Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 103 views

    Ace Navigation vs. Fernandez

    Uploaded by

    Nej Adunay
    The document summarizes a labor dispute between Ace Navigation and seaman Fernandez over disability benefits. Fernandez filed a complaint with the NLRC seeking benefits. Ace Navigation argued the labor arbiter had no jurisdiction and that disputes must be resolved through mandatory arbitration according to the collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The labor arbiter denied the motion, asserting jurisdiction over money claims. The NLRC and CA also denied Ace Navigation's appeals. The issue before the court is whether mandatory arbitration can be waived. The court held that the CBA language unequivocally requires disputes be submitted to grievance procedures and mandatory arbitration, which cannot be waived.

    Copyright:

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

    Ace Navigation vs. Fernandez

    Uploaded by

    Nej Adunay
    103 views1 page
    The document summarizes a labor dispute between Ace Navigation and seaman Fernandez over disability benefits. Fernandez filed a complaint with the NLRC seeking benefits. Ace Navigation argued the labor arbiter had no jurisdiction and that disputes must be resolved through mandatory arbitration according to the collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The labor arbiter denied the motion, asserting jurisdiction over money claims. The NLRC and CA also denied Ace Navigation's appeals. The issue before the court is whether mandatory arbitration can be waived. The court held that the CBA language unequivocally requires disputes be submitted to grievance procedures and mandatory arbitration, which cannot be waived.

    Original Title

    20. Ace Navigation vs. Fernandez.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes a labor dispute between Ace Navigation and seaman Fernandez over disability benefits. Fernandez filed a complaint with the NLRC seeking benefits. Ace Navigation argued the labor arbiter had no jurisdiction and that disputes must be resolved through mandatory arbitration according to the collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The labor arbiter denied the motion, asserting jurisdiction over money claims. The NLRC and CA also denied Ace Navigation's appeals. The issue before the court is whether mandatory arbitration can be waived. The court held that the CBA language unequivocally requires disputes be submitted to grievance procedures and mandatory arbitration, which cannot be waived.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    103 views1 page

    Ace Navigation vs. Fernandez

    Uploaded by

    Nej Adunay
    The document summarizes a labor dispute between Ace Navigation and seaman Fernandez over disability benefits. Fernandez filed a complaint with the NLRC seeking benefits. Ace Navigation argued the labor arbiter had no jurisdiction and that disputes must be resolved through mandatory arbitration according to the collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The labor arbiter denied the motion, asserting jurisdiction over money claims. The NLRC and CA also denied Ace Navigation's appeals. The issue before the court is whether mandatory arbitration can be waived. The court held that the CBA language unequivocally requires disputes be submitted to grievance procedures and mandatory arbitration, which cannot be waived.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    20. Ace Navigation vs. Fernandez GR 197309, Oct.

    10, 2012

    Fact: On October 9, 2008, seaman Respondent filed with the NLRC a complaint for disability
    benefits, with prayer for moral and exemplary damages, plus attorney’s fees, against
    petitioners. The petitioners moved to dismiss the complaint, contending that the labor
    arbiter had no jurisdiction over the dispute. They argued that exclusive original jurisdiction
    is with the voluntary arbitrator or panel of voluntary arbitrators, pursuant to Section 29 of
    the POEA Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC), since the parties are covered by the
    CBA. Under Section 14 of the CBA, a dispute between a seafarer and the company shall be
    settled through the grievance machinery and mandatory voluntary arbitration. Fernandez
    opposed the motion. He argued that inasmuch as his complaint involves a money claim,
    original and exclusive jurisdiction over the case is vested with the labor arbiter. Labor
    Arbiter denied the motion to dismiss, holding that under Section 10 of Republic Act (R.A.)
    No. 8042, the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, the labor arbiter has
    original and exclusive jurisdiction over money claims arising out of an employer-employee
    relationship or by virtue of any law or contract, notwithstanding any provision of law to the
    contrary. The petitioners appealed to the NLRC, but the labor agency denied the appeal. The
    petitioners moved for reconsideration, but the NLRC denied the motion, prompting the
    petitioners to elevate the case to the CA which was also denied, Hence the petition.

    Issue: Whether the Mandatory Arbitration can be waived?

    Held: No, Contrary to the CA’s reading of the CBA’s Article 14, there is unequivocal or
    unmistakable language in the agreement which mandatorily requires the parties to submit
    to the grievance procedure any dispute or cause of action they may have against each
    other. Any Dispute, grievance, or misunderstanding concerning any ruling, practice, wages
    or working conditions in the COMPANY or any breach of the Contract of Employment, or any
    dispute arising from the meaning or application of the provisions of this Agreement or a
    claim of violation thereof or any complaint or cause of action that any such Seaman may
    have against the COMPANY, as well as complaints which the COMPANY may have against
    such Seaman shall be brought to the attention of the GRIEVANCE RESOLUTION COMMITTEE
    before either party takes any action, legal or otherwise. Bringing such a dispute to the
    Grievance Resolution Committee shall be unwaivable prerequisite or condition precedent for
    bringing any action, legal or otherwise, in any forum and the failure to so refer the dispute
    shall bar any and all legal or other actions. If by reason of the nature of the Dispute, the
    parties are unable to amicably settle the dispute, either party may refer the case to a
    MANDATORY ARBITRATION COMMITTEE. The MANDATORY ARBITRATION COMMITTEE shall
    consist of one representative to be designated by the UNION, and one representative to be
    designated by the COMPANY and a third member who shall act as Chairman and shall be
    nominated by mutual choice of the parties.

    You might also like