2006 BENJAMIN L. SAROCAM, Petitioner, vs. INTERORIENT MARITIME ENT., INC., and DEMACO UNITED LTD., Respondents. FACTS • petitioner Benjamin L. Sarocam was hired by Interorient Maritime Ent. • With a basic monthly salary was US$450.00 on a 48-hour work week, with a fixed overtime pay of US$180.00 per month for 105 hours, supplementary wage of US$70.00, and vacation leave with pay of 2.5 days • While the vessel was navigating to China • petitioner suffered lumbar sprain when he accidentally fell from a ladder • Then he was examined and founded with neuromyositis with the waist and diabetes • The employer agreed repatriate him • Then the petitioner was refered to the company- designated physician, Dr. Teodoro F. Pidlaoan • Petitioner was then declared 'fit for duty effective on that day’ petitioner executed a release and quitclaim in favor of his employers where he acknowledged the receipt of US$405.00 as his sickwages and freed his employers from further liability. • However,petitioner filed a complaint with the labor arbitration branch of the NLRC for disability benefit, illness allowance/reimbursement of medical expenses, damages and attorney's fees. • But it was denied by the labor arbiter for the reason because he was declared 'fit for duty’ and executed a release and quitclaim in favor of his employers and already received his sickness allowance. ISSUE : • DOES THE EXECUTION BY PETITIONER OF A RELEASE AND QUITCLAIM ESTOP HIM FROM CLAIMING DISABILITY BENEFITS UNDER THE POEA STANDARD EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT HELD • Since he was declared fit for work, petitioner has no more right to claim disability benefits under the contractual provisions of the POEA Standard Employment Contract • The court held that they recognize legitimate waivers that represent a voluntary and reasonable settlement of a worker's claim which should be respected as the law between the parties making it valid and binding. • That the petitioner voluntarily entered to it and represents a reasonable settlement, it is binding on the parties and may not later be disowned simply because of a change of mind, where It was made with full understanding on the part of the petitioner and the consideration for the quitclaim is credible and reasonable, the transaction must be recognized as a valid and binding undertaking 17.) G.R. No. 77875 February 4, 1993 PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., petitioner, vs. ALBERTO SANTOS, JR., HOUDIEL MAGADIA, GILBERT ANTONIO, REGINO DURAN, PHILIPPINE AIRLINES EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, and THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, respondents FACTS • Individual respondents are all Port Stewards of Catering Sub-Department, Passenger Services Department of petitioner. • In various occasion several deduction was made to their salary because of the inventory losses • Then the respondent filed a formal grievance where the union wanting to discuss certain matters and was sent to Mr. Reynaldo Abad, Manager for Catering, there was no reply for the reason mr abad, who at the time was on vacation leave. • Upon his return a meeting was schedule. The respondent then refuse to ramp the inventory. • Mr Abad by denying the petition of individual respondents in order to resolve the grievance and state that it was proper that the employee was charge and the said respondent was terminated for 7 days to 30 days depending on the infraction made • Private responded file to labor arbiter under the grounds of the illegal suspension but was later dismiss the complaint . Then a motion to reconsider was also denied . ISSUE • whether or not public respondent NLRC acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in rendering the aforementioned decision. HELD • It has not been shown that respondent NLRC has unlawfully neglected the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins it to perform as a duty or has otherwise unlawfully excluded petitioner from the exercise of a right to which it is entitled • to petitioner's submission, the grievance of employees is not a matter which requires the personal act of Mr. Abad and thus could not be delegated. Petitioner could at least have assigned an officer-in-charge to look into the grievance and possibly make his recommendation to Mr. Abad • Under the policy of social justice, the law bends over backward to accommodate the interests of the working class on the humane justification that those with less privileges in life should have more privileges in law. • The absence of mr abad made a dire effect on the part of the respondents and it was clear of injustice, Thus, private respondents should not be faulted for believing that the effects of the CBA in their favor had already stepped into the controversy. 27.) G.R. No. 149629 October 4, 2004
ALAN D. GUSTILO, Petitioner,
- versus -
WYETH PHILIPPINES, INC., FILEMON
VERZANO, JR., AURELIO MERCADO and EDGAR EPILEPSIA, Respondents. FACTS • Alan D. Gustilo (petitioner) was employed by Wyeth Philippines, Inc., respondent company, as a pharmaceutical territory manager • In the petitoners records show on various date he was reprimanded and suspended him habitually neglecting to submit his periodic reports • Then petitioner was charge with wilful violation of company rules and regulations and directing him to submit a written explanation upon not achieving the objective of the respondent company plan given to him. • Upon recommendation of a Review Panel, respondent company terminated the services of petitioner • Petitioner then file with the regional labor arbitration a complaint for illegal suspension illegal dismissal and payment of allowances, other monetary benefits, damages and attorneys fees against the respondent. ISSUE • WHETHER OR NOT THE PETIONER IS ENTINTILED OF THE SAID AWARD HELD • He is not entitled for the reason It bears stressing that petitioner did not only violate company disciplinary rules and regulations. As found by the Court of Appeals, he falsified his employment application form by not stating therein that he is the nephew of Mr. Danao, respondent Wyeths Nutritional Territory Manager. Also, on February 2, 1993, he was suspended for falsifying a gasoline receipt. On June 28, 1993, he was warned for submitting a false report of his trade outlet calls. On September 8, 1993, he was found guilty of unauthorized availment of sick, vacation and emergency leaves. These infractions manifest his slack of moral principle. In simple term, he is dishonest. • Its is the where the court state that to those who invoke social justice may do so only if their hand are clean and their motives blameless. In the case at bar the petitioner failed to measure up to such requirements.