7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 1/8
5/12/2011
1
UPDATE ON LABOR LAWRULINGS IN CERTAIN 2009
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
BY: DEAN FROILAN M. BACUNGAN
1
LBC EXPRESS – METRO MANILA,
INC. VS. MATEO
G.R. NO. 168215. JUNE 9, 2009
2
JUST CAUSE
1.The services of a regular employee may be terminated only for just or authorized causes, including gross and habitualnegligence under Article 282, paragraph (b) of the Labor Code.Gross negligence is characterized by want of even slight care,acting or omitting to act in a situation where there is a duty to act,not inadvertently but willfully and int entionally with a consciousindifference to consequences insofar as other persons may beaffected.
3
JUST CAUSE
2. What happened was not a simple case of oversight and
could not be attributed to a simple lapse of judgment. No amountof good intent, or previous conscientious performance of duty,
can assuage the damage Mateo caused LBC when he failed toexercise the requisite degree of diligence required of him under
the circumstances.
4
REQUIREMENT of DUE PROCESS
The memorandum directing Mateo to bepresent for investigation clearly providedthe reasons or grounds for Mateo’sinvestigation. As stated there, the groundswere the “alleged carnapping of motorcycleand the alleged pilferage of a package”.Nothing could be clearer. What the lawmerely requires is that the employee beinformed of the particular acts or omissionsfor which his dismissal is sought. Thememorandum did just that. Mateo wasthereafter given the opportunity to explainhis side and was handed the requisitesecond notice (of termination). Proceduraldue process was therefore complied with.
5
Sycip, Gorres,
Velayo & Company
vs. De Raedt
G.R. No. 161366.
June 16, 2009
6
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
o b l
h a n
a
b l
C h
a n R
C
n R
b
s B a
7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 2/8
5/12/2011
2
EXISTENCE of EMPLOYER – EMPLOYEERELATIONSHIP
CONTROL TEST
1.To determine the existence of an employer –employee relationship, case law hasconsistently applied the four-fold test, to wit;
(a) the selection and engagement of the
employee;
(b) the payment of wages;
(c) the power of dismissal;
(d) the employer’s power to control the
employee on the means andmethods by which the work isaccomplished.
7
EXISTENCE of EMPLOYER – EMPLOYEERELATIONSHIP
The so – called “control test” is the mostimportant indicator of the presence or absenceof an employer – employee relationship.
2. There existed no employer – employeerelationship between the parties. De Raedt isan independent contractor, who was engagedby SGV to render services to SGV’s client TMI,and ultimately to DA on the CECAP project,regarding matters in the field of her specialknowledge and training for a specific period oftime.
8
Balladares vs.Peak Ventures
Corporation
G.R. No. 161794.
June 16, 2009
9
It should be noted that pet itioners’ complaint involved
underpayment of wages and other benefits. In order to verify the
allegations in the complaint, DOLE conducted an inspect ion,
which yielded proof of violations of labor standards. By the nature
of the complaint and from the result of the inspection, theauthority of the DOLE, under Article 128, came into play
regardless of the monetary value of the claims involved.
1 0
This Court has held in a plethora ofcases that reliance on the Servando rulingis no longer tenable in view of theenactment of R.A. No. 7730, amendingArticle 128 (b) of the Labor Code. TheSecretary of Labor or his duly authorizedrepresentatives is now empowered to hearand decide, in a summary proceeding, anymatter involving the recovery of any amountof wages and other monetary claims arisingout of employer – employee relations at thetime of the inspection, even if the amount ofthe monetary claim exceeds P5, 000.00.
1 1
Triumph International (Phils.),
Inc. vs. Apostol
G.R. No. 164423.
June 16, 2009
1 2
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
o b l
r
e
a
b l
C
,
C
n R
b
s
C h
B a
7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 3/8
5/12/2011
3
As a general rule, petitions for
review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Civil
Procedure filed before this Court may
only raise questions of law. However, jurisprudence has recognized several
exceptions to this rule.
1 3
PROCEDURE
1.The power of the Court of Apeals to review NLRC decisions via a
Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 has been settled as early as
our decision in St. Martin Funeral Home vs. NLRC (295 SCRA 494
[1998]). In said case, we held that the proper vehicle for such
review is a Special Civil Action for Certiorari under Rule 65 of theRules of Court, and that the case should be filed in the Court of
Appeals in strict observance of the doctrine of the hierarchy of
courts.
1 4
PROCEDURE
2. Equally settled is the rule that factualfindings of labor officials, who are deemed tohave acquired expertise in matters within their
jurisdiction, are generally accorded not onlyrespect but even finality by the courts whensupported by substantial evidence, i.e., the
amount of relevant evidence which areasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. But these findings are notinfallible. When there is a showing that theywere arrived at arbitrarily or in disregard of theevidence on record, they may be examined bythe courts.
1 5
Dismissals of employees have two facets:
1.The legality of the act of dismissal, which
constitutes substantive due process;
2.The legality in the manner of dismissal,
which constitutes procedural due process.
1 6
As previously mentioned, fraud or willful breach of the
employer’s trust is a just cause for termination of employment
under Article 282 ( c ) of the Labor Code. This provision ispremised on the fact that the employee concerned holds a
position of trust and confidence, a situation which exists where
such employee is entrusted by the employer with confidence on
delicate matters, such as care and protection, handling or custody
of the employer’s property.
1 7
Treatment of managerial employees distinguished from
that of the rank – and – file personnel insofar as the application of
the doctrine of loss of trust and confidence is concerned. – With
respect to rank – and – file personnel, loss of trust andconfidence, as ground for valid dismissal, requires proof of
involvement in the alleged events in question, and that mereuncorroborated assertions and accusations by the employer will
not be sufficient.
1 8
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
o b l
e
, e
c
a
b l
C h
a n R
C
n R
b l e s
B a
s
C h a
s
t
r s
B a
7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 4/8
5/12/2011
4
Metropolitan Bank and
Trust Company vs.National Labor
Relations Commission
G.R. No. 152928. June
18, 2009
1 9
RETIREMENT BENEFIT
1.Retirement; To be considered a company practice, the giving of
the benefits should have been done over a long period of time,
and must be shown to have been consistent and deliberate.
2.This Court held that the grant of these benefits has ripened into
company practice or policy which cannot be peremptorily
withdrawn.
2 0
It is a jurisprudential rule that where there is an
established employer practice of regularly, knowingly and
voluntarily granting benefits to employees over a significantperiod of time, despite the lack of a legal or contractual obligation
on the part of the employer to do so, the grant of such benefits
ripens into a vested right of the employees and can no longer be
unilaterally reduced or withdrawn by the employer.
2 1
“J” Marketing
Corporation vs.Taran
G.R. No. 163924.
June 18, 2009 2 2
SEPARATION PAY
1.It is well to note that there is no provision in the Labor Code that
grants separation pay to voluntarily resigning employees.
2.However, an employer who agrees to expend such benef it as an
incident of the resignation should not be allowed to renege on the
fulfillment of such commitment.
2 3
Ritualo vs. People
G.R. No. 178337.
June 25, 2009
2 4
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
o b l
e
t
r
a
b l
C h
a n R
C
n R
b l e s
B a
s B a
7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 5/8
5/12/2011
5
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT
Article 13 (b) of the Labor Code defines recruitmentand placement as:
Any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting,
transporting, utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers, andincludes referrals, contract services, promising oradvertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether forprofit or not; Provided, that any person or entity which, inany manner, offers or promises for a fee employment to twoor more persons shall be deemed engaged in recruitmentand placement.
To be engaged in illegal recruitment, it is plain thatthere must at least be a promise or an offer of employmentfrom the person posing as a recruiter whether locally orabroad.
2 5
ESTAFA
Art. 315, par. 2 (a) of the revised PenalCode, enumerates one of the modes ofcommitting estafa, thus: xxxx2. By means ofany of the following false pretenses orfraudulent acts executed prior to orsimultaneously with the commission of thefraud: (a) By using fictitious name, orfalsely pretending to possess power,influence, qualifications, property, credit,agency, business or imaginary transactions,or by means of other similar deceits.
2 6
Technological Institute of
the Philippines Teachers
and Employees
Organization (TIPTEO)
VS. Court of Appeals
G.R. No. 158703.
June 26, 2009 2 7
SERIOUS MISCONDUCT
The present violation involves elements of falsification and
dishonesty. Knowing fully what Manalo deserved, Salon gave hima grade of 6.0 instead of a failing grade. In the process, she
changed – in short, falsified – her own records by changing the
submitted record and the supporting documents. Viewed in any
light, this is Serious Misconduct under Article 282 (a) of the Labor
Code, and a just cause for termination of employment.
2 8
DUE PROCESS REQUIREMENT
Salon notified in writing about the charges
against her, she was given a reasonable
opportunity to explain her side; she was also
called to an investigation where, again, she
had the opportunity to explain why she should
not be dismissed. She was only dismissed
after the conclusion of the investigation and
after she had been given a second notice in
writing that she was being terminated as a
faculty member of the school. In short, she has
nothing to complain about in terms of the
process she underwent that led to herdismissal. 2 9
Pentagon Steel
Corporation vs.
Court of Appeals
G.R. No. 174141.
June 26, 2009 3 0
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
.
a
b l
C
C
n R
s B a
7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 6/8
5/12/2011
6
CONCILIATION and MEDIATION
Information and statements made at conciliation proceedings
shall be treated as privileged communication and shall not beused as evidence in the Commission; Conciliators and similar
officials shall not testify in any court or body regarding anymatters taken up at conciliation proceedings conducted by them.
3 1
COMPROMISE AGREEMENT
Offers for compromise are irrelevant because
they are not intended as admissions by the
parties making them. A true offer of compromise
does not, in legal contemplation, involve an
admission on the part of a defendant that he or
she is legally liable, or on the part of a plaintiff,
that his or her claim is groundless or even
doubtful, since it is made with a view to avoid
controversy and save the expense of litigation. It
is the distinguishing mark of an offer of
compromise that it is made tentatively,
hypothetically, and in contemplation of mutual
concessions. 3 2
ABANDONMENT
In evaluating a charge of abandonment, the jurisprudential
rule is that abandonment is a matter of intention that cannot be
lightly presumes from equivocal acts. To constitute abandonment,
two elements must concur:
1.The failure to report for work or absence without valid or
justifiable reason,
2.A clear intent, manifested through overt acts, to sever the
employer – employee relationship.
3 3
Alcatel Philippines,
Inc. vs. Relos
G.R. No. 164315.
July 3, 2009
3 4
PROJECT EMPLOYEE
1.The employment of a project employee ends on thedate specified in the employment contract. Therefore,respondent was not illegally dismissed but hisemployment terminated upon the expiration of hisemployment contract. Here, Alcatel employedrespondent as a Site Inspector until 31 December 1995.
2.A project employee or a member of a work pool mayacquire the status of a regular employee when thefollowing concur:
a)There is a continuous rehiring of project employeeseven after the cessation of a project;
b)The tasks performed by the alleged “projectemployee” are vital, necessary and indispensable tothe usual business or trade of the employer.
3 5
TEODOR S. MIRANDA, JR.
vs
ASIAN TERMINALS, INC.
G.R. No. 174316
July 23, 2009
3 6
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
r
,
a
b l
,
C
n R
b
o
ir
s
o
B a
7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 7/8
5/12/2011
7
INTRA UNION DISPUTE INVOLVING
SHOP STEWARD
1.A shop steward is appointed by
the union in a shop, department,
or plant and serves as
representative of the union,
charged with negotiating and
adjustment of grievances of
employees with the supervisor of
the employer.
3 7
2. A shop steward may bean elective official withinthe union or keyadministrative personnel,and it is considered to bewithin the same class asunion officers, agents andrepresentatives.
3 8
Since the Shop Steward is a union position, the
controversy surrounding his recall from his position as Shop
Steward becomes a dispute within the union. An “Internal Union
Dispute” or intra – union conflict refers to a conflict within orinside a labor union. It includes all disputes or grievances arising
from any violation of or disagreement over any provision of theconstitution and by – laws of a union.
3 9
TMI, and not on groundsunder labor laws. Though the
end of the contract between theDA and TMI was not the groundfor the withdrawal of De Raedtfrom the CECAP, De Raedt wasdisengaged from the projectupon the instruction of SGV’sclient.
4 0
DISMISSALS to be LEGAL
When there is no showing of a clear, valid and legal cause for
the termination of employment, the law considers the matter a
case of illegal dismissal and the burden is on the employer to
prove that the termination was for a valid or authorized cause, An
employee’s dismissal due to serious misconduct must be
supported by substantial evidence.
4 1
DUE PROCESS
Under the Labor Code, there are twin requirements to
justify a valid dismissal from employment:
a)The dismissal must be for any of the causes provided in Article
282 of the Labor Code (substantive aspect)
b)The employee must be given an opportunity to be heard and to
defend himself (procedural aspect)
4 2
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
o b l
a
b l
C
R
C
n R
b l e s
B a
C h
lt
s B a
7/23/2019 Bacungan.update on Labor Law ...Tain 2009 August 26, 2010_new
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bacunganupdate-on-labor-law-tain-2009-august-26-2010new 8/8
5/12/2011
8
DUE PROCESS
The essence of the due processrequirement being a mere opportunity to be
heard, we agree with the Court of Appealsthat although respondent was given alimited time to explain his side and presentevidence, he, however, was able to refutethe findings of petitioner. Hence, the chanceafforded to respondent, although limited, isa clear opportunity to be heard on the issueat hand. What the law abhors and prohibitsis the absolute absence of the opportunityto be heard.
4 3
It is necessary for this Court to clarify and explicitlydeclare that no liability for respondent’s illegal dismissal should
attach to petitioners Aguiluz and Cruz, and respondent’s
complaint as against them should be dismissed. Unless they have
exceeded their authority, corporate officers are, as a general rule,
not personally liable for their official acts, because a corporation,
by legal fiction, has a personality separate and distinct from its
officers, stockholders and members.
4 4
1st ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
o b l
u
t
t ,
b l e s
C h
a n R
a
C h a n R o
b l e s
B a
C h a
n R o
b l e s
B a