Sie sind auf Seite 1von 20

URDANETA CITY UNIVERSITY GRADING SYSTEM:

COLLEGE OF LAW QUIZZES 20%


COURSE SYLLABUS IN LABOR LAW REVIEW RECITATION 30%
3 units or 45 hours of EXAMINATION 40%
Discussion, Recitation & Quizzes ATTENDANCE 10%

I
INTRODUCTION TO LABOR STANDARDS

1. General Provisions
A. An Overview of the Labor Code
a. Important Definitions and Distinctions: Labor, Labor Standard Laws,
Labor Relations Law and Social Legislation
B. Declaration of Basic Policy
a. Constitutional Provisions
b. Social Justice
 Calalang vs. Williams 70 Phil 726
 C. Alcantara and Sons vs. CA, et al, September 29, 2010)
C. Construction in Favor of Labor
a. MERALCO vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 78763, July 12, 1989
b. Colgate Palmolive Philippines vs. Ople, G.R. No. 73681, June 30, 1988
c. Insular Hotel Employees Union vs. Water Front, September 22, 2010
d. Sanchez vs. Harry Lyons Construction, October 19, 1950
e. Philippine National Construction Corporation vs. NLRC, August 11, 1997
D. Management Rights
a. San Miguel Brewery Sales vs. Ople, February 8, 1989
E. Effectivity of Rules and Regulations
a. Philsa International Placement, April 4, 2001
b. PASEI vs. Drilon, June 30, 1988
c. CBTC Employees Union vs. Clave January 7, 1986
F. Applicability of the Labor Code
a. Juco vs. NLRC, August 18, 1997

II
PRE-EMPLOYMENT

1. Recruitment and Placement


A. Read: (2002 POEA Rules and Regulations Governing Land-based Overseas
Workers)
B. Definition of Recruitment

1|Page
a. People vs. Panis, July 11, 1986
C. Elements
a. People vs. Goce, August 29, 1995
D. Illegal Recruitment
a. Definition under the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995
as amended by Republic Act No. 10022
b. Qualifying Circumstances
c. Venue for filing
d. Consequences of Conviction
 People vs. Turda, July 6, 1994
 People vs. Saley 291 SCRA 715
 People vs. Cabais, March 16, 2001
 Salazar vs. Achacoso, March 14, 1990
2. License and Authority
A. Distinctions
B. Non-Transferability
C. Duration
D. Requirement for Bond
a. Finman General Assurance vs. Innocencio, November 15, 1989
E. Private Recruitment
a. Qualifications and Disqualifications
F. Ban on Direct Hiring; Exceptions (Article 18)
3. Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA)
A. Principal Functions
B. Regulatory Functions
a. Suspension or cancellation of license (Part VI, Rule IV – 2002 POEA
Rules and Regulations Governing Land-based Overseas Workers)
 Transaction Overseas vs. Secretary of Labor, September 5, 1997
b. Fees to be paid by workers under Article 32 (Part II, Rule V – 2002 POEA
Rules and Regulations Governing Land-based Overseas Workers)
 Eastern Assurance and Surety Corp. vs. Secretary of Labor,
January 17, 1990
C. Adjudicatory Functions
a. Pacific Asia Overseas Shipping Corporation vs. NLRC, May 6, 1988
b. Mckenzie, et al. vs. Cui, February 6, 1989
c. Del Rosario vs. NLRC, et al., July 24, 1990
d. JMM Promotions and Management vs. NLRC et al., November 22 ,1993
e. ACTI Overseas Corporation vs. Josefina Echin, October 11, 2010
4. Overseas employment Contracts
A. Important Definitions under Rule II, Part I of the POEA Rules & Regulations
a. Chavez vs. Bonto-Perez, March 1, 1995

2|Page
b. Virjen Shipping and Marine Services vs. NLRC 125 SCRA 577 (1983)
c. Suzara vs. Benipayo, August 1, 1989
d. Seagull vs. Balatongan, February 28, 1989
B. Nature of Overseas Employment Contract of Seafarers
a. Edgardo Panganiban vs. Tara Trading Ship Management, October 18,
2010
b. Millares and Lagda vs. NLRC, July 29, 2002
5. Termination of Overseas Employment Contract
A. Premature Termination of Contract
a. Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042
b. Serrano vs. Gallant Maritime Services Inc. March 24, 2009
B. Compensation for Death and other Benefits
a. Lapid vs. NLRC, April 29, 1999
b. Interorient vs. NLRC September 16, 1996
c. More Maritime Agencies vs. NLRC, November 19, 1999
d. Seagull vs. NLRC, June 8, 2000
e. NFD International Manning Agents vs. NLRC, January 16, 1998
6. Mandatory Remittance of Foreign Exchange Earnings
7. Employment of Non-Resident Aliens
A. Requisites for employment of Non-Resident Aliens
B. Employment of Resident Aliens
a. Almodiel vs. NLRC, June 14, 1993
b. General Milling Corporation vs. Torres, April 22, 1991
C. Exemptions from Permit requirement
a. DO No. 75-06, May 31, 2006
D. Validity and consequence for non-compliance
E. Rule on Nationalized Business and Other Prohibitions

III
CONCEPT OF EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP

1. Terminologies and Basic Principles


A. Chua vs. NLRC, February 15, 1990
B. Yokohoma Inc. vs. Yokohoma Union, December 10, 2007
C. Paguio vs. NLRC, May 9, 2003
D. Pepsi Cola Distributors vs. Gal-lang, September 24, 1991
2. Elements of Employer-Employee Relationship
A. Brotherhood Labor Unity Movement vs. Zamora, January 7, 1987
B. Sevilla vs. Court of Appeals, April 16, 1988
C. Dy Keh Beng vs. International Labor, May 25, 1979
D. Sonza vs. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation, June 10, 2004

3|Page
3. Illustrative Cases as to the existence of employer-employee relationship
A. Insurance Agents
a. Grepalife vs. Judicio, December 21. 1989
b. Insular Life vs. NLRC, November 15, 1989
B. School Teachers
a. Feati University vs. Bautista, December 27, 1966
b. Magi’s Young Achievers vs. Manalo, February 13, 2009
C. Barbers
a. Corporal vs. NLRC, October 2, 2000
D. Jeepney Drivers
a. Citizen’s League of Free Workers vs. Abbas, September 23, 1966
b. Jardin et al vs. NLRC, 326 SCRA 299, February 23, 2000
E. In-house lawyers as distinguished from outside retainers
a. Hydro Resources vs. Pagalilauan, 172 SCRA 399, April 18, 1989
b. Air Material Wing Services and Loan Association vs. NLRC, June 30,
1994
F. Piece-rate workers
a. Makati Haberdashery vs. NLRC, 179 SCRA 448 (1989)
b. Labor Congress vs. NLRC, May 21, 1998
G. Musicians in movie projects
a. LVN Pictures vs. Philippine Musicians Guild, 1 SCRA 132 (1961)
H. Farm workers of sugar central
a. Victorias Milling Co. vs. NLRC, 262 SCRA 623, October 2, 1996
I. Shoe shine boys
a. Besa vs. Trajano, 146 SCRA 501 (1986)
4. Other illustrative cases
A. Sy vs. CA, February 27, 2003
B. Orlando vs. NLRC November 25, 1998
C. Filipinas Broadcasting Network vs. NLRC March 11, 1998
D. Continental Marble vs. NLRC May 9, 1988
E. Ruga et al. vs. NLRC, January 22, 1990
F. MAM Realty Development vs. NLRC, June 2, 1995

IV
LEGITIMATE LABOR CONTRACT AND LABOR-ONLY CONTRACT

1. Preliminary Matters
A. Manila Water vs. Dalumpines et al., October 2, 2010
B. Babas vs. Lorenzo Shipping Corporation, December 15, 2010
C. Spic n Span Services vs. Paje, August 25, 2010
2. Trilateral Relationship Created

4|Page
A. Rosewood Processing Incorporated vs. NLRC, May 21, 1998
B. MERALCO vs. NLRC, March 14, 2008
3. Distinctions and other forms of Prohibited Labor Contracting
4. Elements of Legitimate Labor Contracting and Labor-Only C ontracting
A. Oregas vs. NLRC, July 21, 2008
B. Ushio Marketing vs. NLRC, August 28, 1998
5. Illustrative Cases
A. Tabas et al. vs. California Manufacturing Company, January 26, 1989
B. Escario vs. NLRC , June 8, 2000
C. Neri vs. NLRC, July 23, 1993
D. Rhone-Poulenc vs. NLRC, January 19, 1993
E. Mafinco vs. Ople, March 25, 1976
F. PAL vs. Ligan, February 29, 2008
6. Posting of Bond
A. Baguio vs. NLRC, October 4, 1991

V
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

1. National Manpower Development Program and TESDA


A. Objectives
B. Manpower and Entrepreneurship
2. Apprentices
A. Definition of Terms
B. Qualifications of Apprentices
C. Requisites for a valid Apprenticeship
a. Nitto Enterprises vs. NLRC, September 29, 1995
b. Holiday Inn vs. NLRC, September 14, 1993
D. Apprentices without compensation
a. Filamer Christian Institute vs. IAC, August 17, 1992
E. Remedies in case of violation of Apprenticeship Agreement
3. Learners
A. Definition of Terms
B. Conditions for hiring Learners
C. Distinctions Between Apprentices and Learners
4. Handicapped Workers
A. Definition
B. When Employable
C. Incentives and Employment Agreement
D. Eligibility for Regular Employment
a. Bernardo et al. vs. NLRC, July 12, 1999

5|Page
VI
WORKING CONDITIONS FOR SPECIAL GROUP OF EMPLOYEES

1. Employment of Women
A. Nightwork Prohibitions and its exceptions
B. Discrimination
C. Stipulations against Marriage
a. Star Paper Corporation vs. Simbol, April 12, 2006
b. Duncan vs. Glaxo, September 17, 2004
c. PT&T vs. NLRC, May 23, 1997
d. Evelyn Chua Qua vs. Clave, August 30, 1990
e. Olympia Gualberto et al. vs. Marinduque Mining, June 28, 1978
D. Anti Sexual Harassment Act or RA 7877
2. Employment of Minors
A. Minimum Employable age and its Exceptions
B. Hours of Work of a Working Child
3. Employment of Househelpers
A. Definition and Illustrations
a. Apex Mining vs. NLRC, April 22, 1991
b. Cunjao vs. Chua Lo Tan, September 29, 1962
B. Minimum Wage
C. Benefits accorded to Househelpers
a. Article 1689-1699 of the New Civil Code
D. Termination and reliefs for Unjust Termination

VII
WORKING CONDITIONS AND REST PERIODS

1. Coverage of Title 1, Book III of the Labor Code


A. Government Employees
a. National Service Corporation vs. NLRC, November 29, 1988
b. Luzon vs. Association of Luzon, October 6, 1995
c. Republic vs. CA, December 20, 1989
B. Managerial Employees
a. Villuga vs. NLRC, August 23, 1993
b. National Sugar vs. NLRC, March 24, 1993
C. Field Personnel
a. Union of Filipro Employees vs. Vivar Jr., January 20, 1992
b. San Miguel vs. Democratic Labor Organization, July 31, 1963
c. Mercidar Fishing Corporation vs. NLRC, October 8, 1998

6|Page
d. Autobus Transport System vs. Bautista, May 16, 2005
D. Employer’s Family members
E. Domestic Helpers
F. Workers paid by results
a. Lara vs. Del Rosario, April 20, 1954
2. Hours of Work
A. Normal Hours of Work and Rationale
a. Manila Terminal vs. CIR, et al., July 16, 1952
B. Inclusions and Principles
a. Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Rule I, Book III of the Implementing Rules
C. Other cases
a. Work hours of Health Personnel
 San Juan De Dios Hospital Employees Association vs. NLRC,
November 28, 1997
b. Teachers during semestral break
 University of Pangasinan Faculty Union vs. University of Pangasinan,
February 20, 1984
c. Work hours of Seafarers
 Stolt-Nielsen vs. NLRC, July 11, 1996
3. Meal Periods and Rest Periods
A. PAL vs. NLRC, February 2, 1999
B. National Development Corporation vs. National Textile, November 30, 1962
C. Sime Darby vs. NLRC, April 15, 1998
4. Night Shift Differential
A. Shell Company vs. National Labor Union, July 26, 1948
B. Mercury Drug vs. Dayao, September 30, 1982
5. Overtime Pay
A. PNB vs. PNB Employees Association, July 30, 1982
B. Bisig ng Manggagawa vs. Phil. Refining Co., Inc., September 30, 1981
C. Damasco vs. NLRC, December 4, 2000
D. Reotan vs. National Rice and Corn Corporation, February 27, 1962
E. MERALCO Workers Union vs. Manila Electric Company, May 29, 1959
F. Naric vs. Naric Wokers Union, May 29, 1959
6. Weekly Rest Periods and Special Days
7. Holidays
A. Jose Rizal vs. NLRC, December 1, 1987
B. Revisit: CBTC Employees Union vs. Clave January 7, 1986
C. Wellington Investment vs. Trajano, July 3, 1995
8. Computation Guides and Samples

7|Page
VIII
LEAVES

1. Leaves:
A. Service Incentive Leave (Article 95, Labor Code)
B. Sick Leave and Vacation Leave
C. Solo Parent Leave (R.A. 8972)
D. Maternity Leave (R.A. No. 8282)
E. Paternity Leave (R.A. No. 8187)
F. Leave for Victims of Violence against Women and their Children (RA 9262)
G. Special Leave for Women (RA 9710)
H. Cases:
a. Murillo vs. Sun valley, June 30, 1988
b. Republic Planters Bank vs. NLRC, January 6, 1997
c. Cuajao vs. Cua Lo Tan, September 29, 1962
d. Davao integrated vs. Abarquez, March 19, 1993
e. Singapore Airlines Local Employees Association vs. NLRC, et al, July 16,
1984

IX
WAGES

1. Remuneration or Earnings
A. Definitions and Distinctions
a. Gaa vs. CA, December 3, 1985
b. Republic vs. NLRC, Jauary 6, 1997
B. Bonus
a. Producers Bank vs. NLRC, March 28, 2001
b. Marcos vs. NLRC, September 8, 1995
c. Traders Royal Bank vs. NLRC, August 30, 1990
C. 13th Month Pay
a. National Federation of Sugar Workers vs. Orejera, 114 SCRA 354 (1982)
b. Universal Corn vs. NLRC, August 21, 1987
c. Deutsch Manufacturing vs. NLRC, April 19, 1989
d. Kamaya vs. NLRC, August 31, 1989
D. Productivity Incentives under RA 6971
2. Capable of being expressed in terms of money
A. Payment by Legal Tender under Article 102 of the Labor Code
a. Congson vs. NLRC, April 5, 1995
B. Exceptions to payment by Legal Tender
a. National Federation of Labor vs. CA, October 19, 2004

8|Page
C. Time of Payment of wages under Article 103 of the Labor Code
D. Place of Payment under of wages Article 104 of the Labor Code
E. Direct Payment of wages under Article 105 of the Labor Code
3. Whether fixed or ascertained on a time, task, piece or commission basis or
other method of computing the same
A. Service Charges under Article 96 of the Labor Code
a. Maranaw Hotels and Resort Corporation vs. NLRC, February 23, 1999
B. Piece Rate Workers under Article 103 of the Labor Code
C. Commissions
a. Songco vs. NLRC, March 23, 1990
b. Soriano vs. NLRC, 155 SCRA 124
c. Philippine Duplicators Inc. vs. NLRC, February 15, 1995
d. Boie Takeda Chemicals vs. Dela Serna, December 10, 1993
4. Under a written and unwritten contract of employment for work done or to be
done or for services rendered or to be rendered
A. Fair Day’s wage for a fair day’s labor
a. Aklan Electric Coop. vs. NLRC, January 25, 2000
B. Equal Pay for Equal Work
a. International School Alliance of Educators vs. Quisimbing, June 1, 2000
C. Rule on Worker’s preference in case of bankruptcy under Article 110 of the
Labor Code
a. PCIB vs. NAMAWU-MIF, August 19, 1982
b. DBP vs. Santos, March 8, 1989
c. Barrayoga vs. Asset Privatization Fund, October 24, 2005
d. DBP vs. NLRC, January 9, 1994
e. Rubberworld Inc. vs. NLRC, July 26, 2000
5. Includes the fair and reasonable values as determined by the Secretary of
Labor, of board, lodging or other facilities customarily furnished by the
employer to the employee.
A. Facilities distinguished from Supplements
a. State Maritime vs. Cebu Seaman’s Association, February 28, 1963
b. Mabeza vs. NLRC, April 18, 1997
c. Atok Big Wedge, 97 Phil 294

X
MINIMUM WAGE, PROHIBITIONS REGARDING WAGES,
WAGE FIXING AND WAGE DISTORTIONS.

1. Minimum Wage
A. Concept of Minimum Wage
a. Del Rancho vs. Ilagan January 2, 1968

9|Page
b. Manila Fashions vs. NLRC, November 13, 1996
B. Applicability and Exemptions
2. Prohibitions regarding Wages
A. Non-Diminution Rule under Article 100 of the Labor Code
a. National Sugar Refineries Corporation vs. NLRC, March 24, 1993
b. Globe Mackay Cable vs. NLRC, June 29, 1988
B. Non-interference in disposal of wages under Article 112 of the Labor Code
C. Unauthorized wage deductions under Article 113 of the Labor Code
D. Unauthorized deposits for loss or damages under Articles 114 and 115 of
the Labor Code
a. Five J Taxi, etc vs. NLRC, August 22, 1994
E. Prohibited Withholding of Wages and Kickbacks under Article 116 of the
Labor Code
F. Deduction to ensure employment under Article 117 of the Labor Code
G. Retaliatory Measures under Article 118 of the Labor Code
3. Wage fixing
A. Wage Orders
B. Criteria for minimum wage fixing
C. Procedure for wage fixing
a. Cagayan Sugar Milling Co. vs. Secretary of Labor, January 15, 1998
b. Nasipit Lumber Co. vs. NWPC, et al., April 27, 1998
D. Frequency of a Wage Order
E. Penalty for Violation
4. Wage Distortion
A. Elements of Wage Distortion
a. Alliance Trade Unions vs. NLRC, February 17, 2004
b. Prubankers Association vs. Prudential Bank, January 25, 1999
B. Distortion Adjustment Formula
a. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company Employees Union vs. NLRC,
September 10, 1993
C. Procedure for correction of a wage distortion
D. Wage Distortion as a ground for strike
a. Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa vs. NLRC, June 27, 1991

XI
HEALTH SAFETY AND SOCIAL WELFARE BENEFITS

1. Medical Dental and Occupational Safety


2. Employees’ Compensation and State Insurance Fund
A. Jose Sarmiento vs. Employees’ Compensation Commission, May 11, 1998
B. Lazo vs. Employees’ Compensation Commission, June 18, 1990

10 | P a g e
3. Workmen’s Compensation Act vs. Employees Compensation Law
A. Tan Tiu Te vs. WCC, August 30, 1958
4. Important Definitions and Principles
A. Castor Garupa vs. Employees’ Compensation Commission, April 12, 2006
B. Panotes vs. ECC 138 SCRA 595 (1985)
C. Nazaro vs. Employees Compensation Commission, February 6, 1990
D. Limbo vs. ECC, July 30, 2002
E. Raro vs. ECC, Aril 27, 1989
F. Orate vs. CA, March 26, 2003
5. Coverage of Liability
A. Belarmino vs. ECC, May 11, 1990
B. Hinoguin vs. ECC, April 17, 1989
C. Valeriano vs. ECC, June 8, 2000
D. Iloilo Dock and Engineering vs. WCC, November 27, 1978
E. Alano vs. ECC, March 16, 1988
F. Lazo vs. ECC, june 18, 1990
6. Limitations on Liability
A. Intoxication
a. Yohanon vs. WCC, August 26, 1977
B. Self-inflicted Injuries and Suicides
a. NAESS Shipping Phil. vs. NLRC, September 4, 1987
b. Mabuhay Shipping Services vs. NLRC, January 21, 1991
c. Lentejos vs. ECC, May 14, 1991
C. Notorious Negligence
a. Solidum vs. GSIS, November 23, 1988
b. Quizon vs. GSIS, October 26, 1987
D. Other Limitations provided by the Labor Code
7. Liability of Third Parties
A. Alba vs. Bulaong 101 Phil 434
8. Disability Benefits
A. Temporary Total Disability
a. Vicente vs. ECC, January 23, 1991
B. Permanent Total Disability
a. Orlino vs. ECC, March 29, 1990
C. Permanent partial Disability
a. GSIS vs. CA, January 29, 1998
9. Death benefits
A. Akmad vs. GSIS, May 9, 1990
B. Manuzon vs. ECC, June 25, 1990
10. Common Provisions
A. ECC vs. Sanico, December 17, 1999

11 | P a g e
B. Philippine International Shipping , May 27, 1985
C. Principe vs. Philippine-Singapore Transport Services, August 16, 1989
D. Siliman University vs. L. Benarao, February 26, 1990

XII
Introduction to Labor Relations

1. Policy Declaration
2. Constitutional Provisions relating to Labor Relations
3. Definition of Terms
4. Typologies of Labor Relations Dispute
5. An Overview of Remedies in Labor Disputes

XIII
The National Labor Relations Commission

1. Creation and Composition


 Appointments not subject to COA confirmation (Calderon vs.
Carale, April 23, 1992)
 Non-Applicability of Barangay Conciliation in Labor Cases
(Montoya vs. Escayo, March 21, 1989)
2. Powers and Duties
a. Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters and the Commission
 Rodriguez vs. Aguilar, August 30, 2005
 Radio Communications vs. CA, April 26, 2006
 Yusen Air vs. Villamor, August 16, 2005
 Spouses Rodrigo vs. Platon, August 31, 2005
b. Powers of the Commission
c. Technical Rules not Binding and prior resort to Amicable Settlement
 Grand Placement & General Services Corp. vs. CA, January 31,
2006
d. Allowed Appearances and limitations in Attorney’s fees.
3. Appeal
a. Grounds
b. Periods of Appeal
c. Requisites for Perfection

12 | P a g e
d. Execution pending Appeal; actual reinstatement vs. payroll
reinstatement
 Pioneer Texturizing Co. vs. NLRC, October 16, 1997
 PT&T vs. NLRC March 21, 1990
 Rosewood Processing Inc. vs. NLRC May 21, 1998
 Star Angel Handicraft vs. NLRC September 20, 1994
 Yupangco Cotton Mills January 16, 2002
 Tanongon vs. Samson May 9, 2002
e. Rules of Judicial Review
f. Execution of Decisions, Order or Awards

XIV
The Bureau of Labor Relations

1. Jurisdiction
2. Inter-Union Disputes vs. Intra-Union Disputes
3. Functions of the Bureau of Labor Relations; Remedies and Procedures
4. Formal Requirements of a valid Compromise
 UFW vs. NLRC, March 23, 1992
 Veloso and Liguaton vs. DOLE, August 5, 1991
 Jag and Haggar Jeans vs. NLRC, February 23, 1995
 Labor et al. vs. NLRC, September 14, 1995
 Morales et al. vs. NLRC, February 6, 1995

XV
The Labor Organizations

1. Classification
2. Registration Requirements
3. Grounds for Cancellation
4. Union Registration & Cancellation
 La Suerte Cigar & Cigarette Factory, 123 SCRA 679
 Johnson & Johnson Labor Union, February 21, 1989
 Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng MAynila, February 21, 1995
 Adamson & Adamson, 127 SCRA 268
 People’s Industrial and Commercial Employees, March 15, 1982
 Taduay Distillery, 149 SCRA 470

13 | P a g e
 Volkschel Labor Union, 137 SCRA 42
 Philippine Skylanders Incorporated, January 31, 2002
 Villar, April 20 ,1983
 Elisco-Elirol Labor Union, December 29, 1977
 Associated Workers Union, July 30, 1990
 Philippine Association of free Labor Unions, February 27, 1969
 Abbot Laboratories, January 26, 2000
 Progressive Development Corporation, February 4, 1992
 Toyota Motors, February 19, 1997
5. Rights and Conditions of Membership in a Labor Organization
 UST Faculty Union, November 16, 1999
 Verceles, Februay 15, 2005
 Vengco, May 5, 1989
 Palacol, February 26, 1990
6. Rights of Legitimate Labor Organizations
 La Carlota, May 19, 1975
 Heirs of Cruz 30 SCRA 917
 Golden Donuts, January 19, 2000
 Me-Shurn Corporation, January 11, 2005

XVI
Coverage of Employees’ rights to Self-Organization
(6 HOURS)
1. Persons not granted the right to Self-Organization
 ICMC vs. Calleja, September 28, 1990
 Metrolab Industries vs. Confesor February 28, 1996
 Benguet Elec. Coop vs. Ferrer-Calleja, December 29, 1989
 NEECO Employees’ Association vs. NLRC, January 24, 2000
 Rosario Bros. Vs. Ople, July 31, 1984
 SSSEA vs. CA, July 28, 1989
2. Ineligibility and limitations to the right to join assist or form labor
organizations.
 Toyota Motor vs. Toyota, February 19, 1997
 Atlas Lithographic vs. Laguesma, January 6, 1992
 De La Salle vs. Laguesma, August 12, 1998
 United Pepsi Cola vs. Laguesma, March 25, 1998

14 | P a g e
XVII
Unfair Labor Practices

1. Unfair Labor Practices of Employers


a. Interference; Totality of Conduct Doctrine
 East Asiatic, 16 SCRA 820
 Manila pencil, 14 SCRA 953
 Cruz vs. PAFLU, October 29, 1971
b. Yellow Dog Condition or Yellow Dog Contract
c. Contracting Out; Runaway Shop
 Complex Electronics Employees Association, July 19, 1999
d. Company Domination of Union; Boulwarism
 Philippine American Cigar, 7 SCRA 375
e. Discrimination
f. Discrimination because of Testimony
g. Violation of duty to Bargain
h. Paid Negotiation
i. Violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement
2. Exceptions
a. Closed Shop Agreement
 National Brewery 8 SCRA 805
b. Union Shop Agreement
 Manalang, 21 SCRA 561
c. Maintenance of Membership Shop Agreement
d. Preferential Shop Agreement
e. Agency Shop Agreement
3. Unfair Labor Practices of Labor Organizations
a. Interference
 Manila Mandarin Employees 154 SCRA 369
b. Discrimination
c. Refusal to Bargain
d. Unreasonable exactions; Featherbedding
e. Unacceptable negotiations; Sweetheart Contract
f. Gross Violations of the Collective Bargaining Agreement

15 | P a g e
XVIII
Collective Bargaining and Agreement Administration;
Grievance Machinery and Voluntary Arbitration

1. Procedure in Collective Bargaining


a. Jurisdictional pre-conditions and procedure
 Kiok-Loy vs. NLRC, January 22, 1986
b. Collective Bargaining, Collective Bargaining Agreement; Zipper Clause
and Mandatory Provisions
c. Stages of Negotiation
2. The Duty to Bargain Collectively
a. Existence and non-existence of CBA; variations
 Republic Savings Bank vs. CA, September 27, 1967
b. Duration of the CBA, Automatic Renewal Clause and the 60-day
Freedom Period
 Manila Electric, February 22, 2000
 New Pacific Timber, March 17, 2000
 Rivera et al., January 23, 2002
c. Exclusive Bargaining Representation & Labor Management Councils
 Democratic Labor, February 28, 1958
 Philtranco Service, June 28, 1989
 Diatagon Labor, 101 SCRA 534
3. Definitions and Distinctions of Grievance machinery, Voluntary
Arbitration, Mediation and Court actions.
4. Jurisdiction of Voluntary Arbitrators
A. San Miguel Corporation vs. NLRC, March 15, 1996
B. Luzon Development Bank, October 6, 1995

XIX
Methods to Determine Bargaining Unit

1. Election bars, grounds for dismissal and procedures


A. Me-Shurn Corporation, January 11, 2005
B. Nestle Philippines 209 SCRA 834
C. Cruzvale 238 SCRA 389
D. La Suerte Cigar 123 SCRA 674

16 | P a g e
E. California Manufacturing Corporation 209 SCRA 606
F. Timbungco 183 SCRA 140
G. R Transport Corp, November 16, 1993
H. UST Faculty Union, November 16, 1999
2. Direct Certification
3. Consent Election
4. Voluntary Recognition; effect and procedure
5. Petition for Certification Election
6. Run-Off Election

XX
STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS

1. Typologies and Forms


2. Grounds for Declaration of Strike
3. Tests in Determining the Legality of Strike
A. Bangalisan, et al., July 31, 1997
B. Gold City vs. NLRC, July 6, 1995
C. National Federation vs. Ovejera, May 31, 1982
D. San Miguel Corporation, March 2, 1999
E. Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa, June 27 ,1991
F. Interphil, December 19, 2001
G. San Miguel Corporation, GR No. 119293, June 10, 2003
H. Union of Filipro Employees, December 19, 1990
I. Zamboanga Wood Products, October 13, 1989
J. St. Scholastica’s College, June 29, 1992
K. Allied Banking Corporation, July 12, 1996
L. Philippine Metal Foundries, 90 SCRA 135

XXI
POST EMPLOYMENT

1. Security of Tenure
A. Rance, June 30, 1988
B. Maglutac, September 21, 1990
2. Typologies of Employment

17 | P a g e
A. Regular Employment
a. A.M. Oreta, August 10, 1989
b. De Leon, August 21, 1989
c. M. Bernardo, July 12, 1999
B. Project Employment
a. ALU-TUCP 234 SCRA 678
b. Fernandez vs. NLRC, 203 SCRA 460
c. Cartagenas vs. Romago Electric Co., September 15, 1989
d. Ocampo, June 6, 1990
e. Philippine National Construction, June 20, 1989
f. Maraguinot and Enero, January 22, 1998
C. Seasonal Employment
a. Manila Hotel, September 30, 1963
b. Industrial Commercial, March 31, 1966
c. Tacloban Sagkahan Rice, March 21, 1990
d. Philippine Tobacco Flue-curing, December 10, 1998
e. Philippine Fruit and Vegetable Industries, July 20, 1999
D. Casual Employment
a. Mercado vs. NLRC, September 5, 1991
E. Temporary or fixed-period employment
a. Brent School, February 5, 1990
b. Cielo, January 28, 1991
c. Purefoods Corporation vs. NLRC, December 12, 1997
d. Philips Semiconductors Inc., April 14, 2004
e. Pangilinan et al., July 12, 2004
f. Millares, July 29, 2002
g. Ravago, March 14, 2005
F. Probationary Employment
a. International Catholic, January 30, 1989
b. ACTI Overseas, August 9, 2001
c. Philippine Federation of Credit Cooperatives, December 11, 1998
d. Sameer Overseas Placement Agency, 317 SCRA 120
e. Bruiser, July 13, 1984
f. Mariwasa, January 26, 1989
g. Holiday Inn, 266 SCRA 417
h. Mitsubishi Motors vs. Chrysler, June 29, 2004
i. University of Sto. Tomas, February 15, 1990

18 | P a g e
G. Termination by Employer
A. Just Causes
a. Villarama, September 2, 1994
b. Felix, March 28, 2001
c. Duncan Association of Detailmen, September 17, 2004
d. Lopez, December 13, 2005
e. Escobin, April 15, 1998
f. OSS Security, February 9, 2000
g. Blue Diary Corp vs. NLRC, September 14, 1999
h. Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Corporation, September 29,
2003
i. Leonardo 333 SCRA 589
j. Labor, et al., September 14, 1995
k. Quezon Electric, April 12, 1989
l. Lamsan Trading, September 30 ,1986
m. Concorde Hotel, August 9, 2001
n. De los Santos, December 20, 2001
o. Nadura, August 24, 1962
p. M.F. Violago 117 SCRA 544
B. Authorized Causes
a. Philippine Sheet Metal Metal Workers’ Union vs. CIR, 83, Phil, 433
b. Wiltshire, February 7, 1991
c. Pantranco North Express, 314 SCRA 740
d. Golden Thread Knitting, 304 SCRA 568
e. Yap 186 SSCRA 664
f. Fuentes, January 2, 1997
g. Lopez Sugar, August 30, 1990
h. FF. Marine Corporation, April 8, 2005
i. Asiaworld, July 23, 1987
j. Dela Salle university, 320 SCRA 363
k. LVN Pictures Employees, September 30, 1970
l. JAT Genereal Services, January 26, 2004
m. Mobil Employees, March 28 ,1990
n. Central Azucarera, 137 SCRA 295
C. Procedure for Dismissal - The Wenphil, Serrano, Agabon and Jaka
Doctrines
D. Retirement

19 | P a g e
a. Philippine Airlines, January 15, 2002
b. MLQU, October 17, 2001
c. Oro Enterprises, November 14, 1994

XXII
Transitory and Final Provisions

1. Penalties
2. Prescription of Offenses and Claims
d. Baliwag Transit, March 16, 1989
e. Fernandez, January 28, 1998

The above Outline is merely a guide for class discussions. The student is
expected to master the legal provisions of the law and digest the cases as cited above.
The undersigned mentor is expected to add more case law regarding a particular subject
matter as the need arises. The Book of C.A. Azucena, Jr. is highly recommended.

Prepared by: Atty. Herbert C. Navarro

20 | P a g e