2013 Labor Law Exam Essay Questions

ON OCTOBER 21, 2013

I.
Jose and Erica, former sweethearts, both worked as saes re!resentati"es for #a$na, a mutinationa firm en$a$ed in
the manufacture and sae of !harmaceutica !roducts. %thou$h the cou!e had aready broken off their reationshi!,
Jose continued to ha"e s!ecia feein$s for Erica.
&ne afternoon, Jose chanced u!on Erica ridin$ in the car of 'aoo, a co(em!oyee and Erica)s ardent suitor* the two
were on their way back to the office from a saes ca on +i"er ,ru$, a ma-or dru$ retaier. In a fit of extreme -eaousy,
Jose rammed 'aoo)s car, causin$ se"ere in-uries to 'aoo and Erica. Jose)s fare u! aso caused hea"y dama$e to
the two com!any(owned cars they were dri"in$.
.%/ %s awyer for #a$na, ad"ise the com!any on whether -ust and "aid $rounds exist to dismiss Jose. .01/
.2/ %ssumin$ this time that #a$na dismissed Jose from em!oyment for cause and you are the awyer of Jose, how
woud you ar$ue the !osition that Jose)s dismissa was ie$a3 .01/
II.
4amma 5om!any !ays its re$uar em!oyees '360.00 a day, and houses them in a dormitory inside its factory
com!ound in #ania. 4amma 5om!any aso !ro"ides them with three fu meas a day.
In the course of a routine ins!ection, a ,e!artment of Labor and Em!oyment .,&LE/ Ins!ector noted that the
workers) !ay is beow the !rescribed minimum wa$e of '027.00 !us '30.00 aowance, and thus re8uired 4amma
5om!any to !ay wa$e differentias.
4amma 5om!any denies any iabiity, ex!ainin$ that after the market "aue of the com!any(!ro"ided board and
od$in$ are added to the em!oyees) '360 cash daiy wa$e, the em!oyees) effecti"e daiy rate woud be way abo"e
the minimum !ay re8uired by aw. 9he com!any counse further !oints out that the em!oyees are aware that their
food and od$in$ form !art of their saary, and ha"e on$ acce!ted the arran$ement.
Is the com!any)s !osition e$ay correct3.:1/
III.
Inter(4arments 5o. manufactures $arments for ex!ort and re8uires its em!oyees to render o"ertime work ran$in$
from two to three hours a day to meet its cients) deadines. +ince 200;, it has been !ayin$ its em!oyees on o"ertime
an additiona 361 of their houry rate for work rendered in excess of their re$uar ei$ht workin$ hours.
,ue to the sowdown of its ex!ort business in 2012, Inter(4arments had to reduce its o"ertime work* at the same
time, it ad-usted the o"ertime rates so that those who worked o"ertime were ony !aid an additiona 261instead of the
!re"ious 361. 9o re!ace the workers) o"ertime rate oss, the com!any $ranted a one(time 61 across(the(board
wa$e increase.
<i$iant =nion, the rank(and(fie bar$ainin$ a$ent, char$ed the com!any with =nfair Labor 'ractice on the $round that
.1/ no consutations had been made on who woud render o"ertime work* and .2/ the uniatera o"ertime !ay rate
reduction is a "ioation of %rtice 100 .entited 'rohibition %$ainst Eimination or ,iminution of 2enefits/ of the Labor
5ode.
Is the union !osition meritorious3 .:1/
I<.
2obby, who was assi$ned as com!any branch accountant in 9arac where his famiy aso i"es, was dismissed by
9heta 5om!any after anomaies in the com!any)s accounts were disco"ered in the branch 2obby fied a com!aint
and was ordered reinstated with fu backwa$es after the Labor %rbiter found that he had been denied due !rocess
because no in"esti$ation actuay took !ace.
9heta 5om!any a!!eaed to the >ationa Labor ?eations 5ommission .>L?5/ and at the same time wrote 2obby,
ad"isin$ him to re!ort to the main com!any office in #akati where he woud be reinstated !endin$ a!!ea 2obby
refused to com!y with his new assi$nment because #akati is "ery far from 9arac and he cannot brin$ his famiy to
i"e with him due to the hi$her cost of i"in$ in #akati.
.%/ Is 2obby)s reinstatement !endin$ a!!ea e$ay correct3 .01/
.2/ %d"ise 2obby on the best course of action to take under the circumstances. .01/
<.
5ris fied a com!aint for ie$a dismissa a$ainst 2aker 5om!any. 9he Labor %rbiter dismissed the com!aint but
awarded 5ris financia assistance. &ny the com!any a!!eaed from the Labor %rbiter)s ruin$. It confined its a!!ea
soey to the 8uestion of whether financia assistance coud be awarded. 9he >L?5, instead of ruin$ soey on the
a!!eaed issue, fuy re"ersed the Labor %rbiter)s decision* it found 2aker 5om!any iabe for ie$a dismissa and
ordered the !ayment of se!aration !ay and fu backwa$es.
9hrou$h a !etition for certiorari under ?ue 76 of the ?ues of 5ourt, 2aker 5om!any chaen$ed the "aidity of the
>L?5 ruin$. It ar$ued that the >L?5 acted with $ra"e abuse of discretion when it rued on the ie$a dismissa issue,
when the ony issue brou$ht on a!!ea was the e$a !ro!riety of the financia assistance award.
5ris countered that under %rtice 21:.c/ of the Labor 5ode, the >L?5 has the authority to @correct, amend, or wai"e
any error, defect or irre$uarity whether in substance or in formA in the exercise of its a!!eate -urisdiction.
,ecide the case. .:1/
<I.
2ecause of the stress in carin$ for her four .0/ $rowin$ chidren, 9ammy suffered a miscarria$e ate in her !re$nancy
and had to under$o an o!eration. In the course of the o!eration, her obstetrician further disco"ered a sus!icious(
ookin$ mass that re8uired the subse8uent remo"a of her uterus .hysterectomy/. %fter sur$ery, her !hysician ad"ised
9ammy to be on fu bed rest for six .7/ weeks. #eanwhie, the bio!sy of the sam!e tissue taken from the mass in
9ammy)s uterus showed a be$innin$ mai$nancy that re8uired an immediate series of chemothera!y once a week for
four .0/ weeks.
.%/ Bhat benefits can 9ammy caim under existin$ socia e$isation3 .01/
.2/ Bhat can ?o$er(9ammy)s 2nd husband and the father of her two .2/ youn$er chidren (caim as benefits under
the circumstances3 .01/
<II.
'hii!!ine Eectric 5om!any is en$a$ed in eectric !ower $eneration and distribution. It is a unioniCed com!any with
Diusan$ #akatao as the union re!resentin$ its rank(and(fie em!oyees. ,urin$ the ne$otiations for their ex!ired
coecti"e bar$ainin$ a$reement .52%/, the !arties duy ser"ed their !ro!osas and counter(!ro!osas on one
another. 9he !arties, howe"er, faied to discuss the merits of their !ro!osas and counter(!ro!osas in any forma
ne$otiation meetin$ because their taks aready bo$$ed down on the ne$otiation $round rues, i.e., on the 8uestion of
how they woud conduct their ne$otiations, !articuary on whether to consider retirement as a ne$otiabe issue.
2ecause of the continued im!asse, the union went on strike. 9he +ecretary of Labor and Em!oyment immediatey
assumed -urisdiction o"er the dis!ute to a"ert wides!read eectric !ower interru!tion in the country. %fter extensi"e
discussions and the fiin$ of !osition !a!ers .before the >ationa 5onciiation and #ediation 2oard and before the
+ecretary himsef/ on the "aidity of the union)s strike and on the wa$e and other economic issues .incudin$ the
retirement issue/, the ,&LE +ecretary rued on the "aidity of the strike and on the dis!uted 52% issues, and ordered
the !arties to execute a 52% based on his ruin$s.
,id the +ecretary of Labor exceed his -urisdiction when he !roceeded to rue on the !arties) 52% !ositions e"en
thou$h the !arties did not fuy ne$otiate on their own3 .:1/
<III.
%fter thirty .30/ years of ser"ice, 2eta 5om!any com!usoriy retired %bert at a$e 76 !ursuant to the com!any)s
?etirement 'an. %bert was duy !aid his fu retirement benefits of one .1/ month !ay for e"ery year of ser"ice under
the 'an. 9hereafter, out of com!assion, the com!any aowed %bert to continue workin$ and !aid him his od
monthy saary rate, but without the aowances that he used to en-oy.
%fter fi"e .6/ years under this arran$ement, the com!any finay se"ered a em!oyment reations with %bert* he was
decared fuy retired in a fittin$ ceremony but the com!any did not $i"e him any further retirement benefits. %bert
thou$ht this treatment unfair as he had rendered fu ser"ice at his usua hours in the !ast fi"e .6/ years. 9hus, he
fied a com!aint for the aowances that were not !aid to him, and for retirement benefits for his additiona fi"e .6/
workin$ years, based either on the com!any)s ?etirement 'an or the ?etirement 'ay Law, whiche"er is a!!icabe.
.%/ %fter %bert)s retirement at a$e 76, shoud he be considered a re$uar em!oyee entited to a his !re"ious
saaries and benefits when the com!any aowed him to continue workin$3 .01/
.2/ Is he entited to additiona retirement benefits for the additiona ser"ice he rendered after a$e 763 .01/
IE.
'abo works as a dri"er at the >ationa 9ire 5om!any .>95/. Fe is a member of the #aayan$ +amahan n$
#an$$a$awa sa >95, the excusi"e rank(and(fie coecti"e bar$ainin$ re!resentati"e in the com!any. 9he union has
a 52% with >95 which contains a union security and a check(off cause. 9he union security cause contains a
maintenance of membershi! !ro"ision that re8uires a members of the bar$ainin$ unit to maintain their membershi!
in $ood standin$ with the union durin$ the term of the 52% under !ain of dismissa. 9he check(off cause on the other
hand authoriCes the com!any to deduct from union members) saaries defined amounts of union dues and other fees.
'abo refused to issue an authoriCation to the com!any for the check(off of his dues, maintainin$ that he wi
!ersonay remit his dues to the union.
.%/ Boud the >95 mana$ement commit unfair abor !ractice if it desists from checkin$ off 'abo)s union dues for
ack of indi"idua authoriCation from 'abo3 .01/
.2/ 5an the union char$e 'abo with disoyaty for refusin$ to aow the check off of his union dues and, on this basis,
ask the com!any to dismiss him from em!oyment3 .01/
E.
Gor ten .10/ se!arate but consecuti"e yeary contracts, 5esar has been de!oyed as an abe(bodied seaman by
#eritt +hi!!in$, throu$h its oca a$ent, %ce #aritime +er"ices .a$ency/, in accordance with the 2000'hii!!ine
&"erseas Em!oyment %dministration +tandard Em!oyment 5ontract .2000 '&E%(+E5/. 5esar)s em!oyment was
aso co"ered by a 52% between the union, %#&+.J', and #eritt +hi!!in$. 2oth the 2000 '&E%(+E5 and the 52%
commony !ro"ide the same mode and !rocedures for caimin$ disabiity benefits. 5esar)s ast contract .for nine
months/ ex!ired on Juy 16, 2013.
5esar disembarked from the "esse #H< +e"en +eas on Juy 17, 2013as a seaman on @finished contractA. Fe
immediatey re!orted to the a$ency and com!ained that he had been ex!eriencin$ s!es of diCCiness, nausea,
$enera weakness, and difficuty in breathin$. 9he a$ency referred him to ,r. +aes, a cardio(!umonary s!eciaist,
who examined and treated him* ad"ised him to take a com!ete rest for a whie* $a"e him medications* and decared
him fit to resume work as a seaman.
%fter a month, 5esar went back to the a$ency to ask for re(de!oyment. 9he a$ency re-ected his a!!ication. 5esar
res!onded by demandin$ tota disabiity benefits based on the aiments that he de"eo!ed and suffered whie on
board #eritt +hi!!in$ "esses. 9he caim was based on the certification of his !hysician .internist ,r. ?eyes/ that he
coud no on$er undertake sea duties because of the hy!ertension and diabetes that afficted him whie ser"in$ on
#eritt +hi!!in$ "esses in the ast 10 years. ?e-ected once a$ain, 5esar fied a com!aint for ie$a dismissa and the
!ayment of tota !ermanent disabiity benefits a$ainst the a$ency and its !rinci!a.
%ssume that you are the Labor %rbiter decidin$ the case. Identify the facts and issues you woud consider materia in
reso"in$ the ie$a dismissa and disabiity com!aint. Ex!ain your choices and their materiaity, and reso"e the
case. .:1/
2013 Labor Law Exam #5Qs
ON OCTOBER 21, 2013
I2eow are the #uti!e 5hoice Questions asked in the 2013 2ar Exams in Labor Law. %nswers are hi$hi$hted.J
1. The parties to a labor dispute can validly submit to voluntary arbitration _________. (1%)
.%/ any dis!uted issue they may a$ree to "ountariy arbitrate
.2/ ony matters that do not fa within the excusi"e -urisdiction of the Labor %rbiter
.5/ any dis!uted issue but ony after conciiation at the >ationa 5onciiation and #ediation 2oard fais
.,/ any dis!uted issue !ro"ided that the Labor %rbiter has not assumed -urisdiction o"er the case on com!usory
arbitration
.E/ ony matters reatin$ to the inter!retation or im!ementation of a coecti"e bar$ainin$ a$reement
2. When there is no recognized collective bargaining agent, can a legitimate labor organization validly
declare a strie against the employer! (1%)
.%/ Kes, because the ri$ht to strike is $uaranteed by the 5onstitution and cannot be denied to any $rou! of
em!oyees.
.2/ >o, because ony an excusi"e bar$ainin$ a$ent may decare a strike a$ainst the em!oyer.
.5/ Kes, because the ri$ht to strike is a basic human ri$ht that the country)s internationa a$reements and the
Internationa Labor &r$aniCation reco$niCe.
.,/ Kes, but ony in case of unfair abor !ractice.
.E/ >o, in the absence of a reco$niCed bar$ainin$ a$ent, the workers) recourse is to fie a case before the
,e!artment of Labor and Em!oyment.
". #r. $el %armen, unsure i& his &oray into business (messengerial service catering purely to la' &irms) 'ould
succeed but intending to go long(term i& he hurdles the &irst year, opted to open his operations 'ith one(year
contracts 'ith t'o la' &irms although he also accepts messengerial service re)uests &rom other &irms as
their orders come. *e started 'ith one permanent secretary and si+ (,) messengers on a one(year, &i+ed(
term, contract.
-s the arrangement legal &rom the perspective o& labor standards! (1%)
.%/ >o, because the arran$ement wi circum"ent worker)s ri$ht to security of tenure.
.2/ >o. If aowed, the arran$ement wi ser"e as startin$ !oint in weakenin$ the security of tenure $uarantee.
.5/ Kes, if the messen$ers are hired throu$h a contractor.
.,/ Kes, because the business is tem!orary and the contracted undertakin$ is s!ecific and time(bound.
.E/ >o, because the fixed term !ro"ided is in"aid.
.. %hito 'as illegally dismissed by $/0 %orp. e&&ective at the close o& business hours o& $ecember 21, 2221.
..a. *e can &ile a complaint &or illegal dismissal 'ithout any legal bar 'ithin _________. (1%)
.%/ three .3/ years
.2/ four .0/ years
.5/ fi"e .6/ years
.,/ six .7/ years
.E/ ten .10/ years
..b. -& he has money claims against $/0 %orp., he can mae the claim 'ithout any legal bar 'ithin
_________. (1%)
.%/ three .3/ years
.2/ four .0/ years
.5/ fi"e .6/ years
.,/ six .7/ years
.E/ ten .10/ years
3. 4&ter vainly struggling to stay &inancially a&loat &or a year, 5#6 %orp. &inally gave up and closed do'n its
operations a&ter its ma7or creditors &iled a petition &or 5#68s insolvency and li)uidation.
-n this situation, 5#68s employees are entitled to _________ as separation pay. (1%)
.%/ one(haf month !ay for e"ery year of ser"ice
.2/ one month !ay for e"ery year of ser"ice
.5/ one(haf month !ay
.,/ one month !ay
.E/ no se!aration !ay at a
,. 4t age ,3 and a&ter 22 years o& se'ing 'or at home on a piece rate basis &or 9:; <arments, a
manu&acturer(e+porter to *ongong, 4ling 6ena decided it 'as time to retire and to 7ust tae it easy.
-s she entitled to retirement pay &rom 9:;! (1%)
.%/ Kes, but ony to one month !ay.
.2/ >o, because she was not a re$uar em!oyee.
.5/ Kes, at the same rate as re$uar em!oyees.
.,/ >o, because retirement !ay is deemed incuded in her contracted !er !iece !ay.
.E/ >o, because homeworkers are not entited to retirement !ay.
=. The minimum 'age prescribed by la' &or persons 'ith disability is __________. (1%)
.%/ 601 of the a!!icabe minimum wa$e
.2/ L61 of the a!!icabe minimum wa$e
.5/ 1001 of the a!!icabe minimum wa$e
.,/ the wa$e that the !arties a$ree u!on, de!endin$ on the ca!abiity of the disabed.
.E/ the wa$e that the !arties a$ree u!on, de!endin$ on the ca!abiity of the disabed, but not ess than 601 of the
a!!icabe minimum wa$e
>. What is the &inancial incentive, i& any, granted by la' to ?9: <arments 'hose cutters and se'ers in its
garments(&or(e+port operations are>2% sta&&ed by dea& and dea&(mute 'orers! (1%)
.%/ %dditiona deduction from its $ross income e8ui"aent to 261 of amount !aid as saaries to !ersons with disabiity.
.2/ %dditiona deduction from its $ross income e8ui"aent to 601 of the direct costs of the construction of faciities for
the use of !ersons with disabiity.
.5/ %dditiona deduction from its net taxabe income e8ui"aent to 61 of its tota !ayro
.,/ Exem!tion from rea !ro!erty tax for one .1/ year of the !ro!erty where faciities for !ersons with disabiity ha"e
been constructed.
.E/ 9he annua deduction under .%/, !us a one(time deduction under .2/.
1. #r. @rtanez has been in the building construction business &or several years. *e ass you, as his ne'
labor counsel, &or the rules he must observe in considering regular employment in the construction industry.
Aou clari&y that an employee, pro7ect or non(pro7ect, 'ill ac)uire regular status i& __________. (1%)
.%/ he has been continuousy em!oyed for more than one year
.2/ his contract of em!oyment has been re!eatedy renewed, from !ro-ect to !ro-ect, for se"era years
.5/ he !erforms work necessary and desirabe to the business, without a fixed !eriod and without reference to any
s!ecific !ro-ect or undertakin$
.,/ he has i"ed u! to the com!any)s re$uariCation standards
.E/ % of the abo"e.
12. ?amahang Tunay, a union o& ran(and(&ile employees lost in a certi&ication election at ?olam %ompany
and has become a minority union. The ma7ority union no' has a signed %B4 'ith the company and the
agreement contains a maintenance o& membership clause.
What can ?amahang Tunay still do 'ithin the company as a union considering that it still has members 'ho
continue to pro&ess continued loyalty to it! (1%)
.%/ It can sti re!resent these members in $rie"ance committee meetin$s.
.2/ It can coect a$ency fees from its members within the bar$ainin$ unit.
.5/ It can sti demand meetin$s with the com!any on com!any time.
.,/ %s a e$itimate abor or$aniCation, it can continue to re!resent its members on non(52%(reated matters.
.E/ >one of the abo"e.
.G/ % of the abo"e.
11. The members o& the administrative sta&& o& Ceta, a construction company, en7oy ten (12) days o& vacation
leave 'ith pay and ten (12) days o& sic leave 'ith pay, annually. The 'orers8 union, Buluran, demands
that Ceta grant its 'orers service incentive leave o& &ive (3) days in compliance 'ith the 5abor %ode.
-s the union demand meritorious! (1%)
.%/ Kes, because non(com!iance with the aw wi resut in the diminution of em!oyee benefits.
.2/ Kes, because ser"ice incenti"e ea"e is a benefit ex!ressy!ro"ided under and re8uired by the Labor 5ode.
.5/ >o, because Meta aready com!ies with the aw.
.,/ >o, because ser"ice incenti"e ea"e is a Labor 5ode benefit that does not a!!y in the construction industry.
.E/ Kes, because Labor 5ode benefits are se!arate from those "ountariy $ranted by the com!any.
12. Dpon the e+piration o& the &irst three (") years o& their %B4, the union and the company commenced
negotiations. The union demanded that the company continue to honor their "2(day union leave bene&it
under the %B4. The company re&used on the ground that the %B4 had already e+pired, and the union had
already consumed their union leave under the %B4.
Who is correct! (1%)
.%/ 9he com!any is correct because the 52% has ex!ired* hence it is no on$er bound to !ro"ide union ea"e.
.2/ 9he com!any is correct because the union has aready consumed the aotted union ea"e under the ex!ired
52%.
.5/ 9he union is correct because it is sti the bar$ainin$ re!resentati"e for the next two .2/ years.
.,/ 9he union is correct because union ea"es are !art of the economic terms that continue to $o"ern unti new terms
are a$reed u!on.
.E/ 9hey are both wron$.
1". *ector, a topnotch *uman ;esource ?pecialist 'ho had 'ored in multinational &irms both in the
9hilippines and overseas, 'as recruited by 4B% %orp., because o& his impressive credentials. -n the course
o& *ector8s employment, the company management &re)uently did not &ollo' his recommendations and he
&elt o&&ended by this constant rebu&&.
Thus, he toyed 'ith the idea o& resigning and o& asing &or the same separation pay that 4B% earlier granted
to t'o (2) department heads 'hen they le&t the company.
To obtain a legal opinion regarding his options, *ector sent an email to 4B%8s retained counsel, re)uesting
&or advice on 'hether the grant by the company o& separation pay to his resigned colleagues has already
ripened into a company practice, and 'hether he can similarly avail o& this bene&it i& he resigns &rom his 7ob.
4s the company8s retained legal counsel, ho' 'ill you respond to *ector! (1%)
.%/ I woud ad"ise him to write mana$ement directy and in8uire about the benefits he can ex!ect if he resi$ns.
.2/ I woud ad"ise him that the !re"ious $rant of se!aration !ay to his coea$ues cannot be considered a com!any
!ractice because se"era other em!oyees had resi$ned and were not $i"en se!aration !ay.
.5/ I woud ad"ise him to ask for se!aration !ay, not on account of com!any !ractice, but on the basis of
discrimination as he is simiary situated as the two resi$ned de!artment heads who were !aid their se!aration !ay.
.,/ I woud not $i"e him any e$a ad"ice because he is not my cient.
.E/ I woud maintain that his 8uestion in"o"es a !oicy matter beyond the com!etence of a e$a counse to $i"e.
1.. 4leta :uiros 'as a &aculty member at B# -nstitute, a private educational institution. ?he 'as hired on a
year(to(year basis under the probationary employment period provision o& the #anual o& ;egulations &or
9rivate ?chools. The terms and conditions o& her engagement 'ere de&ined under her rene'able yearly
contract.
0or reasons o& its o'n, B# -nstitute no longer 'anted to continue 'ith 4leta8s teaching services. Thus, a&ter
the contract &or her second year e+pired, B# -nstitute advised 4leta that her contract 'ould no longer be
rene'ed. This advice prompted 4leta to &ile a complaint &or illegal dismissal against B# -nstitute.
Will the complaint prosper! (1%)
.%/ Kes, because no -ust or authoriCed cause existed for the termination of her !robationary em!oyment.
.2/ Kes, because under the Labor 5ode, %eta became a re$uar em!oyee after 7 months and she may now ony be
dismissed for cause.
.5/ >o, because there was no dismissa to s!eak of. Fer em!oyment was automaticay terminated u!on the
ex!iration of her year(to(year fixed term em!oyment.
.,/ >o, because 2# Institute may dismiss its facuty members at wi in the exercise of its academic freedom.
.E/ >o, because %eta was sti on !robationary em!oyment.
13. ;obert, an employee o& 4B% %ompany, is married to Wanda. @ne day, Wanda visited the company o&&ice
'ith her three (") emaciated minor children, and narrated to the #anager that ;obert had been s)uandering
his earnings on his mistress, leaving only a paltry sum &or the support o& their children. Wanda tear&ully
pleaded 'ith the #anager to let her have one hal& o& ;obert8s pay every payday to ensure that her children
'ould at least have &ood on the table. To support her plea, Wanda presented a Easulatan signed by ;obert
giving her one hal& o& his salary, on the condition that she 'ould not complain i& he stayed 'ith his mistress
on 'eeends.
-& you 'ere the #anager, 'ould you release one hal& o& ;obert8s salary to Wanda! (1%)
.%/ >o, because an em!oyer is !rohibited from interferin$ with the freedom of its em!oyees to dis!ose of heir
wa$es.
.2/ Kes, because of ?obert)s si$ned authoriCation to $i"e Banda one haf of his saary.
.5/ >o, because there is no written authoriCation for %25 5om!any to reease ?obert)s saary to Banda.
.,/ Kes, because it is ?obert)s duty to financiay su!!ort his minor chidren.
.E/ >o, because ?obert)s Dasuatan is based on an ie$a consideration and is of doubtfu e$a "aidity.
1,. ;icardo operated a success&ul #aati sea&ood restaurant patronized by a large clientele base &or its
superb cuisine and impeccable service. ;icardo charged its clients a 12% service charge and distributed
>3% o& the collection e)ually among its ran(and(&ile employees, 12% among managerial employees, and 3%
as reserve &or losses and brea ages. Because o& the huge volume o& sales, the employees received sizeable
shares in the collected service charges.
4s part o& his business development e&&orts, ;icardo opened a branch in %ebu 'here he maintained the
same practice in the collection and distribution o& service charges. The %ebu branch, ho'ever, did not
attract the &orecasted clienteleF hence, the %ebu employees received lesser service charge bene&its than
those en7oyed by the #aati(based employees. 4s a result, the %ebu branch employees demanded
e)ualization o& bene&its and &iled a case 'ith the 65;% &or discrimination 'hen ;icardo re&used their
demand.
1,.a. Will the case prosper! (1%)
.%/ Kes, because the em!oyees are not recei"in$ e8ua treatment in the distribution of ser"ice char$e benefits.
.2/ Kes, because the aw !ro"ides that the :61 em!oyees) share in the ser"ice char$e coection shoud be e8uay
di"ided amon$ a the em!oyees, in this case, amon$ the 5ebu and #akati em!oyees aike.
.5/ >o, because the em!oyees in #akati are not simiary situated as the 5ebu em!oyees with res!ect to cost of
i"in$ and conditions of work.
.,/ >o, because the ser"ice char$e benefit attaches to the outet where ser"ice char$es are earned and shoud be
distributed excusi"ey amon$ the em!oyees !ro"idin$ ser"ice in the outet.
.E/ >o, because the market and the cientee the two branches are ser"in$, are different.
1,.b. -n order to improve the %ebu service and sales, ;icardo decided to assign some o& its #aati(based
employees to %ebu to train %ebu employees and e+pose them to the #aati standard o& service. 4 che& and
three 'aiters 'ere assigned to %ebu &or the tas. While in %ebu, the assigned personnel shared in the %ebu
service charge collection and thus received service charge bene&its lesser than 'hat they 'ere receiving in
#aati.
-& you 'ere the la'yer &or the assigned personnel, 'hat 'ould you advice them to do! (1%)
.%/ I woud ad"ise them to fie a com!aint for unawfu diminution of ser"ice char$e benefits and for !ayment of
differentias.
.2/ I woud ad"ise them to fie a com!aint for ie$a transfer because work in 5ebu is hi$hy !re-udicia to them in
terms of con"enience and ser"ice char$e benefits.
.5/ I woud ad"ise them to fie a com!aint for discrimination in the $rant of ser"ice char$e benefits.
.,/ I woud ad"ise them to acce!t their 5ebu trainin$ assi$nment as an exercise of the com!any)s mana$ement
!rero$ati"e.
.E/ I woud ad"ise them to demand the continuation of their #akati(based benefits and to fie a com!aint under
.2/abo"e if the demand is not heeded.
1=. %onstant Builders, an independent contractor, 'as charged 'ith illegal dismissal and non(payment o&
'ages and bene&its o& ten dismissed employees. The complainants impleaded as co(respondent 4ble
%ompany, %onstant Builder8s principal in the construction o& 4ble8s o&&ice building. The complaint demanded
that %onstant and 4ble be held solidarily liable &or the payment o& their bac'ages, separation pay, and all
their unpaid 'ages and bene&its.
-& the 5abor 4rbiter rules in &avor o& the complainants, choose the statement that best describes the e+tent o&
the liabilities o& %onstant and 4ble. (1%)
.%/ 5onstant and %be shoud be hed soidariy iabe for the un!aid wa$es and benefits, as we as backwa$es and
se!aration !ay, based on %rtice 10; of the Labor 5ode which !ro"ides that @e"ery em!oyer or indirect em!oyer
sha be hed res!onsibe with his contractor or subcontractor for any "ioation of any !ro"ision of this 5ode.A
.2/ 5onstant and %be shoud be hed soidariy iabe for the un!aid wa$es and benefits, and shoud order 5onstant,
as the workers) direct em!oyer, to be soey iabe for the backwa$es and se!aration !ay.
.5/ 5onstant and %be shoud be hed soidariy iabe for the un!aid wa$es and benefits and the backwa$es since
these !ertain to abor standard benefits for which the em!oyer and contractor are iabe under the aw, whie
5onstant aone N as the actua em!oyer N shoud be ordered to !ay the se!aration !ay.
.,/ 5onstant and %be shoud be hed soidariy iabe for the un!aid wa$es and benefits, and 5onstant shoud be
hed iabe for their backwa$es and se!aration !ay uness %be is shown to ha"e !artici!ated with maice or bad faith
in the workers) dismissa, in which case both shoud be hed soidariy iabe.
.E/ 9he abo"e statements are a inaccurate.
1>. The 9inagbulod union &iled a 9etition &or %erti&ication /lection, alleging that it 'as a legitimate labor
organization o& the ran(and(&ile employees o& $elta %ompany. @n $elta8s motion, the #ed 4rbiter dismissed
the 9etition, based on the &inding that 9inagbulod 'as not a legitimate labor union and had no legal
personality to &ile a 9etition &or %erti&ication /lection because its membership 'as a mi+ture o& ran(and(&ile
and supervisory employees.
-s the dismissal o& the 9etition &or %erti&ication /lection by the #ed(4rbiter proper! (1%)
.%/ Kes, because %rtice 206 of the Labor 5ode !rohibits su!er"isory em!oyees from -oinin$ the union of he rank
and fie em!oyees and !ro"ides that a union re!resentin$ both rank and fie and su!er"isory em!oyees as members
is not a e$itimate abor or$aniCation.
.2/ >o, because the $rounds for the dismissa of a !etition for certification eection do not incude mixed membershi!
in one union.
.5/ >o, because a fina order of canceation of union re$istration is re8uired before a !etition for certification eection
may be dismissed on the $round of ack of e$a !ersonaity of the union.
.,/ >o, because ,eta 5om!any did not ha"e the e$a !ersonaity to !artici!ate in the certification eection
!roceedin$s and to fie a motion to dismiss based on the e$itimacy status of the !etitionin$ union.