Labor Law

Trixie is a scientist/researcher in the academe, specializing in vaccine research, particularly messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology. At the start of the pandemic in 2020, Trixie was hired by AZ Corp. to help formulate and produce a vaccine against COVID-19. The employment contract provides: "You shall not work for whatsoever capacity, either as an employee, agent, or consultant with any person, anywhere in the Philippines, whose business is in direct and indirect competition with the company during the period of this contract, and for a period of ten (10) years from date of resignation or separation from the company. Violation of this stipulation shall make you liable for liquidated damages in the amount of Php 5,000,000.00." Trixie was able to successfully produce the vaccine and for which AZ Corp. paid her Php 50,000,000.00. Thereafter, Trixie resigned from AZ Corp. and returned to her work in the academe. AZ Corp. filed a complaint for damages in the amount of Php 5,000,000.00 against Trixie for violation of the above stipulation in her contract. If you were the judge, rule on the validity of the stipulation. Explain briefly. (5 points)

As Human Resources Manager of a five-star hotel, you were told in confidence by several fearful employees in the housekeeping department that Joy, the head of housekeeping, was a harsh disciplinarian who would pinch the ears of her staff or rap their heads to drill instructions on the proper way to clean and tidy up the hotel rooms. One day, the assistant housekeeper urgently called you to the supply room of the hotel, where you found housekeeping staff Erika and Patricia slumped on the floor with bloody faces. The assistant housekeeper reported that she saw Joy beat up Erika and Patricia with a mop for allegedly stealing complimentary toiletries for guests. Erika and Patricia were hospitalized for a couple of days due to the injuries they sustained. (a) Can Joy be placed on preventive suspension pending administrative investigation? If so, for what maximum period? Explain briefly.

As Human Resources Manager of a five-star hotel, you were told in confidence by several fearful employees in the housekeeping department that Joy, the head of housekeeping, was a harsh disciplinarian who would pinch the ears of her staff or rap their heads to drill instructions on the proper way to clean and tidy up the hotel rooms. One day, the assistant housekeeper urgently called you to the supply room of the hotel, where you found housekeeping staff Erika and Patricia slumped on the floor with bloody faces. The assistant housekeeper reported that she saw Joy beat up Erika and Patricia with a mop for allegedly stealing complimentary toiletries for guests. Erika and Patricia were hospitalized for a couple of days due to the injuries they sustained. (b) If Joy is placed on preventive suspension, is she entitled to receive her wages and other benefits during the period? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Julian was hired by Index Agency, a licensed manpower and recruitment corporation, which had a Service Agreement with Kainan Resto, a fast food restaurant, for the provision of ancillary and support services. Index Agency assigned Julian to work at Kainan Resto as a cashier and counter clerk, whose duties involved taking customer orders, receiving payments, preparing food orders, and serving food to customers. Julian was accused of short-changing a customer during one transaction. He was immediately dismissed from service by the manager of Kainan Resto. Julian filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Index Agency and Kainan Resto. In its defense, Kainan Resto argued that Julian was not its employee but that of Index Agency, given that Index Agency is a licensed manpower and recruitment corporation. Is Kainan Resto correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Due to Bitoy's repeated unwanted sexual advances towards his co-worker Diego, Diego went to the Personnel Manager to report Bitoy's behavior. The Personnel Manager started a disciplinary action case against Bitoy. In his written explanation, Bitoy denied the allegation of sexual advances. He also pointed out that sexual harassment only pertains to a superior-subordinate relationship, where the perpetrator is the superior and the victim is the subordinate. Since Diego is not his subordinate, as they are co-workers with the same rank, Bitoy cannot be subject to disciplinary action. Is Bitoy's contention correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Two legitimate labor organizations (Union Jack and Union Jill) are competing to become the first sole and exclusive bargaining agent (SEBA) in Maharlika Company. The unions agree to a consent election without involving the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). Union Jack garners an overwhelming majority of the valid votes cast during the consent election. Negotiation for a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) commences, and while this is ongoing, a third union, Union Jumble, files with the BLR a petition for certification election seeking certification as the SEBA in Maharlika Company. Union Jack opposes the petition, arguing that no petition for certification election can be filed within one year from the consent election, and during the CBA negotiation. Is Union Jack correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Sonic Build Corp. employed Leo and Dan in its cement factory and assigned them the tasks of, among others, directing and supervising rank-and-file employees. Leo and Dan are required to ensure that such employees obey company rules and regulations, and recommend to the company's Human Resources Department any required disciplinary action against erring employees. There is only one union representing rank-and-file employees. May Leo and Dan join the union? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Marino, a seafarer, was engaged as an oiler on board Searena Corporation's oil tanker vessel. After ten consecutive contracts, with each contract having a duration of eight months and the last one ending in December 2021, Marino decided it was time to enjoy his hard-earned money, and disembarked from the vessel upon the expiration of his employment contract. In April 2022, he felt excruciating pain in his groin. He went to a doctor and was diagnosed with acute hernia. The doctor also determined that the hernia was caused by repeated heavy lifting because of his work as an oiler. As a result, Marino filed a case against Searena Corporation before the Labor Arbiter, claiming total and permanent disability under the POEA Standard Employment Contract. Searena Corporation raised in its position paper that Marino is barred from filing the case as he did not raise any complaints during the term of his employment, and within three days from his arrival in the country after his last employment. If you were the Labor Arbiter, rule on Searena Corporation's defense. Explain briefly. (5 points)

Discuss and differentiate between the procedural requirements in termination of employment for (i) just and (ii) authorized causes. Explain briefly. (5 points)

Cristina, a new-hire of Sterling Corporation (Sterling), was made to join Sterling Corporation Employees Union (SCEU) in compliance with the union shop provision in the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between SCEU and Sterling. At the request of SCEU, Sterling started deducting union dues from Cristina's salary and remitting the same to SCEU pursuant to the CBA provisions. Cristina protested, claiming that she has not authorized the deduction in writing. Is Cristina's claim valid? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Krys is a daily-paid factory worker who is required to render eight hours of work per day. Two days ago, he rendered only seven hours of work as he arrived late in the morning. Yesterday, Krys worked for nine hours as he was required to assist in the processing of perishable goods. His supervisor, Rudy, told Krys that he would not get any overtime pay as his work for nine hours yesterday was meant to offset the one-hour shortfall in his work the day before. b) Assuming Krys is entitled to overtime pay, how much will he get as overtime pay if his daily wage is Php 640.00? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Krys is a daily-paid factory worker who is required to render eight hours of work per day. Two days ago, he rendered only seven hours of work as he arrived late in the morning. Yesterday, Krys worked for nine hours as he was required to assist in the processing of perishable goods. His supervisor, Rudy, told Krys that he would not get any overtime pay as his work for nine hours yesterday was meant to offset the one-hour shortfall in his work the day before. a) Is Rudy correct? Explain briefly.

Kotse Corp. operates a mobile phone application "Kotse PH" that allows users to book private cars on demand to their destination, and matches them with nearby available "driver-partners." The destination is only made known to the driver-partners when the users have boarded the vehicle. Kotse Corp. has an accreditation process for its driver-partners who are required to submit bio-data, professional driver's license, and negative drug test result, as well as pass an exam on road safety. After accreditation, the driver-partners are free to choose their own work hours but Kotse Corp. requires them to complete at least a total of 40 hours per week or else the driver's share in the fare will be reduced. The fare is determined by the application software depending on distance, time, and the demand for rides. The fare is paid by the user or passenger through the application and Kotse Corp. remits the driver's share of 75% of the fare every two weeks. Kotse Corp. keeps 25% as its commission. The driver-partners are evaluated by the users or passengers through a five-star rating system. Driver-partners who consistently have an average rating of two stars or below may be removed from Kotse Corp.'s roster of driver-partners. The driver-partners use their own vehicles, pay for fuel, and secure their own vehicle insurance. Is there an employer-employee relationship between Kotse Corp. and its driver-partners? Explain briefly. (5 points)

Sigaw Corp., a media entity, produces television shows. To streamline its processes, it created a database of camera crew and sound engineers whom it usually engages for its television shows. Sigaw Corp. pays them only "talent fees" each time they are engaged for a show. After several years of this set-up, the camera crew and sound engineers filed a complaint for regularization against Sigaw Corp. before the Labor Arbiter. On the other hand, Sigaw Corp. claims that they are not regular employees but independent contractors or talents because they are engaged and paid for their specific technical skills. Rule on the complaint. Explain briefly. (5 points)

A nongovernmental organization operating in the Philippines which seeks to promote equality and human dignity in the workplace has 40 rank-and-file employees. Can the employees of this cause-oriented, nongovernmental organization form a labor union? Explain briefly.

Upon the owner's instructions, the restaurant manager served a notice of termination on a cashier who has been employed in that restaurant for more than five years. Effective immediately, the notice was based on the alleged insubordination of the cashier. The owner had ordered the termination immediately after learning from the manager that the cashier was asking whether the restaurant was remitting Social Security System contributions deducted from employees' salaries. Will an action for illegal dismissal filed by the cashier prosper? Explain briefly.

In 2019, as a response to a viral #UniversityDoBetter movement, a university announced that it would create the position of independent gender auditor answerable only to the university's Board of Regents. The #UniversityDoBetter movement had arisen when a high school student started to post on social media complaints alleging sexual improprieties by some professors. Others soon followed with their own stories. Even traditional media outlets covered their stories. True to its promise, the university engaged one of its former professors with profound feminist views as gender auditor. The contract stipulated a performance review after five months of the gender auditor's being engaged. The gender auditor's performance was never the subject of any assessment by the Board of Regents. For about two years, the gender auditor submitted several candid findings on the behavior of some members of the university's faculty and administration. In January 2021, the gender auditor submitted a report that the university's management, including the Board of Regents, enabled and facilitated a hostile environment not only for women but also for those whose sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression were considered "nonconforming," i.e., members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and other gender and sexual minorities (LGBTQIA+) community. This report leaked and stirred a controversy, causing the university president to be dismissed from their post. In January 2022, after the president's dismissal, the gender auditor received a letter from the Board of Regents, requiring the submission of a performance assessment to determine whether the gender auditor can be considered a regular employee. The gender auditor seeks your advice because you passed the #BestBarEver2020_21 and were recognized for exemplary performance. Is the gender auditor still a probationary employee? Explain briefly.

Because of dwindling sales and the consequent limitation of production, rumors were rife that XYZ, Inc. would reduce its employee force. The next day, the employees of XYZ, Inc. received a notice that the company will have a winding down period of 10 days, after which there will be a six (6)-month suspension of operations to allow the company to address its precarious financial position. On the fourth (4th) month of suspension of its operations, XYZ, Inc. posted an announcement that it will resume its operations in 60 days but at the same time announced that instead of closing down due to financial losses, it will retrench 50% of the work force. (b) Assuming that XYZ, Inc., instead of retrenchment, extended the suspension of its operations from six (6) months to eight (8) months, would the same be legally permissible? If not, what are the consequences? (2.5%)

W Ship Management, Inc. hired Seafarer G as bosun in its vessel under the terms of the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC). On his sixth (6th) month on board, Seafarer G fell ill while working. In particular, he complained of stomach pain, general weakness, and fresh blood in his stool. When his illness persisted, he was medically repatriated on January 15, 2018. On the same day, Seafarer G submitted himself to a post-employment medical examination, wherein he was referred for further treatment. As of September 30, 2018, Seafarer G has yet to be issued any fit-to-work certification by the company-designated physician, much less a final and definitive assessment of his actual condition. Since Seafarer G still felt unwell, he sought an opinion from a doctor of his choice who later issued an independent assessment stating that he was totally and permanently disabled due to his illness sustained during work. Seafarer G then proceeded to file a claim for total and permanent disability compensation. The company asserts that the claim should be dismissed due to prematurity since Seafarer G failed to first settle the matter through the third-doctor conflict resolution procedure as provided under the 2010 POEA-SEC. (b) Will Seafarer G's claim for total and permanent disability benefits prosper despite his failure to first settle the matter through the third-doctor conflict resolution procedure? Explain. (3%)

W Ship Management, Inc. hired Seafarer G as bosun in its vessel under the terms of the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC). On his sixth (6th) month on board, Seafarer G fell ill while working. In particular, he complained of stomach pain, general weakness, and fresh blood in his stool. When his illness persisted, he was medically repatriated on January 15, 2018. On the same day, Seafarer G submitted himself to a post-employment medical examination, wherein he was referred for further treatment. As of September 30, 2018, Seafarer G has yet to be issued any fit-to-work certification by the company-designated physician, much less a final and definitive assessment of his actual condition. Since Seafarer G still felt unwell, he sought an opinion from a doctor of his choice who later issued an independent assessment stating that he was totally and permanently disabled due to his illness sustained during work. Seafarer G then proceeded to file a claim for total and permanent disability compensation. The company asserts that the claim should be dismissed due to prematurity since Seafarer G failed to first settle the matter through the third-doctor conflict resolution procedure as provided under the 2010 POEA-SEC. (c) Assuming that Seafarer G failed to submit himself to a post-employment medical examination within three (3) working days from his return, what is the consequence thereof to his claim? Explain. (2%)

Ms. A is a volleyball coach with five (5) years of experience in her field. Before the start of the volleyball season of 2015, she was hired for the sole purpose of overseeing the training and coaching of the University's volleyball team. During her hiring, the Vice-President for Sports expressed to Ms. A the University's expectation that she would bring the University a championship at the end of the year. In her first volleyball season, the University placed ninth (9th) out of 10 participating teams. Soon after the end of the season, the Vice-President for Sports informed Ms. A that she was a mere probationary employee and hence, she need not come back for the next season because of the poor performance of the team. In any case, the Vice-President for Sports claimed that Ms. A was a fixed-term employee whose contract had ended at the close of the year. (a) Is Ms. A a probationary, fixed-term, or regular employee? Explain your reasons as to why she is or she is not such kind of an employee for each of the types of employment given. (5%)

Discuss the differences between compulsory and voluntary/optional retirement as well as the minimum benefits provided under the Labor Code for retiring employees of private establishments. (2.5%)

Because of dwindling sales and the consequent limitation of production, rumors were rife that XYZ, Inc. would reduce its employee force. The next day, the employees of XYZ, Inc. received a notice that the company will have a winding down period of 10 days, after which there will be a six (6)-month suspension of operations to allow the company to address its precarious financial position. On the fourth (4th) month of suspension of its operations, XYZ, Inc. posted an announcement that it will resume its operations in 60 days but at the same time announced that instead of closing down due to financial losses, it will retrench 50% of the work force. (a) Is the announcement that there would be retrenchment affecting 50% of the work force sufficient compliance with the legal requirements for retrenchment? Explain. (2.5%)

When resolving a case of unfair labor practice (ULP) filed by a union, what should be the critical point of analysis to determine if an act constitutes ULP? (2.5%)

Ms. A is a volleyball coach with five (5) years of experience in her field. Before the start of the volleyball season of 2015, she was hired for the sole purpose of overseeing the training and coaching of the University's volleyball team. During her hiring, the Vice-President for Sports expressed to Ms. A the University's expectation that she would bring the University a championship at the end of the year. In her first volleyball season, the University placed ninth (9th) out of 10 participating teams. Soon after the end of the season, the Vice-President for Sports informed Ms. A that she was a mere probationary employee and hence, she need not come back for the next season because of the poor performance of the team. In any case, the Vice-President for Sports claimed that Ms. A was a fixed-term employee whose contract had ended at the close of the year. (b) Assuming that Ms. A was dismissed by the University for serious misconduct but was never given a notice to explain, what is the consequence of a procedurally infirm dismissal from service under our Labor law and jurisprudence? Explain. (2%)

W Ship Management, Inc. hired Seafarer G as bosun in its vessel under the terms of the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC). On his sixth (6th) month on board, Seafarer G fell ill while working. In particular, he complained of stomach pain, general weakness, and fresh blood in his stool. When his illness persisted, he was medically repatriated on January 15, 2018. On the same day, Seafarer G submitted himself to a post-employment medical examination, wherein he was referred for further treatment. As of September 30, 2018, Seafarer G has yet to be issued any fit-to-work certification by the company-designated physician, much less a final and definitive assessment of his actual condition. Since Seafarer G still felt unwell, he sought an opinion from a doctor of his choice who later issued an independent assessment stating that he was totally and permanently disabled due to his illness sustained during work. Seafarer G then proceeded to file a claim for total and permanent disability compensation. The company asserts that the claim should be dismissed due to prematurity since Seafarer G failed to first settle the matter through the third-doctor conflict resolution procedure as provided under the 2010 POEA-SEC. (a) What is the third-doctor conflict resolution procedure under the 2010 POEA-SEC? Explain. (2%)

On December 1, 2018, GHI Co., an organized establishment, and Union J, the exclusive bargaining agent therein executed a five (5)-year collective bargaining agreement (CBA) which, after ratification, was registered with the Bureau of Labor Relations. (b) When is the earliest time that another union can file for a petition for certification election? Explain. (2.5%)

On December 1, 2018, GHI Co., an organized establishment, and Union J, the exclusive bargaining agent therein executed a five (5)-year collective bargaining agreement (CBA) which, after ratification, was registered with the Bureau of Labor Relations. (a) When can the union ask, at the earliest, for the renegotiation of all terms of the CBA, except its representation aspect? Explain. (2.5%)

Upon a review of the wage rate and structure pertaining to its regular rank and file employees, K Corporation found it necessary to increase its hiring rates for employees belonging to the different job classification levels to make their salary rates more competitive in the labor market. After the implementation of the new hiring salary, Union X, the exclusive bargaining agent of the rank and file employees, demanded a similar salary adjustment for the old employees. It argued that the increase in hiring rates resulted in wage distortion since it erased the wage gap between the new and old employees. In other words, new employees would enjoy almost the same salary rates as K Corporation's old employees. (b) Did a wage distortion arise under the circumstances which legally obligated K Corporation to rectify the wages of its old employees? Explain. (3%)

After due proceedings, the Labor Arbiter (LA) declared Mr. K to have been illegally dismissed by his former employer, ABC, Inc. As a consequence, the LA directed ABC, Inc. to pay Mr. K separation pay in lieu of reinstatement as well as his full backwages. While ABC, Inc. accepted the finding of illegal dismissal, it nevertheless filed a motion for reconsideration, claiming that the LA erred in awarding both separation pay and full backwages, and instead, should have ordered Mr. K's reinstatement to his former position without loss of seniority rights and other privileges, but without payment of backwages. In this regard, ABC, Inc. pointed out that the LA's ruling did not contain any finding of strained relations or that reinstatement was no longer feasible. In any case, it appears that no evidence was presented on this score. (a) Is ABC, Inc.'s contention to delete the separation pay, and instead, order reinstatement without backwages correct? Explain. (3%)

After due proceedings, the Labor Arbiter (LA) declared Mr. K to have been illegally dismissed by his former employer, ABC, Inc. As a consequence, the LA directed ABC, Inc. to pay Mr. K separation pay in lieu of reinstatement as well as his full backwages. While ABC, Inc. accepted the finding of illegal dismissal, it nevertheless filed a motion for reconsideration, claiming that the LA erred in awarding both separation pay and full backwages, and instead, should have ordered Mr. K's reinstatement to his former position without loss of seniority rights and other privileges, but without payment of backwages. In this regard, ABC, Inc. pointed out that the LA's ruling did not contain any finding of strained relations or that reinstatement was no longer feasible. In any case, it appears that no evidence was presented on this score. (b) Assuming that on appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) upholds the decision of the LA, where, how, and within what timeframe should ABC, Inc. assail the NLRC ruling? (2%)

Upon a review of the wage rate and structure pertaining to its regular rank and file employees, K Corporation found it necessary to increase its hiring rates for employees belonging to the different job classification levels to make their salary rates more competitive in the labor market. After the implementation of the new hiring salary, Union X, the exclusive bargaining agent of the rank and file employees, demanded a similar salary adjustment for the old employees. It argued that the increase in hiring rates resulted in wage distortion since it erased the wage gap between the new and old employees. In other words, new employees would enjoy almost the same salary rates as K Corporation's old employees. (a) What is wage distortion? (2%)

Mr. A signed a one (1)-year contract with XYZ Recruitment Co. for deployment as welding supervisor for DEF, Inc. located in Dubai. The employment contract, which the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) approved, stipulated a salary of US$600.00 a month. Mr. A had only been in his job in Dubai for six (6) months when DEF, Inc. announced that it was suffering from severe financial losses and thus intended to retrench some of its workers, among them Mr. A. DEF, Inc. hinted, however, that employees who would accept a lower salary could be retained. Together with some other Filipino workers, Mr. A agreed to a reduced salary of US$400.00 a month and thus, continued with his employment. (b) Assuming that the reduction was invalid, may Mr. A hold XYZ Recruitment Co. liable for underpayment of wages? Explain. (2.5%)

Mr. A signed a one (1)-year contract with XYZ Recruitment Co. for deployment as welding supervisor for DEF, Inc. located in Dubai. The employment contract, which the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) approved, stipulated a salary of US$600.00 a month. Mr. A had only been in his job in Dubai for six (6) months when DEF, Inc. announced that it was suffering from severe financial losses and thus intended to retrench some of its workers, among them Mr. A. DEF, Inc. hinted, however, that employees who would accept a lower salary could be retained. Together with some other Filipino workers, Mr. A agreed to a reduced salary of US$400.00 a month and thus, continued with his employment. (a) Was the reduction of Mr. A's salary valid? Explain. (2.5%)

Due to serious business reverses, ABC Co. decided to terminate the services of several officers receiving "fat" compensation packages. One of these officers was Mr. X, its Vice-President for External Affairs and a member of the Board of Directors. Aggrieved, Mr. X filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) — Regional Arbitration Branch. ABC Co. moved for the dismissal of the case on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, asserting that since Mr. X occupied the position of Vice-President for External Affairs which is listed in the by-laws of the corporation, the case should have been filed before the Regional Trial Court. The Labor Arbiter (LA) denied ABC Co.'s motion and proceeded to rule that Mr. X was illegally dismissed. Hence, he was reinstated in ABC Co.'s payroll pending its appeal to the NLRC. (b) Assuming that jurisdiction is not at issue and that the NLRC reverses the LA's ruling of illegal dismissal with finality, may ABC Co. claim reimbursement for the amounts it paid to Mr. X during the time that he was on payroll reinstatement pending appeal? Explain. (2.5%)

Due to serious business reverses, ABC Co. decided to terminate the services of several officers receiving "fat" compensation packages. One of these officers was Mr. X, its Vice-President for External Affairs and a member of the Board of Directors. Aggrieved, Mr. X filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) — Regional Arbitration Branch. ABC Co. moved for the dismissal of the case on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, asserting that since Mr. X occupied the position of Vice-President for External Affairs which is listed in the by-laws of the corporation, the case should have been filed before the Regional Trial Court. The Labor Arbiter (LA) denied ABC Co.'s motion and proceeded to rule that Mr. X was illegally dismissed. Hence, he was reinstated in ABC Co.'s payroll pending its appeal to the NLRC. (a) Did the LA err in denying ABC Co.'s motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction? Explain. (2.5%)

Briefly discuss the powers and responsibilities of the following in the scheme of the Labor Code: (c) Voluntary Arbitrators (2%)

Briefly discuss the powers and responsibilities of the following in the scheme of the Labor Code: (b) Bureau of Labor Relations (2%)

Briefly discuss the powers and responsibilities of the following in the scheme of the Labor Code: (a) Secretary of Labor (2%)

For purposes of prescription, within what periods from the time the cause of action accrued should the following cases be filed: (e) Illegal recruitment (1%)

For purposes of prescription, within what periods from the time the cause of action accrued should the following cases be filed: (d) Offenses under the Labor Code (1%)

For purposes of prescription, within what periods from the time the cause of action accrued should the following cases be filed: (c) Unfair labor practice (1%)

For purposes of prescription, within what periods from the time the cause of action accrued should the following cases be filed: (b) Illegal dismissal (1%)

For purposes of prescription, within what periods from the time the cause of action accrued should the following cases be filed: (a) Money claims arising from employer-employee relations (1%)

Ms. T was caught in the act of stealing the company property of her employer. When Ms. T admitted to the commission of the said act to her manager, the latter advised her to just tender her resignation; otherwise, she would face an investigation which would likely lead to the termination of her employment and the filing of criminal charges in court. Acting on her manager's advice, Ms. T submitted a letter of resignation. Later on, Ms. T filed a case for constructive dismissal against her employer. While Ms. T conceded that her manager spoke to her in a calm and unforceful manner, she claimed that her resignation was not completely voluntary because she was told that should she not resign, she could be terminated from work for just cause and worse criminal charges could be filed against her. (a) What is the difference between resignation and constructive dismissal? (2%)

W Gas Corp. is engaged in the manufacture and distribution to the general public of various petroleum products. On January 1, 2010, W Gas Corp. entered into a Service Agreement with Q Manpower Co., whereby the latter undertook to provide utility workers for the maintenance of the former's manufacturing plant. Although the workers were hired by Q Manpower Co., they used the equipment owned by W Gas Corp. in performing their tasks, and were likewise subject to constant checking based on W Gas Corp.'s procedures. On February 1, 2010, Mr. R, one of the utility workers, was dismissed from employment in line with the termination of the Service Agreement between W Gas Corp. and Q Manpower Co. Thus, Mr. R filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against W Gas Corp., claiming that Q Manpower Co. is only a labor-only contractor. In the course of the proceedings, W Gas Corp. presented no evidence to prove Q Manpower Co.'s capitalization. (b) Will Mr. R's complaint for illegal dismissal against W Gas Corp. prosper? Explain. (2.5%)

W Gas Corp. is engaged in the manufacture and distribution to the general public of various petroleum products. On January 1, 2010, W Gas Corp. entered into a Service Agreement with Q Manpower Co., whereby the latter undertook to provide utility workers for the maintenance of the former's manufacturing plant. Although the workers were hired by Q Manpower Co., they used the equipment owned by W Gas Corp. in performing their tasks, and were likewise subject to constant checking based on W Gas Corp.'s procedures. On February 1, 2010, Mr. R, one of the utility workers, was dismissed from employment in line with the termination of the Service Agreement between W Gas Corp. and Q Manpower Co. Thus, Mr. R filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against W Gas Corp., claiming that Q Manpower Co. is only a labor-only contractor. In the course of the proceedings, W Gas Corp. presented no evidence to prove Q Manpower Co.'s capitalization. (a) Is Q Manpower Co. a labor-only contractor? Explain. (2.5%)

D, one of the sales representatives of OP, Inc., was receiving a basic pay of P50,000.00 a month, plus a 1% overriding commission on his actual sales transactions. In addition, beginning three (3) months ago, or in August 2019, D was able to receive a monthly gas and transportation allowance of P5,000.00 despite the lack of any company policy therefor. In November 2019, D approached his manager and asked for his gas and transportation allowance for the month. The manager declined his request, saying that the company had decided to discontinue the aforementioned allowance considering the increased costs of its overhead expenses. In response, D argued that OP, Inc.'s removal of the gas and transportation allowance amounted to a violation of the rule on non-diminution of benefits. Is the argument of D tenable? Explain. (2.5%)

Ms. F, a sales assistant, is one of the eight (8) workers regularly employed by ABC Convenience Store. She was required to report on December 25 and 30. Should ABC Convenience Store pay her holiday pay? Explain. (2.5%)

Mrs. B, the personal cook in the household of X, filed a monetary claim against her employer, X, for denying her service incentive leave pay. X argued that Mrs. B did not avail of any service incentive leave at the end of her one (1) year of service and hence, not entitled to the said monetary claim. (b) Assuming that Mrs. B is instead a clerk in X's company with at least 30 regular employees, will her monetary claim prosper? Explain. (2.5%)

Mrs. B, the personal cook in the household of X, filed a monetary claim against her employer, X, for denying her service incentive leave pay. X argued that Mrs. B did not avail of any service incentive leave at the end of her one (1) year of service and hence, not entitled to the said monetary claim. (a) Is the contention of X tenable? Explain. (2.5%)

A, B, and C were hired as resident-doctors by MM Medical Center, Inc. In the course of their engagement, A, B, and C maintained specific work schedules as determined by the Medical Director. The hospital also monitored their work through supervisors who gave them specific instructions on how they should perform their respective tasks, including diagnosis, treatment, and management of their patients. One day, A, B, and C approached the Medical Director and inquired about the non-payment of their employment benefits. In response, the Medical Director told them that they were not entitled to any because they were mere "independent contractors" as expressly stipulated in the contracts which they admittedly signed. As such, no employer-employee relationship existed between them and the hospital. (b) Is the Medical Director's reliance on the contracts signed by A, B, and C to refute the existence of an employer-employee relationship correct? If not, are A, B, and C employees of MM Medical Center, Inc.? Explain. (3%)

A, B, and C were hired as resident-doctors by MM Medical Center, Inc. In the course of their engagement, A, B, and C maintained specific work schedules as determined by the Medical Director. The hospital also monitored their work through supervisors who gave them specific instructions on how they should perform their respective tasks, including diagnosis, treatment, and management of their patients. One day, A, B, and C approached the Medical Director and inquired about the non-payment of their employment benefits. In response, the Medical Director told them that they were not entitled to any because they were mere "independent contractors" as expressly stipulated in the contracts which they admittedly signed. As such, no employer-employee relationship existed between them and the hospital. (a) What is the control test in determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship? (2%)

X is a member of the Social Security System (SSS). In 2015, he died without any spouse or children. Prior to the semester of his death, X had paid 36 monthly contributions. His mother, M, who had previously been receiving regular support from X, filed a claim for the latter's 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 SSS? Explain. (2.5%)

X is a member of the Social Security System (SSS). In 2015, he died without any spouse or children. Prior to the semester of his death, X had paid 36 monthly contributions. His mother, M, who had previously been receiving regular support from X, filed a claim for the latter's death benefits. (a) Is M entitled to claim death benefits from the SSS? Explain. (2.5%)

Define, explain or distinguish the following terms: (d) Bona fide occupational qualifications (2%)

Define, explain or distinguish the following terms: (c) Strikes and lockouts (2%)

Define, explain or distinguish the following terms: (b) Seasonal and project employees (2%)

Define, explain or distinguish the following terms: (a) Just and authorized causes (2%)

Define, explain or distinguish the following terms: (e) Grievance machinery (2%)

Ms. T was caught in the act of stealing the company property of her employer. When Ms. T admitted to the commission of the said act to her manager, the latter advised her to just tender her resignation; otherwise, she would face an investigation which would likely lead to the termination of her employment and the filing of criminal charges in court. Acting on her manager's advice, Ms. T submitted a letter of resignation. Later on, Ms. T filed a case for constructive dismissal against her employer. While Ms. T conceded that her manager spoke to her in a calm and unforceful manner, she claimed that her resignation was not completely voluntary because she was told that should she not resign, she could be terminated from work for just cause and worse criminal charges could be filed against her. (b) Will Ms. T's claim for constructive dismissal prosper? Explain. (3%)

Your favorite relative, Tita Nilda, approaches you and seeks your advice on her treatment of her kasambahay, Noray. Tita Nilda shows you a document called a "Contract of Engagement" for your review. Under the Contract of Engagement, Noray shall be entitled to a rest day every week, 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 this Contract of Engagement should embody all terms and conditions of Noray's work as the engagement of a kasambahay is a private matter and should not be regulated by the State. (c) Are stay-in family drivers included under the Kasambahay Law?

Your favorite relative, Tita Nilda, approaches you and seeks your advice on her treatment of her kasambahay, Noray. Tita Nilda shows you a document called a "Contract of Engagement" for your review. Under the Contract of Engagement, Noray shall be entitled to a rest day every week, 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 this Contract of Engagement should embody all terms and conditions of Noray's work as the engagement of a kasambahay is a private matter and should not be regulated by the State. (b) Is the stipulation that she may be requested to work on a rest day legal? (2.5%)

Your favorite relative, Tita Nilda, approaches you and seeks your advice on her treatment of her kasambahay, Noray. Tita Nilda shows you a document called a "Contract of Engagement" for your review. Under the Contract of Engagement, Noray shall be entitled to a rest day every week, 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 this Contract of Engagement should embody all terms and conditions of Noray's work as the engagement of a kasambahay is a private matter and should not be regulated by the State. (a) Is Tita Nilda correct in saying that this is a private matter and should not be regulated by the State? (2.5%)

Sgt. Nemesis was a detachment non-commissioned officer of the Armed Forces of the Philippines in Nueva Ecija. He and some other members of his detachment sought permission from their Company Commander for an overnight pass to Nueva Vizcaya to settle some important matters. The Company Commander orally approved their request and allowed them to carry their firearms as the place they were going to was classified as a "critical place." They arrived at the place past midnight; and as they were alighting from a tricycle, one of his companions accidentally dropped his rifle, which fired a single shot, and in the process hit Sgt. Nemesis fatally. The shooting was purely accidental. At the time of his death, he was still legally married to Nelda, but had been separated de facto from her for 17 years. For the last 15 years of his life, he was living in with Narda, with whom he has two minor children. Since Narda works as a kasambahay, the two children lived with their grandparents, who provided their daily support. Sgt. Nemesis and Narda only sent money to them every year to pay for their school tuition. Nelda and Narda, both for themselves and the latter, also on behalf of her minor children, separately filed claims for compensation as a result of the death of Sgt. Nemesis. The Line of Duty Board of the AFP declared Sgt. Nemesis' death to have been "in line of duty", and recommended that all benefits due Sgt. Nemesis be given to his dependents. However, the claims were denied by GSIS because Sgt. Nemesis was not in his workplace nor performing his duty as a soldier of the Philippine Army when he died. (b) As between Nelda and Narda, who should be entitled to the benefits? (2.5%)

Sgt. Nemesis was a detachment non-commissioned officer of the Armed Forces of the Philippines in Nueva Ecija. He and some other members of his detachment sought permission from their Company Commander for an overnight pass to Nueva Vizcaya to settle some important matters. The Company Commander orally approved their request and allowed them to carry their firearms as the place they were going to was classified as a "critical place." They arrived at the place past midnight; and as they were alighting from a tricycle, one of his companions accidentally dropped his rifle, which fired a single shot, and in the process hit Sgt. Nemesis fatally. The shooting was purely accidental. At the time of his death, he was still legally married to Nelda, but had been separated de facto from her for 17 years. For the last 15 years of his life, he was living in with Narda, with whom he has two minor children. Since Narda works as a kasambahay, the two children lived with their grandparents, who provided their daily support. Sgt. Nemesis and Narda only sent money to them every year to pay for their school tuition. Nelda and Narda, both for themselves and the latter, also on behalf of her minor children, separately filed claims for compensation as a result of the death of Sgt. Nemesis. The Line of Duty Board of the AFP declared Sgt. Nemesis' death to have been "in line of duty", and recommended that all benefits due Sgt. Nemesis be given to his dependents. However, the claims were denied by GSIS because Sgt. Nemesis was not in his workplace nor performing his duty as a soldier of the Philippine Army when he died. (a) Are the dependents of Sgt. Nemesis entitled to compensation as a result of his death? (2.5%)

Nathaniel has been a salesman assigned by Newmark Enterprises (Newmark) for nearly two years at the Manila office of Nutrition City, Inc. (Nutrition City). He was deployed pursuant to a service agreement between Newmark and Nutrition City, the salient provisions of which were as follows: a) the Contractor (Newmark) agrees to perform and provide the Client (Nutrition City), on a non-exclusive basis, such tasks or activities that are considered contractible under existing laws, as may be needed by the Client from time to time; b) the Contractor shall employ the necessary personnel like helpers, salesmen, and drivers who are determined by the Contractor to be efficiently trained; c) the Client may request replacement of the Contractor's personnel if quality of the desired result is not achieved; d) the Contractor's personnel will comply with the Client's policies, rules, and regulations; and e) the Contractor's two service vehicles and necessary equipment will be utilized in carrying out the provisions of this Agreement. When Newmark fired Nathaniel, he filed an illegal dismissal case against the wealthier company, Nutrition City, Inc., alleging that he was a regular employee of the same. Is Nathaniel correct? (2.5%)

Nico is a medical representative engaged in the promotion of pharmaceutical products and medical devices for Northern Pharmaceuticals, Inc. He regularly visits physicians' clinics to inform them of the chemical composition and benefits of his employer's products. At the end of every day, he receives a basic wage of PhP700.00 plus a PhP150.00 "productivity allowance." For purposes of computing Nico's 13th month pay, should the daily "productivity allowance" be included? (2.5%)

A certification election was conducted in Nation Manufacturing Corporation, whereby 55% of eligible voters in the bargaining unit cast their votes. The results were as follows: Union Nana: 45 votes; Union Nada: 40 votes; Union Nara: 30 votes; No Union: 80 votes. Union Nana moved to be declared as the winner of the certification election. (b) Assume that the eligibility of 30 voters was challenged during the pre-election conference. The ballots of the 30 challenged voters were placed inside an envelope sealed by the DOLE Election Officer. Considering the said envelope remains sealed, what should be the next course of action with respect to the said challenged votes? (2.5%)

A certification election was conducted in Nation Manufacturing Corporation, whereby 55% of eligible voters in the bargaining unit cast their votes. The results were as follows: Union Nana: 45 votes; Union Nada: 40 votes; Union Nara: 30 votes; No Union: 80 votes. Union Nana moved to be declared as the winner of the certification election. (a) Can Union Nana be declared as the winner? (2.5%)

Nonato had been continuously employed and deployed as a seaman who performed services that were necessary and desirable to the business of N-Train Shipping, through its local agent, Narita Maritime Services (Agency), in accordance with the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (2010 POEA-SEC). Nonato's last contract (for five months) expired on November 15, 2016. Nonato was then repatriated due to a "finished contract." He immediately reported to the Agency and complained that he had been experiencing dizziness, weakness, and difficulty in breathing. The Agency referred him to Dr. Neri, who examined, treated, and prescribed him with medications. After a few months of treatment and consultations, Nonato was declared fit to resume work as a seaman. Nonato went back to the Agency to ask for re-deployment but the Agency rejected his application. Nonato filed an illegal dismissal case against the Agency and its principal, with a claim for total disability benefits based on the ailments that he developed on board N-Train Shipping vessels. The claim was based on the certification of his own physician, Dr. Nunez, that he was unfit for sea duties because of his hypertension and diabetes. (a) Was Nonato a regular employee of N-Train Shipping? (2.5%)

Nelda worked as a chambermaid in Hotel Neverland with a basic wage of PhP560.00 for an eight-hour workday. On Good Friday, she worked for one (1) hour from 10:00 PM to 11:00 PM. Her employer paid her only PhP480.00 for each 8-hour workday, and PhP70.00 for the work done on Good Friday. She sued for underpayment of wages and non-payment of holiday pay and night shift differential pay for working on a Good Friday. Hotel Neverland denied the alleged underpayment, arguing that based on long-standing unwritten tradition, food and lodging costs were partially shouldered by the employer and partially paid for by the employee through salary deduction. According to the employer, such valid deduction caused the payment of Nelda's wage to be below the prescribed minimum. The hotel also claimed that she was not entitled to holiday pay and night shift differential pay because hotel workers have to work on holidays and may be assigned to work at night. (b) Applying labor standards law, how much should Nelda be paid for work done on Good Friday? Show the computation in your test booklet and encircle your final answer. (2.5%)

Nelda worked as a chambermaid in Hotel Neverland with a basic wage of PhP560.00 for an eight-hour workday. On Good Friday, she worked for one (1) hour from 10:00 PM to 11:00 PM. Her employer paid her only PhP480.00 for each 8-hour workday, and PhP70.00 for the work done on Good Friday. She sued for underpayment of wages and non-payment of holiday pay and night shift differential pay for working on a Good Friday. Hotel Neverland denied the alleged underpayment, arguing that based on long-standing unwritten tradition, food and lodging costs were partially shouldered by the employer and partially paid for by the employee through salary deduction. According to the employer, such valid deduction caused the payment of Nelda's wage to be below the prescribed minimum. The hotel also claimed that she was not entitled to holiday pay and night shift differential pay because hotel workers have to work on holidays and may be assigned to work at night. (a) Does the hotel have valid legal grounds to deduct food and lodging costs from Nelda's basic salary? (2.5%)

Nayon Federation issued a charter certificate creating a rank-and-file Neuman Employees Union. On the same day, New Neuman Employees Union filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Regional Office, attaching the appropriate charter certificate. (a) The employer, Neuman Corporation, filed a motion to dismiss the petition for lack of legal personality on the part of the petitioner union. Should the motion be granted? (2.5%)

Nayon Federation issued a charter certificate creating a rank-and-file Neuman Employees Union. On the same day, New Neuman Employees Union filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Regional Office, attaching the appropriate charter certificate. (b) The employer likewise filed a petition for cancellation of union registration against New Neuman Employees Union, alleging that Nayon Federation already had a chartered local rank-and-file union, Neuman Employees Union, pertaining to the same bargaining unit within the establishment. Should the petition for cancellation prosper? (2.5%)

Due to his employer's dire financial situation, Nicanor was prevailed upon by his employer to voluntarily resign. In exchange, he demanded payment of salary differentials, 13th month pay, and financial assistance, as promised by his employer. Management promised to pay him as soon as it is able to pay off all retrenched rank-and-file employees. Five years later, and before management was able to pay Nicanor the amount promised to him, Nicanor died of a heart attack. His widow, Norie, filed a money claim against the company before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), including interest on the amount of the unpaid claim. She also claimed additional damages arguing that the supposed resignation letter was obtained from her spouse through undue pressure and influence. The employer filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that (A) the NLRC did not have jurisdiction over money claims, and (B) the action has prescribed. (a) Does the NLRC have jurisdiction to award money claims including interest on the amount unpaid? (2.5%)

Nelson complained before the DOLE Regional Office about Needy Corporation's failure to pay his wage increase amounting to PhP5,000.00 as mandated in a Wage Order issued by the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board. Consequently, Nelson asked the DOLE to immediately issue an Order sustaining his money claim. To his surprise, he received a notice from the DOLE to appear before the Regional Director for purposes of conciliating the dispute between him and Needy Corporation. When conciliation before the Regional Director failed, the latter proceeded to direct both parties to submit their respective position papers in relation to the dispute. Needy Corporation argued that since Nelson was willing to settle for 75% of his money claim during conciliation proceedings, only a maximum of 75% of the said money claim may be awarded to him. (b) Should the Regional Director sustain Needy Corporation's argument? (2.5%)

Nelson complained before the DOLE Regional Office about Needy Corporation's failure to pay his wage increase amounting to PhP5,000.00 as mandated in a Wage Order issued by the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board. Consequently, Nelson asked the DOLE to immediately issue an Order sustaining his money claim. To his surprise, he received a notice from the DOLE to appear before the Regional Director for purposes of conciliating the dispute between him and Needy Corporation. When conciliation before the Regional Director failed, the latter proceeded to direct both parties to submit their respective position papers in relation to the dispute. Needy Corporation argued that since Nelson was willing to settle for 75% of his money claim during conciliation proceedings, only a maximum of 75% of the said money claim may be awarded to him. (a) Was DOLE's action to conduct mandatory conciliation in light of Nelson's complaint valid? (2.5%)

Nonato had been continuously employed and deployed as a seaman who performed services that were necessary and desirable to the business of N-Train Shipping, through its local agent, Narita Maritime Services (Agency), in accordance with the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (2010 POEA-SEC). Nonato's last contract (for five months) expired on November 15, 2016. Nonato was then repatriated due to a "finished contract." He immediately reported to the Agency and complained that he had been experiencing dizziness, weakness, and difficulty in breathing. The Agency referred him to Dr. Neri, who examined, treated, and prescribed him with medications. After a few months of treatment and consultations, Nonato was declared fit to resume work as a seaman. Nonato went back to the Agency to ask for re-deployment but the Agency rejected his application. Nonato filed an illegal dismissal case against the Agency and its principal, with a claim for total disability benefits based on the ailments that he developed on board N-Train Shipping vessels. The claim was based on the certification of his own physician, Dr. Nunez, that he was unfit for sea duties because of his hypertension and diabetes. (b) Can Nonato successfully claim disability benefits against N-Train Shipping and its agent Narita Maritime Services? (2.5%)

Narciso filed a complaint against Norte University for the payment of retirement benefits after having been a part-time professional lecturer in the same school since 1974. Narciso taught for two semesters and a summer term for the school year 1974-1975, took a leave of absence from 1975 to 1977, and resumed teaching until 2003. Since then, his contract has been renewed at the start of every semester and summer, until November 2005 when he was told that he could no longer teach because he was already 75 years old. Norte University also denied Narciso's claim for retirement benefits stating that only full-time permanent faculty, who have served for at least five years immediately preceding the termination of their employment, can avail themselves of post-employment benefits. As part-time faculty member, Narciso did not acquire permanent employment status under the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools, in relation to the Labor Code, regardless of his length of service. (a) Is Narciso entitled to retirement benefits? (2.5%)

Due to his employer's dire financial situation, Nicanor was prevailed upon by his employer to voluntarily resign. In exchange, he demanded payment of salary differentials, 13th month pay, and financial assistance, as promised by his employer. Management promised to pay him as soon as it is able to pay off all retrenched rank-and-file employees. Five years later, and before management was able to pay Nicanor the amount promised to him, Nicanor died of a heart attack. His widow, Norie, filed a money claim against the company before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), including interest on the amount of the unpaid claim. She also claimed additional damages arguing that the supposed resignation letter was obtained from her spouse through undue pressure and influence. The employer filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that (A) the NLRC did not have jurisdiction over money claims, and (B) the action has prescribed. (b) Assuming that the NLRC has jurisdiction, has the action prescribed? (2.5%)

Narciso filed a complaint against Norte University for the payment of retirement benefits after having been a part-time professional lecturer in the same school since 1974. Narciso taught for two semesters and a summer term for the school year 1974-1975, took a leave of absence from 1975 to 1977, and resumed teaching until 2003. Since then, his contract has been renewed at the start of every semester and summer, until November 2005 when he was told that he could no longer teach because he was already 75 years old. Norte University also denied Narciso's claim for retirement benefits stating that only full-time permanent faculty, who have served for at least five years immediately preceding the termination of their employment, can avail themselves of post-employment benefits. As part-time faculty member, Narciso did not acquire permanent employment status under the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools, in relation to the Labor Code, regardless of his length of service. (b) If he is entitled to retirement benefits, how should retirement pay be computed in the absence of any contract between him and Norte University providing for such benefits? (2.5%)

Sgt. Nemesis was a detachment non-commissioned officer of the Armed Forces of the Philippines in Nueva Ecija. He and some other members of his detachment sought permission from their Company Commander for an overnight pass to Nueva Vizcaya to settle some important matters. The Company Commander orally approved their request and allowed them to carry their firearms as the place they were going to was classified as a "critical place." They arrived at the place past midnight; and as they were alighting from a tricycle, one of his companions accidentally dropped his rifle, which fired a single shot, and in the process hit Sgt. Nemesis fatally. The shooting was purely accidental. At the time of his death, he was still legally married to Nelda, but had been separated de facto from her for 17 years. For the last 15 years of his life, he was living in with Narda, with whom he has two minor children. Since Narda works as a kasambahay, the two children lived with their grandparents, who provided their daily support. Sgt. Nemesis and Narda only sent money to them every year to pay for their school tuition. Nelda and Narda, both for themselves and the latter, also on behalf of her minor children, separately filed claims for compensation as a result of the death of Sgt. Nemesis. The Line of Duty Board of the AFP declared Sgt. Nemesis' death to have been "in line of duty", and recommended that all benefits due Sgt. Nemesis be given to his dependents. However, the claims were denied by GSIS because Sgt. Nemesis was not in his workplace nor performing his duty as a soldier of the Philippine Army when he died. (c) Are the minor children entitled to the benefits considering that they were not fully dependent on Sgt. Nemesis for support? (2.5%)

Due to his employer's dire financial situation, Nicanor was prevailed upon by his employer to voluntarily resign. In exchange, he demanded payment of salary differentials, 13th month pay, and financial assistance, as promised by his employer. Management promised to pay him as soon as it is able to pay off all retrenched rank-and-file employees. Five years later, and before management was able to pay Nicanor the amount promised to him, Nicanor died of a heart attack. His widow, Norie, filed a money claim against the company before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), including interest on the amount of the unpaid claim. She also claimed additional damages arguing that the supposed resignation letter was obtained from her spouse through undue pressure and influence. The employer filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that (A) the NLRC did not have jurisdiction over money claims, and (B) the action has prescribed. (c) May Nicanor's spouse successfully claim additional damages as a result of the alleged undue pressure and influence? (2.5%)

Natasha Shoe Company adopted an organizational streamlining program that resulted in the retrenchment of 550 employees in its main plant. After having been paid their separation benefits, the retrenched workers demanded payment of retirement benefits under a CBA between their union and management. Natasha Shoe Company denied the workers' demand. (a) What is the most procedurally peaceful means to resolve this dispute? (2.5%)

Upon compliance with the legal requirements on the conduct of a strike, Navarra Union staged a strike against Newfound Corporation on account of a collective bargaining deadlock. During the strike, some members of Navarra Union broke the windows and punctured the tires of the company-owned buses. The Secretary of Labor and Employment assumed jurisdiction over the dispute. (b) May the company readmit strikers only by restoring them to the payroll? (2.5%)

Natasha Shoe Company adopted an organizational streamlining program that resulted in the retrenchment of 550 employees in its main plant. After having been paid their separation benefits, the retrenched workers demanded payment of retirement benefits under a CBA between their union and management. Natasha Shoe Company denied the workers' demand. (b) Can the workers claim both separation pay and retirement benefits? (2.5%)

Upon compliance with the legal requirements on the conduct of a strike, Navarra Union staged a strike against Newfound Corporation on account of a collective bargaining deadlock. During the strike, some members of Navarra Union broke the windows and punctured the tires of the company-owned buses. The Secretary of Labor and Employment assumed jurisdiction over the dispute. (a) Should all striking employees be admitted back to work upon the assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary of Labor and Employment? Will these include striking employees who damaged company properties? (2.5%)

Nagrab Union and Nagrab Corporation have an existing CBA which contains the following provision: "New employees within the coverage of the bargaining unit who may be regularly employed shall become members of Nagrab Union. Membership in good standing with the Nagrab Union is a requirement for continued employment with Nagrab Corporation." Nagrab Corporation subsequently acquired all the assets and rights of Nuber 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 employees. Nagrab Corporation refused on the ground that this should not apply to the absorbed employees who were former employees of another corporation whose assets and rights it had acquired. (c) How would you advise the human resources manager of Nagrab Corporation to proceed? (2.5%)

Nagrab Union and Nagrab Corporation have an existing CBA which contains the following provision: "New employees within the coverage of the bargaining unit who may be regularly employed shall become members of Nagrab Union. Membership in good standing with the Nagrab Union is a requirement for continued employment with Nagrab Corporation." Nagrab Corporation subsequently acquired all the assets and rights of Nuber 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 employees. Nagrab Corporation refused on the ground that this should not apply to the absorbed employees who were former employees of another corporation whose assets and rights it had acquired. (b) May a newly-regularized employee of Nagrab Corporation (who is not part of the absorbed employees) refuse to join Nagrab Union?

Nagrab Union and Nagrab Corporation have an existing CBA which contains the following provision: "New employees within the coverage of the bargaining unit who may be regularly employed shall become members of Nagrab Union. Membership in good standing with the Nagrab Union is a requirement for continued employment with Nagrab Corporation." Nagrab Corporation subsequently acquired all the assets and rights of Nuber 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 employees. Nagrab Corporation refused on the ground that this should not apply to the absorbed employees who were former employees of another corporation whose assets and rights it had acquired. (a) Was Nagrab Corporation correct in refusing to enforce the CBA provision with respect to the absorbed employees? (2.5%)

Nexturn Corporation employed Nini and Nono, whose tasks involved directing and supervising rank-and-file employees engaged in company operations. Nini and Nono are required to ensure that such employees obey company rules and regulations, and recommend to the company's Human Resources Department any required disciplinary action against erring employees. In Nexturn Corporation, there are two independent unions, representing rank-and-file and supervisory employees, respectively. (b) May the two unions be affiliated with the same Union Federation? (2.5%)

Nexturn Corporation employed Nini and Nono, whose tasks involved directing and supervising rank-and-file employees engaged in company operations. Nini and Nono are required to ensure that such employees obey company rules and regulations, and recommend to the company's Human Resources Department any required disciplinary action against erring employees. In Nexturn Corporation, there are two independent unions, representing rank-and-file and supervisory employees, respectively. (a) May Nini and Nono join a union? (2.5%)

Nicodemus was employed as a computer programmer by Network Corporation, a telecommunications firm. He has been coming to work in shorts and sneakers, in violation of the "prescribed uniform policy" based on company rules and regulations. The company human resources manager wrote him a letter, giving him 10 days to comply with the company uniform policy. Nicodemus asserted that wearing shorts and sneakers made him more productive, and cited his above-average output. When he came to work still in violation of the uniform policy, the company sent him a letter of termination of employment. Nicodemus filed an illegal dismissal case. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Nicodemus and ordered his reinstatement with backwages. Network Corporation, however, refused to reinstate him. The NLRC 1st Division sustained the Labor Arbiter's judgment. Network Corporation still refused to reinstate Nicodemus. Eventually, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the NLRC and ruled that the dismissal was valid. Despite the reversal, Nicodemus still filed a motion for execution with respect to his accrued backwages. (b) Should Nicodemus' motion for execution be granted? (2.5%)

Nicodemus was employed as a computer programmer by Network Corporation, a telecommunications firm. He has been coming to work in shorts and sneakers, in violation of the "prescribed uniform policy" based on company rules and regulations. The company human resources manager wrote him a letter, giving him 10 days to comply with the company uniform policy. Nicodemus asserted that wearing shorts and sneakers made him more productive, and cited his above-average output. When he came to work still in violation of the uniform policy, the company sent him a letter of termination of employment. Nicodemus filed an illegal dismissal case. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Nicodemus and ordered his reinstatement with backwages. Network Corporation, however, refused to reinstate him. The NLRC 1st Division sustained the Labor Arbiter's judgment. Network Corporation still refused to reinstate Nicodemus. Eventually, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the NLRC and ruled that the dismissal was valid. Despite the reversal, Nicodemus still filed a motion for execution with respect to his accrued backwages. (a) Were there valid legal grounds to dismiss Nicodemus from his employment? (2.5%)

Nena worked as an Executive Assistant for Nesting, CEO of Nordic Corporation. One day, Nesting called Nena into his office and showed her lewd pictures of women in seductive poses which Nena found offensive. Nena complained before the General Manager who, in turn, investigated the matter and recommended the dismissal of Nesting to the Board of Directors. Before the Board of Directors, Nesting argued, that since the Anti-Sexual Harassment Law requires the existence of "sexual favors," he should not be dismissed from the service since he did not ask for any sexual favor from Nena. Is Nesting correct? (2.5%)

One of Pacific Airline's policies was to hire only single applicants as flight attendants, and considered as automatically resigned the flight attendants at the moment they got married. Is the policy valid? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

Are there differences between a househelper and a homeworker? Explain your answer. (4%)

Distinguish a learner from an apprentice. (4%)

Percival was a mechanic of Pacific Airlines. He enjoyed a meal break of one hour. However, during meal breaks, he was required to be on stand-by for emergency work. During emergencies, he was made to forego his meals or to hurry up eating. He demanded payment of overtime for work done during his meal periods. Is Percival correct? Explain your answer. (3%)

The Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board (RTWPB) for Region 3 issued a wage order on November 2, 2017 fixing the minimum wages for all industries throughout Region 3. The law mandates that no petition for wage increase shall be entertained within a period of 12 months from the effectivity of the wage order. Under what circumstances may the Kilusang Walang Takot, a federation of labor organizations that publicly and openly assails the wage order as blatantly unjust, initiate the review of the wage increases under the wage order without waiting for the end of the 12-month period? Explain your answer. (3%)

The Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board (RTWPB) for Region 3 issued a wage order on November 2, 2017 fixing the minimum wages for all industries throughout Region 3. Is the wage order subject to the approval of the National Wages and Productivity Commission before it takes effect? (2%)

Phil, a resident alien, sought employment in the Philippines. The employer, noticing that Phil was a foreigner, demanded that he first secure an employment permit from the DOLE. Is the employer correct? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

Andrew Manning Agency (AMA) recruited Feliciano for employment by Invictus Shipping, its foreign principal. Meantime, AMA and Invictus Shipping terminated their agency agreement. Upon his repatriation following his premature termination, Feliciano claimed from AMA and Invictus Shipping the payment of his salaries and benefits for the unserved portion of the contract. AMA denied liability on the ground that it no longer had an agency agreement with Invictus Shipping. Is AMA correct? Explain your answer. (3%)

Procopio was dismissed from employment for stealing his co-employee Raul's watch. Procopio filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter ruled in Procopio's favor on the ground that Raul's testimony was doubtful, and, therefore, the doubt should be resolved in favor of Procopio. On appeal, the NLRC reversed the ruling because Article 4 of the Labor Code - which states that all doubts in the interpretation and implementation of the provisions of the Labor Code, including the implementing rules and regulations, shall be resolved in favor of labor - applied only when the doubt involved the "implementation and interpretation" of the Labor Code; hence, the doubt, which involved the application of the rules on evidence, not the Labor Code, could not necessarily be resolved in favor of Procopio. Was the reversal correct? Explain your answer. (3%)

As a rule, direct hiring of migrant workers is not allowed. What are the exceptions? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

Pursuant to his power under Sec. 278(g) (263(g)) of the Labor Code, the Secretary of Labor assumed jurisdiction over the 3-day old strike in Armor Steel Plates, Inc., one of the country's bigger manufacturers of steel plates, and ordered all the striking employees to return to work. The striking employees ignored the order to return to work. What conditions may justify the Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction? (2.5%)

Pursuant to his power under Sec. 278(g) (263(g)) of the Labor Code, the Secretary of Labor assumed jurisdiction over the 3-day old strike in Armor Steel Plates, Inc., one of the country's bigger manufacturers of steel plates, and ordered all the striking employees to return to work. The striking employees ignored the order to return to work. What are the consequences of the assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary of Labor, and of the disobedience to the return to work? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

Due to business recession, Ballistic Company retrenched a part of its workforce. Opposing the retrenchment, some of the affected employees staged a strike. Eventually, the retrenchment was found to be justified, and the strike was declared illegal; hence, the leaders of the strike, including the retrenched employees, were declared to have lost their employment status. Are the striking retrenched employees still entitled to separation pay under Sec. 298 (283) of the Labor Code despite the illegality of their strike? Explain your answer. (2%)

A sympathetic strike is stoppage of work to make common cause with other strikers in another establishment or business. Is the sympathetic strike valid? Explain your answer. (1%)

What are the accepted tests to determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship? (5%)

Applying the tests to determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship, is a jeepney driver operating under the boundary system an employee of his jeepney operator or a mere lessee of the jeepney? Explain your answer. (3%)

Given that the liability for an illegal strike is individual, not collective, state when the participating union officers and members may be terminated from employment because of the illegal strike. Explain your answer. (4%)

Rosa was granted vacation leave by her employer to spend three weeks in Africa with her family. Prior to her departure, the General Manager of the company requested her to visit the plant of a client of the company in Zimbabwe in order to derive best manufacturing practices useful to the company. She accepted the request because the errand would be important to the company and Zimbabwe was anyway in her itinerary. It appears that she contracted a serious disease during the 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 have resulted from an illness either definitely accepted as an occupational disease by the Employees' Compensation Commission, or caused by employment subject to proof that the risk of contracting the same is increased by working conditions. Is the serious disease Rosa contracted during her trip to Africa compensable? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

Gene is a married regular employee of Matibay Corporation. The employees and Matibay Corporation had an existing CBA that provided for funeral or bereavement aid of P15,000.00 in case of the death of a legal dependent of a regular employee. His widowed mother, who had been living with him and his family for many years, died; hence, he claimed the funeral aid. Matibay Corporation denied the claim on the basis that she had not been his legal dependent as the term legal dependent was defined by the Social Security Law. (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 death of his widowed mother? Explain your answer. (2%)

Juanito initiated a case for illegal dismissal against Mandarin Company. The Labor Arbiter decided in his favor, and ordered his immediate reinstatement with full backwages and without loss of seniority and other benefits. Mandarin Company did 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 and paid his full backwages and other benefits even as it appealed to the NLRC. A few months later, the NLRC reversed the ruling of the Labor Arbiter and declared that Juanito's dismissal was valid. The reversal ultimately became final. May Mandarin Company recover the backwages and other benefits paid to Juanito pursuant to the decision of the Labor Arbiter in view of the reversal by the NLRC? Rule with reasons. (2.5%)

State the jurisdiction of the Voluntary Arbitrator, or Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators in labor disputes? (4%)

Marcel was the Vice President for Finance and Administration and a member of the Board of Directors of Mercedes Corporation. He brought a complaint for illegal suspension and illegal dismissal against Mercedes Corporation, which moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the complaint pertained to the jurisdiction of the RTC due to the controversy being intra-corporate based on his positions in the corporation. Marcel countered that he had only been removed as Vice President for Finance and Administration, not as a member of the Board of Directors. He also argued that his position was not listed as among the corporate offices in Mercedes Corporation's by-laws. Is the argument of Marcel correct? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

The modes of determining the exclusive bargaining agent of the employees in a business are: (a) voluntary recognition; (b) certification election; and (c) consent election. Explain how they differ from one another. (4%)

Give the procedure to be observed for validly terminating the services of an employee based on a just cause? (4%)

What are the grounds for validly terminating the services of an employee based on a just cause? (5%)

The labor sector has been loudly agitating for the end of labor-only contracting, as distinguished from job contracting. Explain these two kinds of labor contracting, and give the effect of a finding that one is a labor-only contractor. Explain your answers. (4%)

Section 255 (245) of the Labor Code recognizes three categories of employees, namely: managerial, supervisory, and rank-and-file. May confidential employees who assist managerial employees, and who act in a confidential capacity or have access to confidential matters being handled by persons exercising managerial functions in the field of labor relations form, or assist, or join labor unions? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

Section 255 (245) of the Labor Code recognizes three categories of employees, namely: managerial, supervisory, and rank-and-file. Give the characteristics of each category of employees, and state whether the employees in each category may organize and form unions. Explain your answer. (5%)

Marciano was hired as Chief Engineer on board the vessel M/V Australia. His contract of employment was for nine months. After nine months, he was re-hired. He was hired a third time after another nine months. He now claims entitlement to the benefits of a regular employee based on his having performed tasks usually necessary and desirable to the employer's business for a continuous period of more than one year. Is Marciano's claim tenable? Explain your answer. (3%)

Dr. Crisostomo entered into a retainer agreement with AB Hotel and Resort whereby he would provide medical services to the guests and employees of AB Hotel and Resort, which, in turn, would provide the 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 availing themselves of the clinic's services. The clinic employed nurses and allied staff, whose salaries, SSS contributions and other benefits he undertook to pay. AB Hotel and Resort issued directives giving instructions to him on the replenishment of emergency kits and forbidding the clinic staff from receiving cash payments from the guests. In time, the nurses and the clinic staff claimed entitlement to rights as regular employees of AB Hotel and Resort, but the latter refused on the ground that Dr. Crisostomo, who was their employer, was an independent contractor. Rule with reasons. (4%)

Tarcisio was employed as operations manager and received a monthly salary of P25,000.00 through his payroll account with DB Bank. He obtained a loan from Roberto to purchase a car. Tarcisio failed to pay Roberto when the loan fell due. Roberto sued to collect, and moved to garnish Tarcisio's payroll account. The latter vigorously objected and argued that salaries were exempt from garnishment. Is Tarcisio correct? Explain your answer. (3%)

Mario Brothers, plumbing works contractor, entered into an agreement with Axis Business Corporation (Axis) for the plumbing works of its building under construction. Mario Brothers engaged the services of Tristan, Arthur, and Jojo as plumber, pipe fitter, and threader, respectively. These workers have worked for Mario Brothers in numerous construction projects in the past but because of their long relationship, they were never asked to sign contracts for each project. No reports to government agencies were made regarding their work in the company. During the implementation of the works contract, Axis suffered financial difficulties and was not able to pay Mario Brothers its past billings. As a result, the three (3) employees were not paid their salaries for two (2) months and their 13th month pay. Because Axis cannot pay, Mario Brothers cancelled the contract and laid off Tristan, Arthur, and Jojo. The 3 employees sued Mario Brothers and Axis for illegal dismissal, unpaid wages, and benefits. (b) Can Axis be made solidarily liable with Mario Brothers to pay the unpaid wages and 13th month pay of Tristan, Arthur, and Jojo? Explain. (2.5%)

Jim is the holder of a certificate of public convenience for a jeepney. He entered into a contract of lease with Nick, whereby they agreed that the lease period is for one (1) year unless sooner terminated by Jim for any of the causes laid down in the contract. The rental is thirty thousand pesos (P30,000.00) monthly. All the expenses for the repair of the jeepney, together with expenses for diesel, oil and service, shall be for the account of Nick. Nick is required to make a deposit of three (3) months to answer for the restoration of the vehicle to its good operating condition when the contract ends. It is stipulated that Nick is not an employee of Jim and he holds the latter free and harmless from all suits or claims which may arise from the implementation of the contract. Nick has the right to use the jeepney at any hour of the day provided it is operated on the approved line of operation. After five (5) months of the lease and payment of the rentals, Nick became delinquent in the payment of the rentals for two (2) months. Jim, as authorized by the contract, sent a letter of demand rescinding the contract and asked for the arrearages. Nick responded by filing a complaint with the NLRC for illegal dismissal, claiming that the contract is illegal and he was just forced by Jim to sign it so he can drive. He claims he is really a driver of Jim on a boundary system and the reason he was removed is because he failed to pay the complete daily boundary of one thousand (P1,000.00) for 2 months due to the increase in the number of tricycles. (b) Assuming that Nick is an employee of Jim, was Nick validly dismissed?

Asia Union (Union) is the certified bargaining agent of the rank-and-file employees of Asia Pacific Hotel (Hotel). The Union submitted its Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) negotiation proposals to the Hotel. Due to the bargaining deadlock, the Union, on December 20, 2014, filed a Notice of Strike with the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB). Consequently, the Union conducted a Strike Vote on January 14, 2015, when it was approved. The next day, waiters who are members of the Union came out of the Union office sporting closely cropped hair or cleanly shaven heads. The next day, all the male Union members came to work sporting the same hair style. The Hotel prevented these workers from entering the premises, claiming that they violated the company rule on Grooming Standards. On January 16, 2015, the Union subsequently staged a picket outside the Hotel premises and prevented other workers from entering the Hotel. The Union members blocked the ingress and egress of customers and employees to the Hotel premises, which caused the Hotel severe lack of manpower and forced the Hotel to temporarily cease operations resulting to substantial losses. On January 20, 2015, the Hotel issued notices to Union members, preventively suspending them and charging them with the following offenses: (1) illegal picket; (2) violation of the company rule on Grooming Standards; (3) illegal strike; and (4) commission of illegal acts during the illegal strike. The Hotel later terminated the Union officials and members who participated in the strike. The Union denied it engaged in an illegal strike and countered that the Hotel committed an unfair labor practice (ULP) and a breach of the freedom of speech. (b) Rule on the allegations of ULP and violation of freedom of speech. Explain. (2.5%)

Differentiate learnership from apprenticeship with respect to the period of training, type of work, salary and qualifications. (5%)

Asia Union (Union) is the certified bargaining agent of the rank-and-file employees of Asia Pacific Hotel (Hotel). The Union submitted its Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) negotiation proposals to the Hotel. Due to the bargaining deadlock, the Union, on December 20, 2014, filed a Notice of Strike with the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB). Consequently, the Union conducted a Strike Vote on January 14, 2015, when it was approved. The next day, waiters who are members of the Union came out of the Union office sporting closely cropped hair or cleanly shaven heads. The next day, all the male Union members came to work sporting the same hair style. The Hotel prevented these workers from entering the premises, claiming that they violated the company rule on Grooming Standards. On January 16, 2015, the Union subsequently staged a picket outside the Hotel premises and prevented other workers from entering the Hotel. The Union members blocked the ingress and egress of customers and employees to the Hotel premises, which caused the Hotel severe lack of manpower and forced the Hotel to temporarily cease operations resulting to substantial losses. On January 20, 2015, the Hotel issued notices to Union members, preventively suspending them and charging them with the following offenses: (1) illegal picket; (2) violation of the company rule on Grooming Standards; (3) illegal strike; and (4) commission of illegal acts during the illegal strike. The Hotel later terminated the Union officials and members who participated in the strike. The Union denied it engaged in an illegal strike and countered that the Hotel committed an unfair labor practice (ULP) and a breach of the freedom of speech. (a) Was the picketing legal? Was the mass action of the Union officials and members an illegal strike? Explain. (2.5%)

Hagibis Motors Corporation (Hagibis) has 500 regular employees in its car assembly plant. Due to the Asian financial crisis, Hagibis experienced very low car sales resulting to huge financial losses. It implemented several cost-cutting measures such as cost reduction on use of office supplies, employment hiring freeze, prohibition on representation and travel expenses, separation of casuals and reduced work week. As counsel of Hagibis, what are the measures the company should undertake to implement a valid retrenchment? Explain. (5%)

Pedro, a bus driver of Biyahe sa Langit Transport, was involved in a collision with a car, damaging the bus. The manager accused him of being responsible for the damage and was told to submit his written explanation within 48 hours. Pedro submitted his explanation within the period. The day after, Pedro received a notice of termination stating that he is dismissed for reckless driving resulting to damage to company property, effective immediately. Pedro asks you, as his counsel, if the company complied with the procedural due process with respect to dismissal of employees. (a) Explain the twin notice and hearing rule. (2.5%)

Inggo is a drama talent hired on a per drama "participation basis" by DJN Radio Company. He worked from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., six days a week, on a gross rate of P80.00 per script, earning an average of P20,000.00 per month. Inggo filed a complaint before the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) against DJN Radio for illegal deduction, non-payment of service incentive leave and 13th month pay, among others. On the basis of the complaint, the DOLE conducted a plant level inspection. The DOLE Regional Director issued an order ruling that Inggo is an employee of DJN Radio, and that Inggo is entitled to his monetary claims in the total amount of P30,000.00. DJN Radio elevated the case to the Secretary of Labor who affirmed the order. The case was brought to the Court of Appeals. The radio station contended that there is no employer-employee relationship because it was the drama directors and producers who paid, supervised, and disciplined him. Moreover, it argued that the case falls under the jurisdiction of the NLRC and not the DOLE because Inggo's claim exceeded P5,000.00. (b) If the DOLE finds that there is an employee-employer relationship, does the case fall under the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter considering that the claim of Inggo is more than P5,000.00? Explain. (2.5%)

Forbes Country Club (Club) owns a golf course and has 250 rank-and-file employees who are members of the Forbes Country Club Union (Union). The Club has a CBA with the Union and one of the stipulations is a Union Security Clause, which reads: "All regular rank-and-file employees who are members of the union shall keep their membership in good standing as a condition for their continued employment during the lifetime of this agreement." Peter, Paul and Mary were the Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer, and Budget Officer of the Union, respectively. They were expelled by the Board of Directors of the Union for malversation. The Union then demanded that the Club dismiss said officials pursuant to the Union Security Clause that required maintenance of union membership. The Club required the three officials to show cause in writing why they should not be dismissed. Later, the Club called the three Union officials for a conference regarding the charges against them. After considering the evidence submitted by the parties and their written explanations, the Club dismissed the erring officials. The dismissed officials sued the Club and the Union for illegal dismissal because there was really no malversation based on the documents presented and their dismissal from the Union was due to the fact that they were organizing another union. (b) If the expulsion by the Union was found by the Labor Arbiter to be baseless, is the Club liable to Peter, Paul and Mary? Explain. (2.5%)

In a case for illegal dismissal and non-payment of benefits, with prayer for damages, Apollo was awarded the following: 1) P200,000.00 as backwages; 2) P80,000.00 as unpaid wages; 3) P20,000.00 as unpaid holiday pay; 4) P5,000.00 as unpaid service incentive leave pay; 5) P50,000.00 as moral damages; and 6) P10,000.00 as exemplary damages. Attorney's fees of ten percent (10%) of all the amounts covered by items 1 to 6 inclusive, plus interests of 6% per annum from the date the same were unlawfully withheld, were also awarded. (b) Robbie likewise questions the imposition of interests on the amounts in question because it was not claimed by Apollo, and the Civil Code provision on interests does not apply to a labor case. Rule on the issue and explain. (2.5%)

In a case for illegal dismissal and non-payment of benefits, with prayer for damages, Apollo was awarded the following: 1) P200,000.00 as backwages; 2) P80,000.00 as unpaid wages; 3) P20,000.00 as unpaid holiday pay; 4) P5,000.00 as unpaid service incentive leave pay; 5) P50,000.00 as moral damages; and 6) P10,000.00 as exemplary damages. Attorney's fees of ten percent (10%) of all the amounts covered by items 1 to 6 inclusive, plus interests of 6% per annum from the date the same were unlawfully withheld, were also awarded. (a) Robbie, the employer, contests the award of attorney's fees amounting to 10% on all the amounts adjudged on the ground that Article 111 of the Labor Code authorizes only 10% "of the amount of wages recovered". Rule on the issue and explain. (2.5%)

Gregorio was hired as an insurance underwriter by the Guaranteed Insurance Corporation (Guaranteed). He does not receive any salary but solely relies on commissions earned for every insurance policy approved by the company. He hires and pays his own secretary but is provided free office space in the office of the company. He is, however, required to meet a monthly quota of twenty (20) insurance policies, otherwise, he may be terminated. He was made to agree to a Code of Conduct for underwriters and is supervised by a Unit Manager. (a) Is Gregorio an employee of Guaranteed? Explain. (2.5%)

Gregorio was hired as an insurance underwriter by the Guaranteed Insurance Corporation (Guaranteed). He does not receive any salary but solely relies on commissions earned for every insurance policy approved by the company. He hires and pays his own secretary but is provided free office space in the office of the company. He is, however, required to meet a monthly quota of twenty (20) insurance policies, otherwise, he may be terminated. He was made to agree to a Code of Conduct for underwriters and is supervised by a Unit Manager. (b) Suppose Gregorio is appointed as Unit Manager and assigned to supervise several underwriters. He holds office in the company premises, receives an overriding commission on the commissions of his underwriters, as well as a monthly allowance from the company, and is supervised by a branch manager. He is governed by the Code of Conduct for Unit Managers. Is he an employee of Guaranteed? Explain. (2.5%)

Inggo is a drama talent hired on a per drama "participation basis" by DJN Radio Company. He worked from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., six days a week, on a gross rate of P80.00 per script, earning an average of P20,000.00 per month. Inggo filed a complaint before the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) against DJN Radio for illegal deduction, non-payment of service incentive leave and 13th month pay, among others. On the basis of the complaint, the DOLE conducted a plant level inspection. The DOLE Regional Director issued an order ruling that Inggo is an employee of DJN Radio, and that Inggo is entitled to his monetary claims in the total amount of P30,000.00. DJN Radio elevated the case to the Secretary of Labor who affirmed the order. The case was brought to the Court of Appeals. The radio station contended that there is no employer-employee relationship because it was the drama directors and producers who paid, supervised, and disciplined him. Moreover, it argued that the case falls under the jurisdiction of the NLRC and not the DOLE because Inggo's claim exceeded P5,000.00. (a) May DOLE make a prima facie determination of the existence of an employer-employee relationship in the exercise of its visitorial and enforcement powers? (2.5%)

What are the requisites of a valid quitclaim? (5%)

Tess, a seamstress at Marikit Clothing Factory, became pregnant. Because of morning sickness, she frequently absented herself from work and often came to the factory only four (4) days a week. After two (2) months, the personnel manager told her that her habitual absences rendered her practically useless to the company and, thus, asked her to resign. She begged to be retained, citing her pregnancy as reason for her absences. Tess asked for leave of absence but her request was denied. She went on leave nevertheless. As a result, she was thus dismissed for going on leave without permission of management. Tess filed a complaint for illegal dismissal. The company's defense: she was legally dismissed because of her numerous absences without leave and not because of her pregnancy. On the other hand, Tess argues that her dismissal was an act of discrimination, based as it was on her pregnancy which the company treated as a disease. Whose position is meritorious - the company's or Tess'? Explain. (5%)

Baldo, a farm worker on pakyaw basis, had been working on Dencio's land by harvesting abaca and coconut, processing copra, and clearing weeds from year to year starting January 1993 up to his death in 2007. He worked continuously in the sense that it was done for more than one harvesting season. (a) Was Dencio required to report Baldo for compulsory social security coverage under the SSS law? Explain. (2.5%)

Forbes Country Club (Club) owns a golf course and has 250 rank-and-file employees who are members of the Forbes Country Club Union (Union). The Club has a CBA with the Union and one of the stipulations is a Union Security Clause, which reads: "All regular rank-and-file employees who are members of the union shall keep their membership in good standing as a condition for their continued employment during the lifetime of this agreement." Peter, Paul and Mary were the Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer, and Budget Officer of the Union, respectively. They were expelled by the Board of Directors of the Union for malversation. The Union then demanded that the Club dismiss said officials pursuant to the Union Security Clause that required maintenance of union membership. The Club required the three officials to show cause in writing why they should not be dismissed. Later, the Club called the three Union officials for a conference regarding the charges against them. After considering the evidence submitted by the parties and their written explanations, the Club dismissed the erring officials. The dismissed officials sued the Club and the Union for illegal dismissal because there was really no malversation based on the documents presented and their dismissal from the Union was due to the fact that they were organizing another union. (a) Is the dismissal of Peter, Paul and Mary by the Club valid? (2.5%)

Pedro, a bus driver of Biyahe sa Langit Transport, was involved in a collision with a car, damaging the bus. The manager accused him of being responsible for the damage and was told to submit his written explanation within 48 hours. Pedro submitted his explanation within the period. The day after, Pedro received a notice of termination stating that he is dismissed for reckless driving resulting to damage to company property, effective immediately. Pedro asks you, as his counsel, if the company complied with the procedural due process with respect to dismissal of employees. (b) Did the Biyahe sa Langit Transport comply with the prior procedural requirements for dismissal? (2.5%)

Jim is the holder of a certificate of public convenience for a jeepney. He entered into a contract of lease with Nick, whereby they agreed that the lease period is for one (1) year unless sooner terminated by Jim for any of the causes laid down in the contract. The rental is thirty thousand pesos (P30,000.00) monthly. All the expenses for the repair of the jeepney, together with expenses for diesel, oil and service, shall be for the account of Nick. Nick is required to make a deposit of three (3) months to answer for the restoration of the vehicle to its good operating condition when the contract ends. It is stipulated that Nick is not an employee of Jim and he holds the latter free and harmless from all suits or claims which may arise from the implementation of the contract. Nick has the right to use the jeepney at any hour of the day provided it is operated on the approved line of operation. After five (5) months of the lease and payment of the rentals, Nick became delinquent in the payment of the rentals for two (2) months. Jim, as authorized by the contract, sent a letter of demand rescinding the contract and asked for the arrearages. Nick responded by filing a complaint with the NLRC for illegal dismissal, claiming that the contract is illegal and he was just forced by Jim to sign it so he can drive. He claims he is really a driver of Jim on a boundary system and the reason he was removed is because he failed to pay the complete daily boundary of one thousand (P1,000.00) for 2 months due to the increase in the number of tricycles. (a) Jim files a motion to dismiss the NLRC case on the ground that the regular court has jurisdiction since the agreement is a lease contract. Rule on the motion and explain. (2.5%)

Zienna Corporation (Zienna) informed the Department of Labor and Employment Regional Director of the end of its operations. To carry out the cessation, Zienna sent a Letter Request for Intervention to the NLRC for permission and guidance in effecting payment of separation benefits for its fifty (50) terminated employees. Each of the terminated employees executed a Quitclaim and Release before Labor Arbiter Nocomora, to whom the case was assigned. After the erstwhile employees received their separation pay, the Labor Arbiter declared the labor dispute dismissed with prejudice on the ground of settlement. Thereafter, Zienna sold all of its assets to Zandra Company (Zandra), which in turn hired its own employees. Nelle, one of the fifty (50) terminated employees, filed a case for illegal dismissal against Zienna. She argued that Zienna did not cease from operating since the corporation subsists as Zandra. Nelle pointed out that aside from the two companies having essentially the same equipment, the managers and owners of Zandra and Zienna are likewise one and the same. For its part, Zienna countered that Nelle is barred from filing a complaint for illegal dismissal against the corporation in view of her prior acceptance of separation pay. Is Nelle correct in claiming that she was illegally dismissed? (5%)

Lazaro, an engineer, organized a union in Garantisado Construction Corporation (Garantisado) which has 200 employees. He immediately filed a Petition for Certification Election, attaching thereto the signatures of 70 employees. Garantisado vehemently opposed the petition, alleging that 25 signatories are probationary employees, while 5 are supervisors. It submitted the contracts of the 25 probationary employees and the job description of the supervisors. It argued that if 30 is deducted from 70, it gives a balance of 40 valid signatures which is way below the minimum number of 50 signatories needed to meet the alleged 25% requirement. If you are the Director of Labor Relations, will you approve the holding of a Certification Election? Explain your answer. (5%)

Dion is an Accounting Supervisor in a trading company. He has rendered exemplary service to the company for 20 years. His co-employee and kumpadre, Mac, called him over the phone and requested him to punch his (Mac's) daily time card as he (Mac) was caught in a monstrous traffic jam. Dion acceded to Mac's request but was later caught by the Personnel Manager while punching Mac's time card. The company terminated the employment of Dion on the ground of misconduct. Is the dismissal valid and just? Explain. (5%)

Amaya was employed as a staff nurse by St. Francis Hospital (SFH) on July 8, 2014 on a probationary status for six (6) months. Her probationary contract required, among others, strict compliance with SFH's Code of Discipline. On October 16, 2014, Dr. Ligaya filed a Complaint with the SFH Board of Trustees against Amaya for uttering slanderous remarks against the former. Attached to the complaint was a letter of Minda, mother of a patient, who confirmed the following remarks against Dr. Ligaya: "Bakit si Dr. Ligaya pa ang napili mong 'pedia' eh ang tanda tanda na n'un? E makakalimutin na yun xxx Alam mo ba, kahit wala namang diperensya yung baby, ipinapa-isolate nya?" The SFH President asks you, being the hospital's counsel, which of these two (2) options is the legal and proper way of terminating Amaya: a) terminate her for a just cause under Article 282 (Art. 297) of the Labor Code (Termination by Employer); or b) terminate her for violating her probationary contract. Explain. (5%)

Matibay Shoe and Repair Store, as added service to its customers, devoted a portion of its store to a shoe shine stand. The shoe shine boys were tested for their skill before being allowed to work and given ID cards. They were told to be present from the opening of the store up to closing time and were required to follow the company rules on cleanliness and decorum. They bought their own shoe shine boxes, polish, and rags. The boys were paid by their customers for their services but the payment is coursed through the store's cashier, who pays them before closing time. They were not supervised in their work by any managerial employee of the store but for a valid complaint by a customer or for violation of any company rule, they can be refused admission to the store. Were the boys employees of the store? Explain. (5%)

Baldo, a farm worker on pakyaw basis, had been working on Dencio's land by harvesting abaca and coconut, processing copra, and clearing weeds from year to year starting January 1993 up to his death in 2007. He worked continuously in the sense that it was done for more than one harvesting season. (b) What are the liabilities of the employer who fails to report his employee for social security coverage? Explain. (2.5%)

Empire Brands (Empire) contracted the services of Style Corporation (Style) for the marketing and promotion of its clothing line. Under the contract, Style provided Empire with Trade Merchandising Representatives (TMRs) whose services began on September 15, 2004 and ended on June 6, 2007, when Empire terminated the promotions contract with Style. Empire then entered into an agreement for manpower supply with Wave Human Resources (Wave). Wave provided the supervisors who supervised the TMRs, who, in turn, received orders from the Marketing Director of Empire. In their agreement, the parties stipulated that Wave shall be liable for the wages and salaries of its employees or workers, including benefits, and protection due them, as well as remittance to the proper government entities of all withholding taxes, Social Security Service, and Philhealth premiums, in accordance with relevant laws. As the TMRs wanted to continue working at Empire, they submitted job applications as TMRs with Wave. Consequently, Wave hired them for a term of five (5) months, or from June 7, 2007 to November 6, 2007, specifically to promote Empire's products. When the TMRs' 5-month contracts with Wave were about to expire, they sought renewal thereof, but were refused. Their contracts with Wave were no longer renewed as Empire hired another agency. This prompted them to file complaints for illegal dismissal, regularization, non-payment of service incentive leave and 13th month pay against Empire and Wave. (a) Are the TMRs employees of Empire? (2.5%)

Empire Brands (Empire) contracted the services of Style Corporation (Style) for the marketing and promotion of its clothing line. Under the contract, Style provided Empire with Trade Merchandising Representatives (TMRs) whose services began on September 15, 2004 and ended on June 6, 2007, when Empire terminated the promotions contract with Style. Empire then entered into an agreement for manpower supply with Wave Human Resources (Wave). Wave provided the supervisors who supervised the TMRs, who, in turn, received orders from the Marketing Director of Empire. In their agreement, the parties stipulated that Wave shall be liable for the wages and salaries of its employees or workers, including benefits, and protection due them, as well as remittance to the proper government entities of all withholding taxes, Social Security Service, and Philhealth premiums, in accordance with relevant laws. As the TMRs wanted to continue working at Empire, they submitted job applications as TMRs with Wave. Consequently, Wave hired them for a term of five (5) months, or from June 7, 2007 to November 6, 2007, specifically to promote Empire's products. When the TMRs' 5-month contracts with Wave were about to expire, they sought renewal thereof, but were refused. Their contracts with Wave were no longer renewed as Empire hired another agency. This prompted them to file complaints for illegal dismissal, regularization, non-payment of service incentive leave and 13th month pay against Empire and Wave. (b) Were the TMRs illegally dismissed by Wave? (2.5%)

Filmore Corporation was ordered 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 appeal fee. However, instead of filing the required appeal bond equivalent to the total amount of the monetary award, Filmore filed a Motion to Reduce the Appeal Bond to P4,000,000.00 but submitted a surety bond in the amount of P4.9 million. Filmore cited financial difficulties as justification for its inability to post the appeal bond in full owing to the shutdown of its operations. It submitted its audited financial statements showing a loss of P40 million in the previous year. To show its good faith, Filmore also filed its Memorandum of Appeal. The NLRC dismissed the appeal for non-perfection on the ground that posting of an appeal bond equivalent to the monetary award is indispensable for the perfection of the appeal and the reduction of the appeal bond, absent any showing of meritorious ground to justify the same, is not warranted. Is the dismissal of the appeal correct? Explain. (5%)

Mario Brothers, plumbing works contractor, entered into an agreement with Axis Business Corporation (Axis) for the plumbing works of its building under construction. Mario Brothers engaged the services of Tristan, Arthur, and Jojo as plumber, pipe fitter, and threader, respectively. These workers have worked for Mario Brothers in numerous construction projects in the past but because of their long relationship, they were never asked to sign contracts for each project. No reports to government agencies were made regarding their work in the company. During the implementation of the works contract, Axis suffered financial difficulties and was not able to pay Mario Brothers its past billings. As a result, the three (3) employees were not paid their salaries for two (2) months and their 13th month pay. Because Axis cannot pay, Mario Brothers cancelled the contract and laid off Tristan, Arthur, and Jojo. The 3 employees sued Mario Brothers and Axis for illegal dismissal, unpaid wages, and benefits. (a) Mario Brothers claims the 3 workers are project employees. It explains that the agreement is, if the works contract is cancelled due to the fault of the client, the period of employment is automatically terminated. Is the contractor correct? Explain. (2.5%)

Ador is a student working on his master's degree in horticulture. To make ends meet, he takes on jobs to come up with flower arrangements for friends. His neighbor, Nico, is about to get married to Lucia and needs a floral arranger. Ador offers his services and Nico agrees. They shake hands on it, agreeing that Nico will pay Ador P20,000.00 for his services but that Ador will take care of everything. As Ador sets about to decorate the venue, Nico changes all of Ador's plans and ends up designing the arrangements himself with Ador simply executing Nico's instructions. (b) Will Nico need to register Ador with the Social Security System (SSS)?

Din Din is a single mother with one child. She is employed as a sales executive at a prominent supermarket. She and her child live in Quezon City and her residence and workplace are a 15-minute drive apart. One day, Din Din is informed by her boss that she is being promoted to a managerial position but she is now being transferred to the Visayas. Din Din does not want to uproot her family and refuses the offer. Her boss is so humiliated by Din Din's refusal of the offer that she gives Din Din successive unsatisfactory evaluations that result in Din Din being removed from the supermarket. Din Din approaches you, as counsel, for legal advice. What would you advise her?

Karina Santos is a famous news anchor appearing nightly in the country's most watched newscast. She is surprised, after one newscast, to receive a notice of hearing before the station's Vice-President for Human Resources and calls the VP immediately to ask what was wrong. Karina is told over the phone that one of her crew filed a complaint against her for verbal abuse and that management is duty-bound to investigate and give her a chance to air her side. Karina objects and denies that she had ever verbally assaulted her crew. The VP then informed her that pending the investigation she will be placed on a 30-day preventive suspension without pay and that she will not be allowed to appear in the newscast during this time. Is the preventive suspension of Karina valid? Discuss the reasons for your answer.

Rico has a temper and, in his work as Division Manager of Matatag Insurance, frequently loses his temper with his staff. One day, he physically assaults his staff member by slapping him. The staff member sues him for physical injuries. Matatag Insurance decides to terminate Rico, after notice and hearing, on the ground of loss of trust and confidence. Rico claims that he is entitled to the presumption of innocence because he has not yet been convicted. Comment on Matatag's action in relation to Rico's argument.

Blank Garments, Inc. (BLANK), a clothing manufacturer, employs more than 200 employees in its manufacturing business. Because of its high overhead, BLANK decided to sell its manufacturing business to Bleach Garments, Inc. (BLEACH) lock, stock and barrel which included goodwill, equipment, and personnel. After taking on BLANK’s business, BLEACH reduces the workforce by not hiring half the workers specifically the ones with seniority. BLANK and BLEACH are still discerned to be sister companies with identical incorporators. The laid-off employees sue both BLANK and BLEACH for unlawful termination. (a) How would you decide this case?

Blank Garments, Inc. (BLANK), a clothing manufacturer, employs more than 200 employees in its manufacturing business. Because of its high overhead, BLANK decided to sell its manufacturing business to Bleach Garments, Inc. (BLEACH) lock, stock and barrel which included goodwill, equipment, and personnel. After taking on BLANK’s business, BLEACH reduces the workforce by not hiring half the workers specifically the ones with seniority. BLANK and BLEACH are still discerned to be sister companies with identical incorporators. The laid-off employees sue both BLANK and BLEACH for unlawful termination. (b) What is the "successor employer" doctrine?

The Alliance of Independent Labor Unions (AILU) is a legitimate labor federation which represents a majority of the appropriate bargaining unit at the Lumens Brewery (LB). While negotiations were ongoing for a renewal of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), LB handed down a decision in a disciplinary case that was pending which resulted in the termination of the AILU's treasurer and two other members for cause. AILU protested the decision, claiming that LB acted in bad faith and asked that LB reconsider. LB refused to reconsider. AILU then walked out of the negotiation and declared a strike without a notice of strike or a strike vote. AILU members locked in the LB management panel by barricading the doors and possible exits (including windows and fire escapes). LB requested the DOLE to assume jurisdiction over the dispute and to certify it for compulsory arbitration. The Secretary of Labor declined to assume jurisdiction, finding that the dispute was not one that involved national interest. LB then proceeds to terminate all of the members of the bargaining agent on the ground that it was unlawful to: (1) barricade the management panel in the building, and (2) participate in an illegal strike. (c) Was LB justified in terminating all those who were members of AILU on the two grounds cited?

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Libra Films and its union, Libra Films Employees’ Union (LFEU), contains the following standard clauses: 1. Maintenance of membership; 2. Check off of union dues and agency fees; and 3. No strike, no lock-out. While Libra Films and LFEU are in re-negotiations for an extension of the CBA, LFEU discovers that some of its members have resigned from the union, citing their constitutional right to organize (which includes the right NOT to organize). LFEU demands that Libra Films institute administrative proceedings to terminate those union members who resigned in violation of the CBA's maintenance of membership clause. Libra Films refuses, citing its obligation to remain a neutral party. As a result, LFEU declares a strike and after filing a notice of strike and taking a strike vote, goes on strike. The union claims that Libra Films grossly violated the terms of the CBA and engaged in unfair labor practice. (a) Are LFEU's claims correct? Explain.

Rocket Corporation is a domestic corporation registered with the SEC, with 30% of its authorized capital stock owned by foreigners and 70% of its authorized capital stock owned by Filipinos. Is Rocket Corporation allowed to engage in the recruitment and placement of workers, locally and overseas? Briefly state the basis for your answer.

When does the recruitment of workers become an act of economic sabotage?

LKG Garments Inc. makes baby clothes for export. As part of its measures to meet its orders, LKG requires its employees to work beyond eight (8) hours everyday, from Monday to Saturday. It pays its employees an additional 35% of their regular hourly wage for work rendered in excess of eight (8) hours per day. Because of additional orders, LKG now requires two (2) 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) hours of overtime work before the change in schedule. He complains that the change adversely affected him because now he can only earn up to a maximum of four (4) hours’ worth of overtime pay. Does Carding have a cause of action against the company?

Benito is the owner of an eponymous clothing brand that is a top seller. He employs a number of male and female models who wear Benito's clothes in promotional shoots and videos. His deal with the models is that Benito will pay them with 3 sets of free clothes per week. Is this arrangement allowed?

Far East Bank (FEB) is one of the leading banks in the country. Its compensation and bonus packages are top of the industry. For the last 6 years, FEB had been providing the following bonuses across-the-board to all its employees: (a) 13th month pay; (b) 14th to 18th month pay; (c) Christmas basket worth P6,000; (d) Gift check worth P4,000; and (e) Productivity-based incentive ranging from a 20% to 40% increase in gross monthly salary for all employees who would receive an evaluation of "Excellent" for 3 straight quarters in the same year. Because of its poor performance over-all, FEB decided to cut back on the bonuses this year and limited itself to the following: (a) 13th month pay; (b) 14th month pay; (c) Christmas basket worth P4,000; and (d) Gift check worth P2,000. Katrina, an employee of FEB, who had gotten a rating of "Excellent" for the last 3 quarters was looking forward to the bonuses plus the productivity incentive bonus. After learning that FEB had modified the bonus scheme, she objected. Is Katrina's objection justified? Explain.

Soledad, a widowed school teacher, takes under her wing one of her students, Kiko, 13 years old, who was abandoned by his parents and has to do odd jobs in order to study. She allows Kiko to live in her house, provides him with clean clothes, food, and a daily allowance of 200 pesos. In exchange, Kiko does routine housework consisting of cleaning the house and doing errands for Soledad. One day, a representative of the DOLE and the DSWD came to Soledad's house and charged her with violating the law that prohibits work by minors. Soledad objects and offers as a defense that she was not requiring Kiko to work as the chores were not hazardous. Further, she did not give him chores regularly but only intermittently as the need may arise. Is Soledad's defense meritorious?

Ador is a student working on his master's degree in horticulture. To make ends meet, he takes on jobs to come up with flower arrangements for friends. His neighbor, Nico, is about to get married to Lucia and needs a floral arranger. Ador offers his services and Nico agrees. They shake hands on it, agreeing that Nico will pay Ador P20,000.00 for his services but that Ador will take care of everything. As Ador sets about to decorate the venue, Nico changes all of Ador's plans and ends up designing the arrangements himself with Ador simply executing Nico's instructions. (a) Is there an employer-employee relationship between Nico and Ador?

Don Don is hired as a contractual employee of CALLHELP, a call center. His contract is expressly for a term of 4 months. Don Don is hired for 3 straight contracts of 4 months each but at 2-week intervals between contracts. After the third contract ended, Don Don is told that he will no longer be given another contract because of "poor performance." Don Don files a suit for "regularization" and for illegal dismissal, claiming that he is a regular employee of CALLHELP and that he was dismissed without cause. You are the Labor Arbiter. How would you decide the case?

Star Crafts is a lantern maker based in Pampanga. It supplies Christmas lanterns to stores in Luzon, Metro Manila, and parts of Visayas, with the months of August to November being the busiest months. Its factory employs a workforce of 2,000 workers who make different lanterns daily for the whole year. Because of increased demand, Star Crafts entered into a contractual arrangement with People Plus, a service contractor, to supply the former with 100 workers for only 4 months, August to November, at a rate different from what they pay their regular employees. The contract with People Plus stipulates that all equipment and raw materials will be supplied by Star Crafts with the express condition that the workers cannot take any of the designs home and must complete their tasks within the premises of Star Crafts. Is there an employer-employee relationship between Star Crafts and the 100 workers from People Plus? Explain.

Luisa is an unwed mother with 3 children from different fathers. In 2004, she became a member of the Social Security System (SSS). That same year, she suffered a miscarriage of a baby out of wedlock from the father of her third child. She wants to claim maternity benefits under the SSS Act. Is she entitled to claim?

Luis, a PNP officer, was off duty and resting at home when he heard a scuffle outside his house. He saw two of his neighbors fighting and he rushed out to pacify them. One of the neighbors shot Luis by mistake, which resulted in Luis's death. Marian, Luis's widow, filed a claim with the GSIS seeking death benefits. The GSIS denied the claim on the ground that the death of Luis was not service-related as he was off duty when the incident happened. Is the GSIS correct?

Victor was hired by a local manning agency as a seafarer cook on board a luxury vessel for an eight-month cruise. 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 any other medication. His condition persisted but the degree varied from day to day. At the end of the cruise, Victor went home to Iloilo and there had himself examined. The examination revealed that he had tuberculosis. (a) Victor sued for medical reimbursement, damages and attorney's fees, claiming that tuberculosis was a compensable illness. Do you agree with Victor? Why or why not?

Victor was hired by a local manning agency as a seafarer cook on board a luxury vessel for an eight-month cruise. 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 any other medication. His condition persisted but the degree varied from day to day. At the end of the cruise, Victor went home to Iloilo and there had himself examined. The examination revealed that he had tuberculosis. (b) Due to his prolonged illness, Victor was unable to work for more than 120 days. Will this entitle him to claim total permanent disability benefits?

The Alliance of Independent Labor Unions (AILU) is a legitimate labor federation which represents a majority of the appropriate bargaining unit at the Lumens Brewery (LB). While negotiations were ongoing for a renewal of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), LB handed down a decision in a disciplinary case that was pending which resulted in the termination of the AILU's treasurer and two other members for cause. AILU protested the decision, claiming that LB acted in bad faith and asked that LB reconsider. LB refused to reconsider. AILU then walked out of the negotiation and declared a strike without a notice of strike or a strike vote. AILU members locked in the LB management panel by barricading the doors and possible exits (including windows and fire escapes). LB requested the DOLE to assume jurisdiction over the dispute and to certify it for compulsory arbitration. The Secretary of Labor declined to assume jurisdiction, finding that the dispute was not one that involved national interest. LB then proceeds to terminate all of the members of the bargaining agent on the ground that it was unlawful to: (1) barricade the management panel in the building, and (2) participate in an illegal strike. (a) Was AILU justified in declaring a strike without a strike vote and a notice of strike? Why or why not?

The Alliance of Independent Labor Unions (AILU) is a legitimate labor federation which represents a majority of the appropriate bargaining unit at the Lumens Brewery (LB). While negotiations were ongoing for a renewal of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), LB handed down a decision in a disciplinary case that was pending which resulted in the termination of the AILU's treasurer and two other members for cause. AILU protested the decision, claiming that LB acted in bad faith and asked that LB reconsider. LB refused to reconsider. AILU then walked out of the negotiation and declared a strike without a notice of strike or a strike vote. AILU members locked in the LB management panel by barricading the doors and possible exits (including windows and fire escapes). LB requested the DOLE to assume jurisdiction over the dispute and to certify it for compulsory arbitration. The Secretary of Labor declined to assume jurisdiction, finding that the dispute was not one that involved national interest. LB then proceeds to terminate all of the members of the bargaining agent on the ground that it was unlawful to: (1) barricade the management panel in the building, and (2) participate in an illegal strike. (b) Was the Secretary of Labor correct in declining to assume jurisdiction over the dispute?

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Libra Films and its union, Libra Films Employees’ Union (LFEU), contains the following standard clauses: 1. Maintenance of membership; 2. Check off of union dues and agency fees; and 3. No strike, no lock-out. While Libra Films and LFEU are in re-negotiations for an extension of the CBA, LFEU discovers that some of its members have resigned from the union, citing their constitutional right to organize (which includes the right NOT to organize). LFEU demands that Libra Films institute administrative proceedings to terminate those union members who resigned in violation of the CBA's maintenance of membership clause. Libra Films refuses, citing its obligation to remain a neutral party. As a result, LFEU declares a strike and after filing a notice of strike and taking a strike vote, goes on strike. The union claims that Libra Films grossly violated the terms of the CBA and engaged in unfair labor practice. (b) Distinguish between a "closed shop" clause and a "maintenance of membership" clause.

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Libra Films and its union, Libra Films Employees’ Union (LFEU), contains the following standard clauses: 1. Maintenance of membership; 2. Check off of union dues and agency fees; and 3. No strike, no lock-out. While Libra Films and LFEU are in re-negotiations for an extension of the CBA, LFEU discovers that some of its members have resigned from the union, citing their constitutional right to organize (which includes the right NOT to organize). LFEU demands that Libra Films institute administrative proceedings to terminate those union members who resigned in violation of the CBA's maintenance of membership clause. Libra Films refuses, citing its obligation to remain a neutral party. As a result, LFEU declares a strike and after filing a notice of strike and taking a strike vote, goes on strike. The union claims that Libra Films grossly violated the terms of the CBA and engaged in unfair labor practice. (c) Distinguish between "union dues" and "agency fees."

George is an American who is working as a consultant for a local IT company. The company has a union and George wants to support the union. How far can George go in terms of his support for the union?

What is the rule on the "equity of the incumbent"?

XYZ Company and Mr. AB, a terminated employee who also happens to be the President of XYZ Employees Union, agree in writing to submit Mr. AB's illegal dismissal case to voluntary arbitration. Is this agreement a valid one?

XYZ Company and XYZ Employees Union (XYZEU) reach a deadlock in their negotiation for a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA). XYZEU files a notice of strike; XYZ Company proposes to XYZEU that the deadlock be submitted instead to voluntary arbitration. If you are counsel for XYZEU, what advice would you give the union as to the: (1) propriety of the request of XYZ Company, and (2) the relative advantages/disadvantages between voluntary arbitration and compulsory arbitration?

Philippine News Network (PNN) engages the services of Anya, a prominent news anchor from a rival station, National News Network (NNN). NNN objects to the transfer of Anya claiming that she is barred from working in a competing company for a period of three years from the expiration of her contract. Anya proceeds to sign with PNN which then asks her to anchor their nightly newscast. NNN sues Anya and PNN before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), asking for a labor injunction. Anya and PNN object claiming that it is a matter cognizable by a regular court and not the NLRC. (a) Is NNN's remedy correct? Why or why not?

Philippine News Network (PNN) engages the services of Anya, a prominent news anchor from a rival station, National News Network (NNN). NNN objects to the transfer of Anya claiming that she is barred from working in a competing company for a period of three years from the expiration of her contract. Anya proceeds to sign with PNN which then asks her to anchor their nightly newscast. NNN sues Anya and PNN before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), asking for a labor injunction. Anya and PNN object claiming that it is a matter cognizable by a regular court and not the NLRC. (b) What are the grounds for a labor injunction to issue?

Philippine News Network (PNN) engages the services of Anya, a prominent news anchor from a rival station, National News Network (NNN). NNN objects to the transfer of Anya claiming that she is barred from working in a competing company for a period of three years from the expiration of her contract. Anya proceeds to sign with PNN which then asks her to anchor their nightly newscast. NNN sues Anya and PNN before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), asking for a labor injunction. Anya and PNN object claiming that it is a matter cognizable by a regular court and not the NLRC. (c) Distinguish the jurisdiction of a Labor Arbiter from that of the NLRC.

Mario comes from a family of coffee bean growers. Deciding to incorporate his fledgling coffee venture, he invites his best friend, Carlo, to join him. Carlo is hesitant because he does not have money to invest but Mario suggests a scheme where Carlo can be the Chief Marketing Agent of the company, earning a salary and commissions. Carlo agrees and the venture is formed. After one year, the business is so successful that they were able to declare dividends. Mario is so happy with Carlo's work that he assigns 100 shares of stock to Carlo as part of the latter's bonus. Much later on, it is discovered that Carlo had engaged in unethical conduct which caused embarrassment to the company. Mario is forced to terminate Carlo but he does so without giving Carlo the opportunity to explain. Carlo filed a case against Mario and the company for illegal dismissal. Mario objected on the ground that the Labor Arbiter had no jurisdiction over the case as it would properly be considered as an intra-corporate controversy cognizable by the RTC. Further, Mario claimed that because Carlo's dismissal was a corporate act, he cannot be held personally liable. (a) As the Labor Arbiter assigned to this case, how would you resolve the jurisdiction question?

Mario comes from a family of coffee bean growers. Deciding to incorporate his fledgling coffee venture, he invites his best friend, Carlo, to join him. Carlo is hesitant because he does not have money to invest but Mario suggests a scheme where Carlo can be the Chief Marketing Agent of the company, earning a salary and commissions. Carlo agrees and the venture is formed. After one year, the business is so successful that they were able to declare dividends. Mario is so happy with Carlo's work that he assigns 100 shares of stock to Carlo as part of the latter's bonus. Much later on, it is discovered that Carlo had engaged in unethical conduct which caused embarrassment to the company. Mario is forced to terminate Carlo but he does so without giving Carlo the opportunity to explain. Carlo filed a case against Mario and the company for illegal dismissal. Mario objected on the ground that the Labor Arbiter had no jurisdiction over the case as it would properly be considered as an intra-corporate controversy cognizable by the RTC. Further, Mario claimed that because Carlo's dismissal was a corporate act, he cannot be held personally liable. (b) What is the rule on personal liability of corporate officers for a corporate act declared to be unlawful?

An accidental fire gutted the JKL factory in Caloocan. JKL decided to suspend operations and requested its employees to stop reporting for work. After six (6) months, JKL resumed operations but hired a new set of employees. The old set of employees filed a case for illegal dismissal. If you were the Labor Arbiter, how would you decide the case?

The jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Commission does not include: (A) exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by the Labor Arbiter. (B) exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by Regional Directors or hearing officers involving the recovery of wages and other monetary claims and benefits arising from employer-employee relations where the aggregate money claim of each does not exceed five thousand pesos (Php5,000). (C) original jurisdiction to act as a compulsory arbitration body over labor disputes certified to it by the Regional Directors. (D) power to issue a labor injunction.

Lito was anticipating the bonus he would receive for 2013. Aside from the 13th month pay, the company has been awarding him and his other co-employees a two to three months bonus for the last 10 years. However, because of poor over-all sales performance for the year, the company unilaterally decided to pay only a one month bonus in 2013. Is Lito's employer legally allowed to reduce the bonus?

The procedural requirements of a valid strike include: (A) a claim of either unfair labor practice or deadlock in collective bargaining. (B) notice of strike filed at least 15 days before a ULP-grounded strike or at least 30 days prior to the deadlock in a bargaining-grounded strike. (C) majority of the union membership must have voted to stage the strike with notice thereon furnished to the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) at least 24 hours before the strike vote is taken. (D) strike vote results must be furnished to the NCMB at least seven (7) days before the intended strike.

Philhealth is a government-owned and controlled corporation employing thousands of Filipinos. Because of the desire of the employees of Philhealth to obtain better terms and conditions of employment from the government, they formed the Philhealth Employees Association (PEA) and demanded Philhealth to enter into negotiations with PEA regarding terms and conditions of employment which are not fixed by law. (b) In case of unresolved grievances, can PEA resort to strikes, walkouts, and other temporary work stoppages to pressure the government to accede to their demands?

Philhealth is a government-owned and controlled corporation employing thousands of Filipinos. Because of the desire of the employees of Philhealth to obtain better terms and conditions of employment from the government, they formed the Philhealth Employees Association (PEA) and demanded Philhealth to enter into negotiations with PEA regarding terms and conditions of employment which are not fixed by law. (a) Are the employees of Philhealth allowed to self-organize and form PEA and thereafter demand Philhealth to enter into negotiations with PEA for better terms and conditions of employment?

Liwayway Glass had 600 rank-and-file employees. Three rival unions — A, B, and C — participated in the certification elections ordered by the Med-Arbiter. 500 employees voted. The unions obtained the following votes: A-200; B-150; C-50; 90 employees voted "no union"; and 10 were segregated votes. Out of the segregated votes, four (4) were cast by probationary employees and six (6) were cast by dismissed employees whose respective cases are still on appeal. (E) Suppose that in the election, the unions obtained the following votes: A-250; B-150; C-50; 40 voted "no union"; and 10 were segregated votes. Should Union A be certified as the bargaining representative?

Liwayway Glass had 600 rank-and-file employees. Three rival unions — A, B, and C — participated in the certification elections ordered by the Med-Arbiter. 500 employees voted. The unions obtained the following votes: A-200; B-150; C-50; 90 employees voted "no union"; and 10 were segregated votes. Out of the segregated votes, four (4) were cast by probationary employees and six (6) were cast by dismissed employees whose respective cases are still on appeal. (D) Suppose the election is declared invalid, which of the contending unions should represent the rank-and-file employees?

Liwayway Glass had 600 rank-and-file employees. Three rival unions — A, B, and C — participated in the certification elections ordered by the Med-Arbiter. 500 employees voted. The unions obtained the following votes: A-200; B-150; C-50; 90 employees voted "no union"; and 10 were segregated votes. Out of the segregated votes, four (4) were cast by probationary employees and six (6) were cast by dismissed employees whose respective cases are still on appeal. (C) Should Union A be declared the winner?

Liwayway Glass had 600 rank-and-file employees. Three rival unions — A, B, and C — participated in the certification elections ordered by the Med-Arbiter. 500 employees voted. The unions obtained the following votes: A-200; B-150; C-50; 90 employees voted "no union"; and 10 were segregated votes. Out of the segregated votes, four (4) were cast by probationary employees and six (6) were cast by dismissed employees whose respective cases are still on appeal. (B) Was there a valid election?

Liwayway Glass had 600 rank-and-file employees. Three rival unions — A, B, and C — participated in the certification elections ordered by the Med-Arbiter. 500 employees voted. The unions obtained the following votes: A-200; B-150; C-50; 90 employees voted "no union"; and 10 were segregated votes. Out of the segregated votes, four (4) were cast by probationary employees and six (6) were cast by dismissed employees whose respective cases are still on appeal. (A) Should the votes of the probationary and dismissed employees be counted in the total votes cast for the purpose of determining the winning labor union?

Linis Manpower, Inc. (LMI) had provided janitorial services to the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) since March 2009. Its service contract was renewed every three months. However, in the bidding held in June 2012, LMI was disqualified and excluded. In 2013, six janitors of LMI formerly assigned at POEA filed a complaint for underpayment of wages. Both LMI and POEA were impleaded as respondents. Should POEA, a government agency subject to budgetary appropriations from Congress, be held liable solidarily with LMI for the payment of salary differentials due the complainant? Cite the legal basis of your answer.

Lolong Law Firm (LLF), which employs around 50 lawyers and 100 regular staff, suffered losses for the first time in its history. The management informed its employees that it could no longer afford to provide them free lunch. Consequently, it announced that a nominal fee would henceforth be charged. Was LLF justified in withdrawing this benefit which it had unilaterally been providing to its employees? (A) Yes, because it is suffering losses for the first time. (B) Yes, because this is a management prerogative which is not due to any legal or contractual obligation. (C) No, because this amounts to a diminution of benefits which is prohibited by the Labor Code. (D) No, because it is a fringe benefit that has already ripened into a demandable right.

Lucy was one of approximately 500 call center agents at Hambergis, Inc. She was hired as a contractual employee four years ago. Her contracts would be for a duration of five (5) months at a time, usually after a one-month interval. Her re-hiring was contingent on her performance for the immediately preceding contract. Six (6) months after the expiration of her last contract, Lucy went to Hambergis personnel department to inquire why she was not yet being recalled to work. She was told that her performance during her last contract was "below average." Lucy seeks your legal advice about her chances of getting her job back. What will your advice be?

Linda was employed by Sectarian University (SU) to cook for the members of a religious order who teach and live inside the campus. While performing her assigned task, Linda accidentally burned herself. Because of the extent of her injuries, she went on medical leave. Meanwhile, SU engaged a replacement cook. Linda filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, but her employer SU contended that Linda was not a regular employee but a domestic househelp. Decide.

Liwanag Corporation is engaged in the power generation business. A stalemate was reached during the collective bargaining negotiations between its management and the union. After following all the requisites provided by law, the union decided to stage a strike. The management sought the assistance of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, who assumed jurisdiction over the strike and issued a return-to-work order. The union defied the latter and continued the strike. Without providing any notice, Liwanag Corporation declared everyone who participated in the strike as having lost their employment. (b) If, before the DOLE Secretary assumed jurisdiction, the striking union members communicated in writing their desire to return to work, which offer Liwanag Corporation refused to accept, what remedy, if any, does the union have?

Liwanag Corporation is engaged in the power generation business. A stalemate was reached during the collective bargaining negotiations between its management and the union. After following all the requisites provided by law, the union decided to stage a strike. The management sought the assistance of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, who assumed jurisdiction over the strike and issued a return-to-work order. The union defied the latter and continued the strike. Without providing any notice, Liwanag Corporation declared everyone who participated in the strike as having lost their employment. (a) Was Liwanag Corporation's action valid?

Lizzy Lu is a sales associate for Luna Properties. The latter is looking to retrench Lizzy and five other sales associates due to financial losses. Aside from a basic monthly salary, Lizzy and her colleagues receive commissions on the sales they make as well as cost of living and representation allowances. In computing Lizzy's separation pay, Luna Properties should consider her: (A) monthly salary only; (B) monthly salary plus sales commissions; (C) monthly salary plus sales commissions, plus cost of living allowance; (D) monthly salary plus sales commissions, plus cost of living allowance and representation allowance.

Lanz was a strict and unpopular Vice-President for Sales of Lobinsons Land. One day, Lanz shouted invectives against Lee, a poor performing sales associate, calling him, among others, a "brown monkey." Hurt, Lee decided to file a criminal complaint for grave defamation against Lanz. The prosecutor found probable cause and filed an information in court. Lobinsons decided to terminate Lanz for committing a potential crime and other illegal acts prejudicial to business. Can Lanz be legally terminated by the company on these grounds?

Luningning Foods engaged the services of Lamitan Manpower, Inc., a bona fide independent contractor, to provide "tasters" that will check on food quality. Subsequently, these "tasters" joined the union of rank-and-file employees of Luningning and demanded that they be made regular employees of the latter as they are performing functions necessary and desirable to operate the company's business. Luningning rejected the demand for regularization. On behalf of the "tasters", the union then filed a notice of strike with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). In response, Luningning sought a restraining order from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) arguing that the DOLE does not have jurisdiction over the case since it does not have an employer-employee relationship with the employees of an independent contractor. If you were the RTC judge, would you issue a restraining order against the union?

Despite a reinstatement order, an employer may choose not to reinstate an employee if: (A) there is a strained employer-employee relationship; (B) the position of the employee no longer exists; (C) the employer's business has been closed; (D) the employee does not wish to be reinstated.

Lionel, an American citizen whose parents migrated to the U.S. from the Philippines, was hired by JP Morgan in New York as a call center specialist. Hearing about the phenomenal growth of the call center industry in his parents’ native land, Lionel sought and was granted a transfer as a call center manager for JP Morgan's operations in Taguig City. Lionel's employment contract did not specify a period for his stay in the Philippines. After three years of working in the Philippines, Lionel was advised that he was being recalled to New York and being promoted to the position of director of international call center operations. However, because of certain "family reasons," Lionel advised the company of his preference to stay in the Philippines. He was dismissed by the company. Lionel now seeks your legal advice on: (a) whether he has a cause of action.

Lionel, an American citizen whose parents migrated to the U.S. from the Philippines, was hired by JP Morgan in New York as a call center specialist. Hearing about the phenomenal growth of the call center industry in his parents’ native land, Lionel sought and was granted a transfer as a call center manager for JP Morgan's operations in Taguig City. Lionel's employment contract did not specify a period for his stay in the Philippines. After three years of working in the Philippines, Lionel was advised that he was being recalled to New York and being promoted to the position of director of international call center operations. However, because of certain "family reasons," Lionel advised the company of his preference to stay in the Philippines. He was dismissed by the company. Lionel now seeks your legal advice on: (b) whether he can file a case in the Philippines.

Lionel, an American citizen whose parents migrated to the U.S. from the Philippines, was hired by JP Morgan in New York as a call center specialist. Hearing about the phenomenal growth of the call center industry in his parents’ native land, Lionel sought and was granted a transfer as a call center manager for JP Morgan's operations in Taguig City. Lionel's employment contract did not specify a period for his stay in the Philippines. After three years of working in the Philippines, Lionel was advised that he was being recalled to New York and being promoted to the position of director of international call center operations. However, because of certain "family reasons," Lionel advised the company of his preference to stay in the Philippines. He was dismissed by the company. Lionel now seeks your legal advice on: (c) what are his chances of winning.

Lincoln was in the business of trading broadcast equipment used by television and radio networks. He employed Lionel as his agent. Subsequently, Lincoln set up Liberty Communications to formally engage in the same business. He requested Lionel to be one of the incorporators and assigned to him 100 Liberty shares. Lionel was also given the title Assistant Vice-President for Sales and Head of Technical Coordination. After several months, there were allegations that Lionel was engaged in "under the table dealings" and received "confidential commissions" from Liberty's clients and suppliers. He was, therefore, charged with serious misconduct and willful breach of trust, and was given 48 hours to present his explanation on the charges. Lionel was unable to comply with the 48-hour deadline and was subsequently barred from entering company premises. Lionel then filed a complaint with the Labor Arbiter claiming constructive dismissal. Among others, the company sought the dismissal of the complaint alleging that the case involved an intra-corporate controversy which was within the jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court (RTC). If you were the Labor Arbiter assigned to the case, how would you rule on the company's motion to dismiss?

Samahang East Gate Enterprises (SEGE) is a labor organization composed of the rank-and-file employees of East Gate Enterprises (EGE), the leading manufacturer of all types of gloves and aprons. EGE was later requested by SEGE to bargain collectively for better terms and conditions of employment of all the rank-and-file employees of EGE. Consequently, EGE filed a petition for certification election before the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). During the proceedings, EGE insisted that it should participate in the certification process. EGE reasoned that since it was the one who filed the petition and considering that the employees concerned were its own rank-and-file employees, it should be allowed to take an active part in the certification process. Is the contention of EGE proper? Explain.

Our Lady of Peace Catholic School Teachers and Employees Labor Union (OLPCS-TELU) is a legitimate labor organization composed of vice-principals, department heads, coordinators, teachers, and non-teaching personnel of Our Lady of Peace Catholic School (OLPCS). OLPCS-TELU subsequently filed a petition for certification election among the teaching and non-teaching personnel of OLPCS before the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). The Med-Arbiter subsequently granted the petition and ordered the conduct of a joint certification election for the teaching and non-teaching personnel of OLPCS. May OLPCS-TELU be considered a legitimate labor organization?

Luisito has been working with Lima Land for 20 years. Wanting to work in the public sector, Luisito applied with and was offered a job at Livecor. Before accepting the offer, he wanted to consult you whether the payments that he and Lima Land had made to the Social Security System (SSS) can be transferred or credited to the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS). What would you advice?

Don Luis, a widower, lived alone in a house with a large garden. One day, he noticed that the plants in his garden needed trimming. He remembered that Lando, a 17-year old out-of-school youth, had contacted him in church the other day looking for work. He contacted Lando who immediately attended to Don Luis's garden and finished the job in three days. (b) Does Don Luis need to register Lando with the Social Security System (SSS)?

Don Luis, a widower, lived alone in a house with a large garden. One day, he noticed that the plants in his garden needed trimming. He remembered that Lando, a 17-year old out-of-school youth, had contacted him in church the other day looking for work. He contacted Lando who immediately attended to Don Luis's garden and finished the job in three days. (a) Is there an employer-employee relationship between Don Luis and Lando?

Which of the following groups does not enjoy the right to self-organization? (A) those who work in a non-profit charitable institution (B) those who are paid on a piece-rate basis (C) those who work in a corporation with less than 10 employees (D) those who work as legal secretaries

Luisa was hired as a secretary by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in Manila. Luisa's first boss was a Japanese national whom she got along with. But after two years, the latter was replaced by an arrogant Indian national who did not believe her work output was in accordance with international standards. One day, Luisa submitted a draft report filled with typographical errors to her boss. The latter scolded her, but Luisa verbally fought back. The Indian boss decided to terminate her services right then and there. Luisa filed a case for illegal dismissal with the Labor Arbiter claiming arbitrariness and denial of due process. If you were the Labor Arbiter, how would you decide the case?

Luisa Court is a popular chain of motels. It employs over 30 chambermaids who, among others, help clean and maintain the rooms. These chambermaids are part of the union rank-and-file employees which has an existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the company. While the CBA was in force, Luisa Court decided to abolish the position of chambermaids and outsource the cleaning of the rooms to Malinis Janitorial Services, a bona fide independent contractor which has invested in substantial equipment and sufficient manpower. The chambermaids filed a case of illegal dismissal against Luisa Court. In response, the company argued that the decision to outsource resulted from the new management's directive to streamline operations and save on costs. If you were the Labor Arbiter assigned to the case, how would you decide?

As a result of a bargaining deadlock between Lazo Corporation and Lazo Employees Union, the latter staged a strike. During the strike, several employees committed illegal acts. Eventually, its members informed the company of their intention to return to work. (c) If due to prolonged strike, Lazo Corporation hired replacements, can it refuse to admit the replaced strikers?

As a result of a bargaining deadlock between Lazo Corporation and Lazo Employees Union, the latter staged a strike. During the strike, several employees committed illegal acts. Eventually, its members informed the company of their intention to return to work. (b) Assuming the company admits the strikers, can it later on dismiss those employees who committed illegal acts?

As a result of a bargaining deadlock between Lazo Corporation and Lazo Employees Union, the latter staged a strike. During the strike, several employees committed illegal acts. Eventually, its members informed the company of their intention to return to work. (a) Can Lazo Corporation refuse to admit the strikers?

Non-lawyers can appear before the Labor Arbiter if: (A) they represent themselves. (B) they are properly authorized to represent their legitimate labor organization or member thereof. (C) they are duly-accredited members of the legal aid office recognized by the DOJ or IBP. (D) they appear in cases involving an amount of less than Php5,000.

Lina has been working as a steward with a Miami, U.S.A.-based Loyal Cruise Lines for the past 15 years. She was recruited by a local manning agency, Macapagal Shipping, and was made to sign a 10-month employment contract everytime she left for Miami. Macapagal Shipping paid for Lina's round-trip travel expenses from Manila to Miami. Because of a food poisoning incident which happened during her last cruise assignment, Lina was not re-hired. Lina claims she has been illegally terminated and seeks separation pay. If you were the Labor Arbiter handling the case, how would you decide?

Cris filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Baker Company. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint but awarded Cris financial assistance. Only the company appealed from the Labor Arbiter’s ruling. It confined its appeal solely to the question of whether financial assistance could be awarded. The NLRC, instead of ruling solely on the appealed issue, fully reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision; it found Baker Company liable for illegal dismissal and ordered the payment of separation pay and full backwages. Through a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, Baker Company challenged the validity of the NLRC ruling. It argued that the NLRC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it ruled on the illegal dismissal issue, when the only issue brought on appeal was the legal propriety of the financial assistance award. Cris countered that under Article 225(c) of the Labor Code, the NLRC has the authority to "correct, amend, or waive any error, defect or irregularity whether in substance or in form" in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Decide the case.

Because of the stress in caring for her four (4) growing children, Tammy suffered 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 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 required an immediate series of chemotherapy once a week for four (4) weeks. (a) What benefits can Tammy claim under existing social legislation?

For ten (10) separate but consecutive yearly contracts, Cesar has been deployed as an able-bodied seaman by Meritt Shipping, through its local agent, Ace Maritime Services (agency), in accordance with the 2000 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (2000 POEA-SEC). Cesar's employment was also covered by a CBA between the union, AMOSUP, and Meritt Shipping. Both the 2000 POEA-SEC and the CBA commonly provide the same mode and procedures for claiming disability benefits. Cesar's last contract (for nine months) expired on July 15, 2013. Cesar disembarked from the vessel M/V Seven Seas on July 16, 2013 as a seaman on "finished contract". He immediately reported to the agency and complained that he had been experiencing spells of dizziness, nausea, general weakness, and difficulty in breathing. The agency referred him to Dr. Sales, a cardio-pulmonary specialist, who examined and treated him; advised him to take a complete rest for a while; gave him medications; and declared him fit to resume work as a seaman. After a month, Cesar went back to the agency to ask for re-deployment. The agency rejected his application. Cesar responded by demanding total disability benefits based on the ailments that he developed and suffered while on board Meritt Shipping vessels. The claim was based on the certification of his physician (internist Dr. Reyes) that he could no longer undertake sea duties because of the hypertension and diabetes that afflicted him while serving on Meritt Shipping vessels in the last 10 years. Rejected once again, Cesar filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and the payment of total permanent disability benefits against the agency and its principal. Assume that you are the Labor Arbiter deciding the case. Identify the facts and issues you would consider material in resolving the illegal dismissal and disability complaint. Explain your choices and their materiality, and resolve the case.

Pablo works as a driver at the National Tire Company (NTC). He is a member of the Malayang Samahan ng Manggagawa sa NTC, the exclusive rank-and-file collective bargaining representative in the company. The union has a CBA with NTC which contains a union security and a check-off clause. The union security clause contains a maintenance of membership provision that requires all members of the bargaining unit to maintain their membership in good standing with the union during the term of the CBA under pain of dismissal. The check-off clause on the other hand authorizes the company to deduct from union members’ salaries defined amounts of union dues and other fees. Pablo refused to issue an authorization to the company for the check-off of his dues, maintaining that he will personally remit his dues to the union. (b) Can the union charge Pablo with disloyalty for refusing to allow the check off of his union dues and, on this basis, ask the company to dismiss him from employment?

Pablo works as a driver at the National Tire Company (NTC). He is a member of the Malayang Samahan ng Manggagawa sa NTC, the exclusive rank-and-file collective bargaining representative in the company. The union has a CBA with NTC which contains a union security and a check-off clause. The union security clause contains a maintenance of membership provision that requires all members of the bargaining unit to maintain their membership in good standing with the union during the term of the CBA under pain of dismissal. The check-off clause on the other hand authorizes the company to deduct from union members’ salaries defined amounts of union dues and other fees. Pablo refused to issue an authorization to the company for the check-off of his dues, maintaining that he will personally remit his dues to the union. (a) Would the NTC management commit unfair labor practice if it desists from checking off Pablo's union dues for lack of individual authorization from Pablo?

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 full retirement benefits of one (1) month pay for every year of service under the Plan. Thereafter, out of compassion, the company allowed Albert to continue working and paid him his old monthly salary rate, but without the allowances that he used to enjoy. After five (5) years under this arrangement, the company finally severed all employment relations with Albert; he was declared fully retired in a fitting ceremony but the company did not give him any further retirement benefits. Albert thought this treatment unfair as he had rendered full service at his usual hours in the past five (5) years. Thus, he filed a complaint for the allowances that were not paid to him, and for retirement benefits for his additional five (5) working years, based either on the company's Retirement Plan or the Retirement Pay Law, whichever is applicable. (b) Is he entitled to additional retirement benefits for the additional service he rendered after age 65?

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 full retirement benefits of one (1) month pay for every year of service under the Plan. Thereafter, out of compassion, the company allowed Albert to continue working and paid him his old monthly salary rate, but without the allowances that he used to enjoy. After five (5) years under this arrangement, the company finally severed all employment relations with Albert; he was declared fully retired in a fitting ceremony but the company did not give him any further retirement benefits. Albert thought this treatment unfair as he had rendered full service at his usual hours in the past five (5) years. Thus, he filed a complaint for the allowances that were not paid to him, and for retirement benefits for his additional five (5) working years, based either on the company's Retirement Plan or the Retirement Pay Law, whichever is applicable. (a) After Albert's retirement at age 65, should he be considered a regular employee entitled to all his previous salaries and benefits when the company allowed him to continue working?

Philippine Electric Company is engaged in electric power generation and distribution. It is a unionized company with Kilusang Makatao as the union representing its rank-and-file employees. During the negotiations for their expired collective bargaining agreement (CBA), the parties duly served their proposals and counter-proposals on one another. The parties, however, failed to discuss the merits of their proposals and counter-proposals in any formal negotiation meeting because their talks already bogged down on the negotiation ground rules, i.e., on the question of how they would conduct their negotiations, particularly on whether to consider retirement as a negotiable issue. Because of the continued impasse, the union went on strike. The Secretary of Labor and Employment immediately assumed jurisdiction over the dispute to avert widespread electric power interruption in the country. After extensive discussions and the filing of position papers (before the National Conciliation and Mediation Board and before the Secretary himself) on the validity of the union's strike and on the wage and other economic issues (including the retirement issue), the DOLE Secretary ruled on the validity of the strike and on the disputed CBA issues, and ordered the parties to execute a CBA based on his rulings. Did the Secretary of Labor exceed his jurisdiction when he proceeded to rule on the parties’ CBA positions even though the parties did not fully negotiate on their own?

Because of the stress in caring for her four (4) growing children, Tammy suffered 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 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 required an immediate series of chemotherapy once a week for four (4) weeks. (b) What can Roger, Tammy's 2nd husband and the father of her two (2) younger children, claim as benefits under the circumstances?

Bobby, who was assigned as company branch accountant in Tarlac where his family also lives, was dismissed by Theta Company after anomalies in the company's accounts were discovered in the branch. Bobby filed a complaint and was ordered reinstated with full backwages after the Labor Arbiter found that he had been denied due process because no investigation actually took place. Theta Company appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and at the same time wrote Bobby, advising him to report to the main company office in Makati where he would be reinstated pending appeal. Bobby refused to comply with his new assignment because Makati is very far from Tarlac and he cannot bring his family to live with him due to the higher cost of living in Makati. (b) Advise Bobby on the best course of action to take under the circumstances.

Bobby, who was assigned as company branch accountant in Tarlac where his family also lives, was dismissed by Theta Company after anomalies in the company's accounts were discovered in the branch. Bobby filed a complaint and was ordered reinstated with full backwages after the Labor Arbiter found that he had been denied due process because no investigation actually took place. Theta Company appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and at the same time wrote Bobby, advising him to report to the main company office in Makati where he would be reinstated pending appeal. Bobby refused to comply with his new assignment because Makati is very far from Tarlac and he cannot bring his family to live with him due to the higher cost of living in Makati. (a) Is Bobby's reinstatement pending appeal legally correct?

Inter-Garments Co. manufactures garments for export and requires its employees to render overtime work ranging from two to three hours a day to meet its clients’ deadlines. Since 2009, it has been paying its employees on overtime an additional 35% of their hourly rate for work rendered in excess of their regular eight working hours. Due to the slowdown of its export business in 2012, Inter-Garments had to reduce its overtime work; at the same time, it adjusted the overtime rates so that those who worked overtime were only paid an additional 25% instead of the previous 35%. To replace the workers’ overtime rate loss, the company granted a one-time 5% across-the-board wage increase. Vigilant Union, the rank-and-file bargaining agent, charged the company with Unfair Labor Practice on the ground that (1) no consultations had been made on who would render overtime work; and (2) the unilateral overtime pay rate reduction is a violation of Article 100 (entitled Prohibition Against Elimination or Diminution of Benefits) of the Labor Code. Is the union position meritorious?

Gamma Company pays its regular employees P350.00 a day, and houses them in a dormitory inside its factory compound in Manila. Gamma Company also provides them with three full meals a day. In the course of a routine inspection, a Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Inspector noted that the workers’ pay is below the prescribed minimum wage of P426.00 plus P30.00 allowance, and thus required Gamma Company to pay wage differentials. Gamma Company denies any liability, explaining that after the market value of the company-provided board and lodging are added to the employees’ P350 cash daily wage, the employees’ effective daily rate would be way above the minimum pay required by law. The company counsel further points out that the employees are aware that their food and lodging form part of their salary, and have long accepted the arrangement. Is the company's position legally correct?

Jose and Erica, former sweethearts, both worked as sales representatives for Magna, a multinational firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical products. Although the couple had already broken off their relationship, Jose continued to have special feelings for Erica. One afternoon, Jose chanced upon Erica riding in the car of Paolo, a co-employee and 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 extreme jealousy, Jose rammed Paolo's car, causing severe injuries to Paolo and Erica. Jose's flare up also caused heavy damage to the two company-owned cars they were driving. (b) Assuming this time that Magna dismissed Jose from employment for cause and you are the lawyer of Jose, how would you argue the position that Jose's dismissal was illegal?

Jose and Erica, former sweethearts, both worked as sales representatives for Magna, a multinational firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical products. Although the couple had already broken off their relationship, Jose continued to have special feelings for Erica. One afternoon, Jose chanced upon Erica riding in the car of Paolo, a co-employee and 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 extreme jealousy, Jose rammed Paolo's car, causing severe injuries to Paolo and Erica. Jose's flare up also caused heavy damage to the two company-owned cars they were driving. (a) As lawyer for Magna, advise the company on whether just and valid grounds exist to dismiss Jose.

Inggu, an electronics technician, worked within the premises of Pit Stop, an auto accessory shop. He filed a Complaint for illegal dismissal, overtime pay and other benefits against Pit Stop. Pit Stop refused to pay his claims on the ground that Inggu was not its employee but was an independent contractor. It was common practice for shops like Pit Stop to collect the service fees from customers and pay the same to the independent contractors at the end of each week. The auto shop explained that Inggu was like a partner who worked within its premises, using parts provided by the shop, but otherwise Inggu was free to render service in the other auto shops. On the other hand, Inggu insisted that he still was entitled to the benefits because he was loyal to Pit Stop, it being a fact that he did not perform work for anyone else. Is Inggu correct? Explain briefly.

Does the performance by a contractual employee, supplied by a legitimate contractor, of activities directly related to the main business of the principal make him a regular employee of the principal? Explain.

Dennis was a taxi driver who was being paid on the "boundary" system basis. He worked tirelessly for Cabrera Transport Inc. for fourteen (14) years until he was eligible for retirement. He was entitled to retirement benefits. During the entire duration of his service, Dennis was not given his 13th month pay or his service incentive leave pay. (a) Is Dennis entitled to 13th month pay and service incentive leave pay? Explain.

ABC Tomato Corporation, owned and managed by three (3) elderly brothers and two (2) sisters, has been in business for 40 years. Due to serious business losses and financial reverses during the last five (5) years, they decided to close the business. (d) If the reason for the closure is due to old age of the brothers and sisters: Are the employees entitled to separation benefits?

ABC Tomato Corporation, owned and managed by three (3) elderly brothers and two (2) sisters, has been in business for 40 years. Due to serious business losses and financial reverses during the last five (5) years, they decided to close the business. (c) If the reason for the closure is due to old age of the brothers and sisters: Is the closure allowed by law?

ABC Tomato Corporation, owned and managed by three (3) elderly brothers and two (2) sisters, has been in business for 40 years. Due to serious business losses and financial reverses during the last five (5) years, they decided to close the business. (b) Are the employees entitled to separation pay?

ABC Tomato Corporation, owned and managed by three (3) elderly brothers and two (2) sisters, has been in business for 40 years. Due to serious business losses and financial reverses during the last five (5) years, they decided to close the business. (a) As counsel for the corporation, what steps will you take prior to its closure?

The modes of determining an exclusive bargaining agreement are: 1. voluntary recognition; 2. certification election; 3. consent election. Explain briefly how they differ from one another.

Mam-manu Aviation Company (Mam-manu) is a new airline company recruiting flight attendants for its domestic flights. It requires that the applicant be single, not more than 24 years old, attractive, and familiar with three (3) dialects, viz: Ilonggo, Cebuano and Kapampangan. Ingga, 23 years old, was accepted as she possesses all the qualifications. After passing the probationary period, Ingga disclosed that she got married when she was 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 transmissible disease at the time of the celebration of their marriage. As a result of this revelation, Ingga was not hired as a regular flight attendant. Consequently, she filed a complaint against Mam-manu alleging that the pre-employment qualifications violate relevant provisions of the Labor Code and are against public policy. Is the contention of Ingga tenable? Why?

For humanitarian reasons, a bank hired several handicapped workers to count and sort out currencies. The handicapped workers knew that the contract was only for a period of six-months and the same period was provided in their employment contracts. After six months, the bank terminated their employment on the ground that their contract has expired. This prompted the workers to file with the Labor Arbiter a complaint for illegal dismissal. Will their action prosper? Why or why not?

The weekly work schedule of a driver is as follows: Monday, Wednesday, Friday - drive the family car to bring and fetch the children to and from school. Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday - drive the family van to fetch merchandise from suppliers and deliver the same to a boutique in a mall owned by the family. (b) The same driver claims that for work performed on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, he should be paid the minimum daily wage of a driver of a commercial establishment. Is the claim of the driver valid?

The weekly work schedule of a driver is as follows: Monday, Wednesday, Friday - drive the family car to bring and fetch the children to and from school. Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday - drive the family van to fetch merchandise from suppliers and deliver the same to a boutique in a mall owned by the family. (a) Is the driver a house helper?

XYZ Manpower Services (XYZ) was sued by its employees together with its client, ABC Polyester Manufacturing Company (ABC). ABC is one of the many clients of XYZ. During the proceedings before the Labor Arbiter, XYZ was able to prove that it had substantial capital of Three Million Pesos. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the employees because it deemed XYZ as a labor only contractor. XYZ was not able to prove that it had invested in tools, equipment, etc. Is the Labor Arbiter's ruling valid? Explain.

Dennis was a taxi driver who was being paid on the "boundary" system basis. He worked tirelessly for Cabrera Transport Inc. for fourteen (14) years until he was eligible for retirement. He was entitled to retirement benefits. During the entire duration of his service, Dennis was not given his 13th month pay or his service incentive leave pay. (b) Since he was not given his 13th month pay and service incentive leave pay, should Dennis be paid upon retirement, in addition to the salary equivalent to fifteen (15) days for every year of service, the additional 2.5 days representing one-twelfth (1/12) of the 13th month pay as well as the five (5) days representing the service incentive leave for a total of 22.5 days? Explain.

A spinster school teacher took pity on one of her pupils, a robust and precocious 12-year old boy whose poor family could barely afford the cost of his schooling. She lives alone at her house near the School after her housemaid had left. In the afternoon, she lets the boy do various chores as cleaning, fetching water and all kinds of errands after school hours. She gives him rice and P100.00 before the boy goes home at 7:00 every night. The school principal learned about it and charged her with violating the law which prohibits the employment of children below 15 years of age. In her defense, the teacher stated that the work performed by her pupil is not hazardous. Is her defense tenable? Why?

Juicy Bar and Night Club allowed by tolerance fifty (50) Guest Relations Officers (GROs) to work without compensation in its establishment under the direct supervision of its Manager from 8:00 P.M. to 4:00 A.M. everyday, including Sundays and holidays. The GROs, however, were free to ply their trade elsewhere at anytime, but once they enter the premises of the night club, they were required to stay up to closing time. The GROs earned their keep exclusively from commissions for food and drinks, and tips from generous customers. In time, the GROs formed the Solar Ugnayan ng mga Kababaihang Inaapi (SUKI), a labor union duly registered with DOLE. Subsequently, SUKI filed a petition for Certification Election in order to be recognized as the exclusive bargaining agent of its members. Juicy Bar and Night Club opposed the petition for Certification Election on the singular ground of absence of employer-employee relationship between the GROs on one hand and the night club on the other hand. May the GROs form SUKI as a labor organization for purposes of collective bargaining? Explain briefly.

X was one of more than one hundred (100) employees who were terminated from employment due to the closure of Construction Corporation A. The Cruz family owned Construction Company A. Upon the closure of Construction Company A, the Cruzes established Construction Company B. Both corporations had the same president, the same board of directors, the same corporate officers, and all the same subscribers. From the General Information Sheet filed by both companies, it also showed that they shared the same address and/or premises. Both companies also hired the same accountant who prepared the books for both companies. X and his co-employees amended their Complaint with the Labor Arbiter to hold Construction Corporation B jointly and severally liable with Construction Company A for illegal dismissal, backwages and separation pay. Construction Company B interposed a Motion to Dismiss contending that they are juridical entities with distinct and separate personalities from Construction Corporation A and therefore, they cannot be held jointly and severally liable for the money claims of workers who are not their employees. Rule on the Motion to Dismiss. Should it be granted or denied? Why?

On August 01, 2008, Y, a corporation engaged in the manufacture of textile garments, entered into a collective bargaining agreement with Union X in representation of the rank-and-file employees of the corporation. The CBA was effective up to June 20, 2011. The contract had an automatic renewal clause which would allow the agreement after its expiry date to still apply until both parties would have been able to execute a new agreement. On May 10, 2011, Union X submitted to Y's management their proposals for the negotiation of a new CBA. The next day, Y suspended negotiations with Union X since Y had entered into a merger with Z, a corporation also engaged in the manufacture of textile garments. Z assumed all the assets and liabilities of Y. Union X filed a complaint with the Regional Trial Court for specific performance and damages with a prayer for preliminary injunction against Y and Z and Z filed a Motion to Dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction. Rule on the Motion to Dismiss.

In the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Dana Films and its rank-and-file Union (which is directly affiliated with MMFF, a national federation), a provision on the maintenance of membership expressly provides that the Union can demand the dismissal of any member employee who commits acts of disloyalty to the Union as provided for in its Constitution and By-Laws. The same provision contains an undertaking by the Union (MMFF) to hold Dana Films free from any and all claims of any employee dismissed. During the term of the CBA, MMFF discovered that certain employee-members were initiating a move to disaffiliate from MMFF and join a rival federation, FAMAS. Forthwith, MMFF sought the dismissal of its employee-members initiating the disaffiliation movement from MMFF to FAMAS. Dana Films, relying on the provision of the aforementioned CBA, complied with MMFF's request and dismissed the employees identified by MMFF as disloyal to it. (b) What are the liabilities of Dana Films and MMFF to the dismissed employees, if any?

In the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Dana Films and its rank-and-file Union (which is directly affiliated with MMFF, a national federation), a provision on the maintenance of membership expressly provides that the Union can demand the dismissal of any member employee who commits acts of disloyalty to the Union as provided for in its Constitution and By-Laws. The same provision contains an undertaking by the Union (MMFF) to hold Dana Films free from any and all claims of any employee dismissed. During the term of the CBA, MMFF discovered that certain employee-members were initiating a move to disaffiliate from MMFF and join a rival federation, FAMAS. Forthwith, MMFF sought the dismissal of its employee-members initiating the disaffiliation movement from MMFF to FAMAS. Dana Films, relying on the provision of the aforementioned CBA, complied with MMFF's request and dismissed the employees identified by MMFF as disloyal to it. (a) Will an action for illegal dismissal against Dana Films and MMFF prosper or not? Why?

A deadlock in the negotiations for the collective bargaining agreement between College X and the Union prompted the latter, after duly notifying the DOLE, to declare a strike on November 5. The strike totally paralyzed the operations of the school. The Labor Secretary immediately assumed jurisdiction over the dispute and issued on the same day (November 5) a return to work order. Upon receipt of the order, the striking union officers and members, on November 1, filed a Motion for Reconsideration thereof questioning the Labor Secretary's assumption of jurisdiction, and continued with the strike during the pendency of their motion. On November 30, the Labor Secretary denied the reconsideration of his return to work order and further noting the strikers’ failure to immediately return to work, terminated their employment. In assailing the Labor Secretary's decision, the Union contends that: 1. The Labor Secretary erroneously assumed jurisdiction over the dispute since College X could not be considered an industry indispensable to national interest; 2. The strikers were under no obligation to immediately comply with the November 5 return to work order because of their then pending Motion for Reconsideration of such order; and 3. The strike being legal, the employment of the striking Union officers and members cannot be terminated. Rule on these contentions. Explain.

Distinguish Labor-Only Contracting and Job Contracting.

A was an able seaman contracted by ABC Recruitment Agency for its foreign principal, Seaworthy Shipping Company (SSC). His employment contract provided that he would serve on board the Almieda II for eight (8) months with a monthly salary of US$450. In connection with his employment, he signed an undertaking to observe the drug and alcohol policy which bans possession or use of all alcoholic beverages, prohibited substances and unprescribed drugs on board the ship. The undertaking provided that: (1) disciplinary action including dismissal would be taken against anyone in possession of the prohibited substances or who is impaired by the use of any of these substances, and (2) to enforce the policy, random test sampling would be done on all those on board the ship. On his third month of service while the Almieda II was docked at a foreign port, a random drug test was conducted on all members of the crew and A tested positive for marijuana. He was given a copy of the drug test result. In compliance with the company's directive, he submitted his written explanation which the company did not find satisfactory. A month later, he was repatriated to the Philippines. Upon arrival in the Philippines, A filed with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) a complaint against the agency and the principal for illegal dismissal with a claim for salaries for the unexpired portion of his contract. (a) Was A’s dismissal valid? Explain.

A is a member of the labor union duly recognized as the sole bargaining representative of his company. Due to a bargaining deadlock, 245 members of the 500-strong union voted on March 13, 2010 to stage a strike. A notice of strike was submitted to the National Conciliation and Mediation Board on March 16, 2010. Seven days later or on March 23, 2010, the workers staged a strike in the course of which A had to leave and go to the hospital where his wife had just delivered a baby. The union members later intimidated and barred other employees from entering the work premises, thus paralyzing the business operations of the company. A was dismissed from employment as a consequence of the strike. (b) Was A’s dismissal valid? Why or why not?

A is a member of the labor union duly recognized as the sole bargaining representative of his company. Due to a bargaining deadlock, 245 members of the 500-strong union voted on March 13, 2010 to stage a strike. A notice of strike was submitted to the National Conciliation and Mediation Board on March 16, 2010. Seven days later or on March 23, 2010, the workers staged a strike in the course of which A had to leave and go to the hospital where his wife had just delivered a baby. The union members later intimidated and barred other employees from entering the work premises, thus paralyzing the business operations of the company. A was dismissed from employment as a consequence of the strike. (a) Was the strike legal? Explain.

Company XYZ has two recognized labor unions, one for its rank-and-file employees (RFLU), and one for supervisory employees (SELU). Of late, the company instituted a restructuring program by virtue of which A, a rank-and-file employee and officer of RFLU, was promoted to a supervisory position along with four (4) other colleagues, also active union members and/or officers. Labor Union KMJ, a rival labor union seeking recognition as the rank-and-file bargaining agent, filed a petition for the cancellation of the registration of RFLU on the ground that A and her colleagues have remained to be members of RFLU. Is the petition meritorious? Explain.

A, a worker at ABC Company, was on leave with pay on March 31, 2010. He reported for work on April 1 and 2, Maundy Thursday and Good Friday, respectively, both regular holidays. Is A entitled to holiday pay for the two successive holidays? Explain.

A, single, has been an active member of the Social Security System for the past 20 months. She became pregnant out of wedlock and on her 7th month of pregnancy, she was informed that she would have to deliver the baby through caesarean section because of some complications. Can A claim maternity benefits? If yes, how many days can she go on maternity leave? If not, why is she not entitled?

Differentiate “surface bargaining” from “blue-sky bargaining.”

Distinguish the terms “conciliation,” “mediation” and “arbitration.”

TRUE OR FALSE. Explain your answer briefly. 1. Deeds of release, waivers and quitclaims are always valid and binding. 2. The relations between employer and employee are purely contractual in nature. 3. As a general rule, direct hiring of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) is not allowed.

Samahang Manggagawang Terracota, a union of supervisory employees at Terracota Inc., recently admitted a member of the company’s managerial staff, A, into the union ranks. (b) Assuming that A is ineligible to join the union, should the registration of Samahang Manggagawang Terracota be cancelled? Explain.

On the first day of collective bargaining negotiations between rank-and-file Union A and B Bus Company, the former proposed a P45/day increase. The company insisted that ground rules for negotiations should first be established, to which the union agreed. After agreeing on ground rules on the second day, the union representatives reiterated their proposal for a wage increase. When company representatives suggested a discussion of political provisions in the Collective Bargaining Agreement as stipulated in the ground rules, union members went on mass leave the next day to participate in a whole day prayer rally in front of the company building. (a) The company filed a petition for assumption of jurisdiction with the Secretary of Labor and Employment. The Union opposed the petition, arguing that it did not intend to stage a strike. Should the petition be granted? Explain.

On the first day of collective bargaining negotiations between rank-and-file Union A and B Bus Company, the former proposed a P45/day increase. The company insisted that ground rules for negotiations should first be established, to which the union agreed. After agreeing on ground rules on the second day, the union representatives reiterated their proposal for a wage increase. When company representatives suggested a discussion of political provisions in the Collective Bargaining Agreement as stipulated in the ground rules, union members went on mass leave the next day to participate in a whole day prayer rally in front of the company building. (b) The Union contended that assuming that the mass leave will be considered as a strike, the same was valid because of the refusal of the company to discuss the economic provisions of the CBA. Rule on the contention.

On the first day of collective bargaining negotiations between rank-and-file Union A and B Bus Company, the former proposed a P45/day increase. The company insisted that ground rules for negotiations should first be established, to which the union agreed. After agreeing on ground rules on the second day, the union representatives reiterated their proposal for a wage increase. When company representatives suggested a discussion of political provisions in the Collective Bargaining Agreement as stipulated in the ground rules, union members went on mass leave the next day to participate in a whole day prayer rally in front of the company building. (c) Union member AA, a pastor who headed the prayer rally, was served a notice of termination by management after it filed the petition for assumption of jurisdiction. May the company validly terminate AA? Explain.

A was hired to work in a sugar plantation performing such tasks as weeding, cutting and loading canes, planting cane points, fertilizing and cleaning the drainage. Because his daily presence in the field was not required, A also worked as a houseboy at the house of the plantation owner. For the next planting season, the owner decided not to hire A as a plantation worker but as a houseboy instead. Furious, A filed a case for illegal dismissal against the plantation owner. Decide with reason.

Flight attendant A, five feet and six inches tall, weighing 170 pounds ended up weighing 220 pounds in two years. Pursuant to the long standing Cabin and Crew Administration Manual of the employer airline that set a 147-pound limit for A’s height, management sent A a notice to “shape up or ship out” within 60 days. At the end of the 60-day period, A reduced her weight to 205 pounds. The company finally served her a Notice of Administration Charge for violation of company standards on weight requirements. Should A be dismissed? Explain.

Several employees and members of Union A were terminated by Western Phone Co. on the ground of redundancy. After complying with the necessary requirements, the Union staged a strike and picketed the premises of the company. The management then filed a petition for the Secretary of Labor and Employment to assume jurisdiction over the dispute. Without the benefit of a hearing, the Secretary issued an Order to assume jurisdiction and for the parties to revert to the status quo ante litem. (a) Was the order to assume jurisdiction legal? Explain.

Company C, a toy manufacturer, decided to ban the use of cell phones in the factory premises. In the pertinent Memorandum, management explained that too much texting and phone-calling by employees disrupted company operations. Two employees-members of Union X were terminated from employment due to violation of the memorandum-policy. The union countered with a prohibitory injunction case (with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order) filed with the Regional Trial Court, challenging the validity and constitutionality of the cell phone ban. The company filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the case should be referred to the grievance machinery pursuant to an existing Collective Bargaining Agreement with Union X, and eventually to Voluntary Arbitration. Is the company correct? Explain.

Rank-and-file workers from Peacock Feathers, a company with 120 employees, registered their independent labor organization with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Regional Office. Management countered with a petition to cancel the union’s registration on the ground that the minutes of ratification of the union constitution and by-laws submitted to the DOLE were fraudulent. Specifically, management presented affidavits of ten (10) out of forty (40) individuals named in the list of union members who participated in the ratification, alleging that they were not present at the supposed January 1, 2010 meeting held for the purpose. The union argued that the stated date of the meeting should have read “January 11, 2010,” instead of “January 1, 2010,” and that, at any rate, the other thirty (30) union members were enough to register a union. Decide with reason.

A worked as a roomboy in La Mallorca Hotel. He sued for underpayment of wages before the NLRC, alleging that he was paid below the minimum wage. The employer denied any underpayment, arguing that based on long standing, unwritten policy, the Hotel provided food and lodging to its housekeeping employees, the costs of which were partly shouldered by it and the balance was charged to the employees. The employees’ corresponding share in the costs was thus deducted from their wages. The employer concluded that such valid deduction naturally resulted in the payment of wages below the prescribed minimum. If you were the Labor Arbiter, how would you rule? Explain.

A was recruited to work abroad by Speedy Recruitment Agency as a technician for a Saudi Arabian construction firm, with a monthly salary of $650.00. When she got to the construction site, the employer compelled her to sign another contract that referred her to another employer for a salary of $350.00. She worked for the second employer and was paid $350.00 until her two-year contract expired. Upon her return to the Philippines, she filed a case against the agency and the two employers. May the agency validly raise the defense that it was not privy to the transfer of A to the second employer? Explain.

A was approached for possible overseas deployment to Dubai by X, an interviewer of job applicants for Alpha Personnel Services, Inc., an overseas recruitment agency. X required A to submit certain documents (passport, NBI clearance, medical certificate) and to pay P25,000 as processing fee. Upon payment of the said amount to the agency cashier, A was advised to wait for his visa. After five months, A visited the office of Alpha Personnel Services, Inc. during which X told him that he could no longer be deployed for employment abroad. A was informed by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) that while Alpha Personnel Services, Inc. was a licensed agency, X was not registered as its employee, contrary to POEA Rules and Regulations. Under POEA Rules and Regulations, the obligation to register personnel with the POEA belongs to the officers of a recruitment agency. (b) May the officers having control, management or direction of Alpha Personnel Services, Inc. be held criminally liable for illegal recruitment? Explain.

A was approached for possible overseas deployment to Dubai by X, an interviewer of job applicants for Alpha Personnel Services, Inc., an overseas recruitment agency. X required A to submit certain documents (passport, NBI clearance, medical certificate) and to pay P25,000 as processing fee. Upon payment of the said amount to the agency cashier, A was advised to wait for his visa. After five months, A visited the office of Alpha Personnel Services, Inc. during which X told him that he could no longer be deployed for employment abroad. A was informed by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) that while Alpha Personnel Services, Inc. was a licensed agency, X was not registered as its employee, contrary to POEA Rules and Regulations. Under POEA Rules and Regulations, the obligation to register personnel with the POEA belongs to the officers of a recruitment agency. (a) May X be held criminally liable for illegal recruitment? Explain.

A, a driver for a bus company, sued his employer for non-payment of commutable service incentive leave credits upon his resignation after five years of employment. The bus company argued that A was not entitled to service incentive leave since he was considered a field personnel and was paid on commission basis and that, in any event, his claim had prescribed. If you were the Labor Arbiter, how would you rule? Explain.

Several employees and members of Union A were terminated by Western Phone Co. on the ground of redundancy. After complying with the necessary requirements, the Union staged a strike and picketed the premises of the company. The management then filed a petition for the Secretary of Labor and Employment to assume jurisdiction over the dispute. Without the benefit of a hearing, the Secretary issued an Order to assume jurisdiction and for the parties to revert to the status quo ante litem. (b) Under the same set of facts the Secretary instead issued an Order directing all striking workers to return to work within 24 hours, except those who were terminated due to redundancy. Was the Order legal? Explain.

Samahang Manggagawang Terracota, a union of supervisory employees at Terracota Inc., recently admitted a member of the company’s managerial staff, A, into the union ranks. (a) Should A be a member of the supervisory union? Explain.

After working from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on a Thursday as one of 5,000 employees in a beer factory, A hurried home to catch the early evening news and have dinner with his family. At around 10 p.m. of the same day, the plant manager called and ordered A to fill in for C who missed the second shift. (b) Assuming that A was made to work from 11 p.m. on Thursday until 2 a.m. on Friday, may the company argue that, since he was two hours late in coming to work on Thursday morning, he should only be paid for work rendered from 1 a.m. to 2 a.m.? Explain?

After working from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on a Thursday as one of 5,000 employees in a beer factory, A hurried home to catch the early evening news and have dinner with his family. At around 10 p.m. of the same day, the plant manager called and ordered A to fill in for C who missed the second shift. (a) May A validly refuse the plant manager’s directive? Explain.

A is employed by XYZ Company where XYZ Employees Union (XYZ-EU) is the recognized exclusive bargaining agent. Although A is a member of rival union XYR-MU, he receives the benefits under the CBA that XYZ-EU had negotiated with the company. XYZ-EU assessed A a fee equivalent to the dues and other fees paid by its members but A insists that he has no obligation to pay said dues and fees because he is not a member of XYZ-EU and he has not issued an authorization to allow the collection. Explain whether his claim is meritorious.

On December 12, 2008, A signed a contract to be part of the crew of ABC Cruises, Inc. through its Philippine manning agency XYZ. Under the standard employment contract of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), his employment was to commence upon his actual departure from the port in the point of hire, Manila, from where he would take a flight to the USA to join the cruise ship “MS Carnegie.” However, more than three months after A secured his exit clearance from the POEA for his supposed departure on January 15, 2009, XYZ still had not deployed him for no valid reason. Is A entitled to relief? Explain.

Because of continuing financial constraints, XYZ, Inc. gave its employees the option to voluntarily resign from the company. A was one of those who availed of the option. On October 5, 2007, he was paid separation benefits equivalent to seven (7) months pay for his six (6) years and seven (7) months of service with the company and he executed a waiver and quitclaim. A week later, A filed against XYZ, Inc. a complaint for illegal dismissal. While he admitted that he was not forced to sign the quitclaim, he contended that he agreed to tender his voluntary resignation on the belief that XYZ, Inc. was closing down its business. XYZ, Inc., however, continued its business under a different company name, he claimed. Rule on whether the quitclaim executed by A is valid or not. Explain.

A, an employee of XYZ Cooperative, owns 500 shares in the cooperative. He has been asked to join the XYZ Cooperative Employees Association. He seeks your advice on whether he can join the association. What advice will you give him?

A was working as a medical representative of RX pharmaceutical company when he met and fell in love with B, a marketing strategist for Delta Drug Company, a competitor of RX. On several occasions, the management of RX called A’s attention to the stipulation in his employment contract that requires him to disclose any relationship by consanguinity or affinity with co-employees or employees of competing companies in light of a possible conflict of interest. A seeks your advice on the validity of the company policy. What would be your advice?

ABC company and U labor union have been negotiating for a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) but failed to agree on certain economic provisions of the existing agreement. In the meantime, the existing CBA expired. The company thereafter refused to pay the employees their midyear bonus, saying that the CBA which provided for the grant of midyear bonus to all company employees had already expired. Are the employees entitled to be paid their midyear bonus? Explain your answer.

A was an able seaman contracted by ABC Recruitment Agency for its foreign principal, Seaworthy Shipping Company (SSC). His employment contract provided that he would serve on board the Almieda II for eight (8) months with a monthly salary of US$450. In connection with his employment, he signed an undertaking to observe the drug and alcohol policy which bans possession or use of all alcoholic beverages, prohibited substances and unprescribed drugs on board the ship. The undertaking provided that: (1) disciplinary action including dismissal would be taken against anyone in possession of the prohibited substances or who is impaired by the use of any of these substances, and (2) to enforce the policy, random test sampling would be done on all those on board the ship. On his third month of service while the Almieda II was docked at a foreign port, a random drug test was conducted on all members of the crew and A tested positive for marijuana. He was given a copy of the drug test result. In compliance with the company's directive, he submitted his written explanation which the company did not find satisfactory. A month later, he was repatriated to the Philippines. Upon arrival in the Philippines, A filed with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) a complaint against the agency and the principal for illegal dismissal with a claim for salaries for the unexpired portion of his contract. (b) Is his claim for salaries for the unexpired portion of his contract tenable? Explain.