Republic Act No.
7641 shall "include part-time employees, employees
PART ONE:
SUGGESTED ANSWERS IN THE 2018 BAR EXAMINATIONS IN
LABOR LAW
I book entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition
Narciso filed a complaint against Norte University for the payment of
retirement benefits after having been a part-time professional lecturer
in the same school since 1974. Narciso taught for two semesters and a
summer term for the school year 1975, took a leave of absence from
1975 to 1977, and resumed teaching until 2003. Since then, his
contract has been renewed at the start of every semester and summer,
until November 2005 when he was told that he could no longer teach
because he was already 75 years old. Norte University also denied
Narciso’s claim for retirement benefits stating that only full-time
permanent faculty, who have served for at least five years immediately
preceding the termination of their employment, can avail themselves
of post-employment benefits. As part-time faculty member, Narciso
did not acquire permanent employment status under the Manual of
Regulations for Private Schools, in relation to the Labor Code,
regardless of his length service.
(a) Is Narciso entitled to retirement benefits? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Narciso is entitled to retirement benefits. A part-time lecturer,
with a fixed-term employment, who did not attain permanent status, is
entitled to retirement pay. This was ruled by the Supreme Court in De
La Salle Araneta University v. Bernardo, G. R. No. 190809, February
13, 2017 as follows: Republic Act No. 7641 states that "any employee
may be retired upon reaching the retirement age x x x;" and "[i]n case
of retirement, the employee shall be entitled to receive such retirement
benefits as he may have earned under existing laws and any collective
bargaining agreement and other agreements." The Implementing Rules
provide that Republic Act No. 7641 applies to "all employees in the
private sector, regardless of their position, designation or status and
irrespective of the method by which their wages are paid, except to
those specifically exempted x x x." And Secretary Quisumbing' s
Labor Advisory further clarifies that the employees covered by
of service and other job contractors and domestic helpers or persons in
the personal service of another."
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in pages 921-924 of the
2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. This was the first time that this
question was asked in the bar examinations.
(b) If he is entitled to retirement benefits, how should retirement pay
be computed in the absence of any contract between him and Norte
University providing for such benefits? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The retirement will be 22.5 days salary, exclusive of leave conversion
benefits. According to Capitol Wireless, Inc. v. Honorable Secretary
Ma. Nieves R. Confessor, G.R. No. 117174, November 13,1996:
For purposes of computing compulsory sand optional retirement
benefits and to align the current retirement plan with the minimum
standards of Art. 287 of the Labor Code, as amended by R.A. 7641,
and Sec. 5 (5.2) of its implementing rules, “1/2 month salary” means
22.5 days salary, exclusive of leave conversion benefits.
xxx xxx xx
Unless the parties provide for broader inclusions, the term ‘one-half
(1/2) month salary’ shall mean fifteen (15) days plus one-twelfth
(1/12) of the 13th month pay and the cash equivalent of not more than
five (5) days of service incentive leaves x x x x (italics supplied).
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in pages 924-925 of the
book entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition
2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving the same
subject matter were given during the 2011 and 2001 Bar
Examinations.
II
Nayon Federation issued a charter certificate creating a rank-and-file
Neuman Employees Union. On the same day, New Neuman
Employees filed a petition for certification election with the
Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Regional Office,
attaching the appropriate charter certificate.
a) The employer, Neuman Corporation, filed a motion to dismiss the
petition for lack of legal personality on the part of the petitioner union.
Should the motion be granted? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The motion should be denied. For purposes of filing a petition for
certification election, New Neuman Employees has legal personality
from the time it was issued with a charter certificate. This clear under
the Labor Code, which provides, The chapter shall acquire legal
personality only for purposes of filing a petition for certification
election from the date it was issued a charter certificate. (Article 241
[234-A], As inserted by Section 2, Republic Act No. 9481 which
lapsed into law on May 25, 2007 and became effective on June 14,
2007)
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in page 218 of the book
entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition 2018,
by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. This was the first time that this question
was asked in the bar examiantions.
b) The employer likewise filed a petition for cancellation of union
registration against New Neuman Employees Union, alleging that
Nayon Federation already had a chartered local rank-and-file union,
Neuman Employees Union, pertaining to the same bargaining unit
within the establishment. Should the petition for cancellation prosper?
(2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under Article 247 of the Labor Code, the following are the relevant
grounds for cancellation of union registration:
(a) Misrepresentation, false statement or fraud in connection with the
adoption or ratification of the constitution and by-laws or amendments
thereto, the minutes of ratification, and the list of members who took
part in the ratification;
(b) Misrepresentation, false statements or fraud in connection with the
election of officers, minutes of the election of officers, and the list of
voters;
(c) Voluntary dissolution by the members.
Unless the employer can prove that any of the foregoing grounds are
present the petition for cancellation will not prosper.
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in page 223 of the book
entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition 2018,
by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. This was the first time that this question
was asked in the bar examiantions.
III
Due to his employer’s dire financial situation, Nicanor was prevailed
upon by his employer to voluntarily resign. In exchange, he demanded
payment of salary differentials, 13th month pay, and financial
assistance, as promised by his employer. Management promised to pay
him as soon as it is able to pay off all retrenched rank-and-file
employees. Five years later, and before management was able to pay
Nicanor the amount promised to him, Nicanor died of a heart attack.
His widow, Norie, filed a money claim against the company before the
National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), including interest on
the amount of the unpaid claim. She also claimed additional damages
arguing that the supposed resignation letter was obtained from her
spouse through undue pressure and influence. The employer filed a
motion to dismiss on the ground that (A) the NLRC did not have
jurisdiction over money claims, and (B) the action has prescribed.
(a) Does the NLRC have jurisdiction to award money claims including
interest on the amount unpaid? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Jurisdiction will depend on the amount being claimed by Nicanor’s
surviving spouse. If the amount exceeds Five Thousand Pesos
(PhP5,000.00) as provided in Article 224 (a [6]) of the Labor Code
then jurisdiction belongs to the Arbitration Branch of the NLRC.
However, if the amount did not exceed Five Thousand Pesos
(PhP5,000.00) and then jurisdiction belongs to the Regional Director
under Article 129 of the Labor Code involving recovery of wages,
simple money claims and other benefits. Either of the said quasi-
judicial body can award interest in the concept of actual and
compensatory damages in accordance. The award of interest in money
claim was explained in Limlingan v. Asian Institute Management, Inc.,
G.R. No. 220481, February 17, 2016, that the rate of interest in the
concept of actual and compensatory damages as well as its accrual are
as follows:
1. When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of a
sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the interest due
should be that which may have been stipulated in writing.
Furthermore, the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the
time it is judicially demanded. In the absence of stipulation, the rate of
interest shall be 6% per annum to be computed from default, i.e., from
judicial or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions of
Article 1169 of the Civil Code.
2. When an obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance of
money, is breached, an interest on the amount of damages awarded
may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per
annum. No interest, however, shall be adjudged on unliquidated claims
or damages, except when or until the demand can be established with
reasonable certainty. Accordingly, where the demand is established
with reasonable certainty, the interest shall begin to run from the time
the claim is made judicially or extrajudicially (Art. 1169, Civil Code),
but when such certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the
time the demand is made, the interest shall begin to run only from the
date the judgment of the court is made (at which time the
quantification of damages may be deemed to have been reasonably
ascertained). The actual base for the computation of legal interest
shall, in any case, be on the amount finally adjudged.
3. When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes
final and executory, the rate of legal interest, whether the case falls
under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2, above, shall be 6% per annum from
such finality until its satisfaction, this interim period being deemed to
be by then an equivalent to a forbearance of credit.
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in page 26 of the book
entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition 2018,
by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano and in pages 589-590 of the book entitled
Principles and Cases Labor Standards and Social Legislation, Second
Edition 2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving the
same subject matter were given during the 2011 and 2016 (on award of
interest in money claim) Bar Examinations.
(b) Assuming that the NLRC has jurisdiction, has the action
prescribed? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The action has not prescribed. This is because Nicanor’s surviving
spouse’s cause of action will accrue upon the categorical denial of the
claim. In this case, there was demand for its payment, however, the
management had promsied to pay as soon as it is able to pay off all
retrenched rank-and-file employees. However, it is was only after five
(5) years that the management was able to pay. Moreover, there was
no denial of the claim. Therefore, prescription did not set in. In the
Degamo v. Avantgarde Shipping Corp., G.R. No. 154460, November
22, 2005 and Serrano v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 139420, August
15, 2001, following cases, the Supreme Court explained the accrual of
a cause of action under Article 306 [291].
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in pages 943-946 of the
book entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition
2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving the same
subject matter was given during the 2010 Bar Examination.
(c) May Nicanor’s spouse successfully claim additional damages as a
result of the alleged undue pressure and influence? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Nicanor’s spouse can successfully claim additional damages as a
result of the alleged undue pressure and influence. This is provided
under Article 224 (a [4] of the Labor Code which provides for claims
for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages arising from
employer-employee relationship within the jurisdictional authority of
the Arbitration Branch of the NLRC.
In the alternative, it can be argued that Nicanor’s spouse cannot
successfully claim additional damages because it is the jurisdictional
authority of the Arbitration Branch of the NLRC. The employer-
employee relationship is only incidental and the cause of action arises
from other sources like torts and damages. Therefore, jurisdiction
belongs to the regular courts.
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in pages 26, 32-38 of the
book entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition
2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving the same
subject matter were given during the 2016, 199 and 1995 Bar
Examinations.
IV
Natasha Shoe Company adopted an organizational streamlining
program that resulted in the retrenchment of 550 employees in its main
plant. After having been paid their separation benefits, the retrenched
workers demanded payment of retirement benefits under a CBA
between their union and management Natasha Shoe Company denied
the workers’ demand.
(a) What is the most procedurally peaceful means to resolve this
dispute? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Since this is a money claim involving the interpretation and
implementation of the CBA, the retrenched workers can refer the
matter to the grievance machinery and if it remained unresolved within
seven (7) days from the date of its submission the same shall be
automatically referred to the voluntary arbitration prescribed in the
CBA.
In the alternative it can be argued, that since this is a dispute between
the retrenched workers and the employer the same cannot be a subject
matter of grievance and voluntary arbitration. This is because only
disputes between the union and the company as ruled in Tabique v.
International Copra Export Corporation, G. R. No. 183335, December
23, 2009, shall be referred to grievance machinery or voluntary
arbitrators. Thus, the dispute should be resolved by way of mandatory
conciliation-mediation in accordance with Article 234 of the Labor
Code.
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in pages 193-195, 436,
433-442 of the book entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations,
Second Edition 2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving
the same subject matter were given during the 2017, 2010, 2008, 2001,
1997 and 1995 Bar Examinations.
(b) Can the workers claim both separation pay and retirement benefits.
(2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the workers can claim both separation pay and retirement
benefits. This was settled rule in the case of Goodyear v. Marina
Angus, G.R. No. 185499, 14 November 2014 where it was ruled that
in the absence of an express or implied prohibition against it,
collection of both retirement benefits and separation pay upon
severance from employment is allowed. This is grounded on the social
justice policy that doubts should always be resolved in favor of labor
rights. (Aquino v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No.
87653, February 11, 1992)
V
Nelda worked as a chambermaid in Hotel Neverland with a basic wage
of PhP560.00 for an eight-hour workday. On Good Friday, she worked
for one (1) hour from 10:00 PM to 11:00 PM. Her employer paid her
only PhP480 for each 8-hour workday, and PhP70.00 for work done
on Good Friday. She sued for underpayment of wages and non-
payment of holiday pay and night shit differential for working on a
Good Friday. Hotel Neverland denied the alleged underpayment,
arguing that based on long-standing unwritten tradition, food and
lodging costs were partially shouldered by the employer and partially
paid for by the employee through salary deduction. According to the
employer, such valid deduction caused the payment of Nelda’s wage
to be below the prescribed minim m. The hotel also claimed that she
was not entitled to holiday pay and night shift differential pay hotel
workers have to work on holidays and may be be assigned to work at
night.
(a) Does the hotel have valid legal grounds to deduct food and lodging
costs from Nelda's basis salary? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As held in Mabeza v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No.
118506, April 18, 1997: Granting that meals and lodging were
provided and indeed constituted facilities, such facilities could not be
deducted without the employer complying first with certain legal
requirements. Without satisfying these requirements, the employer
simply cannot deduct the value from the employee’s wages. First,
proof must be shown that such facilities are customarily furnished by
the trade. Second, the provision of deductible facilities must be
voluntarily accepted in writing by the employee. Finally, facilities
must be charged at fair and reasonable value. (Labor Code, Art. 97 [f])
Applying the above, unless the hotel can comply with the legal
requirements it has no valid legal grounds to deduct food and lodging
costs from Nelda's basis salary.
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in page 502 of the book
entitled Principles and Cases Labor Standards and Social Legislation,
Second Edition 2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving
the same subject matter were given during the 2013 and 2010 Bar
Examinations.
(b) Applying labor standards law, how much should Nelda be paid for
work done Good Friday? Show the computation in your test booklet
and encircle your final answer. (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
It can be argued:
The rule in order to be paid regular holiday like two successive
holidays provides as follows, Where there are two (2) successive
regular holidays, like Holy Thursday and Good Friday, an employee
may not be paid for both holidays if he absents himself from work on
the day immediately preceding the first holiday, unless he works on
the first holiday, in which case he is entitled to his holiday pay on the
second holiday.(Section 10, Rule IV, Book III, Rules to Implement the
Labor Code)
Applying the above rule, unless Nelda had complied with the rules on
absences she is not entitled for her holiday pay for work done on Good
Friday.
However, on the assumption that she complied with the rules Nelda
should be paid as follows: P560 x 200%=P1,120.00 or since he only
worked for one hour the pay should be as follows: 70 x 200% =
P140.00
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in page 453 of the book
entitled Principles and Cases Labor Standards and Social Legislation,
Second Edition 2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving
the same subject matter was given during the 2013 and 2010 Bar
Examinations.
VI
A certification election was conducted in Nation Manufacturing
Corporation, whereby 55% of eligible voters in the bargaining unit
cast their votes. The results were as follows:
Union Nana : 45 votes
Union Nada : 40 votes
Union Nara : 30 votes
No Union : 80 votes
Union Nana moved to be declared as the winner of the certification
election.
a) Can Union Nana be declared as the winner? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Union Nana cannot be declared as the winner. This is because the said
union did not obtain the majority of the valid votes casts as provided
under Article 268 of the Labor Code.
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in pages 416-417 and
419of the book entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second
Edition 2018, by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. Questions involving the
same subject matter were given during the 2014, 2009 Bar
Examinations.
b) Assume that the eligibility of 30 voters was challenged during pre-
election conference. The ballots of the 30 challenged voters were
placed inside an envelope sealed by the DOLE Election Office.
Considering the said envelope remains sealed, what should be the next
course of action with respect to the said challenged votes? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The procedure in the Challenge of Votes provides as follows:
The ballot of the voter who has been property challenged during the
Pre-Election conferences, shall be placed in an envelope which shall
be sealed by the Election Officer in the presence of the voter and the
representatives of the contending unions. The election Officer shall
indicate on the envelope the voter’s name, the union challenging the
voter, and the ground for the challenged. The sealed envelope shall
then be signed by the Election Officer and the representatives of the
contending unions. The Election Officer shall note all challenges in the
minutes of the election proceedings and shall have custody of all
envelops containing the challenged votes. The envelopes shall be
opened and the question of eligibility shall be passed upon by the
Mediator-Arbiter only if the number of segregated votes will
materially alter the results of the election. (Section 11, Rule IX, Book
V, Rules to Implement the Labor Code, as amended by Department
Order No. 40-F-03, Series of 2008 and renumbered by Department
Order No. 40-I-15, Series of 2015)
Applying the said procedure, if the number of segregated votes will
materially alter the results of the election the next course of action with
respect to the said challenged votes is to open the said envelopes and
the question of eligibility shall be passed upon by the Mediator-
Arbiter.
NOTE: The foregoing answer can be found in page 402 of the book
entitled Principles and Cases Labor Relations, Second Edition 2018,
by Atty. Voltaire T. Duano. This is the first time that this type if
question was asked in the Bar Examinations.