasambahay law kung gaano katagal or gaano kabilis ang employment
contract. Pero sabi sa civil code, “a contract can be for 2 years, extendable”. So daoat 2
years lang ang simula. Pero walang ganun sa kasambahay law pero hindi rin nire-fill ni
kasambahay law yung civil code provision na yon so, it appears na ganun pa rin yung set
up, 2 years initial contract subject to renewals. In case of termination, “hindi pwedeng e
terminate ng either party ang kasambahay before the expiration of the term”, that is the
GENERAL RULE. Pero, since it's only a general rule, it has exceptions.
- It can be terminated by the kasambahay in any of the following circumstances:
(1) Verbal or Emotionally abused by the employer or any member of the household.
(2) Inhumane Treatment and Physically abused by the employer or any member of the
household.
(3) Commission of a Crime or Offense against the domestic worker by the employer or
any member of the household.
(4) Violation of terms and conditions of the contract by the employer or any other
member of the household.
(5) Disease Prejudicial to the health of domestic worker, the employer or the members
of the household.
(6) Other Causes Analogous before going.
- So doon sa 1,2,3,4,5,6 na grounds na yon, meron similar na ground para i-terminate ang
kasambahay ay pwedeng ipa-terminate. For example, if it's not verbal or emotional
abuse, pero it's some kind of other kind of abuse, it is analogous to verbal and
emotional abuse, and the kasambahay can use that as a basis to terminate the
kasambahay contract. Yung verbal or emotional abuse, Inhumane Treatment abuse,
Commissions of crime, Violation of terms of the contract, Disease, and Other Analogous
Causes, yon yung grounds ng kasambahay to terminate the kasambahay contract.
- Pwede din siyang i-erminate ng employer based on any of the following grounds; (1)
misconduct or willful disobedience of the employers lawful orders in connection with
work. So any kind of misconduct or willful disobedience is not automatically a ground
for termination of the contract kailangan yung disobedience must be respect to a lawful
order, and that order must be in connection with the work (the kasambahay). So, if the
order is unlawful like, punta ka nga dun sa kanto, bili mokong drugs. That's not a lawful
order. So the kasambahay can ignore that, and hindi yun pwedeng gawing basis ni
employer para i-terminate siya sa trabaho or it's not in connection with the work, bawal
din. Misconduct or willful disobedience must be;
- (1) with respect to a lawful order and in connection with the work,
- (2) Cause or Habitual neglect on inefficiency in the performance of duties,
- (3) fraud or willful breach of trust,
- (4) Commission of a crime against the employer or any immediate member of family,
- (5) Violation of the terms and conditions of the employment contract,
- (6) Disease prejudicial to the health of the domestic worker, the employer or members
of the household,
- (7) Other Analogous Causes. So, if you will not notice if mayroong disease which is
prejudicial to the health of the domestic worker, or the employer or the member of the
household, Either the kasambahay or the employer can use that as a crown to terminate
the contract.
- We talked about PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION, na pag may narinig si kasambahay sa
loob ng bahay and kinalat niya sa iba. This is an example of Willful Breach of Trust. Since
the kasambahay is practically a member of the house already, and kinakalat niya yung
mga anong klaseng private communication within the home, It is already considered as
a breach of the trust reposed in the kasambahay by the employer and this can be
already be a reason para i-terminate ng employer yung services ni kasambahay. In case
of illegal dismissal, ILLEGAL DISMISSAL, if there is no basis for the termination kung hindi
pumasok sa grounds nayon ang dismissal, then it is “ILLEGAL”. In case of illegal dismissal,
the kasambahay will be entitled to the wages already earned plus ingenuity of 15 days
worth of salaries. If the case of abandonment without justifiable reason, unpaid salaries
not exceeding days of work are forfeited, and the employer may recover cost incurred
related to deployment expenses provided the services have been terminated within 6
months from the engagement. So, if wala pang 6 months from the time na mag-start si
kasambahay ay inabandon niya yung work niya, mafo-forfeit yung maximum of 15 days
worth of salaries and pwedeng bawiin ni employer yung costs na nagastos niya para i-
deploy or para papuntahin sa kanila yung kasambahay. If walang period na nakalagay sa
contract nila, it can be terminated by giving notice to the other party 5 days before the
intended termination date.
- If walang period na nakalagay dun sa contract nila it can be terminated by giving notice
to the other party five days before the intended termination date. The kasambahay or
the employer their contract does not provide for termination of the agreement
pwedeng i- terminate yun which will take effect five days after the notice. If the
kasambahay is terminated kelangang mag issue ni employer ng certificate of
employment at nakalagay dun yung nature of the work, duration of the work and
performance of kasambahay at kelangan within five days from the request ay maibigay
ito ni employer.
SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
- Labor related disputes between the kasambahay and the employer are heard before
the DOLE regional office, this is a separate from ordinary kinds and offenses which are
covered by revise penal code and other penal laws itong kinds of offenses na ito are
under the jurisdiction of the regular course, so dalwa ang jurisdiction pagdating sa
kasambahay, if it is labor related gusto ni DOLE if is a crime under ito ng jurisdiction of
regular course.
APEX MINING
 - It talks about the difference between a domestic worker and a regular employee what
happened here was itong si Candido was employed by Apex Mining yung work nya is
magprovide ng laundry services dun sa staff house Apex, now habang naglalaba itong si
Candido nadulas sya na- injured yung likod nya so nagleave sya at nung babalik na sya
ayaw syang pabalikin tapos inoofferan sya ng pera para di sya bumalik pero di nya
tinatanggap, hanggang di na sya pinayagang pumasok and then nagfile sya ng complaint
for illegal dismissal . The only question here related is wether or not Candido is a
domestic worker or regular employee? Kasi the nature of Candido's work is as a laundry
service provider pero the employer is a company, Apex Mining and Candido provide
services sa staff house ni Apex Mining in resolving that questions sabi ni Supreme Court
it would depend on the nature of work, the nature of employees work is determining
factor that the employee is domestic worker or regular employee, sabi ni Supreme Court
if the worker is engaged to attend the personal comfort of the employer and the
household edi domestic worker sya pero if the worker is engaged in a business or
industry for such services that being rendered and that employee will be considered as
regular employee. Now using those two conditions giving by supreme court lumalabas
na pasok sya sa pangalwa. Si apex mining si engage in a business or industry and the
laundry services are being rendered dun sa staff house in a business or industry since
the work is not being provided for the personal comfort of the employer in the
householdand the employee is not a domestic worker and it is a regular employee . So
since si Candido is a regular employee she's entitled dun sa illegal dismissal complaint
nya kasi nga while she is providing laundry services , this laundry services are not being
provided for the personal comfort of an employer and the household and it is given to a
business, so the services rendered is to a business and not to a household, yun yung
difference.

PHILIPPINE INTEGRATED LABOR ASSISTANCE CORPORATION VS. NLRC

- what happened here was si Dayag ay nagwork sa Hongkong as a domestic worker and
yung agency nya is si PHILAC . 7 days palang si Dayag sa Hongkong ay pinaalis na sya ng
amo nya so nagfile ng complaint for illegal dismissal itong si Dayag and she was awarded
876 thousand Hongkong dollar it is around 5 million+ for the unexpired portion of her
salary. So yun yung pinaka cinocontest ni PHILAC dito sabi nya bat namin bibigyan ng
876 thousand hongkong dollar eh nakalagay dun sa batas ang ibinibigay lang sa
kasambahay or r domestic worker is 15 days salary . Sabi ni supreme court yung 15 days
salary is being paid as an indemnity for illegal dismissal. This 15 days salary as an
indemnity for illegal dismissal is in addition to and not a substitute for salaries of
 unexpired portion since Filipino overseas worker din sya and since indemnity nga lang
sya for the violation of the security of tenure of the employee , the 15 days salary is paid
in addition dun sa unexpired portion nung salary nya, so ayun not only the domestic
worker entitled to 15 days salary as indemnity for the illegal dismissal, the domestic
worker is also entitled to unexpired portion of the contract.
HOME WORKERS
- are those who are working at home , yung mga pinag iiwanan ng mga goods and
materials para i-process nila tapos dadaanan ni employer or contractor pagkatapos
babayaran sila. They are provided with materials which they will process at home and
which are later pick up process by the employer or the contractor. They are not
considered as employees. Under Article 82 nakalagay dun they are not included under
coverage of Book 3, several special provisions sa department order sa 05 s92 sa
implementing rules of the labor code: sa deductions, condition of payment and item
probihited for homework. Generally bawal mag deduct sa sweldo ng homeworker
unless they are showing na si (1)homeworker ang may problema (2) homeworker is
given reasonable opportunity to contest deduction (3) the amount deducted is fair and
reasonable and does not exceed actual loss or damage (4) and deduction are made that
will not exceed 20% weekly earnings of the homeworker. So for example the
homeworker earns 5,000 a week tapos yung loss or damage na ginawa nya is worth
10,000 hindi pwedeng lumampas ng 20% of the 5,000 a week yung ibabawas sa kanya .
Yung 10,000 na loss or damage na ginawa nya after they notified of that loss and
nacontest nya pero nakitang sya talaga ang may kasalanan, ang pwede lang na ibawas sa
kanya is maximum of 20% of the weekly earnings, then yung 10,000 na yun will be
spread out for that number of weeks para up to 20% lang yung ibabawas sa kanya per
week so magiging 1,000. From the 5,000 mababawasan lang sya ng 1k every week
hanggang mabayaran nya yung total ng loss or damages na ginawa nya.
- In conditions of payment pag may ginawang product itong homeworker and hindi nya
yun ginawa ng maayos pwedeng ipaulit sa kanya ni employer or ni contractor without
paying the fee again. So for example babayaran ni contractor si homeworker for each
item completed tapos nung pinick up na ni employer or contractor nakita nya na mali
mali ying ginawa nya. Pag inayos ulit ni homeworker yun hindi na sya kelangan bayaran
ulit, the second is the employer did not paid for goods and materials if hindi agad nahuli
ni employer yung ginawang mali ni homeworker tas naibenta na tapos naibalik which is
due to the fault of homeworker and that homeworker is not entitled to payment for
particular item. There are several items that are probihited for homeworkers or hindi
nila pwedeng gawin sa bahay
- (1) explosive and fireworks similar items
- (2) drugs and poison
- (3) particle whose requires processing like exposure to toxic substances.