Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 67 views

    Isae vs. Quisumbing

    Uploaded by

    ronald
    1) The case involves a dispute between local and foreign teachers employed by an international school over differences in pay and benefits. 2) The school claimed the differences were justified based on additional costs borne by foreign hires related to relocation and limited tenure. 3) However, the court ruled that equal pay is required for equal work under Philippine law and public policy, and that the international nature of the school does not exempt it from this requirement. Differences in pay based solely on nationality violate the legal principle of equal pay for equal work.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Isae vs. Quisumbing

    Uploaded by

    ronald
    67 views2 pages
    1) The case involves a dispute between local and foreign teachers employed by an international school over differences in pay and benefits. 2) The school claimed the differences were justified based on additional costs borne by foreign hires related to relocation and limited tenure. 3) However, the court ruled that equal pay is required for equal work under Philippine law and public policy, and that the international nature of the school does not exempt it from this requirement. Differences in pay based solely on nationality violate the legal principle of equal pay for equal work.

    Original Description:

    COL

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The case involves a dispute between local and foreign teachers employed by an international school over differences in pay and benefits. 2) The school claimed the differences were justified based on additional costs borne by foreign hires related to relocation and limited tenure. 3) However, the court ruled that equal pay is required for equal work under Philippine law and public policy, and that the international nature of the school does not exempt it from this requirement. Differences in pay based solely on nationality violate the legal principle of equal pay for equal work.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    67 views2 pages

    Isae vs. Quisumbing

    Uploaded by

    ronald
    1) The case involves a dispute between local and foreign teachers employed by an international school over differences in pay and benefits. 2) The school claimed the differences were justified based on additional costs borne by foreign hires related to relocation and limited tenure. 3) However, the court ruled that equal pay is required for equal work under Philippine law and public policy, and that the international nature of the school does not exempt it from this requirement. Differences in pay based solely on nationality violate the legal principle of equal pay for equal work.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    International School Alliance of Educators v.

    Quisumbing
    Doctrine: The basic test of an asserted bargaining unit's acceptability is whether or not it is
    fundamentally the combination which will best assure to all employees the exercise of their
    collective bargaining rights.

    FACTS:
    1. Petitioners work under private respondent International School. The school is authorized to
    employ its own personnel selected by it either from Philippine or other nationalities abroad.

    2. The school hires both foreign and local teachers as members of its faculty, classifying the
    same as: foreign hires and local hires.

    3. The School grants foreign hires certain benefits not accorded local hires: like

    b. Housing
    c. Transportation
    d. shipping costs
    e. taxes
    f. home leave travel allowance
    g. salary rate of 25% more than local hires

    4. Petitioners contested the difference in salary rates between foreign and local hires. They
    claim that it is discriminatory to Filipinos, and is violative of the legal truism of "equal pay
    for equal work."

    5. The school justifies the difference on the economic disadvantage of foreign hires since they
    have to endure dislocation factor and limited tenure.

    ISSUE:
    WON the legal truism of "equal pay for equal work applies to the school notwithstanding its
    international character.

    Ruling

    1. Yes. The Constitution enjoins the State to "protect the rights of workers and promote their
    welfare to afford labor full protection." The State, therefore, has the right and duty to regulate
    the relations between labor and capital. These relations are not merely contractual but are so
    impressed with public interest that labor contracts, collective bargaining agreements
    included, must yield to the common good. Should such contracts contain stipulations that
    are contrary to public policy, courts will not hesitate to strike down these stipulations.

    2. Public policy abhors inequality and discrimination. Persons who work with substantially
    equal qualifications, skill, effort and responsibility, under similar conditions, should be paid
    similar salaries. This rule applies to the School notwithstanding its "international
    character".

    3. The Constitution, Article 19 of the Civil Code, the Labor Code and the International
    Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights impregnably institutionalize in this
    jurisdiction the long honored legal truism of "equal pay for equal work."

    4. The practice of the School of according higher salaries to foreign-hires contravenes public
    policy.

    You might also like