LABOR LAW license.
She is now charged with
#BernaBar2019
Kinn’s Notes
From BNDG: Lahat ng mga bar notes may mga panimula na
inspirational messages, eto yung dito: Kinnnnnnn, kaya mo
ang exams. Kung kinaya mo ako, kakayanin mo lalo ang
exams. Stay positive. Smile. I know and believe na kaya mo
to. Iloveyou.
I. General Provisions
What is the equipoise rule? Is it
applicable to Labor Cases?
Answer: The equipoise rule is a
criminal law concept wherein in cases
where the evidence of the prosecution
and accused are equally weighted, the
scales of justice must be titled in favor
of the accused on the basis of the
presumption of innocence.
The same is applicable to labor cases as
construction of labor laws and cases are
for the employee, in case the evidence
is in equipoise, the scales of justice tilts
in favor of the employee. (Hubilda vs.
HSY Marketing, GR No. 207354)
II. Pre-Employment
Illegal recruitment
The lack of license or authority to
recruit and deploy workers renders
the recruitment activity unlawful.
Differentiate large scale illegal
recruitment and illegal recruitment
committed by a syndicate.
Answer: Illegal recruitment is deemed
committed by a syndicate if carried out
by a group of three or more persons
conspiring and/or confederating with
one another in carrying out any
unlawful or illegal transaction. There is
illegal recruitment in a large scale if
committed against three or more
persons, individually or as a group.
Molina is the President of ABC
Corporation which recruited
workers for abroad without a
illegal recruitment. She argues that
she cannot be charged with the
same because the one conducting
the illegal recruitment is the
corporation and not her. Rule on her
contention.
Answer: Her contention is wrong.
Officers having control, management,
or direction of their business shall be
liable for illegal recruitment. This is
provided by RA 8042 as in the case of
juridical persons, the officers having
control, management or direction of
their business shall be held liable for
illegal recruitment. (People vs. Molina, GR
No. 229712)
III. Labor Standards
Wages
At the beginning of the year, XX
Company increased the salary of
their entry-level position employees
from 500 to 600. The next-in-rank
employees’ salary remained at 610.
The next-in-rank employees claim
wage distortion. Is there wage
distortion?
Answer: No, there is none. Wage
distortion only applies only to wage
adjustments and increases due to a
prescribed law or wage order. In this
case, the wage adjustment was based on
a management prerogative, thus, wage
distortion cannot be made applicable.
(PGIEU vs. Chevron, GR No. 207252)
Alex is a salesman for AAA
Corporation was terminated. Alex
claims that he is entitled to
backwages including his
commission for the period that he
was working. AAA Corporation
claims that backwages should only
claim his fixed wage and not his
commission as it is discretionary. Is
Alex entitled to the commission?
Answer: Yes, he is.
his definition explicitly includes
commissions as part of wages. While
commissions are, indeed, incentives or
forms of encouragement to inspire
employees to put a little more industry
on the jobs particularly assigned to
them, still these commissions are direct
remunerations for services rendered. In
fact, commissions have been defined as
the recompense, compensation or
reward of an agent, salesman, executor,
trustee, receiver, factor, broker or
bailee, when the same is calculated as a
percentage on the amount of his
transactions or on the profit to the
principal. The nature of the work of a
salesman and the reason for such type
of remuneration for services rendered
demonstrate clearly that commissions
are part of a salesman's wage or salary.
(Asentitsta vs. Jupp and Company, GR No.
229404)
IV. Social Welfare Legislation
Disability Benefits
Important notes:
 Only reasonable proof of work-
connection and not direct causal
relation is the quantum of proof
for compensability of non-
occupational disease. (Magat vs.
Interorient Maritime, GR No.
232892)
 A claimant must still show
reasonable connection between
nature of work and illness
despite presumption of work-
relatedness. (Espere vs. NFD
International, GR No. 212098)
 Death on account of a work-
related illness is compensable
even if occurring after
employment contract. The
following requisites are
necessary: (1) the seafarer’s work
must involve the risks described
herein; (2) the disease was
contracted as a result of the
seafarer’s exposure to the
described risks; (3) the disease
was contracted within a period
of exposure and under such
other factors necessary to
contract it; (4) there was no
notorious negligence on the part
of the seafarer. (Magsaysay
Maritime vs. De Jesus, GR No.
203943)
V. Labor Relations
PLC Union entered into a new CBA
with PLC Corporation. In the new
agreement, their grocery allowance
was removed. PLC Union demands
for that the grocery allowance be
paid. Can PLC Union demand for
such?
Answer: No. Any benefit not included
in the CBA is not demandable.
(SONEDCO vs. Universal Robina, GR
No. 220383)
In the same CBA, PLC Union was
granted a transportation allowance
which will be given every 20th day of
the month. PLC Corporation
decided that the said allowance be
given every 15th day of the month
along with the salary on the 15th day.
Is it valid?
Answer: No. The employer cannot
unilaterally add or modify the
agreement beyond the terms of the
CBA. (HSBC Union vs. HSBC, GR No.
218390)
VI. Post-employment
Construction workers: Rules on
nature of employment:
 The mere fact that construction
workers worked on projects that
were time-bound did
automatically characterize them
as project employees. The nature
of work is determinative. The
 following requisites are to be
complied: (1) continuously, as
opposed to intermittently,
rehired by the same employer
for the same tasks or nature of
tasks; and (2) these tasks are
vital, necessary and indispensable
to the usual business or trade of
the employer, then the employee
must be deemed a regular
employee. (Albar vs. Esponosa,
GR No. 227734)
 Repeated employment on a per-
project basis does not result to
regular employment. (Wenceslao
vs. Makati Development Corporation,
GR No. 230696)
Job contracting
Job contracting is deemed legitimate
and permissible when the contractor
has substantial capital or investment
and runs a business that is independent
and free from control by the principal.
Termination by Employer
Redundancy
Redundancy exists when the service
capability of the workforce is in excess
of what is reasonably needed to meet
the demands of the business enterprise.
It has been ruled that an employer has
no legal obligation to keep more
employees than are necessary for the
operation of its business. For the
implementation of redundancy
program to be valid, the employer must
comply with the following requisites:
(1) written notice served on both the
employees and the DOLE at least one
month prior to the intended date of
termination of employment; (2)
payment of separation pay equivalent
to at least one month pay for every year
of service; (3) good faith in abolishing
the redundant positions; and fair and
reasonable criteria in ascertaining what
positions are to be declared redundant
and accordingly abolished, taking into
consideration different factors. (PNB
vs. Dalmacio, GR No. 202308)
Loss of trust and confidence
In order to properly invoke the ground
of loss of trust and confidence as a just
cause for dismissal, two conditions
must be satisfied: (1) the employer
must show that the employee
concerned holds a position of trust and
confidence; and (2) the employer must
establish the existence of an act
justifying the loss of trust and
confidence. (Distribution & Control
Products vs. Santos, GR No. 212616)
Union Officers
Ava is a union officer of PLE Union.
He violated certain policies of the
union causing him to be dismissed
and fired by PLE Corporation. Was
the dismissal valid?
Answer: No, it is not. Union officers
cannot be dismissed merely based on
the provisions of impeachment of
union officers. (United Polyresin vs.
Pinuela, GR No. 2096555)
Constructive Dismissal
Constructive dismissal exists when an
employee is left with no choice but to
forego continued employment.
Termination by Employee
EX Corporation was not in good
terms with Emir, one of its
employees, and asked him to
execute a resignation letter. Emir
questions the order alleging that it
is constructive dismissal. Is Emir
correct?
Answer: No. There is nothing
reprehensible or illegal when an
employer grants an employee a chance
to resign and save face rather than
smear the latter’s employment record.
(Couse vs. Ferritz Integrated Development
Corporation, GR No. 230664)
Resignation
Resignation contradicts claim of illegal
dismissal. (Coseteng vs. Perez, GR No.
18938)
Reliefs
Important notes:
 Illegally dismissed employee is
entitled to all benefits granted
prior to dismissal;
 If there is no actual dismissal or
abandonment, the remedy is
reinstatement but without
backwages, but if there are
strained relations between the
parties, each party bears his own
loss.
to dismiss an employee. (De Leon
Transporation vs. Macuray, GR No.
214940)
VIII. Jurisdiction and Reliefs
Appellate courts have the power to
scrutinize NLRC Decisions even
though the law gives no explicit
provision for appeals.
Arbitration
Voluntary arbitrator’s decision must be
appealed within 10 days from receipt of
decision. (NYK Ship Management vs.
Dabu, GR No. 225142)

Money claims
Important notes:
 Separation pay and backwages
must be computed until the
finality of decision awarding the
same;
 When a quitclaim is declared
invalid for one reason or
another, the recipient thereto
must return or offset the
compensation received;
 If one grants involuntary
separation benefits excludes the
right to voluntary separation
benefits;
 An illegally dismissed employee
is entitled to back wages
computed from the time of
dismissal until reinstatement and
based on the most recent salary
rate upon termination.

VII. Management Prerogative

Note: Dismissal of employees is a
prerogative belonging to management.
At any rate, even assuming that
respondent was indeed told by
respondent’s bus dispatcher that he was
AWOL, this was not tantamount to
dismissal, actual or constructive. An
ordinary bus dispatcher has no power