INSULAR BANK OF ASIA v. AMADO G.
INCIONG, Issues: whether or not the decision of a Labor Arbiter awarding payment of regular
Facts:
1. Inciong filed a complaint against the Insular Bank for the payment of holiday pay
before the National Labor Relations Commission Labor Arbiter Ricarte T. Soriano
rendered a decision in the above-entitled case, granting petitioner's complaint for
payment of holiday pay.
Respondent bank did not appeal from the said decision. Instead, it complied with the
order of Arbiter Ricarte T. Soriano by paying their holiday Presidential Decree No.
850 was promulgated amending, among others, the provisions of the Labor Code on
the right to holiday pay... by authority of Article 5 of the same Code, the Department
of Labor (now Ministry of Labor) promulgated the rules and regulations for the
implementation of holidays with pay.
Policy Instruction No. 9 was issued by the then Secretary of Labor (now Minister)
interpreting the above-quoted rule, pertinent portion of which read
The ten (10) paid legal holidays law, to start with, is intended to benefit principally
daily employees. In the case of monthly, only those whose monthly salary did not yet
include payment for the ten (10) paid legal holidays are entitled to the benefit.
If the monthly paid employee is receiving not less than P240, the maximum monthly...
minimum wage, and his monthly pay is uniform from January to December, he is
presumed to be already paid the ten (10) paid legal holidays. However, if deductions
are made from his monthly salary on account of holidays in months where they occur,
then he is still entitled to the... ten (10) paid legal holidays.
Respondent bank, by reason of the ruling laid down by the aforecited rule
implementing Article 94 of the Labor Code and by Policy Instruction No. 9, stopped
the payment of holiday pay to all its employees.
Inciong filed a motion for a writ of execution to enforce the arbiter's decision...
whereby the respondent bank was ordered to pay its employees their daily wage for
the unworked regular holidays.
respondent bank filed an opposition to the motion for a writ of execution alleging...
that... its refusal to pay the corresponding unworked holiday pay... is based on and
justified by Policy Instruction No. 9
Labor Arbiter Ricarte T. Soriano, instead of issuing a writ of execution, issued an order
enjoining the respondent bank to continue paying its employees their regular holiday
pay on the following grounds... that the judgment is already final and the... findings
which is found in the body of the decision as well as the dispositive portion thereof is
res judicata or is the law of the case between the parties; and... that since the decision
had been partially implemented by the respondent bank, appeal from the said...
decision is no longer available... the National Labor Relations Commission...
promulgated its resolution en banc dismissing respondent bank's appeal
holiday pay can still be set aside on appeal by the Deputy Minister of Labor even
though it has already becone final and had been partially executed, the finality of
which... was affirmed by the National Labor Relations Commission sitting en banc, on
the basis of an Implementing Rule and Policy Instruction promulgated by the Ministry
of Labor long after the said decision had become final and executory.
Ruling:
WE agree with the petitioner's contention that Section 2, Rule IV, Book III of the
implementing rules and Policy Instruction No. 9 issued by the then Secretary of Labor
are null and void since in the guise of clarifying the Labor Code's provisions on holiday
pay, they in... effect amended them by enlarging the scope of their exclusion
Article 94 of the Labor Code... provides... very worker shall be paid his regular daily
wage during regular holidays, except in retail and service establishments regularly
employing less than ten (10) workers.
From the above-cited provisions, it is clear that monthly paid employees are not
excluded from the benefits of holiday pay. However, the implementing rules on
holiday pay promulgated by the then Secretary of Labor excludes monthly paid
employees from the said benefits
In the case at bar, the provisions of the Labor Code on the entitlement to the benefits
of holiday pay are... clear and explicit it provides for both the coverage of and
exclusion from the benefits. In Policy Instruction No. 9, the then Secretary of Labor
went as far as to categorically state that the benefit is principally intended for daily
paid employees, when the law clearly states... that every worker shall be paid their
regular holiday pay. This is a flagrant violation of the mandatory directive of Article
4 of the Labor Code, which states that "All doubts in the implementation and
interpretation of the provisions of this Code, including its... implementing rules and
regulations, shall be resolved in favor of labor."
Obviously, the Secretary (Minister) of Labor had exceeded his statutory authority
granted by Article 5 of the Labor Code authorizing him to promulgate the necessary
implementing rules and regulations.
THE PETITION IS HEREBY GRANTED
LUNA v. RODRIGUEZ
The law provides that "at all elections, the polls shall be open from seven o'clock in
the morning until six o'clock in the afternoon." The polls should be open and closed in
strict accord with said provisions. Voters who do not appear and offer to vote within
the hours designated by the law should not be permitted to vote if the time for closing
the polls has arrived. Upon the other hand, if the voter is prevented, during the voting
hours, from voting, and is not permitted to vote by reason of the failure of the
inspectors to do their duty, then, certainly, in the absence of some fraud, neither such
votes nor the entire vote of the precinct should be annulled simply because some votes
were cast after the regular hours. The ballot of the innocent voter should not be
annulled and he should not be deprived of his participation in the affairs of his
government when he was guilty of no illegal act or fraud. The election inspectors
should be held to comply strictly with the law. If they violate the law, they should be
punished and not the innocent voter.
2. ID.; PURPOSE; VOTERS BE PERMITTED UNHAMPERED AND
UNMOLESTED TO EXPRESS WILL THROUGH BALLOT. — The purpose of an
election is to give the voters a direct participation in the affairs of their government,
either in determining who shall be their public officials or in deciding some question
of public interest; and for this purpose, all of the legal voters should be permitted,
unhampered and unmolested, to cast their ballots. When that is done, and no frauds
have been committed, the ballot should be counted and the election should not be
declared null. Innocent voters should not be deprived of their participation in the
affairs of their government for mere irregularities on the part of election o􏰉cers for
which they are in no way responsible. A different rule would make the manner and
method of performing a public duty of greater importance than the duty itself.
(b) that a record of said oath shall be filed with the secretary with the other records of
the board of inspectors after the election; and (c) when said oath is taken then two of
the inspectors, each of whom shall belong to a different political party may assist him
in the preparation of his ballot. The ballot of an incapacitated person who voted
without taking the oath, or was assisted by one inspector alone, or by two belonging
to the same party, should not be counted if such ballot can be identified. In the absence
of fraud, however, all of the ballots of the precinct should not be invalidated by the
mere fact that the inspectors did not comply with their duty. Innocent voters should
not be deprived of their participation in the election for a violation of the law for which
they were in no way responsible. Incapacitated persons are usually persons who are
unable to acquaint themselves with the provisions of the law. They are, therefore,
absolutely dependent upon the advice and counsel of others. Generally, they have no
idea whatever as to the form and requirements in casting their ballots. Their ignorance,
however, does not relieve them from their responsibility under the law nor from the
effect of their failure to comply therewith. It is the duty of the inspectors to see that
the law is complied with by the voter before he is permitted to vote. If the inspectors
violate the law, they should be punished criminally.
5. ID.; VOTING BOOTHS; PURPOSE. — While the law provides the manner of
constructing voting booths, and while the provisions are in a sense mandatory yet the
purpose of the law is to require voting booths which afford the voter an opportunity,
if he desires, to prepare his ballot in absolute secrecy. Secrecy is the object of the
booth. An opportunity to prepare the ballot in private is the purpose of the provision.
When the booth affords that protection the purpose of the law is fulfilled. To hold
otherwise — to establish a different rule — would make the manner of performing a
public duty more important than the performance of the duty itself.

3. ID.; RULES AND REGULATIONS; MANDATORY AND DIRECTORY

PROVISIONS. — It has been announced in many decisions that the rules and
regulations, for the conduct of elections, are mandatory before the election, but when
it is sought to enforce them after the elections, they are held to be directory only, if
that is possible, especially where, if they are held to be mandatory, innocent voters will
be deprived of their votes without any fault on their part. The various and numerous
provisions of the Election Law were adopted to assist the voters in their participation
in the affairs of the government and not to defeat that object. When the voters have
honestly cast their ballots, the same should not be nullified simply because the o􏰉cers
appointed under the law to direct the election and guard the purity of the ballot have
not done their duty. The law provides a remedy, by criminal action, against them. They
should be prosecuted criminally, and the will of the honest voter, as expressed through
his ballot, should be protected and upheld.

4. ID.; INCAPACITATED VOTERS; VOTING WITHOUT TAKING REQUIRED

OATH. — When an incapacitated person offers to vote, the law requires: (a) That he
take an oath to the effect that he is disabled and the nature of the disability, together
with the fact that he desires the inspectors to assist him in the preparation of his ballot;