Labor Law - Faqsnuas 2023 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS

• A. LEGAL BASIS
o 1. 1987 Constitution
o 2. Civil Code
o 3. Labor Code
• B. STATE POLICY TOWARDS LABOR
o 1. Security of Tenure
o 2. Social Justice
o 3. Equal Work Opportunities
o 4. Right to Self-Organization and Collective Bargaining
o 5. Construction in Favor of Labor
o 6. Burden of Proof and Quantum of Evidence
II. PRE-EMPLOYMENT
• A. RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT OF LOCAL AND MIGRANT WORKERS
o 1. Definition of Recruitment and Placement
o 2. Regulation of Recruitment and Placement
■ Regulatory Authorities
• Philippine Overseas Employment and Administration

• Regulatory and Visitorial Powers of the Department of Labor and
Employment Secretary
■ Ban on Direct Hiring
■ Entities prohibited from Recruiting
■ Suspension or Cancellation of License or Authority
■ Prohibited Practices [Article 34, Labor Code]

o 3. Illegal recruitment [Labor Code and the Migrant Workers and Overseas
Employment Act of 1995 (RA 8042), as amended by RA 10022]
■ Elements
■ Types
■ Illegal recruitment vs. Estafa
0 4.Liability of Local Recruitment Agency and Foreign Employer
■ Solidary Liability
■ Theory of Imputed Knowledge
0 5. Termination of Contract of Migrant Worker
• B. Employment of Non-Resident Aliens

• C. Discriminatory Practices
o Age (RA 10911 or the Anti-Age Discrimination in Employment Act)
o Gender and/or Marital Status (RA 9710 or the Magna Carta of Women)
o Health Condition (RA 7277 or the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons)
o Solo Parents (Sec. 7, RA 8972, as amended by RA 11861)
#HernanDoltBar2023 #ParaSaBARyan
THAT IN ALL THINGS, GOD MAY BE GLORIFIED
SBCA CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ill. EMPLOYMENT PROPER

• A. Management Prerogative
o 1. Discipline
o 2. Transfer of Employees
o 3. Productivity Standard
o 4.Bonus
o 5. Change of Working Hours
o 6.Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications
o 7. Marriage between Employees of Competitor-Employers
o 8. Post-Employment Restrictions
• B. Labor Standards
o 1. Conditions of employment
■ Coverage
■ Hours of work
• Normal hours of work; hours worked
• Compressed work week
• Meal periods
• Night-shift differential
• Overtime work
• Computation of additional Compensation (Rates only)
■ Rest Period
■ Holidays
■ Service charge [Article 96 of the Labor Code, as amended by RA
11360]
■ Occupational Safety and Health Standards LAw (RA 11058)
• Covered Wokplaces [Sec. 3(c)]

• Duties of Employers Workers and Other Persons [Sec. 4]
• Workers' Right to Know [Sec. 5]
• Workers' Right to Refuse Unsafe Work [Sec. 6]
• Workers' Right to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) [Sec. 8]
o 2. Wages
■ Definitions
• Wage vs. Salary
• Facilities vs. Supplements
■ Principles
• No Work, No Pay
• Equal Pay for Equal Work
• Fair Wage for Fair Work
• Non-Diminution of Benefits
TABLE OF CONTENTS
■ Payment of Wages
■ Prohibitions Regarding Wages
■ Wage Distortion
• Concept
■ Minimum Wage Law
■ Holiday Pay
■ 13th Month Pay
o 3. Leaves
■ Service incentive leave
■ Expanded Maternity leave

■ Paternity leave
■ Solo parent leave (RA 8972, as amended by RA 11861)
■ Leave benefits for women workers under Magna Carta of Women

(R.A. No. 9710) and Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children
of 2004 (R.A. No. 9262)
■ Compassionate Leaves
o 4. Special groups of employees

■ Women
• Discrimination
• Stipulation against marriage
• Prohibited acts
■ Minors
■ Kasambahays
■ Homeworkers
■ Night workers
■ Apprentices and Learners
■ Persons with Disabilities

• Discrimination
0 Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (RA 7277)
0 Mental Health Act (RA 11036)
• Incentives for Employers
0 5. Sexual Harassment in the Work Environment
■ Sexual Harassment Act (R.A. No. 7877)
■ Safe Spaces Act (Article IV of R.A. No. 11313 only; Exclude: Liability of
Employers)
• C. Social Welfare Legislation
o 1. SSS Law (R.A. No. 8282, as amended by RA 11199)
■ Coverage
■ Dependents and beneficiaries
■ Benefits
TABLE OF CONTENTS
o 2. GSIS Law (R.A. No. 8291)

■Coverage
■Dependents and beneficiaries
■ Benefits
o 3. Disability and death benefits
■ Labor Code
■ POEA-Standard Employment Contract

• D. Labor Relations
o 1. Right to self-organization
■ Coverage
■ Eligibility for Membership
■ Doctrine of Necessary Implication

■ Commingling or Mixed Membership
■ Effect of Inclusion as Members of Employees Outside of the
Bargaining Unit
o 2. Bargaining Unit
o 3. Bargaining Representative
o 4. Rights of Labor Organizations
■ Check-Off, Assessment, and Agency Fees
■ Collective Bargaining
• Economic Terms and Conditions
• Non-Economic Terms and Conditions
• Duty to Bargain Collectively
• Mandatory Provisions in the Collective Bargaining Agreement
(CBA)
o 5. Unfair Labor Practices
■ Nature and Aspect
■ By Employers
■ By Organizations
0 6. Peaceful Concerted Activities
■ Strikes (Valid vs. Illegal)
■ Picketing
■ Lockouts
■ Assumption of Jurisdiction by the DOLE Secretary
o 7. Telecommuting Act (RA 11165)

■ Definition [Sec. 3]
■ Telecommuting Program [Sec. 4]
■ Fair Treatment [Sec. 5]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IV. POST-EMPLOYMENT
• A. Employer-Employee Relationship
o 1. Tests to Determine Employer-Employee Relationship
o 2. Kinds of Employment
■ Regular
■ Casual
■ Probationary
■ Project
■ Seasonal
■ Fixed-term
■ Floating Status
o 3. Legitimate Subcontracting vs. Labor-Only Contracting
■ Elements
■ Trilateral Relationship
■ Solidary Liability
• B. Termination of Employment by Employer
o 1. Just Causes
o 2. Authorized Causes
o 3. Due Process
■ Twin Notice Requirement
■ Hearing
o 4. Termination of Contract of Migrant Workers under RA 8042 as
amended by RA 10022
• C. Termination of Employment by Employee
o 1. Resignation vs. Constructive Dismissal
• D. Preventive Suspension
• E. Reliefs from Illegal Dismissal
• F. Retirement
V. JURISDICTION AND RELIEFS
• A. Labor Arbiter
0 1. Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiter vs. Jurisdiction of Regional Director
0 2. Requisites to Perfect an Appeal with the National Labor Relations
Commission
0 3. Reinstatement and/or Execution Pending Appeal
• B. National Labor Relations Commission

• C. Court of Appeals
• D. Supreme Court
• E. Bureau of Labor Relations
• F. National Conciliation and Mediation Board
o Conciliation vs. Mediation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• G. DOLE Regional Directors

• H. DOLE Secretary
o 1. Jurisdiction
o 2. Visitorial and Enforcement Powers
o 3. Power to Suspend Effects of Termination
o 4. Remedies
• I. Voluntary Arbitrator
• J. Prescription of Actions
o 1. Money Claims
o 2. Illegal Dismissal
o 3. Unfair Labor Practice
o 4. Offenses under the Labor Code
o 5. Illegal Recruitment
employees engaged in company operations.
I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND
Nini and Nono are required to ensure that
CONCEPTS
such employees obey company rules and
regulations, and recommend to the
company's Human Resources Department any
A. LEGAL BASIS
required disciplinary action against erring
employees. In Nextum Corporation, there are
two independent unions, representing
1. 1987 Constitution rank-and-file and supervisory employees,
respectively.
2. Civil Code a) May Nini and Nono join a union? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Nini and Nono may

3. Labor Code join a union. Pursuant to Article 255 of the
Labor Code, a labor organization designated or
selected by the majority of the employees in an
appropriate collective bargaining unit shall be
B. STATE POLICY TOWARDS LABOR the exclusive representative of the employees
in such a unit for the purpose of collective
bargaining. In the present case, considering
1. Security of Tenure that Nini and Nono are supervisors, they may
join a supervisory union. The only limitation
prescribed under the Labor Code is that
2. Social Justice supervisors and rank-and-file employees cannot
lump into a single union (Article 255, Labor
Code).
3. Equal Work Opportunities B) May the two unions be affiliated with the
same Union Federation? (2.5%) (2018 Bar
Exam)
4. Right to Self-Organization and Collective
Bargaining SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. Pursuant to R.A.
9481, a rank and file union and a supervisors'
union operating within the same establishment
QUESTION: The employees’ rights to may join the same federation or national union
organize and to bargain collectively are as affiliates thereof. (Article 255, Labor Code,
means of exercising the broader right to as amended).
participate in policy or decision-making
processes. The employees' right to ───※ ·❆· ※───
participate in policy and decision making
processes is available QUESTION: Nagrab Union and Nagrab
(A) if a labor-management council exists. Corporation have an existing CBA which
(B) if a labor-management council does contains the following provision: "New
not exist. employees within the coverage of the
(C) if a union exists and it agrees to the bargaining unit who may be regularly
creation of a labor-management employed shall become members of Nagrab
council. Union. Membership in good standing with the
(D) whether or not a labor-management Nagrab Union is a requirement for continued
council exists. (2011 Bar Exam) employment with Nagrab Corporation."
Nagrab Corporation subsequently acquired
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) Whether or not a all the assets and rights of Nuber
labor-management council exists. Corporation and absorbed all of the latter's
employees. Nagrab Union immediately
───※ ·❆· ※─── demanded enforcement of the above- stated
CBA provision with respect to the absorbed
QUESTION: Nexturn Corporation employed employees. Nagrab Corporation refused on
Nini and Nono, whose tasks involved the ground that this should not apply to the
directing and supervising rank-and-file absorbed employees who were former
1
employees of another corporation whose
II. PRE-EMPLOYMENT
assets and rights it had acquired.
(a) Was Nagrab Corporation correct in

A. RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT OF
refusing to enforce the CBA provision with
LOCAL AND MIGRANT WORKERS
respect to the absorbed employees? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Nagrab Corporation

is not correct in refusing to enforce the CBA 1. Definition of Recruitment and Placement
provision with respect to the absorbed
employees. The reason being is that all
employees covered by the bargaining unit are 2. Regulation of Recruitment and
subject to the terms of a union security Placement Activities
agreement. The CBA provision is clear -
“membership in good standing with the Nagrab
Union is a requirement for continued a) Regulatory Authorities
employment with Nagrab Corporation.”
The Supreme Court, in the case of BPI (1) Philippine Overseas Employment
Employees Union-Davao City-FUBU v. Bank of Administration
the Philippines Islands G.R. No. 174912, July
24, 2013, ruled that the union security clause
does not differentiate between regular (2) Regulatory and Visitorial Powers of the
employees and how they acquire the status of a Department
"new employee" for coverage under the clause. of Labor and Employment Secretary
As a result of a merger or acquisition of assets
and rights between two corporations, absorbed
employees should be regarded as new b) Ban on Direct Hiring
employees of the surviving corporation.
QUESTION: As a rule, direct hiring of migrant
(b) May a newly-regularized employee of workers is not allowed. What are the
Nagrab Corporation (who is not part of the exceptions? Explain your answer. (2017 Bar
absorbed employees) refuse to join Nagrab Exam)
Union? How would you advise the human
resources manager of Nagrab Corporation to SUGGESTED ANSWER: The ban on direct hiring
proceed? (2.5%) (2018 Bar Exam) does not apply to:
1. Members of the diplomatic corps;
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, they may not refuse 2. International organization;
to join the union because all employees 3. Heads of State;
covered by the bargaining unit are subject to 4. Government officials with the rank of
the terms of a union security agreement. Thus, at least deputy minister;
if Nagrab Union recommends the dismissal of a 5. Government officials with lesser rank,
newly-regularized employee who refuses to join if endorsed by the Philippine Overseas
the union, I would advise the human resources Labor Office (POLO), or Head of Mission
manager of Nagrab Corporation to approve the in the absence of the POLO;
recommendation after complying with the 6. Relatives who are permanent residents
procedural requirements of due process, which of the host country (Revised POEA
means that the employee concerned should be Rules Governing the Recruitment and
required to explain before effecting the Employment of Land-based Overseas
dismissal. Workers of 2016);
7. Employers of professionals and skilled
5. Construction in Favor of Labor workers with duly
executed/authenticated contracts
containing terms and conditions over
6. Burden of Proof and Quantum of and above the standards set by the
Evidence Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration (POEA); and
2
8. Those that may be allowed by the (A) The recruiter demands and gets
Secretary of Labor and Employment money from the recruit but issues no
(Article 18, Labor Code). receipt.
9. Name hires or workers who are able to (B) The recruiter gives the impression
secure overseas employment that he is able to send the recruit
opportunities with an employer abroad.
without the assistance or participation (C) The recruiter has insufficient capital
of any agency. [Labor Code, POEA and has no fixed address.
Rules] (D) The recruiter has no authority to
recruit. (2011 Bar Exam)
c) Entities Prohibited from Recruiting
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) The recruiter gives
the impression that he is able to send the
recruit abroad.
d) Suspension or Cancellation of License or
Authority
b) Types
e) Prohibited Practices [Article 34, Labor

QUESTION. Rocket Corporation is a domestic
Code]
corporation registered with the SEC, with
30% of its authorized capital stock owned by
foreigners and 70% of its authorized capital
3. Illegal Recruitment [Labor Code and the stock owned by Filipinos.
Migrant Workers and (a) Is Rocket Corporation allowed to
Overseas Employment Act of 1995 (RA engage in the recruitment and
8042), as amended by RA placement of workers, locally and
10022] overseas? Briefly state the basis for
your answer. (2%)
QUESTION. During the open forum following (b) When does the recruitment of
your lecture to a group of managers and HRD workers become an act of economic
personnel, you were asked the following sabotage? (2%) (2015 Bar Exam)
questions: What qualifying circumstances
will convert “illegal recruitment” to SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) No. Art. 27 of the
“economic sabotage,” thus subjecting its Labor Code mandates that foreign corporations,
perpetrator or perpetrators to a penalty of engaged in the recruitment and placement of
life imprisonment and a fine of at least workers, both locally or overseas, cannot own
P500,000.00? (2005 Bar Exam) more that twenty-five percent (25%) of the
authorized and voting capital stock.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Section 6(m) of R.A.
8042 or the Migrant Workers and Overseas OTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. Article 27 of
Filipinos Act of 1995 as amended provides that the Labor Code requires that a Corporation
illegal recruitment is considered economic must have at least 75% of its authorized and
sabotage if it is committed by a syndicate or is voting capital stock owned and controlled by
large scale in scope. Filipino citizens in order to legally engage in
the recruitment and placement of workers,
It is syndicated illegal recruitment if the illegal both locally and overseas. However, because
recruitment is carried out by three (3) or more only 70% of its authorized capital stock is
conspirators. On the other hand, large-scale owned by Filipinos, it cannot participate in the
illegal recruitment exists when three (3) or valid recruitment and placement of workers,
more persons, individually or as a group, are whether locally or overseas.
victimized by an illegal recruiter (Art. 38(b),
Labor Code and Sec. 6, Migrant Workers Act). (b) Illegal recruitment is considered as
economic sabotage if it is:
a. carried out by a group of three (3) or
a) Elements
more persons conspiring or
confederating with one another, and
QUESTION. Which of the following is an b. it is committed or against three (3) or
essential element of illegal recruitment? more persons individually or as a group.
3
even if AMA and Invictus had already
c) Illegal Recruitment vs. Estafa
terminated their contract.
4. Liability of Local Recruitment Agency b) Theory of Imputed Knowledge

and Foreign Employer
5. Termination of Contract of Migrant

a) Solidary Liability Worker
QUESTION. When a recruitment agency fails

B. EMPLOYMENT OF NON-RESIDENT ALIENS
to deploy a recruit without valid reason and
without the recruit's fault, the agency is
obligated to QUESTION: George is an American who is
(A) reimburse the recruit's documentary working as a consultant for a local IT
and processing expenses. company. The company has a union and
(B) reimburse the recruit’s expenses with George wants to support the union. How far
6% interest. can George go in terms of his support for the
(C) pay the recruit damages equivalent union? (3%) (2015 Bar Exam)
to one year’s salary.
(D) find another employer and deploy SUGGESTED ANSWER: Considering that he is a
the recruit within 12 months. (2011 foreigner, George is prohibited from engaging,
Bar Exam) directly or indirectly, in all forms of trade union
activities, unless he is employed – provided
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) Reimburse the that he is in possession of valid permits issued
recruit's documentary and processing expenses. by DOLE and proof of reciprocity — George
must first prove that the country where he is a
───※ ·❆· ※─── national recognizes the right of Filipinos
working therein to organize (Art. 269 of the
QUESTION. Andrew Manning Agency (AMA) Labor Code, as amended by R.A. 6715).
recruited Feliciano for employment by
lnvictus Shipping, its foreign principal. However, George is not an employee but an
Meantime, AMA and lnvictus Shipping independent contractor. As a consultant, he is
terminated their agency agreement. Upon contracted to do his work according to his own
his repatriation following his premature methods and without being subject to the
termination, Feliciano claimed from AMA and control of the employer except only as to the
lnvictus Shipping the payment of his salaries result of the work. There is no existing
and benefits for the unserved portion of the employer-employee relationship between
contract. AMA denied liability on the ground George and the IT company. Not being an
that it no longer had an agency agreement employee, he cannot assist the union nor join
with lnvictus Shipping. Is AMA correct? it.
Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 Bar Exam)
───※ ·❆· ※───
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, AMA is not correct.
Pursuant to R.A. 8042 or the Migrant Workers QUESTION. Phil, a resident alien, sought
and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, the solidary employment in the Philippines. The
liability of a manning agency is not affected by employer, noticing that Phil was a foreigner,
the pre-termination of its contract with its demanded that he first secures an
foreign principal. The solidary liability of the employment permit from the DOLE. Is the
principal and the recruitment agency exists for employer correct? Explain your answer.
the whole duration of the employment (2.5%) (2017 Bar Exam)
contract. Neither is it affected by the
assumption of its responsibility by another SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the employer is not
manning agency. correct because Phil is a resident alien. Under
the D.O. 186-17, permanent resident foreign
In the case at bar, AMA recruited Feliciano for nationals and probationary or temporary
employment by Invictus Shipping. Accordingly, resident visa holders under Section 13 (a-f) of
AMA remains solidarily liable with Invictus for the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940 and
any breach of Feliciano’s employment contract Section 3 of the Alien Social Integration Act of
4
1995 are exempted from securing an Alien result in Din Din being removed from the
Employment Permit. supermarket. Din Din approaches you, as
counsel, for legal advice. What would you
advise her? (4%) (2015 Bar Exam)
C. DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Din Din may file a
complaint against her boss for illegal dismissal.
1. Age (RA 10911 or the Anti-Age
An employee is not bound to accept a
Discrimination in Employment Act)
promotion, which is in the nature of a gift or
reward. Refusal to be promoted is a valid
exercise of a right. Such exercise cannot be
2. Gender and/or Marital Status (RA 9710
considered in law as insubordination, or willful
or the Magna Carta of
disobedience of a lawful order of the employer,
Women)
thus, it cannot be the basis of an employee's
dismissal from service (Echo 2000 Commercial
Corporation v. Obrero Filipino-Echo 2000
3. Health Condition (RA 7277 or the Magna Chapter-CLO, G.R. No. 214092, Jan. 11, 2016).
Carta for Disabled
Persons)
In Pfizer Inc. v. Velasco (645 SCRA
135 [2011]), the Supreme Court held that the
management prerogative to transfer personnel
4. Solo Parents (Sec. 7, RA 8972, as must be exercised without grave abuse of
amended by RA 11861) discretion and putting to mind the basic
elements of justice and fair play. Hence, Din
QUESTION. Of the four definitions below, Din’s dismissal is illegal.
which one does NOT fit the definition of
“solo parent” under the Solo Parents Furthermore, R.A. 1161 prohibits discrimination
Welfare Act? against any solo parent employee with respect
(A) Solo parenthood while the other to terms and conditions of employment on
parent serves a sentence for at least account of his/her status.
one year.
(B) A woman who gives birth as a result
III. EMPLOYMENT PROPER
of rape.
(C) Solo parenthood due to the death of
a spouse.
A. MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVE
(D) Solo parenthood where the spouse
left for abroad and fails to give
support for more than a year. (2011
1. Discipline
Bar Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) Solo parenthood

where the spouse left for abroad and fails to 2. Transfer of Employees
give support for more than a year.
───※ ·❆· ※─── 3. Productivity Standard
QUESTION. Din Din is a single mother with

one child. She is employed as a sales 4. Bonus
executive at a prominent supermarket. She
and her child live in Quezon City and her QUESTION. X Company’s CBA grants each
residence and workplace are a 15-minute employee a 14th month year-end bonus.
drive apart. One day, Din Din is informed by Because the company is in financial
her boss that she is being promoted to a difficulty, its head wants to negotiate the
managerial position but she is now being discontinuance of such bonus. Would such a
transferred to the Visayas. Din Din does not proposal violate the “non-diminution rule”
want to uproot her family and refuses the in the Labor Code?
offer. Her boss is so humiliated by Din Din's (A) No, but it will certainly amount to
refusal of the offer that she gives Din Din negotiating in bad faith.
successive unsatisfactory evaluations that
5
(B) Yes since the rule is that benefits
a) Coverage
already granted in a CBA cannot be
withdrawn or reduced.
(C) No, since the law does not prohibit a QUESTION. LKG Garments Inc. makes baby
negotiated discontinuance of a CBA clothes for export. As part of its measures to
benefit. meet its orders, LKG requires its employees
(D) Yes, since such discontinuance will to work beyond eight (8) hours everyday,
cancel the enjoyment of existing from Monday to Saturday. It pays its
benefits. (2011 Bar Exam) employees an additional 35% of their regular
hourly wage for work rendered in excess of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (C) No, since the law eight (8) hours per day. Because of
does not prohibit a negotiated discontinuance additional orders, LKG now requires two (2)
of a CBA benefit. shifts of workers with both shifts working
beyond eight (8) hours but only up to a
maximum of four (4) hours. Carding is an
employee who used to render up to six (6)
5. Change of Working Hours
hours of overtime work before the change in
schedule. He complains that the change
QUESTION. The meal time (lunch break) for adversely affected him because now he can
the dining crew in Glorious Restaurant is only earn up to a maximum of four (4) hours'
either from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m. or from 1:30 worth of overtime pay. Does Carding have a
p.m. to 2:30 p.m., with pay. But the cause of action against the company? (4%)
management wants to change the mealtime (2015 Bar Exam)
to 11: a.m. to 12 noon or 12:30 p.m. to 1:30
p.m., without pay. Will the change be legal? SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Carding does not
(A) Yes, absent an agreement to the have a cause of action against the company.
contrary, the management Enforcing a limit on overtime work is a
determines work hours and, by law, management prerogative exercised in good
meal break is without pay. faith by LKG Garments. It is not demandable as
(B) No, because lunch break regardless a matter of right nor is it a diminution of
of time should be with pay. benefits. It is only the employer who can
(C) Yes, the management has control of require employees to render overtime work
its operations. under exceptional situations. Likewise, Article
(D) No, because existing practice cannot 87 of the Labor Code does not guarantee an
be discontinued unilaterally. (2011 employee of overtime work.
Bar Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) Yes, absent an b) Hours of Work

agreement to the contrary, the management
determines work hours and, by law, meal break
is without pay. (1) Normal Hours of Work and Hours
Worked
6. Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications
QUESTION. Under the Labor Code, its
provisions on working conditions, including
7. Marriage Between Employees of the eight-hour work day rule, do not apply
Competitor-Employers to domestic helpers. Does it follow from this
that a domestic helper's workday is not
limited by law?
8. Post-Employment Restrictions (A) No, since a domestic helper cannot
be required to work more than ten
hours a day.
B. LABOR STANDARDS (B) Yes, since a domestic helper's hours
of work depend on the needs of the
household he or she works for.
1. Conditions of Employment (C) No, because a domestic helper is
legally entitled to overtime pay after
ten hours of work.
6
(D) Yes, a domestic helper may be (D) domestic helper. (2011 Bar Exam)
required to work twelve hours a day
or beyond. (2011 Bar Exam) SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) A regular company
employee.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) No, since a domestic
helper cannot be required to work more than
d) Holidays
ten hours a day.
(2) Compressed Work Week e) Service Charge [Article 96 of the Labor

Code, as amended
by RA 11360]
(3) Meal Periods
f) Occupational Safety and Health

(4) Night-Shift Differential Standards Law (RA 11058)
(5) Overtime Work (1) Covered Workplaces [Sec. 3(c)]
QUESTION. Percival was a mechanic of

(2) Duties of Employers Workers and Other
Pacific Airlines. He enjoyed a meal break of
Persons
one hour. However, during meal breaks, he
[Sec. 4]
was required to be on stand-by for
emergency work. During emergencies, he was
made to forego his meals or to hurry up
(3) Workers’ Right to Know [Sec. 5]
eating. He demanded payment of overtime
for work done during his meal periods. Is
Percival correct? explain your answer. (3%)
(2017 Bar Exam) (4) Workers' Right to Refuse Unsafe Work
[Sec. 6]
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Percival is correct.
His meal period is considered as hours worked
because he cannot use his one-hour meal (5) Workers' Right to Personal Protective
period for his own purposes. During his meal Equipment
period, he is not completely relieved of his (PPE) [Sec. 8]
duties because he is required to be on stand-by
for emergency work. In effect, he was engaged
to wait for emergencies (PANAM v. Pan 2. Wages
American Employees Association, G.R. No.
L-16275, Feb. 23, 1961).
a) Definitions
(6) Computation of Additional

Compensation (Rates QUESTION: The Regional Tripartite Wages
only) and Productivity Board (RTWPB) for Region 3
issued a wage order on November 2, 2017
fixing the minimum wages for all industries
c) Rest Periods throughout Region 3.
(a) Is the wage order subject to the approval

QUESTION. Under the Labor Code on Working of the National Wages and Productivity
Conditions and Rest Periods, a person hired Commission before it takes effect? (2%)
by a high company official but paid for by
the company to clean and maintain his staff (b) The law mandates that no petition for
house is regarded as wage increase shall be entertained within a
(A) a person rendering personal service period of 12 months from the effectivity of
to another. the wage order. Under what circumstances
(B) a regular company employee. may the Kilusang Walang Takot, a federation
(C) a family member. of labor organizations that publicly and
7
openly assails the wage order as blatantly wage, the employees' effective daily rate
unjust, initiate the review of the wage would be way above the minimum pay
increases under the wage order without required by law. The company counsel
waiting for the end of the 12-month period? further points out that the employees are
explain your answer. (3%) (2017 Bar Exam) aware that their food and lodging form part
of their salary, and have long accepted the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) No, wage orders arrangement.
issued by the RTWPB are not subject to
approval of the National Wages and Is the company's position legally
Productivity Commission before they take correct?(8%) (2013 Bar Exam)
effect. The rules merely require the RTWPB to
furnish the National Wages and Productivity
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. Under the law, only
Commission with a copy of the Wage Order.
the value of the facilities may be deducted
Approval by the National Wages and
from the employees but not the value of
Productivity Commission is not necessary
supplements. Supplements granted voluntarily,
because wage orders issued by the RTWPB are
regularly and unconditionally cannot be
appealable to the National Wages and
reduced or withdrawn under the principle of
Productivity Commission. Article 99 of the
non-diminution of benefits (Atok Big Wedge
Labor Code is clear - the minimum wage rates
Mutual Benefit Association v. Atok Big Wedge
in each region of the country shall be those
Mining Co., G.R. No. L-7349, July 19, 1955).
prescribed by the RTWPB without mentioning
The difference lies in the purpose why it was
approval by the National Wages and
given by the employer. If it is primarily for the
Productivity Commission. The jurisdiction of
employees gain, then the benefit is a facility.
the National Wages and Productivity
However, if its provision is mainly for the
Commission is appellate.
employer’s advantage, then it is a supplement
(Our House Realty vs. Parian, G.R. No. 204651,
(b) The Kilusang Walang Takot can initiate the
Aug. 6, 2014). In the present case, the board
review of the wage increases under the wage
and lodging provided for by Gamma Company
order without waiting for the end of the
falls under supplements because it is for the
12-month period in case of supervening events,
employer’s advantage. Thus, it is not part of
such as extraordinary increase in prices of
the employee’s wages.
petroleum products and basic goods/services
(Sec. 3, Rule IV, Revised Rules of Procedure on
Minimum Wage Fixing). b) Principles
(1) Wage vs. Salary

(1) No Work, No Pay
(2) Facilities vs. Supplements

(2) Equal Pay for Equal Work
QUESTION. Gamma Company pays its regular

employees P350.00 a day, and houses them (3) Fair Wage for Fair Work
in a dormitory inside its factory compound
in Manila. Gamma Company also provides
them with three full meals a day. (4) Non-Diminution of Benefits
In the course of a routine inspection, a QUESTION. Far East Bank (FEB) is one of the
Department of Labor and Employment leading banks in the country. Its
(DOLE) Inspector noted that the workers' compensation and bonus packages are top of
pay is below the prescribed minimum wage the industry. For the last 6 years, FEB had
of P426.00 plus P30.00 allowance, and thus been providing the following bonuses
required Gamma Company to pay wage across-the-board to all its employees: (a)
differentials. 13th month pay; (b) 14th to 18th month pay;
(c) Christmas basket worth P6,000; (d) Gift
Gamma Company denies any liability, check worth P4,000; and (e)
explaining that after the market value of Productivity-based incentive ranging from a
the company provided board and lodging are 20% to 40% increase in gross monthly salary
added to the employees' P350 cash daily
8
for all employees who would receive an withdrawn without the consent of its affected
evaluation of "Excellent" for 3 straight employees.
quarters in the same year. Because of its
poor performance over-all, FEB decided to
c) Payment of Wages
cut back on the bonuses this year and
limited itself to the following: (a) 13th
month pay; (b) 14th month pay; (c) QUESTION. Nelda worked as a chambermaid
Christmas basket worth P4,000; and (d) Gift in Hotel Neverland with a basic wage of
check worth P2,000 PhP560.00 for an eight-hour workday. On
Good Friday, she worked for one (1) hour
Katrina, an employee of FEB, who had from 10:00 PM to 11:00 PM. Her employer
gotten a rating of "Excellent" for the last 3 paid her only PhP480.00 for each 8-hour
quarters was looking forward to the bonuses workday, and PhP70.00 for the work done on
plus the productivity incentive bonus. After Good Friday. She sued for underpayment of
learning that FEB had modified the bonus wages and non-payment of holiday pay and
scheme, she objected. Is Katrina's objection night shift differential pay for working on a
justified? Explain. (3%) (2015 Bar Exam) Good Friday. Hotel Neverland denied the
alleged underpayment, arguing that based
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. Katrina’s objection on long-standing unwritten tradition, food
is not justified. Bonus cannot be demanded as a and lodging costs were partially shouldered
matter of right because the granting of bonus is by the employer and partially paid for by
a pure act of liberality and is entirely the employee through salary deduction.
dependent on the profits. The granting of a According to the employer, such a valid
bonus is a management prerogative, something deduction caused the payment of Nelda's
given in addition to what is ordinarily received wage to be below the prescribed minimum.
by or strictly due the recipient (Producers Bank The hotel also claimed that she was not
of the Philippines vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 100701, entitled to holiday pay and night shift
March 28, 2001). In the present case, FEB differential pay because hotel workers have
decided to cut back on the bonuses because of to work on holidays and may be assigned to
its poor performance. Thus, the reduction of work at night.
bonuses, as a management prerogative, is
justified. (a) Does the hotel have valid legal grounds
to deduct food and lodging costs from
OTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER: Katrina’s Nelda's basic salary? (2.5%)
objection is justified. Having enjoyed the
across-the-board bonuses, Katrina has earned a SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, there was no legal
vested right. Hence, none of them can be ground to make such deductions. Jurisprudence
withheld or reduced. In the problem, the provides that there are three requirements
company has not proven its alleged losses to be before the value of facilities may be deducted
substantial. Permitting reduction of pay at the from an employee’s wage. First, there must be
slightest indication of losses is contrary to the proof which shows that the facilities are
policy of the State to afford full protection to customarily furnished by the trade. Second, the
labor and promote full employment (Linton provision of deductible facilities must be
Commercial Co. v. Hellera, G.R. No. 163147, voluntarily accepted in writing by the
October 10,2007,535 SCRA 434). As to the employee. Lastly, the facilities must be charged
withheld productivity-based bonuses, Katrina is at a fair and reasonable value (Mabeza v. NLRC,
deemed to have earned them because of her G.R. No.118506, Apr. 18, 1997). In the present
excellent performance ratings for three case, the second and third requirements were
quarters. On this basis, they cannot be not met.
withheld without violating the Principle of
Non-Diminution of Benefits. (b) Applying labor standards law, how much
should Nelda be paid for work done on Good
Moreover, it is evident from the facts of the Friday? Show the computation in your test
case that what was withdrawn by FEB was a booklet and encircle your final answer.
productivity bonus. Protected by RA No. 6791 (2.5%) (2018 Bar Exam)
which mandates that the monetary value of the
productivity improvement be shared with the SUGGESTED ANSWER: Nelda’s take home pay
employees, the “productivity-based for working on Good Friday is as follows:
incentive”scheme of FEB cannot just be 1. Php 70.00 (Salary for 1 hour work)
9
2. Php 560.00 (100% of hourly work on to effectively obliterate the distinctions
Good Friday which is a Regular Holiday) embodied in such wage structure based on
3. Php 56.00 (10% of the regular wage as skills, length of service, or other logical bases of
night shift differential following Art. differentiation (P.I. Manufacturing, Inc. v. P.I.
86, Labor Code) Manufacturing Supervisors and Foremen
Association, G.R. No. 167217, Feb. 4, 2008).
TOTAL: Php 686.00
(b) Did a wage distortion arise under the
circumstances which legally obligated K
d) Prohibitions Regarding Wages
Corporation to rectify the wages of its old
employees? Explain. (3%) (2019 Bar Exam)
QUESTION. Benito is the owner of an
eponymous clothing brand that is a top SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, wage distortion did
seller. He employs a number of male and not arise under the present circumstances
female models who wear Benito's clothes in because the increase in the hiring rates did not
promotional shoots and videos. His deal with come from a law or wage order. Wage distortion
the models is that Benito will pay them with can exist only when the wage increase was
3 sets of free clothes per week. Is this brought about by law or wage order.
arrangement allowed? (2%) (2015 Bar Exam)
(1) Concept
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the models are
Benito’s employees. Article 102 of the Labor
Code prohibits payment of wages by means of
f) Minimum Wage Law
promissory notes, vouchers, coupons, tokens,
tickets, chits, or any object other than legal
tender. Therefore, the payment of 3 sets of
g) Holiday Pay
free clothes is not a valid form of
compensation.
h) 13th Month Pay
e) Wage Distortion
3. Leaves
QUESTION. Upon a review of the wage rate
and structure pertaining to its regular rank
and file employees, K Corporation found it
a) Service Incentive Leave
necessary to increase its hiring rates for
employees belonging to the different job
classification levels to make their salary QUESTION. Which of the following grounds
rates more competitive in the labor market. exempts an enterprise from the service
After the implementation of the new hiring incentive leave law?
salary, Union X, the exclusive bargaining (A) The employees already enjoy 15 days
agent of the rank and file employees, vacation leave with pay.
demanded a similar salary adjustment for the (B) The employer's business has been
old employees. It argued that the increase in suffering losses in the past three
hiring rates resulted in wage distortion since years.
it erased the wage gap between the new and (C) The employer regularly employs
old employees. In other words, new seven employees or less.
employees would enjoy almost the same (D) The company is located in a special
salary rates as K Corporation’s old economic zone. (2011 Bar Exam)
employees.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) The employees
(a) What is wage distortion? (2%) already enjoy 15 days vacation leave with pay.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Wage Distortion is a

b) Maternity Leave
situation where an increase in prescribed wage
rates results in the elimination or severe
contraction of intentional quantitative
differences in wage or salary rates between and c) Paternity Leave
among employee groups in an establishment as
10
───※ ·❆· ※───
d) Solo Parent Leave (RA 8972, as amended
by RA 11861)
QUESTION. Your favorite relative, Tita
Nilda, approaches you and seeks your advice
on her treatment of her kasambahay, Noray.
e) Leave Benefits for Women Workers
Tita Nilda shows you a document called a
Under Magna Carta of
"Contract of Engagement" for your review.
Women (RA 9710) and Anti-Violence
Under the Contract of Engagement, Noray
Against Women and
shall be entitled to a rest day every week,
their Children of 2004 (RA 9262)
provided that she may be requested to work
on a rest day if Tita Nilda should need her
services that day. Tita Nilda also claims that
f) Compassionate Leaves this Contract of Engagement should embody
all terms and conditions of Noray's work as
the engagement of a kasambahay is a
4. Special Groups of Employees private matter and should not be regulated
by the State.
a) Women a) Is Tita Nilda correct in saying that this is
a private matter and should not be
regulated by the State? (2.5%)
b) Minors
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Tita Nilda is not
correct in saying that the engagement of a
c) Kasambahays Kasambahay is a private matter and should not
be regulated by the State. Under R.A 10361,
QUESTION: Are there differences between a the State recognizes this employment
househelper and a homeworker? Explain your relationship and establishes minimum labor
answer. (4%) (2017 Bar Exam) standards for domestic workers, toward decent
employment and income, enhanced coverage of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. The differences social protection and respect for human rights.
between a house helper and a homeworker are Engagement of an employee for work is
as follows: impressed with public interest to the end that
1) As to regulatory law, househelpers stipulations in employment contracts are
(Kasambahay) are protected by R.A. subject to the protection and regulation under
10361; whereas, industrial the law. Domestic workers need to be
homeworkers are protected by P.D. 442 protected by the State because they are most
as renumbered; prone to abuse, harassment, violence, or
2) As to nature of work, a kasambahay economic exploitation.
ministers to the personal comfort and
convenience of a household; whereas, a b) Is the stipulation that she may be
homeworker processes or fabricates requested to work on a rest day legal? (2.5%)
raw materials;
3) As to the place of work, a kasambahay SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, the stipulation is
works at his employer’s house; legal. While domestic workers are entitled to a
whereas, a homeworker works at home weekly rest period, Section 21 of the
or about the premise of his home; Kasambahay Law allows both the employer and
4) As to tenure, a kasambahay is a domestic worker to agree on certain
contractual worker, a homeworker has arrangements to offset, waive or accumulate
security of tenure (D.O. 5, s. 1995); rest days, subject to payment of appropriate
5) As to jurisdiction, the issues of a wages and benefits.
kasambahay against his/her employer
are for the DOLE Regional Director to c) Are stay-in family drivers included under
hear and resolve (Sec. 31, R.A. 10361); the Kasambahay Law? (2.5%) (2018 Bar
whereas, the issues of a homeworker Exam)
against his employer are not exclusively
for the DOLE Regional Director to SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, stay-in family
resolve. drivers are not covered by the provisions of the
Kasambahay Law because they are not
11
classified as domestic workers. Instead, they
are considered individuals providing personal
(a) Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (RA
services to another person. The Rules and
7277)
Regulations implementing the Kasambahay Law
explicitly state in Section 2 that family drivers
are excluded from the coverage of the law. The
(b) Mental Health Act (RA 11036)
term "Kasambahay" refers to individuals
engaged in domestic work within an
employment relationship, such as general
househelp, nursemaids or "yayas," cooks, (2) Incentives for Employers
gardeners, or laundry personnel. However,
individuals who perform domestic work only
occasionally or sporadically and not on a 5. Sexual Harassment in the Work
regular occupational basis are not included Environment
under this definition.
a) Sexual Harassment Act (RA 7877)
d) Homeworkers
QUESTION. In a work-related environment,
e) Night Workers sexual harassment is committed when:
(A) the offender has authority, influence,
or moral ascendancy over his
f) Apprentices and Learners subordinate victim.
(B) the victim’s continued employment is
conditioned on sexual favor from her.
QUESTION. Distinguish a learner from an (C) the female victim grants the demand
apprentice. (4%) (2017 Bar Exam) for sexual favor against her will.
(D) the victim is not hired because she
SUGGESTED ANSWER: A learner differs from an turned down the demand for sexual
apprentice as follows: favor. (2011 Bar Exam)
1) A learner is engaged for not more than
3 months; whereas, an apprentice is SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) The victim’s
engaged for not more than 6 months; continued employment is conditioned on sexual
2) A learner performs a semi-skilled work, favor from her.
whereas, an apprentice performs a
highly technical work; ───※ ·❆· ※───
3) A learner is regularized by the
completion of his learnership, whereas, QUESTION: Nena worked as an Executive
the completion of the apprenticeship Assistant for Nesting, CEO of Nordic
does not regularize an apprentice; Corporation. One day, Nesting called Nena
4) The illegal dismissal of a learner on the into his office and showed her lewd pictures
third month of his employment of women in seductive poses which Nena
regularizes him; whereas, the illegal found offensive. Nena complained before the
dismissal of an apprentice anytime General Manager who, in turn, investigated
during the period of his apprentice the matter and recommended the dismissal
does not have the same legal effect; of Nesting to the Board of Directors. Before
and the Board of Directors, Nesting argued, that
5) In the event of disputes, a learner shall since the Anti-Sexual Harassment Law
file his complaint with the Labor requires the existence of "sexual favors," he
Arbiter; whereas, subject to exhaustion should not be dismissed from the service
of administrative remedies, an since he did not ask for any sexual favor from
apprentice shall file his complaint with Nena. Is Nesting correct? (2.5%) (2018 Bar
the DOLE Regional Director. Exam)
g) Persons With Disabilities SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Nesting is not

correct. Under Section 3(b) of R.A. 7877 or the
Anti-Sexual Harassment Act, in a work-related
(1) Discrimination or employment environment, sexual
harassment is committed when the harassment
12
results in an intimidating hostile or offensive non-discriminatory. Likewise, the Expanded
environment for the employee. In the present Maternity Leave Law states that the benefit
case, the sexual harassment committed by covered all female workers in government and
Nesting, the employer, by showing Nena nude the private sector, including those in the
pictures of women in seductive poses resulted informal economy, regardless of civil status or
in an intimidating, hostile or offensive the legitimacy of her child.
environment on the part of the employee.
b) Dependents and Beneficiaries
OTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER: Nesting's
argument regarding the absence of a "sexual
favor" is incorrect. While further evidence may
be needed to establish criminal liability under c) Benefits
RA 7877 (the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act), he
can still be held accountable under the valid QUESTION. Gene is a married regular
grounds for termination stated in Article 297 of employee of Matibay Corporation. The
the Labor Code. In the case of Villarama v. employees and Matibay Corporation had an
NLRC and Golden Donuts (G.R. No. 106341, existing CBA that provided for funeral or
September 2, 1994), the Supreme Court ruled bereavement aid of ₱15,000.00 in case of
that managerial employees are held to higher the death of a legal dependent of a regular
work ethics and a greater level of employee. His widowed mother, who had
responsibility. Engaging in sexual harassment been living with him and his family for many
towards a subordinate is considered a form of years, died; hence, he claimed the funeral
"moral perversity," which justifies dismissal due aid. Matibay Corporation denied the claim
to the loss of trust and confidence. on the basis that she had not been his legal
dependent as the term legal dependent was
b) Safe Spaces Act (Article IV of RA 11313 defined by the Social Security Law.
only; Exclude:
Liability of Employers) (a) Who may be the legal dependents of Gene
under the Social Security Law? (2.5%)
(b) Is Gene entitled to the funeral aid for the

C. SOCIAL WELFARE LEGISLATION
death of his widowed mother? explain your
answer. (2%) (2017 Bar Exam)
1. SSS Law (RA 8282, as amended by RA
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) Gene’s legal
11199)
dependents under the Social Security Law are
as follows: (I) Primary Beneficiaries, who are
his legitimate spouse who lives with him and all
a) Coverage
types of children who are below 21, unmarried,
and unemployed, or if over 21 years of age, is
QUESTION. Luisa is an unwed mother with 3 congenitally or while still a minor has been
children from different fathers. In 2004, she permanently incapacitated and incapable of
became a member of the Social Security self-support, physically or mentally; and (II)
System (SSS). That same year, she suffered a Secondary beneficiaries, who are his parents as
miscarriage of a baby out of wedlock from long as wholly dependent on him for support.
the father of her third child. She wants to
claim maternity benefits under the SSS Act. (b) Yes, Gene is entitled to the funeral aid
Is she entitled to claim? (3%) (2015 Bar because his deceased mother was wholly
Exam) dependent on him for support until her death.
Being his legal dependent, she is covered by
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Luisa is entitled to the provision of the CBA on funeral or
maternity benefits under the law. Provided that bereavement aid.
she has notified her employer of her pregnancy
and the probable date of her childbirth, and ───※ ·❆· ※───
has paid at least three (3) monthly maternity
contributions in the twelve-month period QUESTION. X is a member of the Social
preceding her miscarriage. Neither her civil Security System (SSS). In 2015, he died
status nor the legitimacy of the child will bar without any spouse or children. Prior to the
her claim because the SSS Act is semester of his death, X had paid 36
13
monthly contributions. His mother, M, who community (GSIS vs. Court of Appeals, G.R.
had previously been receiving regular No. 128524, April 20, 1999).
support from X, filed a claim for the latter’s
death benefits. He is deemed on round-the-clock duty unless on
official leave, in which case his death outside
(a) Is M entitled to claim death benefits the performance of an official peace-keeping
from the SSS? Explain. (2.5%) mission will bar any death claim. In this case,
Luis was not on official leave and he died in the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, M is entitled to the performance of a peace-keeping mission.
death benefits. Under R.A. 8282, she became Hence, his death is compensable.
the sole beneficiary of X considering that X is
single and without children.
3. Disability and Death Benefits
(b) Assuming that X got married to his
girlfriend a few days before his death, is M
entitled to claim death benefits from the a) Labor Code
SSS? Explain. (2.5%) (2019 Bar Exam)
QUESTION. Rosa was granted vacation leave
SUGGESTED ANSWER: M is restored to her by her employer to spend three weeks in
secondary beneficiary status. Under R.A. Africa with her family. Prior to her
8282, The wife of X is now the primary departure, the General Manager of the
beneficiary until she remarries; provided that company requested her to visit the plant of
she was living with him at the time of his a client of the company in Zimbabwe in
death (Yolanda Signey v. SSS, G.R. No. 173582, order to derive best manufacturing practices
January 28, 2008) useful to the company. She accepted the
request because the errand would be
2. GSIS Law (RA 8291) important to the company and Zimbabwe
was anyway in her itinerary. It appears that
she contracted a serious disease during the
a) Coverage trip. Upon her return, she filed a claim for
compensation, insisting that she had
contracted the disease while serving the
interest of her employer.
Under the Labor Code, the sickness or death
of an employee, to be compensable, must
c) Benefits
have resulted from an illness either
definitely accepted as an occupational
QUESTION. Luis, a PNP officer, was off duty disease by the Employees' Compensation
and resting at home when he heard a scuffle Commission, or caused by employment
outside his house. He saw two of his subject to proof that the risk of contracting
neighbors fighting and he rushed out to the same is increased by working conditions.
pacify them. One of the neighbors shot Luis
by mistake, which resulted in Luis's death. Is the serious disease Rosa contracted during
Marian, Luis's widow, filed a claim with the her trip to Africa compensable? explain your
GSIS seeking death benefits. The GSIS denied answer. (2.5%) (2017 Bar Exam)
the claim on the ground that the death of
Luis was not service-related as he was off SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, the serious disease
duty when the incident happened. Is the contracted by Rosa is compensable. Under the
GSIS correct? (3%) (2015 Bar Exam) Amended Rules on Employee Compensation
(AREC), disability or death arising from disease
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, GSIS is not correct. is compensable if the disease is an occupational
Members of the national police are by the one, i.e., it is listed under Annex “A” of the
nature of their functions technically on duty AREC as such. If unlisted, it is still an
24 hours a day because policemen are subject occupational disease if covered by the
to call at any time and may be asked by their Proximate Cause Theory or the Increased Risk
superiors or by any distressed citizen to assist Theory.
in maintaining the peace and security of the
14
In the case at bar, she contracted the disease Nemesis arose out and in the course of his
as a result of her performance of a employment as a soldier on active day in the
work-related task. Hence, there being no AFF, thus it is compensable. Only the primary
efficient intervening cause breaking the chain and secondary dependents of Sgt. Nemesis are
of causes connecting that performance to her entitled to compensation provided that they
disease, the occupational character of her meet the prescribed qualification. As to Nelda,
medical condition is beyond doubt (Proximate she must be the legal wife and living with Sgt.
Cause Theory). Nemesis. While as to his children, legitimate or
illegitimate, they must be below 21 years old,
───※ ·❆· ※─── unmarried and not gainfully employed.
(Hinoguin v. ECC, G.R. No. 8430, April 17,
QUESTION. Sgt. Nemesis was a detachment 1989)
non-commissioned officer of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines in Nueva Ecija. He (b) As between Nelda and Narda, who should
and some other members of his detachment be entitled to the benefits? (2.5%)
sought permission from their Company
Commander for an overnight pass to Nueva SUGGESTED ANSWER: Neither Nelda nor Narda
Vizcaya to settle some important matters. is entitled to the benefit. As to Nelda, she is
The Company Commander orally approved not living with Sgt. Nemesis, hence the second
their request and allowed them to carry requisite is absent. As to Narda, she is not the
their firearms as the place they were going legal spouse, hence the first requisite is
to was classified as a "critical place." They lacking. Hence, none of Nelda and Narda is the
arrived at the place past midnight; and as primary dependent of Sgt. Nemesis.
they were alighting from a tricycle, one of
his companions accidentally dropped his ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: For a spouse to qualify
rifle, which fired a single shot, and in the as a beneficiary, they must be the legal spouse
process hit Sgt. Nemesis fatally. The and residing with the employee at the time of
shooting was purely accidental. At the time the employee's death. In the case of Nelda,
of his death, he was still legally married to who was separated from the deceased
Nelda, but had been separated de facto from employee, she may still be eligible for benefits
her for 17 years. For the last 15 years of his if the separation was a result of the employee
life, he was living in with Narda, with whom abandoning her without valid reason or for
he has two minor children. Since Narda other justifiable grounds. On the other hand,
works as a kasambahay, the two children Narda, who is not the legal spouse, is not
lived with their grandparents, who provided entitled to the benefits. However, the
their daily support. Sgt. Nemesis and Narda Employees' Compensation Commission (ECC)
only sent money to them every year to pay can act as a mediator between the two
for their school tuition. claimants, helping them reach a mutually
agreeable compromise in allocating the
Nelda and Narda, both for themselves and compensation among themselves and their
the latter, also on behalf of her minor dependent children (Samar Mining Co. Inc. v.
children, separately filed claims for WCC, G.R. No. L-29938-39, March 31, 1971).
compensation as a result of the death of Sgt.
Nemesis. The Line of Duty Board of the AFP (c) Are the minor children entitled to the
declared Sgt. Nemesis' death to have been benefits considering that they were not fully
"in line of duty", and recommended that all dependent on Sgt. Nemesis for support?
benefits due to Sgt. Nemesis be given to his (2.5%) (2018 Bar Exam)
dependents. However, the claims were
denied by GSIS because Sgt. Nemesis was not SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, the minor children
in his workplace nor performing his duty as a are entitled to the benefits. The minor
soldier of the Philippine Army when he died. children, even though they are not dependent
on Sgt. Nemesis are entitled to the benefits
(a) Are the dependents of Sgt. Nemesis because all the requirements are met such that
entitled to compensation as a result of his they are all below 21 years old, unmarried and
death? (2.5%) not gainfully employed. The fact that they are
fully dependent is not a requirement.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, the dependents of
Sgt. Nemesis are entitled to compensation as a
b) POEA-Standard Employment Contract
result of the latter’s death. The death of Sgt.
15
repatriated for further examination and
QUESTION. Celia, an OFW that Moonshine treatment in the Philippines. This obligation
Agency recruited and deployed, died in was entirely omitted in bad faith by the
Syria, her place of work. Her death was not company when it waited for his contract to
work-related, it appearing that she had been expire on him before signing him off. On this
murdered. Insisting that she committed basis, Victor is entitled to medical
suicide, the employer and the agency took reimbursement, damages and attorney’s fees.
no action to ascertain the cause of death
and treated the matter as a “closed case.” (b) Due to his prolonged illness, Victor was
The worker's family sued both the employer unable to work for more than 120 days. Will
and the agency for moral and exemplary this entitle him to claim total permanent
damages. May such damages be awarded? disability benefits? (2%) (2015 Bar Exam)
(A) Yes, the agency and the employer’s
uncaring attitude makes them liable SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. For a disability to be
for such damages. compensable under Sec. 20(A) of the POEA-SEC,
(B) Yes, but only the principal is liable two elements must concur: (a) the injury or
for such damages since the agency illness must be work related, and (b) it must
had nothing to do with Celia’s death. have existed during the term of the seafarer's
(C) No, since her death is not at all employment (Malicdem v. Asia Bulk Transport
work-related. Phils., Inc., G.R. No. 224753, June 19, 2019).
(D) No, since her death is not Both requisites are present in this case.
attributable to any act of the agency However, POEA-SEC further commands that the
or the employer. (2011 Bar Exam) employee seeking disability benefits submit
himself to a post-employment medical
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) Yes, the agency and examination by a company-designated
the employer’s uncaring attitude makes them physician within three (3) working days. As a
liable for such damages. consequence to his failure to submit himself to
post-employment medical examination, he
───※ ·❆· ※─── effectively forfeited his right to claim disability
benefits (Coastal Safeway Marine Services, Inc.
QUESTION. Victor was hired by a local v. Esguerra, G.R. No. 185352, Aug. 10, 2011).
manning agency as a seafarer cook on board
a luxury vessel for an eight-month cruise.
D. LABOR RELATIONS
While on board, Victor complained of chronic
coughing, intermittent fever, and joint
pains. He was advised by the ship's doctor to
take complete bed rest but was not given 1. Right to Self-Organization
any other medication. His condition
persisted but the degree varied from day to
day. At the end of the cruise, Victor went a) Coverage
home to Iloilo and there had himself
examined. The examination revealed that he
had tuberculosis. b) Eligibility for Membership
(a) Victor sued for medical reimbursement, QUESTION. Juicy Bar and Night Club allowed
damages and attorney's fees, claiming that by tolerance fifty (50) Guest Relations
tuberculosis was a compensable illness. Do Officers (GROs) to work without
you agree with Victor? Why or why not? (2%) compensation in its establishment under the
direct supervision of its Manager from 8:00
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, I agree with Victor. P.M. To 4:00 A.M. everyday, including
POEA-SEC defines “work-related illness” as any Sundays and holidays. The GROs, however,
sickness as a result of an occupational disease were free to ply their trade elsewhere at
listed under Sec. 32-A of the contract and any time, but once they entered the
Pulmonary TB is among the listed occupational premises of the night club, they Were
diseases. The same provision of law stated that required to stay up to closing time. The
for an occupational disease to be compensable, GROs earned their keep exclusively from
it must be contracted as a result of his commissions for food and drinks, and tips
exposure to the risk involved in his work. from generous customers. In time, the GROs
Therefore, Victor should have been medically formed the Solar Ugnayan ng mga
16
Kababaihang lnaapi (SUKI), a labor union (B) No, “confidential employees” are
duly registered with DOLE. Subsequently, those who assist persons who
SUKI filed a petition for Certification formulate, determine, or enforce
Election in order to be recognized as the management policies in the field of
exclusive bargaining agent of its members. labor relations.
Juicy Bar and Night Club opposed the (C) Yes, secretaries and clerks of
petition for Certification Election on the company executives are extensions of
singular ground of absence of the management and, therefore,
employer-employee relationship between the should not join the union.
GROs on one hand and the night club on the (D) No, “confidential” employees are
other hand. May the GROs form SUKI as a those who handle executive records
labor organization for purposes of collective and payroll or serve as executive
bargaining? Explain briefly. (5%) (2012 Bar secretaries of top-level managers.
Exam) (2011 Bar Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, the GROs may form SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) No, “confidential
a labor organization for purposes of collective employees” are those who assist persons who
bargaining. In the present case, the GROs formulate, determine, or enforce management
worked under the direct supervision of the policies in the field of labor relations.
Night Club Manager for a substantial period of
time. Under Article 138 of the Labor Code, with ───※ ·❆· ※───
or without compensation, the GROs are
deemed as employees of the night club. Hence, QUESTION. A certification election was
being employees, they are entitled to all the conducted in Nation Manufacturing
rights and benefits granted to employees under Corporation, whereby 55% of eligible voters
the Constitution and the labor laws including in the bargaining unit cast their votes. The
the right to form labor organizations for results were as follows:
purposes of collective bargaining (Article 243, ● Union Nana : 45 votes
Labor Code). ● Union Nada: 40 votes
● Union Nara : 30 votes
● No Union : 80 votes
c) Doctrine of Necessary Implication
Union Nana moved to be declared as the
winner of the certification election.
d) Commingling or Mixed Membership
(a) Can Union Nana be declared as the
winner? (2.5%)
e) Effect of Inclusion as Members of SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) No, Union Nana
Employees Outside of cannot be immediately declared as winner.
the Bargaining Unit Under Article 268 of the Labor Code, run-off
elections must be first conducted. A run-off
election is required since the present case
2. Bargaining Unit involves an election which provided for three or
more choices, with no choice receiving a
QUESTION. The existing collective bargaining majority of the valid votes cast, and the total
unit in Company X includes some fifty number of votes for all contending unions at
“secretaries” and “clerks” who routinely least 50% of the number of votes cast. In the
record and monitor reports required by their present case, the majority vote is 97.5 and
department heads. Believing that these Union Nana gathered only 45 votes, hence it
secretaries and clerks should not be union cannot be certified.
members because of the confidential nature
of their work, the management discontinued (b) Assume that the eligibility of 30 voters
deducting union dues from their salaries. Is was challenged during the pre-election
the management’s action legal? conference. The ballots of the 30 challenged
(A) No, only managers are prohibited voters were placed inside an envelope sealed
from joining unions; the law does not by the DOLE Election Officer. Considering the
bar “confidential employees” from said envelope remains sealed, what should
joining unions. be the next course of action with respect to
17
the said challenged votes? (2.5%) (2018 Bar (b) When is the earliest time that another
Exam) union can file for a petition for certification
election? Explain. (2.5%) (2019 Bar Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (b) Under Rule IX,
Section 11 of the Rules Implementing Book V of SUGGESTED ANSWER: Article 265 of the Labor
the Labor Code, the envelope with challenged Code provides that another union can file a
votes shall be opened and the question of petition for certification election during the
eligibility shall be passed upon by the DOLE freedom period of the CBA which is the last 60
med-arbiter. In the case at bar, since the days before its date of expiry.
challenged votes may materially affect the
results of the election, and may in fact even
4. Rights of Labor Organizations
give Union Nada or Union Nara an absolute
majority, then the said challenged votes should
be opened.
a) Check Off, Assessment, and Agency Fees
3. Bargaining Representative
b) Collective Bargaining
QUESTION. Government employees may elect
a union as their exclusive representative but
this right is not available to (1) Economic Terms and Conditions
(A) regular employees in government
instrumentalities and agencies. QUESTION. Llanas Corporation and Union X,
(B) employees of government-owned and the certified bargaining agent of its
controlled corporations without employees, concluded a CBA for the period
original charters. January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2004. But,
(C) employees of government-owned or long before the CBA expired, members of
controlled corporations with original Union Y, the minority union, showed
charters. dissatisfaction with the CBA under the belief
(D) employees of provincial and local that Union X was a company union. Agitated
government units. (2011 Bar Exam) by its members, Union Y filed a petition for
a Certification Election on December 1,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) Employees of 2002. Will the petition prosper?
government-owned and -controlled (A) No, such a petition can only be filed
corporations without original charters. within the freedom period of the
CBA.
───※ ·❆· ※─── (B) No, since a petition for certification
can be filed only upon the expiration
QUESTION. On December 1, 2018, GHI Co., of the CBA.
an organized establishment, and Union J, (C) Yes, a certification is the right
the exclusive bargaining agent therein remedy for ousting a company union.
executed a five (5)-year collective (D) Yes, employees should be allowed to
bargaining agreement (CBA) which, after cancel at the earliest opportunity a
ratification, was registered with the Bureau CBA that they believed was obtained
of Labor Relations. by a company union. (2011 Bar
Exam)
(a) When can the union ask, at the earliest,
for the renegotiation of all terms of the SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) No, such a petition
CBA, except its representation aspect? can only be filed within the freedom period of
Explain. (2.5%) the CBA.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Article 265 of the Labor

Code provides that except for the (2) Non-Economic Terms and Conditions
representational aspect of the CBA, the other
provisions can be renegotiated not later than 3
years from the date of the CBA’s effectivity. (3) Duty to Bargain Collectively
18
While Nad, Ned, and Nod were distributing
(4) Mandatory Provisions in the Collective
the flyers at the company assembly plant, a
Bargaining
company supervisor barged in and demanded
Agreement (CBA)
that they cease from distributing the flyers,
stating that the assembly line employees
were trying to beat a production deadline
5. Unfair Labor Practices
and were thoroughly distracted. Norlyn tried
to show the HR manager's text message
authorizing flyer distribution during work
a) Nature and Aspect hours, but the supervisor brushed it aside.
As a result, Nad, Ned, and Nod were

b) By Employers suspended for violating company rules on
trespass and highly-limited union activities
QUESTION. The negotiating panels for the during work hours. The Union filed an unfair
CBA of X Company established a rule that labor practice (ULP) case before the NLRC
only employees of the company will sit in for union discrimination.
each panel. In the next session, the
management panel objected to the presence (a) Will the ULP case filed by the Union
of the union counsel. Still the negotiation prosper? (2.5%)
proceeded. At the next session, the
management panel again objected to the SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) The ULP case filed
presence of the union counsel as a by the Union will not prosper because there
non-observance of the “no outsider” rule. was a valid reason on the part of the supervisor
The negotiation nonetheless proceeded. Does to prevent the distribution of the flyers during
the management panel's objection to the working hours which is to prevent the
presence of the union counsel constitute disruption of work at the assembly line which
unfair labor practice through bad-faith was beating a production deadline. Although
bargaining? the HR manager granted the request of Nad,
(A) Yes, the management is harping on a Ned, and Nod to distribute the flyers, such
non-mandatory matter instead of approval was not communicated to the
proceeding with the mandatory supervisor but to another union member. In the
subjects of bargaining. absence of such a directive from the
(B) No, there is no bargaining in bad management to the supervisor, the latter was
faith since the bargaining proceeded justified in preventing Nad, Ned, and Nod from
anyway. distributing the flyers during working hours.
(C) Yes, the management panel has no
legal basis for limiting the ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Yes. Nad, Ned, and
composition of the union negotiating Nod's supervisor directly intervened in union
panel. activities, violating their right to
(D) No, since it is the union that violates self-organization. Despite their actions, Nad,
the ground rules fashioned by the Ned, and Nod can be considered to have acted
parties, it is the one negotiating in in good faith since they had obtained prior
bad faith. (2011 Bar Exam) permission from the HR Manager. However, it
appears that the HR Manager failed to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) No, there is no communicate this permission to the plant
bargaining in bad faith since the bargaining supervisor.
proceeded anyway.
(b) Assume the NLRC ruled in favor of the
───※ ·❆· ※─── Union. The Labor Arbiter's judgment
included, among others, an award for moral
QUESTION. In Northern Lights Corporation, and exemplary damages at PhP50,000.00
union members Nad, Ned, and Nod sought each for Nad, Ned, and Nod. should Northern
permission from the company to distribute be Lights given to Corporation the Union, and
flyers with respect to a weekend union argued not that individually any award to its
activity. The company HR manager granted members. Is Northern Lights Corporation
the request through a text message sent to correct? (2.5%) (2018 Bar Exam)
another union member, Norlyn.
19
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. The argument of There can be no such type of dispute between
Northern Lights Corporation is incorrect. The the parties not related as employer and
award of moral and exemplary damages should employee.
be given to Nad, Ned, and Nod, as they are the
individuals who suffered damages. In Digitel ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: No. Under the Labor
Telecommunications Philippines, Inc. v. Digitel Code, a strike may be declared only in the
Employees Union (DEU), G.R. No. 184903-04, following cases:
October 10, 2012, the Supreme Court clarified a. Bargaining deadlocks; and
that the award of moral and exemplary b. Unfair labor practices
damages in cases of illegal dismissal resulting In the case of a sympathetic strike, neither of
from unfair labor practices can be made the above grounds is present. Thus, a
individually or in aggregate amounts. Since the sympathetic strike is not valid.
affected individuals can be identified, damages
can be awarded individually, as is the case ───※ ·❆· ※───
here.
QUESTION. Due to business recession,
Ballistic Company retrenched a part of its
workforce. Opposing the retrenchment, some
c) By Organizations of the affected employees staged a strike.
Eventually, the retrenchment was found to
be justified, and the strike was declared
6. Peaceful Concerted Activities illegal; hence, the leaders of the strike,
including the retrenched employees, were
declared to have lost their employment
a) Strikes (Valid vs. Illegal) status.
QUESTION. Given that the liability for an Are the striking retrenched employees still
illegal strike is individual, not collective, entitled to separation pay under Sec. 298
state when the participating union officers (283) of the Labor Code despite the illegality
and members may be terminated from of their strike? Explain your answer. (2%)
employment because of the illegal strike. (2017 Bar Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, the striking
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The individual liabilities retrenched employees are still entitled to
of the participants in an illegal strike are as separation pay. Since the retrenchment
follows: preceded the strike, the liability of the
company to pay separation pay under the
As to the union officers, they shall lose their Article 298 of the Labor Code has attached
employment when they knowingly participate already. Therefore, regardless of the outcome
in an illegal strike. of its complaint for illegal strike, it must
discharge said duty. An illegal strike staged by
As to union members, they shall lose their retrenched employees will not extinguish said
employment based on their participation and obligation.
act of committing illegalities in the course of
the illegal strike. b) Picketing
───※ ·❆· ※───

c) Lockouts
QUESTION: A sympathetic strike is stoppage
of work to make common cause with other
strikers in another establishment or d) Assumption of Jurisdiction by the DOLE
business. Is the sympathetic strike valid? Secretary
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, a sympathetic strike E. TELECOMMUTING ACT (RA 11165)

is not valid. Of the three elements of a strike,
the required labor dispute is lacking. A labor
dispute is understood as one arising from a IV. POST-EMPLOYMENT
bargaining deadlock or unfair labor practice.
20
availing themselves of the clinic’s services.
The clinic employed nurses and allied staff,
A. EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP
whose salaries, SSS contributions and other
benefits he undertook to pay. AB Hotel and
Resort issued directives giving instructions
1. Tests to Determine Employer-Employee
to him on the replenishment of emergency
Relationship
kits and forbidding the clinic staff from
receiving cash payments from the guests.
QUESTION. What are the accepted tests to
determine the existence of an In time, the nurses and the clinic staff
employer-employee relationship? (5%) (2017 claimed entitlement to rights as regular
Bar Exam) employees of AB Hotel and Resort, but the
latter refused on the ground that Dr.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The acceptable tests for Crisostomo, who was their employer, was an
determining employer-employee relationship independent contractor. Rule, with reasons.
are as follows: (4%) (2017 Bar Exam)
- The Fourfold Test. Its component are: SUGGESTED ANSWER: Dr. Crisostomo is an
- Selection and engagement of independent contractor. Therefore, no
the employee; employer-employee relationship exists between
- Payment of wages; the clinic personnel and AB Hotel and Resort.
- Power of dismissal; and The claimants are the employees of Dr.
- Power to control the Crisostomo.
employees’ conduct.
This fact may be gleaned from the following
- Two-tier test. It is the combination of manifestations:
- The Economic Reality Test; and 1. The selection and engagement of the
- The Control Test. nurses and clinic staff were made by
Dr. Crisostomo;
───※ ·❆· ※─── 2. Their wages were paid by Dr.
Crisostomo; and
QUESTION: Applying the tests to determine 3. Dr. Crisostomo does not receive salary
the existence of an employer-employee from AB Hotel and Resort as his
relationship, is a jeepney driver operating compensation is only in the form of a
under the boundary system an employee of retainer.
his jeepney operator or a mere lessee of the
jeepney? explain your answer. (3%) (2017 Moreover, the hotel is not contractually given
Bar Exam) the right to dissociate them for just or
authorized causes.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: A jeepney driver is an
employee. The same State-imposed restrictions Finally, the hotel does not exercise control over
which are for the operator to observe in the means by which they deliver medical
running his business affair are also imposed by services. On top of these, they are not
him on his driver. Therefore, pursuant to the economically dependent on the hotel but on
Control Test, the latter is an employee under Dr. Crisostomo.
the boundary system (National Labor Union v.
Dinglasan, G.R. No. L-14183, Nov. 28, 1959). The fact that AB Hotel and Resort gave
instructions to him regarding replenishment of
───※ ·❆· ※─── emergency kits and forbidding his staff from
receiving cash payments from guests is not
QUESTION: Dr. Crisostomo entered into a material. They are nothing more than
retainer agreement with AB Hotel and Resort guidelines which will not create an
whereby he would provide medical services employer-employee relationship (Insular Life
to the guests and employees of AB Hotel and Co., Ltd. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 84484, Nov. 15,
Resort, which, in turn, would provide the 1989).
clinic premises and medical supplies. He
received a monthly retainer fee of ───※ ·❆· ※───
P60,000.00, plus a 70% share in the service
charges from AB Hotel and Resort’s guests
21
QUESTION. A, B, and C were hired as
a) Regular
resident-doctors by MM Medical Center, Inc.
In the course of their engagement, A, B, and C
maintained specific work schedules as QUESTION. Marciano was hired as Chief
determined by the Medical Director. The Engineer on board the vessel MN Australia.
hospital also monitored their work through His contract of employment was for nine
supervisors who gave them specific months. After nine months, he was re-hired.
instructions on how they should perform their He was hired a third time after another nine
respective tasks, including diagnosis, months. He now claims entitlement to the
treatment, and management of their benefits of a regular employee based on his
patients. One day A, B, and C approached the having performed tasks usually necessary
Medical Director and inquired about the and desirable to the employer’s business for
nonpayment of their employment benefits. In a continuous period of more than one year. Is
response, the Medical Director told them that Marciano’s claim tenable? (3%) (2017 Bar
they are not entitled to any because they are Exam)
mere "independent contractors" as expressly
stipulated in the contracts which they SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Marciano’s claim is
admittedly signed. As such, no bereft of merit. In Millares v. NLRC (G.R. No.
employer-employee relationship exists 110524, July 29, 2002), the Supreme Court
between them and the hospital. ruled that seafarers are contractual employees
for a fixed term and cannot attain regular
(a) What is the control test in determining status. In the case at bar, Marciano is
the existence of an employer-employee? (2%) considered a seafarer since he is hired as Chief
Engineer on board a vessel. Therefore,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: “Control” as used in the Marciano’s claim that he is a regular employee
Control Test refers to the authority of the does not hold water.
employer to manage the employee on both the
result of the work to be done and the means by ───※ ·❆· ※───
which the work is to be accomplished (Lakas sa
Industriya ng Kapatirang Haligi ng QUESTION. Section 255 (245) of the Labor
Alyansa-Pinagbuklod ng Manggagawang Promo Code recognizes three categories of
ng Burlingame v. Burlingame Corp., G.R. No. employees, namely: managerial, supervisory,
162833, June 15, 2007). and rank-and-file.
(b) Is the Medical Director’s reliance on the (a) Give the characteristics of each category
contracts signed by A, B, and C to refute the of employees, and state whether the
existence of an employer-employee employees in each category may organize
relationship correct? If not, are A, B, and C and form unions. Explain your answer. (5%)
employees of MM Medical Center, Inc.?
explain. (3%) (2019 Bar Exam) (b) May confidential employees who assist
managerial employees, and who act in a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the Medical Director confidential capacity or have access to
is not correct. The employer and employee confidential matters being handled by
relationship is both a question of law and fact. persons exercising managerial functions in
It requires the presentation of evidence to prove the field of labor relations form, or assist,
this relationship. It cannot be subject to or join labor unions? Explain your answer.
contractual stipulation. In the case at bar, the (2.5%) (2017 Bar Exam)
element of control is present as the Medical
Director determines the specific work schedule SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) The characteristics
of A, B, and C. The hospital also monitored their of these employee categories as as follows:
work through supervisors who give them specific 1. Managerial Employees - They execute
instructions on how they should perform their management policies in the areas of
respective tasks. Thus, there is control over the hiring, firing, transferring, recalling,
means of achieving the desired result. suspending, laying off and disciplining
subordinate employees. As
distinguished from top managers who
2. Kinds of Employment
are corporate officers, they are
referred to as middle managers who
22
have supervision of the plant or a employee regardless of the employer’s intent
division thereof. to hire him as a probationary employee
2. Supervisory Employees - Also referred (Abbott Laboratories v. Alcaraz, G.R. No.
to as Line Managers, they recommend 192571, July 23, 2013).
managerial actions. In their discharge
of this function, they have discretion,
b) Casual
independence and their
recommendations are effective; and
they do not perform their work in a
c) Probationary
clerical or routinary manner only.
3. Rank-and-File Employees - If neither
managerial nor supervisory, an
employee falls under this last category d) Project
through the Principle of Elimination.
(b) It depends. Not all confidential employees e) Seasonal

are disqualified from forming or joining a labor
organization. If the confidential employees
have access to labor relations information, then f) Fixed-Term
they are disqualified; otherwise, they can
organize or join labor unions (San Miguel
Corporation Supervisors & Exempt Employees g) Floating Status
Union v. Laguesma, G.R. No. 110399, Aug. 15,
1997).
───※ ·❆· ※─── 3. Legitimate Subcontracting vs.
Labor-Only Contracting
QUESTION: Ms. A is a volleyball coach with
five (5) years of experience in her field.
Before the start of the volleyball season of a) Elements
2015, she was hired for the sole purpose of
overseeing the training and coaching of the QUESTION: Distinguish Labor-Only
University’s volleyball team. During her contracting and Job-Only contracting. (2012
hiring, the VicePresident for Sports Bar Exam)
expressed to Ms. A the University’s
expectation that she would bring the SUGGESTED ANSWER: Article 106 of the Labor
University a championship at the end of the Code provides that labor-only contracting is an
year. In her first volleyball season, the arrangement where the person supplying
University placed ninth (9th) out of 10 workers does not have substantial capital or
participating teams. Soon after the end of investment in the form of tools, equipment,
the season, the Vice-president for Sports machineries, work premises, and the workers
informed Ms. A that she was a mere recruited and placed by such persons are
probationary employee and hence, she need performing activities which are directly
not come back for the next season because related to the principal business of the
of the poor performance of the team. In any employer.
case, the Vice-President for Sports claimed
that Ms. A was a fixed-term employee On the other hand, job-only contracting is an
whose contract had ended at the close of arrangement where a principal agrees to put
the year. out or farm out with the contractor or
subcontractor the performance or completion
Is Ms. A a probationary, fixed-term, or of a specific job, work, or service within a
regular employee? Explain your reasons as definite or predetermined period, regardless
to why she is or she is not such kind of an of whether such job, work, or service is to be
employee for each of the types of performed or completed within or outside the
employment given. (5%) (2019 Bar Exam) premises of the principal (Petron Corporation
v. Armz Caberte et. al, G.R. No. 182255, June
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Ms. A is a regular 15, 2015).
employee. Under the Labor Code, When the
employee is hired without being apprised of ───※ ·❆· ※───
such standard, he is deemed a regular
23
QUESTIONS. W Gas Corp. is engaged in the (a) the Contractor (Newmark) agrees to
manufacture and distribution to the general perform and provide the Client (Nutrition
public of various petroleum products. On City), on a non-exclusive basis, such tasks or
January 1, 2010, W Gas Corp. entered into a activities that are considered contractible
Service 2019 - assigned to JM Agreement under existing laws, as may be needed by
with Q Manpower Co., whereby the latter the Client from time to time;
undertook to provide utility workers for the
maintenance of the former’s manufacturing (b) the Contractor shall employ the
plant. Although the workers were hired by Q necessary personnel like helpers, salesmen,
Manpower Co., they used the equipment and drivers who are determined by the
owed by W gas Corp. in performing their Contractor to be efficiently trained;
tasks, and were likewise subject to constant
checking based on W gas Corp.’s procedures. (c) the Client may request replacement of
On February 1, 2010, Mr. R, one of the the Contractor's personnel if quality of the
utility workers, was dismissed from desired result is not achieved;
employment in line with the termination of
the Service Agreement between W Gas Corp. (d) the Contractor's personnel will comply
and Q Manpower Co. Thus, Mr. R filed a with the Client's policies, rules, and
complaint for illegal dismissal against W Gas regulations; and
Corp., claiming that Q Manpower Co. is only
a labor-only contractor. In the course of the (e) the Contractor's two service vehicles and
proceedings, W Gas Corp. presented no necessary equipment will be utilized in
evidence to prove Q manpower Co.’s carrying out the provisions of this
capitalization. Agreement.
Is Q Manpower Co. a labor-only contractor? When Newmark fired Nathaniel, he filed an

Explain. (2.5%) (2019 Bar Exam) illegal dismissal case against the wealthier
company, Nutrition City, Inc., alleging that
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Q Manpower Co. is he was a regular employee of the same. Is
a Labor-Only Contractor because it merely Nathaniel correct? (2.5%) (2018 Bar Exam)
provided utility workers to W Gas. Article 106
of the Labor Code defines labor-only SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Nathaniel is
contracting as an arrangement where a person correct. He is a regular employee of Nutrition
without substantial capital or investment in the City because his job as salesman is usually
form of tools, equipment, machinery, or work necessary or desirable to the business of
premises, among other things, supplies workers Nutrition City. Similarly, Newmark merely
to an employer, and such workers perform supplied manpower to Nutrition City to perform
activities directly related to the principal a job which is directly related to Nutrition
business of the latter. In the case at bar, Q City’s business, thereby making it a labor-only
Manpower does not have substantial capital or contractor. In a labor-only arrangement, the
investment in the form of tools, equipment, employees of the labor-only contractor will be
machinery or work premises. Likewise, the deemed employees of the principal. Hence,
performance of Q Manpower Co.’s job was Nathaniel is a regular employee of Nutrition
subject to constant checking based on W Gas City. (Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. v.
Corp.’s procedures, which is an indication that Agito, G.R. No. 179546, February 13, 2009)
W Gas exercised control over the means in
achieving the result. Therefore, Q Manpower
Co. is a Labor-Only Contractor. b) Trilateral Relationship
───※ ·❆· ※───

c) Solidary Liability
QUESTION. Nathaniel has been a salesman
assigned by Newmark Enterprises (Newmark)
for nearly two years at the Manila office of B. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT BY
Nutrition City, Inc. (Nutrition City). He was EMPLOYER
deployed pursuant to a service agreement
between Newmark and Nutrition City, the
salient provisions of which were as follows: 1. Just Causes
24
QUESTION. A foreign guest in a luxury hotel by the employee of the lawful orders of his
complained that he lost certain valuable employer or his representatives in connection
items in his hotel room. An investigation by with his work. Misconduct involves the
the hotel pointed to two roomboys as the transgression of some established and definite
most probable thieves. May the management rule of action, forbidden act, a dereliction of
invoke “loss of confidence” as a just cause duty, willful in character, and implies wrongful
for dismissing the roomboys? intent and not mere error in judgment. For
(A) No, “loss of confidence” as reason for misconduct to be serious and therefore a valid
dismissal does not apply to rank and ground for dismissal, it must be:
file employees.
(B) No, “loss of confidence” applies only 1. Of grave and aggravated character and not
to confidential positions. merely trivial or unimportant; and
(C) Yes, “loss of confidence” is broad 2. Connected with the work of the employee.
enough to cover all dishonest acts of
employee. (b) Assuming this time that Magna dismissed
(D) Yes, “loss of confidence” applies to Jose from employment for cause and you
employees who are charged with the are the lawyer of Jose, how would you argue
care and custody of the employer's the position that Jose's dismissal was
property. (2011 Bar Exam) illegal? (4%) (2013 Bar Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) Yes, “loss of SUGGESTED ANSWER: I would argue that the
confidence” applies to employees who are offense committed by Jose did not relate to
charged with the care and custody of the the performance of his duties. For misconduct
employer's property. or improper behavior to be a just cause for
dismissal, it (a) must be serious; (b) must
───※ ·❆· ※─── relate to the performance of the employee’s
duties; and (c) must show that the employee
QUESTION. Jose and Erica, former has become unfit to continue working for the
sweethearts, both worked as sales employer.
representatives for Magna, a multinational
firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of On the basis of the foregoing, it can be
pharmaceutical products. Although the concluded that Jose was not guilty of serious
couple had already broken off their misconduct and that he was not performing
relationship, Jose continued to have special official work at the time of the incident
feelings for Erica. (Lagrosas v. Bristol Myers Squibb, G.R. No.
168637/170684, Sept. 12, 2008).
One afternoon, Jose chanced upon Erica
riding in the car of Paolo, a co-employee and
2. Authorized Causes
Erica's ardent suitor; the two were on their
way back to the office from a sales call on
Silver Drug, a major drug retailer. In a fit of QUESTION. Sampaguita Company wants to
extreme jealousy, Jose rammed Paolo's car, embark on a retrenchment program in view
causing severe injuries to Paolo and Erica. of declining sales. It identified five
Jose's flare up also caused heavy damage to employees that it needed to separate. The
the two company owned cars they were human resource manager seems to recall
driving. that she has to give the five employees and
the DOLE a 30-day notice but she feels that
(a) As lawyer for Magna, advise the company she can give a shorter notice. What will you
on whether just and valid grounds exist to advise her?
dismiss Jose. (4%) (A) Instead of giving a 30-day notice, she
can just give a 30-day advance salary
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Jose can be dismissed and make the separation effective
for serious misconduct, violation of company immediately.
rules and regulations, and commission of a (B) So long as she gave DOLE a 30-day
crime against the employer‘s representatives. prior notice, she can give the
employees a shorter notice.
Article 282 of the Labor Code provides that an (C) The 30-day advance notice to the
employer may terminate an employment for employee and the DOLE cannot be
any serious misconduct or willful disobedience
25
shortened even with a 30-day wrong or protect fraud (Complex Electronics
advance salary. Association v. NLRC, G.R. No. 121315 & 122136,
(D) She can give a shorter notice if the July 19, 1999). Therefore, they can be held
retrenchment is due to severe and jointly and severally liable for the money
substantial losses. (2011 Bar Exam) claims of workers who are not their employees.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (C) The 30-day advance ───※ ·❆· ※───

notice to the employee and the DOLE cannot be
shortened even with a 30-day advance salary. QUESTION. After thirty (30) years of service,
Beta Company compulsorily retired Albert at
───※ ·❆· ※─── age 65 pursuant to the company's
Retirement Plan. Albert was duly paid his
QUESTION. X was one of more than one full retirement benefits of one (1) month
hundred (100) employees who were pay for every year of service under the Plan.
terminated from employment due to the Thereafter, out of compassion, the company
closure of Construction Corporation A. The allowed Albert to continue working and paid
Cruz family owned Construction Company A. him his old monthly salary rate, but without
Upon the closure of Construction Company A, the allowances that he used to enjoy.
the Cruzes established Construction
Company B. Both corporations had the same After five (5) years under this arrangement,
president, the same board of directors, the the company finally severed all employment
same corporate officers, and all the same relations with Albert; he was declared fully
subscribers. From the General Information retired in a fitting ceremony but the
Sheet filed by both companies, it also company did not give him any further
showed that they shared the same address retirement benefits. Albert thought this
and/or premises. Both companies also hired treatment unfair as he had rendered full
the same accountant who prepared the service at his usual hours in the past five (5)
books for both companies. years. Thus, he filed a complaint for the
allowances that were not paid to him, and
X and his co-employees amended their for retirement benefits for his additional
Complaint with the Labor Arbiter to hold five (5) working years, based either on the
Construction Corporation 8 joint and company's Retirement Plan or the
severally liable with Construction Company Retirement Pay Law, whichever is
A for illegal dismissal, backwages and applicable.
separation pay. Construction Company 8
interposed a Motion to Dismiss contending
(a) After Albert's retirement at age 65,
that they are juridical entities with distinct
should he be considered a regular employee
and separate personalities from
entitled to all his previous salaries and
Construction Corporation A and therefore,
benefits when the company allowed him to
they cannot be held jointly and severally
continue working? (4%)
liable for the money claims of workers who
are not their employees. Rule on the Motion
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Albert would be
to Dismiss. Should it be granted or denied?
considered a contractual employee, not a
Why? (5%) (2012 Bar Exam)
regular employee. His salaries and benefits will
be in accordance with the stipulation of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The motion to dismiss
contract he signed with the company. The
should be denied. The facts show that the
present case is similar to a case decided by the
businesses of Construction Company A and
Supreme Court (Januaria Rivera v. United
Construction Company B are related, that all of
Laboratories, G.R. No. 155639, Apr. 22, 2009)
the employees of Company A are the same
where the Court held that the company, in
persons manning and providing for auxiliary
employing a retired employee whose
services to units of Company B, and that the
knowledge, experience and expertise the
physical plants, offices and facilities are
company recognized, as an employee or as a
situated in the same compound, taken
consultant, is not an illegality; on the contrary,
together, justify the piercing of the corporate
it is a recognized practice within Philippine
veil of Company B (Indophil Textile Mill
jurisdiction.
Workers Union vs. Calica, G.R. No. 96490, Feb.
3, 1992). The fiction of the corporate entity
can be disregarded when it is used to justify (b) Is he entitled to additional retirement
26
benefits for the additional service he Labor Arbiter declared as illegal the dismissal
rendered after age 65? (4%) (2013 Bar of those whose commission of unlawful acts
Exam) had not been proved. They were ordered
immediately reinstated. The employer
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, as a matter of refused, however, to reinstate them on the
equity and fair play, Albert cannot be ground that the rule on immediate
compulsorily retired twice in the same reinstatement applies only to terminations
company. due to just or authorized causes. Is the
employer’s refusal justified?
(A) No, every employee found to have
3. Due Process
been illegally dismissed is entitled to
immediate reinstatement even
pending appeal.
a) Twin Notice Requirement
(B) Yes. The employer’s refusal is legal
and justified as a penalty for defying
QUESTION: The employer must observe both the secretary’s lawful order.
substantive and procedural due process (C) Yes, the rule on immediate
when dismissing an employee. If procedural reinstatement does not apply to
due process is not observed, the dismissal employees who have defied a
will be regarded as: return-to-work order.
(A) defective; the dismissal process has (D) No. The dismissal of the employees
to be repeated. was valid; reinstatement is
(B) an abuse of employer's discretion, unwarranted. (2011 Bar Exam)
rendering the dismissal void.
(C) ineffectual; the dismissal will be held SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) No, every employee
in abeyance. found to have been illegally dismissed is
(D) legal and valid but the employer will entitled to immediate reinstatement even
be liable for indemnity. (2011 Bar pending appeal.
Exam)
───※ ·❆· ※───
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) Legal and valid but
the employer will be liable for indemnity. QUESTION. In the Collective Bargaining
Agreement (CBA) between Dana Films and its
rank-and-file Union (which is directly
b) Hearing affiliated with MMFF, a national federation),
a provision on the maintenance of
membership expressly provides that the
4. Termination of Contract of Migrant Union can demand the dismissal of any
Workers Under RA 8042 as amended by RA member employee who commits acts of
10022 disloyalty to the Union as provided for in its
Constitution and By-Laws. The same
provision contains an undertaking by the
C. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT BY Union (MMFF) to hold Dana Films free from
EMPLOYEE any and all claims of any employee
dismissed. During the term of the CBA, MMFF
discovered that certain employee-members
1. Resignation vs. Constructive Dismissal were initiating a move to disaffiliate from
MMFF and join a rival federation, FAMAS.
Forthwith, MMFF sought the dismissal of its
D. PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION employee-members initiating the
disaffiliation movement from MMFF to
FAMAS. Dana Films, relying on the provision
E. RELIEFS FROM ILLEGAL DISMISSAL of the aforementioned CBA, complied with
MMFF's request and dismissed the employees
QUESTION. The employees’ union in San identified by MMFF as disloyal to it.
Joaquin Enterprise continued their strike
despite a return to work order from the (a) Will an action for illegal dismissal
Secretary of Labor. Because of this defiance, against Dana Films and MMFF prosper or
the employer dismissed the strikers. But the not? Why? (5%)
27
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, an action for illegal (1) It was its exclusive prerogative to
dismissal will prosper. Although, under the CBA, choose the kind of reinstatement to
Dana Films is bound to dismiss any employee give Juanito who would have chosen
who is expelled by MMFF for disloyalty upon its actual reinstatement if he had his way;
written request, it cannot be done hastily and hence, he cannot be punished for
summarily. Due process is required before a helplessly submitting to the payroll
member can be dropped from the list of union reinstatement imposed on him; and
members of good standing. The company’s
dismissal of its workers without the benefit of a (2) No employee would ever agree to a
hearing, and without inquiring from the payroll reinstatement if, at the end of
workers on the cause of their expulsion the day, he would be compelled to
constituted bad faith on its part (Liberty reimburse as to be driven to penury
Cotton Mills Workers Union, et. al vs. Liberty (PAL v. Garcia, et. al., G.R. No. 164856,
Cotton Mills, Inc. et. al., G.R. No. L-33987, Jan. 20, 2009).
May 31, 1979).
F. RETIREMENT
(b) What are the liabilities of Dana Films
and MMFF to the dismissed employees, if
any? (5%) (2012 Bar Exam) QUESTION. The Labor Code on retirement
pay expands the term “one-half (½) month
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Dana Films and MMFF’s salary” because it means:
liabilities are: (1) to reinstate the illegally (A) 15 days' pay plus 1/12th of the 13th
dismissed employees to their former positions month pay and 1/12th of the cash
without reduction in rank, seniority and salary; value of service incentive leave.
and (2) to jointly and severally pay the (B) 15 days' pay plus 1/12th of the 13th
dismissed employees backwages, without any month pay and the cash equivalent of
reduction in pay or qualification (Amada Rice v. five days service incentive leave.
NLRC, G.R. No. 68147, June 30, 1988). (C) 15 days pay plus a full 13th month
pay.
───※ ·❆· ※─── (D) 15 calendar days' pay per year of
service plus allowances received
QUESTION. Juanito initiated a case for during the retirement year. (2011 Bar
illegal dismissal against Mandarin Company. Exam)
The Labor Arbiter decided in his favor, and
ordered his immediate reinstatement with SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) 15 calendar days'
full backwages and without loss of seniority pay per year of service plus allowances
and other benefits. Mandarin Company did received during the retirement year.
not like to allow him back in its premises to
prevent him from influencing his co-workers ───※ ·❆· ※───
to move against the interest of the company;
hence, it directed his payroll reinstatement QUESTION. Discuss the differences between
and paid his full backwages and other compulsory and voluntary/optional retirement
benefits even as it appealed to the NLRC. as well as the minimum benefits provided under
the Labor Code for retiring employees of private
A few months later, the NLRC reversed the establishments. (2.5%) (2019 Bar Exam)
ruling of the Labor Arbiter and declared that
Juanito's dismissal was valid. The reversal SUGGESTED ANSWER: A voluntary/optional
ultimately became final. retirement is a termination of employment on the
ground of bilateral agreement to terminate the
May Mandarin Company recover the employment regardless of years of service.
backwages and other benefits paid to Compulsory retirement, on the other hand, is a
Juanito pursuant to the decision of the Labor retirement as required by law.
Arbiter in view of the reversal by the NLRC?
Rule with reasons. (2.5%) (2017 Bar Exam) Article 302 of the Labor Code provides that the
retiring employee will be paid as follows: (22.5
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. Mandarin Company days x Daily Rate) x Length of service.
cannot recover the wages it paid Juanito under
payroll reinstatement for these reasons:
28
reinstatement to his former position without
V. JURISDICTION AND REMEDIES
loss of seniority rights and other privileges,
but without payment of backwages. In this
regard, ABC, Inc. pointed out that the LA’s
A. LABOR ARBITER
ruling did not contain any finding of strained
relations or that reinstatement was no
longer feasible. In any case, it appears that
1. Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiter vs. no evidence was presented on this score.
Jurisdiction of Regional Director
(a) Is ABC, Inc.’s contention to delete the
QUESTION. Jose Lovina had been a member separation pay, and instead, order
of the board of directors and Executive Vice reinstatement without backwages correct?
President of San Jose Corporation for 12 Explain. (3%)
years. In 2008, the San Jose stockholders did
not elect him to the board of directors nor SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Labor Arbiter fails
did the board reappoint him as Executive to state that there is a bar to reinstatement.
Vice President. He filed an illegal dismissal Therefore, under Article 294 of the Labor Code,
complaint with a Labor Arbiter. Contending the LA should have ordered reinstatement
that the Labor Arbiter had no jurisdiction pursuant to the general rule.
over the case since Lovina was not an
employee, the company filed a motion to (b) Assuming than on appeal, the National
dismiss. Should the motion be granted? Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) upholds
(A) No, the Labor Arbiter has jurisdiction the decision of the LA, where, how, and
over all termination disputes. within what time frame should ABC, Inc.
(B) Yes, it is the NLRC that has assail the NLRC ruling? (2%) (2019 Bar Exam)
jurisdiction over disputes involving
corporate officers. SUGGESTED ANSWER: After the denial of the
(C) No, a motion to dismiss is a appellant’s motion for reconsideration, the
prohibited pleading under the NLRC NLRC’s decision and order of denial can be
Rules of Procedure. assailed under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court
(D) Yes, jurisdiction lies with the regular through the filing a petition for certiorari
courts since the complainant was a within 60 days from receipt of said denial
corporate officer. (2011 Bar Exam) order. Correction of error of jurisdiction,
resulting in the nullification of the assailed
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) Yes, jurisdiction lies dispositions, should be sought based on the
with the regular courts since the complainant NLRC’s grave abuse of its appellate power
was a corporate officer. amounting to lack of or excess of jurisdiction.
───※ ·❆· ※───

2. Requisites to Perfect an Appeal With the
National Labor QUESTION. Due to serious business reverses,
Relations Commission ABC Co. decided to terminate the services
of several officers receiving "fat"
compensation packages. One of these
3. Reinstatement and/or Execution Pending officers was Mr. X, its VicePresident for
Appeal External Affairs and a member of the Board
of Directors. Aggrieved, Mr. X filed a
QUESTION. After due proceedings, the Labor complaint for illegal dismissal before the
Arbiter (LA) declared Mr. K to have been National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)
illegally dismissed by his former employer, – Regional Arbitration Branch. ABC Co.
AB, Inc. As a consequence, the LA directed moved for the dismissal of the case on the
ABC, Inc. to pay Mr. K separation pay in lieu ground of lack of jurisdiction, asserting that
of reinstatement as well as his full since Mr. X occupied the position of
backwages. While ABC, Inc. accepted the Vice-President for External Affairs which is
finding of illegal dismissal, it nevertheless listed in the by-laws of the corporation, the
filed a motion for reconsideration, claiming case should have been tiled before the
that the LA erred in awarding both Regional Trial Court. The Labor Arbiter (LA)
separation pay and full backwages, and denied ABC Co.’s motion and proceeded to
instead, should have ordered Mr. K’s rule that Mr. X was illegally dismissed.
29
Hence, he was reinstated in ABC Co.’s
payroll pending its appeal to the NLRC. SUGGESTED ANSWER: The contention of Cris is
bereft of merit. Sec. 4(d) of the 2005 Revised
Assuming the LA’s ruling of illegal dismissal Rules of Procedure of the NLRC provides that
with finality, may ABC Co. claim the Commission shall limit itself to reviewing
reimbursement for the amounts it paid to and deciding specific issues that were elevated
Mr. X during the time that he was on payroll on appeal. In the case at bar, the NLRC
reinstatement pending appeal? Explain. evidently went against its own rules of
(2.5%) (2019 Bar Exam) procedure when it passed upon the issue of
illegal dismissal although the question raised by
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The ABC Co. cannot the respondent in their appeal was concerned
claim reimbursement because Mr. X has solely with the legality of the Labor Arbiter’s
nothing to do with the reinstatement given award and financial assistance despite the
him. The principle of unjust enrichment has no finding that the petitioner was lawfully
application in the present scenario (Garcia v. terminated (Luna vs. Allado construction Co.,
PAL G. R. No. 164856, January 20, 2009). G.R. No. 175251, May 30, 2011).
Moreover, a reinstatement order by the LA is ───※ ·❆· ※───
immediately executory and no reimbursement
is due even if it is reversed on appeal. In this QUESTION. Bobby, who was assigned as
case, the Principle of Unjust Enrichment has company branch accountant in Tarlac where
no application; hence, he can keep the his family also lives, was dismissed by
salaries he received. Theta Company after anomalies in the
company's accounts were discovered in the
branch Bobby filed a complaint and was
B. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
ordered reinstated with full backwages after
COMMISSION
the Labor Arbiter found that he had been
denied due process because no investigation
QUESTION. Cris filed a complaint for illegal actually took place.
dismissal against Baker Company. The
Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint but Theta Company appealed to the National
awarded Cris financial assistance. Only the Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and at
company appealed from the Labor Arbiter's the same time wrote Bobby, advising him to
ruling. It confined its appeal solely to the report to the main company office in Makati
question of whether financial assistance where he would be reinstated pending
could be awarded. The NLRC, instead of appeal Bobby refused to comply with his new
ruling solely on the appealed issue, fully assignment because Makati is very far from
reversed the Labor Arbiter's decision; it Tarlac and he cannot bring his family to live
found Baker Company liable for illegal with him due to the higher cost of living in
dismissal and ordered the payment of Makati.
separation pay and full backwages.
(A) Is Bobby's reinstatement pending appeal
Through a petition for certiorari under Rule legally correct? (4%)
65 of the Rules of Court, Baker Company
challenged the validity of the NLRC ruling. SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Bobby’s
It argued that the NLRC acted with grave reinstatement pending appeal is not legally
abuse of discretion when it ruled on the correct. The transfer of an employee ordinarily
illegal dismissal issue, when the only issue lies within the ambit of management
brought on appeal was the legal propriety prerogative. But like other rights, there are
of the financial assistance award. limitations thereto. This managerial
prerogative to transfer personnel must be
Cris countered that under Article 218(c) of exercised without grave abuse of discretion,
the Labor Code, the NLRC has the authority bearing in mind the basic element of justice
to "correct, amend, or waive any error, and fair play. Hence, the transfer of Bobby
defect or irregularity whether in substance from Tarlac to Makati must be done in good
or in form" in the exercise of its appellate faith, and it must not be unreasonable,
jurisdiction. inconvenient or prejudicial to the employee.
For another, the reinstatement of Bobby ought
Decide the case. (8%) (2013 Bar Exam) to be to his former position, much akin to
return to work order, i.e., to restore the status
30
quo in the workplace (Composite Enterprises v. employment shall be subject to mandatory
Capamaroso, G.R. No. 159919, Aug. 8, 2007). conciliation-mediation. The Labor Arbiter or
appropriate DOLE agency or office that has
(B) Advise Bobby on the best course of action jurisdiction over the dispute shall entertain
to take under the circumstances. (4%) (2013 only endorsed or referred cases by the duly
Bar Exam) authorized officer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The best course of (b) Should the Regional Director sustain
action for Bobby to take under the Needy Corporation's argument? (2.5%) (2018
circumstances is to allege constructive Bar Exam)
dismissal in the same case, and pray for
separation pay in lieu of reinstatement. SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the Regional
Director should not sustain Needy Corporation’s
contention. Article 239 of the Labor Code
C. COURT OF APPEALS provides that the information and statements
given in confidence at the
conciliation-mediation proceedings shall be
D. SUPREME COURT treated as privileged communication and shall
not be used as evidence in any arbitration
proceeding, except when there is a waiver of
E. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS confidentiality. In the case at bar, Nelson’s
willingness to settle for 75% of his money claim
may not be used against him in the money
F. NATIONAL CONCILIATION AND MEDIATION claims case before the Regional Director due to
BOARD the confidentiality rule.
1. Conciliation vs. Mediation F. NATIONAL CONCILIATION AND MEDIATION

BOARD
QUESTION. Nelson complained before the

DOLE Regional Office about Needy H. DOLE SECRETARY
Corporation's failure to pay his wage
increase amounting to PhPS,000.00 as
mandated in a Wage Order issued by the 1. Jurisdiction
Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity
Board. Consequently, Nelson asked the DOLE
to immediately issue an Order sustaining his QUESTION. Philippine Electric Company is
money claim. To his surprise, he received a engaged in electric power generation and
notice from the DOLE to appear before the distribution. It is a unionized company with
Regional Director for purposes of Kilusang Makatao as the union representing
conciliating the dispute between him and its rank-and-file employees. During the
Needy Corporation. When conciliation before negotiations for their expired collective
the Regional Director failed, the latter bargaining agreement (CBA), the parties
proceeded to direct both parties to submit duly served their proposals and
their respective position papers in relation counter-proposals on one another. The
to the dispute. Needy Corporation argued parties, however, failed to discuss the
that since Nelson was willing to settle for merits of their proposals and
75% of his money claim during conciliation counter-proposals in any formal negotiation
proceedings, only a maximum of 75% of the meeting because their talks already bogged
said money claim may be awarded to him. down on the negotiation ground rules, i.e.,
on the question of how they would conduct
(a) Was DOLE's action to conduct mandatory their negotiations, particularly on whether
conciliation in light of Nelson's complaint to consider retirement as a negotiable
valid? (2.5%) issue.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. Article 234 of the Because of the continued impasse, the union
Labor Code in relation to R.A. 10396 or the went on strike. The Secretary of Labor and
Mandatory Conciliation-Mediation Law provides Employment immediately assumed
that all issues arising from labor and jurisdiction over the dispute to avert
31
widespread electric power interruption in return to work? explain your answer. (2.5%)
the country. After extensive discussions and (2017 Bar Exam)
the filing of position papers (before the
National Conciliation and Mediation Board SUGGESTED ANSWER: (b) The Assumption of
and before the Secretary himself) on the Jurisdiction Order (AJO) issued by the Secretary
validity of the union's strike and on the of Labor, whether or not it includes an explicit
wage and other economic issues (including "return to work" instruction, carries an
the retirement issue), the DOLE Secretary injunctive effect. Therefore, once the AJO is
ruled on the validity of the strike and on the duly served, the union is obligated to promptly
disputed CBA issues, and ordered the resume work. Failure to comply with the AJO
parties to execute a CBA based on his renders the strike illegal due to violation of an
rulings. injunction. The AJO serves two purposes: first,
it prevents an impending strike or lockout, or
Did the Secretary of Labor exceed his lifts an ongoing strike or lockout, and second, it
jurisdiction when he proceeded to rule on orders both the workers to return to work
the parties' CBA positions even though the immediately and the employer to re-admit all
parties did not fully negotiate on their own? workers under the same terms and conditions
(8%) (2013 Bar Exam) that existed prior to the strike or lockout.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the Secretary of

2. Visitorial and Enforcement Powers
Labor did not exceed his jurisdiction when he
proceeded to rule on the parties’ CBA positions
despite the parties not having fully negotiated QUESTION. The Secretary of Labor and
on their own. The power of the Secretary of Employment or his duly authorized
Labor under Article 263(g) is plenary. He can representative, including labor regulations
rule on all issues, questions or controversies officers, shall have access to employer's
arising from the labor dispute, including the records and premises during work hours.
legality of the strike, even those over which Why is this statement an inaccurate
the Labor Arbiter has exclusive jurisdiction statement of the law?
(Bangong Pagkakaisa ng mga Manggagawa sa (A) Because the power to inspect applies
Triumph International v. DOLE Secretary, G.R. only to employer records, not to the
No. 167401 and 167407, July 5, 2010). premises.
(B) Because only the Secretary of Labor
───※ ·❆· ※─── and Employment has the power to
inspect, and such power cannot be
QUESTION. Pursuant to his power under Sec. delegated.
278(g) (263(g)) of the Labor Code, the (C) Because the law allows inspection
Secretary of Labor assumed jurisdiction over anytime of the day or night, not only
the 3-day old strike in Armor Steel Plates, during work hours.
Inc., one of the country's bigger (D) Because the power to inspect is
manufacturers of steel plates, and ordered already delegated to the DOLE
all the striking employees to return to work. regional directors, not to labor
The striking employees ignored the order to regulations officers. (2011 Bar Exam)
return to work.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (C) Because the law
(a) What conditions may justify the allows inspection anytime of the day or night,
Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction? not only during work hours.
(2.5%)
───※ ·❆· ※───
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) The Secretary of
Labor may assume jurisdiction if, in his opinion, QUESTION. Briefly discuss the powers and
there is a labor dispute likely to result in a responsibilities of the following in the scheme of
strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the Labor Code:
the national interest (Art. 278 (g), Labor
Code). (a) Secretary of Labor (2%) (2019 Bar Exam)
(b) What are the consequences of the SUGGESTED ANSWER: Under Article 128 of
assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary the Labor Code, the Labor Secretary has
of Labor, and of the disobedience to the Visitorial and Enforcement Power. It also has
32
assumption power under Article 278 and
4. Remedies
suspension power under Article 292 of the
Labor Code.
I. VOLUNTARY ARBITRATOR
Specifically, the DOLE Secretary has the
following powers:
QUESTION. State the jurisdiction of the
(1) Power to inspect employer’s records Voluntary Arbitrator, or Panel of Voluntary
and premises at any time of the day or Arbitrators in labor disputes? (4%) (2017 Bar
night whenever work is being Exam)
undertaken therein, and the right to
copy therefrom, to question any SUGGESTED ANSWER: The voluntary arbitrator
employee and investigate any fact, or panel of voluntary arbitrators shall have
condition or matter which may be exclusive and original jurisdiction to hear and
necessary to determine violations or decide all unresolved grievances arising from:
which may aid in the enforcement of
the Labor Code and of any labor law, 1. The implementation or interpretation of the
wage order or rules and regulations collective bargaining agreements (Article 274,
issued pursuant thereto (Art. 128, Labor Code, Section 4, Rule XIX, Book V,
Labor Code). Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code);
(2) Power to issue compliance orders to
give effect to the labor standards 2. The interpretation or enforcement of
provisions of this Code and other labor company personnel policies which remain
legislation based on the findings of unresolved after exhaustion of the grievance
labor employment and enforcement procedure (Article 274, Labor Code, Section 4,
officers or industrial safety engineers Rule XIX, Book V, Omnibus Rules Implementing
made in the course of inspection (Art. the Labor Code);
128, Labor Code).
(3) Power to issue writs of execution to the 3. Wage distortion issues arising from the
appropriate authority for the application of any wage orders in organized
enforcement of their orders, except in establishments (Article 124, Labor Code,
cases where the employer contests the Section 4, Rule XIX, Book V, Omnibus Rules
findings of the labor employment and Implementing the Labor Code);
enforcement officer and raises issues
supported by documentary proofs 4. The interpretation and implementation of
which were not considered in the the productivity incentive programs under R.A.
course of inspection (Art. 128, Labor 6971;
Code).
(4) Power to order stoppage of work or 5. Upon agreement of the parties, shall also
suspension of operations of any unit or hear and decide all other labor disputes
department of an establishment when including unfair labor practices and bargaining
noncompliance with the law or deadlocks (Article 275, Labor Code, Section 4,
implementing rules and regulations Rule XIX, Book V, Omnibus Rules Implementing
poses grave and imminent danger to the Labor Code); and
the health and safety of workers in the
workplace (Art. 128, Labor Code). 6. Violations of a Collective Bargaining
(5) Assumption of Jurisdiction and/or Agreement, except those which are gross in
Certification to the NLRC for character, shall no longer be treated as unfair
Compulsory Arbitration in labor labor practice and shall be resolved as
disputes causing or likely to cause a grievances under the Collective Bargaining
strike or lockout in an industry Agreement (Article 274, Labor Code).
indispensable to the national interest
(Arts. 128 and 278, Labor Code). ───※ ·❆· ※───
3. Power to Suspend Effects of Termination
33
QUESTION. Briefly discuss the powers and
responsibilities of the following in the
scheme of the Labor Code:
(c) Voluntary Arbitrators (2%) (2019 Bar

Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Voluntary

Arbitrator or Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators
shall have the original and exclusive
jurisdiction over the following cases:
(1) Unresolved grievances arising from the
interpretation or implementation of
the CBA. (Article 274, Labor Code, as
amended)
interpretation or enforcement of
company personnel policies. (Article
274, Labor Code, as amended)
(3) Violations of the CBA that are not
gross in nature. (Article 274, Labor
Code, as amended)
(4) Other labor disputes, including unfair
labor practices and bargaining
deadlocks, upon
(5) agreement of the parties. (Article 275,
Labor Code, as amended)
(6) Cases related to national interest.
(Article 278[h], Labor Code, as
amended)
(7) Issues of wage distortion resulting
from the application of any wage
orders in organized establishments.
(R.A. No. 6727
interpretation and implementation of
the Productivity Incentive Programs
under R.A. No. 6971.
34
(D) the revision of laws to generate greater
I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND
employment. (2011 Bar Exam)
CONCEPTS
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (C) The humanization of
laws and equalization of economic forces.
A. LEGAL BASIS
3. Equal Work Opportunities

1. 1987 Constitution
4. Right to Self-Organization and Collective

Bargaining
2. Civil Code
QUESTION. Tarcisio was employed as 5. Construction in Favor of Labor

operations manager and received a monthly
salary of P25,000.00 through his payroll QUESTION. Procopio was dismissed from
account with DB Bank. He obtained a loan from employment for stealing his co-employee
Roberto to purchase a car. Tarcisio failed to Raul's watch. Procopio filed a complaint for
pay Roberto when the loan fell due. Roberto illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in
sued to collect and moved to garnish Tarcisio’s Procopio's favor on the ground that Raul's
payroll account. The latter vigorously objected testimony was doubtful, and, therefore, the
and argued that salaries were exempt from doubt should be resolved in favor of Procopio.
garnishment. Is Tarcisio correct? Explain your On appeal, the NLRC reversed the ruling
answer. (2017 Bar Exam) because Article 4 of the Labor Code - which
states that all doubts in the interpretation and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Tarcisio is not correct. implementation of the provisions of the Labor
Under Art. 1708 of the Civil Code, only wages, Code, including the implementing rules and
which are the compensation paid for manual or regulations, shall be resolved in favor of labor
unskilled labor, are exempt from garnishment. - applied only when the doubt involved the
"implementation and interpretation" of the
In the present case, the subject of garnishment is Labor Code; hence, the doubt, which involved
Tarcisio’s salary as a managerial employee, which the application of the rules on evidence, not
is not considered as wages. the Labor Code, could not necessarily be
resolved in favor of Procopio. Was the reversal
Thus, Tarcisio’s salary may be garnished. correct? explain your answer. (2017 Bar Exam)
3. Labor Code SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the reversal is not

correct. Although Article 4 of the Labor Code
provides that all doubts in the implementation
B. STATE POLICY TOWARDS LABOR and interpretation of the provisions of the Labor
Code, including its implementing rules and
regulations, shall be resolved in favor of labor,
1. Security of Tenure this principle has been extended by jurisprudence
to cover doubts in the evidence presented by the
employer (Peñaflor v. Outdoor Clothing
2. Social Justice Manufacturing Corporation, G.R. No. 177114,
Apr. 13, 2010). Thus, in application to the present
case, since Raul’s testimony was doubtful, the
QUESTION. For labor, the Constitutionally doubt should be resolved in favor of Procopio.
adopted policy of promoting social justice in all
phases of national development means:
(A) the nationalization of the tools of 6. Burden of Proof and Quantum of
production. Evidence
(B) the periodic examination of laws for the
common good.
(C) the humanization of laws and II. PRE-EMPLOYMENT
equalization of economic forces.
36
A. RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT OF a) Solidary Liability
LOCAL AND MIGRANT WORKERS
b) Theory of Imputed Knowledge

1. Definition of Recruitment and Placement
5. Termination of Contract of Migrant

2. Regulation of Recruitment and Worker
Placement Activities
QUESTION: Philworld, a POEA-licensed agency,
recruited and deployed Mike with its principal,
a) Regulatory Authorities
Delta Construction Company in Dubai for a
2-year project job. After he had worked for a
year, Delta and Philworld terminated for
(1) Philippine Overseas Employment
unknown reasons their agency agreement.
Administration
Delta stopped paying Mike's salary. When Mike
returned to the Philippines, he sued both
Philworld and Delta for unpaid salary and
(2) Regulatory and Visitorial Powers of the damages. May Philworld, the agency, be held
Department liable?
of Labor and Employment Secretary (A) No, since Philworld, the recruitment
agency, is not the employer liable for
unpaid wages.
b) Ban on Direct Hiring (B) Yes, since the agency is equally liable
with the foreign principal despite the
termination of their contract between
c) Entities Prohibited from Recruiting them.
(C) Yes, since the law makes the agency
liable for the principal’s malicious
d) Suspension or Cancellation of License or refusal to pay Mike’s salary.
Authority (D) No, since Mike did not get paid only
after Delta and Philworld terminated
their contract. (2011 Bar Exam)
e) Prohibited Practices [Article 34, Labor
Code] SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) Yes, since the agency is
equally liable with the foreign principal despite
the termination of their contract between them.
3. Illegal Recruitment [Labor Code and the
Migrant Workers and
Overseas Employment Act of 1995 (RA B. EMPLOYMENT OF NON-RESIDENT ALIENS
8042), as amended by RA
10022]
C. DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES
a) Elements
1. Age (RA 10911 or the Anti-Age
Discrimination in Employment Act)
b) Types
2. Gender and/or Marital Status (RA 9710

c) Illegal Recruitment vs. Estafa or the Magna Carta of
Women)
4. Liability of Local Recruitment Agency

and Foreign Employer 3. Health Condition (RA 7277 or the Magna
Carta for Disabled
Persons)
37
continuation of employment that a woman
employee shall not get married or to stipulate
4. Solo Parents (Sec. 7, RA 8972, as
that upon getting married, a woman shall be
amended by RA 11861)
considered resigned or separated. Moreover,
Man-manu‘s pre-employment requirement cannot
be justified as a bona fide occupational
III. EMPLOYMENT PROPER
qualification, where the particular requirements
of the job would justify it. The said requirement
is not valid because it does not reflect an
A. MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVE inherent quality that is reasonably necessary for a
satisfactory job performance (Philippine
Telegraph and Telephone Company v. NLRC, G.R.
1. Discipline No. 118978, May 23, 1997).
2. Transfer of Employees 7. Marriage Between Employees of

Competitor-Employers
3. Productivity Standard
8. Post-Employment Restrictions
4. Bonus
B. LABOR STANDARDS
5. Change of Working Hours

1. Conditions of Employment
6. Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications

a) Coverage
QUESTION. Mam-manu Aviation Company
(Mam-manu) is a new airline company b) Hours of Work
recruiting flight attendants for its domestic
flights. It requires that the applicant be single,
not more than 24 years old, attractive, and (1) Normal Hours of Work and Hours
familiar with three (3) dialects, viz: llonggo, Worked
Cebuano and Kapampangan. lngga, 23 years
old, was accepted as she possesses all the
qualifications.
(2) Compressed Work Week
After passing the probationary period, lngga
disclosed that she got married when she was
(3) Meal Periods
18 years old but the marriage was already in
the process of being annulled on the ground
that her husband was afflicted with a sexually
(4) Night-Shift Differential
transmissible disease at the time of the
celebration of their marriage. As a result of
this revelation, lngga was not hired as a
(5) Overtime Work
regular flight attendant. Consequently, she
filed a complaint against Mam-manu alleging
that the pre-employment qualifications violate
(6) Computation of Additional
relevant provisions of the Labor Code and are
Compensation (Rates
against public policy. Is the contention of lngga
only)
tenable? Why? (5%) (2012 Bar Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Ingga’s contention is

c) Rest Periods
tenable under Article 136 of the Labor Code
which considers as an unlawful act of the
employer to require as a condition for or
38
d) Holidays
c) Payment of Wages
e) Service Charge [Article 96 of the Labor

Code, as amended d) Prohibitions Regarding Wages
by RA 11360]
e) Wage Distortion
f) Occupational Safety and Health
Standards Law (RA 11058)
(1) Concept
(1) Covered Workplaces [Sec. 3(c)]

f) Minimum Wage Law
(2) Duties of Employers Workers and Other

Persons g) Holiday Pay
[Sec. 4]
h) 13th Month Pay

(3) Workers’ Right to Know [Sec. 5]
3. Leaves
(4) Workers' Right to Refuse Unsafe Work
[Sec. 6]
a) Service Incentive Leave
(5) Workers' Right to Personal Protective

Equipment b) Maternity Leave
(PPE) [Sec. 8]
c) Paternity Leave
2. Wages
d) Solo Parent Leave (RA 8972, as amended

a) Definitions by RA 11861)
(1) Wage vs. Salary e) Leave Benefits for Women Workers

Under Magna Carta of
Women (RA 9710) and Anti-Violence
(2) Facilities vs. Supplements Against Women and
their Children of 2004 (RA 9262)
b) Principles
f) Compassionate Leaves
(1) No Work, No Pay

4. Special Groups of Employees
(2) Equal Pay for Equal Work

a) Women
(3) Fair Wage for Fair Work

b) Minors
(4) Non-Diminution of Benefits
39
(a) What benefits can Tammy claim under
c) Kasambahays
existing social legislation? (4%)
d) Homeworkers SUGGESTED ANSWER: Assuming that Tammy was

employed, she is entitled to a special leave
benefit of two months with full pay
e) Night Workers (Gynecological leave) under R.A. 9710 or the
Magna Carta of Women. She can also claim
Sickness Leave Benefit in accordance with the SSS
f) Apprentices and Learners Law.
(b) What can Roger - Tammy's 2nd husband and

g) Persons With Disabilities the father of her two (2) younger children -
claim as benefits under the circumstances?
(4%) (2013 Bar Exam)
(1) Discrimination
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Under R.A. 8187 or the
Paternity Leave Act of 1996, Roger, if lawfully
married to tammy and cohabiting with her at the
(a) Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (RA
time of miscarriage,as the father of the
7277)
conceived child can claim paternity leave of
seven days with full pay, available only only for
the four deliveries of the legitimate spouse with
(b) Mental Health Act (RA 11036)
whom he is cohabiting. In this case, the
miscarried child was the third delivered child,
therefore, Roger can avail the paternity leave of
(2) Incentives for Employers
seven days.
5. Sexual Harassment in the Work 1. SSS Law (RA 8282, as amended by RA

Environment 11199)
a) Sexual Harassment Act (RA 7877) a) Coverage
b) Safe Spaces Act (Article IV of RA 11313 b) Dependents and Beneficiaries

only; Exclude:
Liability of Employers)
c) Benefits
C. SOCIAL WELFARE LEGISLATION

2. GSIS Law (RA 8291)
QUESTION. Because of the stress in caring for
her four (4) growing children, Tammy suffered
a) Coverage
a miscarriage late in her pregnancy and had
to undergo an operation. In the course of the
operation, her obstetrician further discovered
a suspicious-looking mass that required the
subsequent removal of her uterus
(hysterectomy). After surgery, her physician
c) Benefits
advised Tammy to be on full bed rest for six
(6) weeks. Meanwhile, the biopsy of the
sample tissue taken from the mass in Tammy's
uterus showed a beginning malignancy that 3. Disability and Death Benefits
required an immediate series of chemotherapy
once a week for four (4) weeks.
a) Labor Code
40
b) POEA-Standard Employment Contract a) Nature and Aspect
D. LABOR RELATIONS b) By Employers
1. Right to Self-Organization c) By Organizations
a) Coverage 6. Peaceful Concerted Activities
b) Eligibility for Membership a) Strikes (Valid vs. Illegal)
c) Doctrine of Necessary Implication b) Picketing
d) Commingling or Mixed Membership c) Lockouts
e) Effect of Inclusion as Members of d) Assumption of Jurisdiction by the DOLE

Employees Outside of Secretary
the Bargaining Unit
E. TELECOMMUTING ACT (RA 11165)

2. Bargaining Unit
IV. POST-EMPLOYMENT
3. Bargaining Representative
A. EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP
4. Rights of Labor Organizations
1. Tests to Determine Employer-Employee

a) Check Off, Assessment, and Agency Fees Relationship
b) Collective Bargaining 2. Kinds of Employment
(1) Economic Terms and Conditions a) Regular
(2) Non-Economic Terms and Conditions b) Casual
(3) Duty to Bargain Collectively c) Probationary
(4) Mandatory Provisions in the Collective d) Project

Bargaining
Agreement (CBA)
e) Seasonal
5. Unfair Labor Practices
41
(B) basic salary plus the salary CBA
f) Fixed-Term
increases during the pendency of his
case.
(C) basic salary plus the increases
g) Floating Status
mandated by wage orders issued during
the pendency of his case.
(D) basic salary at the time of dismissal.
3. Legitimate Subcontracting vs. (2011 Bar Exam)
Labor-Only Contracting
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) Basic salary plus the
regular allowances and the thirteenth month pay.
a) Elements
───※ ·❆· ※───
b) Trilateral Relationship QUESTION. Ms. T was caught in the act of
stealing the company property of her
employer. When Ms. T admitted to the
c) Solidary Liability commission of the said act to her manager, the
latter advised her to just tender her
resignation; otherwise, she would face an
B. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT BY investigation which would likely lead to the
EMPLOYER termination of her employment and the filing
of criminal charges in court. Acting on her
manager’s advice, Ms. T submitted a letter of
1. Just Causes resignation. Later on, Ms. T filed a case for
constructive dismissal against her employer.
While Ms. T conceded that her manager spoke
2. Authorized Causes to her in a calm and unforceful manner, she
claimed that her resignation was not
completely voluntary because she was told
3. Due Process that should she not resign, she could be
terminated from work for just cause and worse
criminal charges could be filed against her.
a) Twin Notice Requirement
(a) What is the difference between resignation
and constructive dismissal? (2%) (2019 Bar
b) Hearing Exam)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: A resignation is a voluntary

4. Termination of Contract of Migrant self-termination when personal reasons cannot be
Workers Under RA 8042 as sacrificed in favor of the exigency of the
amended by RA 10022 employer’s business (Gan v. Galderma Philippines
G.R No. 177167, Jan. 17, 2013). On the other
hand, constructive dismissal is quitting a
C. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT BY particular employment because the employer has
EMPLOYEE made continued employment impossible,
unreasonable or unlikely (Phil. Japan Active
Carbon Corp v. NLRC, G. R. No. 83239, March 8,
1. Resignation vs. Constructive Dismissal 1989).
QUESTION. An employee proved to have been D. PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION

illegally dismissed is entitled to reinstatement
and full backwages computed on the basis of
QUESTION. Karina Santos is a famous news
his:
anchor appearing nightly in the country's most
(A) basic salary plus the regular
watched newscast. She is surprised, after one
allowances and the thirteenth month
newscast, to receive a notice of hearing before
pay.
the station's Vice-President for Human
42
Resources and calls the VP immediately to ask required appeal bond equivalent to the total
what was wrong. Karina is told over the phone amount of the monetary award, Filmore filed a
that one of her crew filed a complaint against Motion to Reduce the Appeal Bond to
her for verbal abuse and that management is P4,000,000.00 but submitted a surety bond in
duty-bound to investigate and give her a the amount of P4.9 million. Filmore cited
chance to air her side. Karina objects and financial difficulties as justification for its
denies that she had ever verbally assaulted inability to post the appeal bond in full owing
her crew. The VP then informed her that to the shutdown of its operations. It submitted
pending the investigation she will be placed on its audited financial statements showing a loss
a 30-day preventive suspension without pay of P40 million in the previous year. To show its
and that she will not be allowed to appear in good faith, Filmore also filed its Memorandum
the newscast during this time. of Appeal.
Is the preventive suspension of Karina valid? The NLRC dismissed the appeal for
Discuss the reasons for your answer. (4%) non-perfection on the ground that posting of
(2015 Bar Exam) an appeal bond equivalent to the monetary
award is indispensable for the perfection of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. Preventive suspension the appeal and the reduction of the appeal
is justified where the employee’s continued bond, absent any showing of meritorious
employment poses a serious and imminent threat grounds to justify the same, is not warranted.
to the life or property of the employer or of the Is the dismissal of the appeal correct? Explain.
employee’s co-workers. It may be imposed in the (5%) (2016 Bar Exam)
course of an investigation for a serious offense in
order to prevent him from causing harm or injury SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. In McBurnie v. Ganzon
to the company or fellow employees (Maricalum (G.R. Nos. 178034/18698485, Oct. 17, 2013),
Mining Corp. v. Decorion, G.R. No. 158673, Apr. NLRC made a serious error in denying outright the
12, 2006; Artificio v. NLRC, G.R. No. 172988, July motion to reduce the bond. Once the motion to
26, 2010). Given the physical proximity between reduce the appeal bond is accompanied by at
Karina Santos and the complaining crew, and the least 10% of the monetary awards, excluding
likelihood of a disciplinary action, the latter must damages and attorney's fees, the same shall
be protected from further verbal abuse. provisionally be deemed the reasonable amount
of the bond in the meantime that an appellant's
motion is pending resolution by the Commission.
E. RELIEFS FROM ILLEGAL DISMISSAL
Only after the posting of a bond in the required
percentage shall an appellant's period to perfect
an appeal under the NLRC Rules be deemed
F. RETIREMENT
suspended. The NLRC must resolve the motion
and determine the final amount of bond that
shail be posted by the appellant, still in
V. JURISDICTION AND REMEDIES accordance with the standards of meritorious
grounds and reasonable amount. Should the NLRC
later determine that a greater amount or the full
A. LABOR ARBITER amount of the bond needs to be posted by the
appellant, then the party shall comply
accordingly. The appellant has ten (10) days from
1. Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiter vs. notice of the NLRC order to perfect the appeal by
Jurisdiction of Regional Director posting the required appeal bond.
2. Requisites to Perfect an Appeal With the 3. Reinstatement and/or Execution Pending

National Labor Appeal
Relations Commission
B. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS

QUESTION. Filmore Corporation was ordered COMMISSION
to pay P49 million to its employees by the
Labor Arbiter. It interposed an appeal by filing
a Notice of Appeal and paid the corresponding C. COURT OF APPEALS
appeal fee. However, instead of filing the
43
3. Power to Suspend Effects of Termination
D. SUPREME COURT
4. Remedies
E. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS
I. VOLUNTARY ARBITRATOR
QUESTION. Briefly discuss the powers and
responsibilities of the following in the scheme
of the Labor Code:
J. PRESCRIPTION OF ACTIONS
(b) Bureau of Labor Relations (2%) (2019 Bar
Exam)
1. Money Claims
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The BLR has original and
exclusive authority to act, at their own initiative
or upon request of either or both parties on: 2. Illegal Dismissal
1. All inter-union and intra-union conflicts,
and
2. All disputes, grievances or problems 3. Unfair Labor Practices
arising from or affecting
labor-management relations in all
workplaces, whether agricultural or 4. Offenses Under the Labor Code
non-agricultural, except those arising
from the implementation or
interpretation of collective bargaining 5. Illegal Recruitment
agreements which shall be the subject of
grievance procedure and/or voluntary QUESTION. For purposes of prescription,
arbitration (Article 232, Labor Code). within what periods from the time the cause of
action accrued should the following cases be
The BLR has appellate jurisdiction over: filed:
1. All cases originating from the Regional a. Money claims arising from
Director involving union registration or employer-employee relations (1%)
cancellation of certificates of union b. Illegal dismissal (1%)
registration and complaints for c. Unfair labor practice (1%)
examination of union books of accounts. d. Offenses under the Labor Code (1%)
e. Illegal recruitment (1%) (2019 Bar
F. NATIONAL CONCILIATION AND MEDIATION Exam)
BOARD
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. Within 3 years from the time the cause of
1. Conciliation vs. Mediation action accrued or from the date it
becomes a legal possibility or can be
judicially brought (Art. 306, Labor Code;
F. NATIONAL CONCILIATION AND MEDIATION Art. 1150, Civil Code; Anabe v. Asian
BOARD Construction, G.R. 183233, Dec. 23,
2009).
b. Within 4 years from complete severance
H. DOLE SECRETARY of employer-employee relationship or
date of salary/positional downgrade (Art.
1146, Civil Code; Orchard Golf & Country
1. Jurisdiction Club v. Francisco, G.R. 178125, March 18,
2013).
c. Not later than 1 year from the date of
accrual or date of commission (Art. 305,
2. Visitorial and Enforcement Powers
Labor Code). As to its criminal aspect, it
shall be prosecuted within 3 years from
44
d. date of finality of the ULP judgment (Art.
305, Labor Code).
e. Within 3 years from date of commission
(Art. 305, Labor Code).
f. Within 5 years if it is simple illegal
recruitment, and within 20 years if
economic sabotage (Sec. 7, Rule IV, R.A.
10022).
45

Labor Law - Faqsnuas 2023 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Labor Law - Faqsnuas 2023 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Labor Law - Faqsnuas 2023 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS

• Philippine Overseas Employment and Administration

■ Entities prohibited from Recruiting

■ Suspension or Cancellation of License or Authority

■ Prohibited Practices [Article 34, Labor Code]

■ Illegal recruitment vs. Estafa

0 4.Liability of Local Recruitment Agency and Foreign Employer

■ Theory of Imputed Knowledge

0 5. Termination of Contract of Migrant Worker

• B. Employment of Non-Resident Aliens

Ill. EMPLOYMENT PROPER

• Covered Wokplaces [Sec. 3(c)]

■ Expanded Maternity leave

■ Leave benefits for women workers under Magna Carta of Women

o 4. Special groups of employees

■ Persons with Disabilities

■ Sexual Harassment Act (R.A. No. 7877)

o 2. GSIS Law (R.A. No. 8291)

■ POEA-Standard Employment Contract

■ Doctrine of Necessary Implication

■ Assumption of Jurisdiction by the DOLE Secretary

o 7. Telecommuting Act (RA 11165)

■ Fair Treatment [Sec. 5]

0 2. Requisites to Perfect an Appeal with the National Labor Relations

• B. National Labor Relations Commission

• G. DOLE Regional Directors

2. Civil Code a) May Nini and Nono join a union? (2.5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Nini and Nono may

(a) Was Nagrab Corporation correct in

SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Nagrab Corporation

e) Prohibited Practices [Article 34, Labor

4. Liability of Local Recruitment Agency b) Theory of Imputed Knowledge

5. Termination of Contract of Migrant

QUESTION. When a recruitment agency fails

SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) Solo parenthood

───※ ·❆· ※─── 3. Productivity Standard

QUESTION. Din Din is a single mother with

SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) Yes, absent an b) Hours of Work

(2) Compressed Work Week e) Service Charge [Article 96 of the Labor

f) Occupational Safety and Health

(5) Overtime Work (1) Covered Workplaces [Sec. 3(c)]

QUESTION. Percival was a mechanic of

(6) Computation of Additional

(a) Is the wage order subject to the approval

(1) Wage vs. Salary

(2) Facilities vs. Supplements

QUESTION. Gamma Company pays its regular

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Wage Distortion is a

g) Persons With Disabilities SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Nesting is not

(b) Is Gene entitled to the funeral aid for the

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Article 265 of the Labor

As a result, Nad, Ned, and Nod were

───※ ·❆· ※───

SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, a sympathetic strike E. TELECOMMUTING ACT (RA 11165)

(b) It depends. Not all confidential employees e) Seasonal

Is Q Manpower Co. a labor-only contractor? When Newmark fired Nathaniel, he filed an

───※ ·❆· ※───