1

LABOR LAW REVIEW

with Fr. Agustin L. Nazareno
Ateneo de Davao University | College of Law
IV-Manresa 2020-2021

This is the first page, notice how it has a different header. Proceed to
the next page for the template.
 ADDU LAW LABOR LAW REVIEW with Fr. Agustin L. Nazareno__ 2

July 2, 2020 Part 1 by Hannah Keziah P. Dela Cerna productivity of the land. And the tenant and the landlord divided the
fruits of the agricultural joint production.
What do we do in this Labor Review? There are three (3) areas that Why was the tenant driven out of these lands? The shortcut reason is
we will cover the industrial revolution. [It was] propelled by new discoveries. The
1. Fundamentals of Labor which includes: spinning jenny (a multi-spindle spinning frame; it was one of the key
a. Certain historical, social, and cultural, antecedents developments in the industrialization of weaving during the early
to labor; Industrial Revolution; invented in 1764 or 1765 by James Hargreaves)
b. Philippine Constitutional provisions on labor; and was created. Cloth became processed by machines and it was sped up.
c. Social Justice And they needed more wool from the sheep in order to make more
2. Labor Standards clothes. What was the result of that? The sheep became expensive, so
3. Labor Relations the landlords started driving the tenants away from the land to raise
more sheep. And so, they (the tenants) flocked to the cities. In the
I will post a copy of the Labor Standards Official Handbook on city, there were more technological advances that began to require
Minimum Wages and Minimum Benefits, 2019 edition. You can workers. People no longer had land to grow their basic food. They
also download it. were just left with selling their labor for wages.

2. Discussion on Quasi-contracts & Compensability

FUNDAMENTALS OF LABOR
Even before that, the rule was, based from the case of Perez v.
1. Cultural & Social Antecedents of Labor Pomar (G.R. No. L-1299, November 16, 1903), that if labor was
Now, let us go to the basic cultural and social antecedents of labor. expended and there was no agreement... What was the rule? Is the
beneficiary of the labor that was exerted under any obligation to pay
1a. Two Basic Principles the one who exerted such labor? Perez v. Pomar says that, in the
The first important principle that not everyone notices is that labor absence of an agreement as to the compensation of labor, the
means service to another—service for the benefit of another. That is beneficiary of that rendition of labor is bound to pay on condition that
the labor that we are talking about and it is for the benefit of another his labor was normally compensated in other settings. When your labor
after the requisites of employer-employee relationship (EE-ER). If it is is normally compensated, even if there is no agreement, then that is
not under EE-ER, it can fall under many different categories. For considered as compensable. Regardless of whether it is labor by a
example, tenant-landlord relationship. That is covered by Agrarian laborer or industrial contractor or labor rendered by a tenant, that is
Law. It could be independent contracting. It could be quasi-contract. compensable labor if it is normally compensated.
That is under the Civil Code.
If the labor you rendered is not compensable or not understood to be
Labor that is compensated constitutes the minority of service to compensable, the beneficiary was under no obligation to compensate
another. Why? [It is] because most of the service to another that is the one who rendered the labor.
done in this world is not compensated. Just think of the many meals
cooked by parents for their children, the many beds that are made, the PEREZ v. POMAR
many house cleaning and laundry that are done by mothers and/or G.R. No. L-1299, November 16, 1903
parental figures. That is what is called in economics as ‘zero-value
labor.’ Facts: Don Vicente Perez filed a complaint asking that the court
determine the amount due the plaintiff for interpreting in these
When you go to service to another that is compensated, again, not all Islands, for services rendered the Tabacalera Company. Defendant
of it is covered by the Labor Code. There is tenant-landlord denied that the company and the defendant as its agent, had
relationship. There is quasi-contract. There is labor done in civic solicited the services of the. plaintiff as interpreter
organizations. There is labor done by members of the cooperative
between the cooperative. In the end, you have a very small Issue: Whether or not defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff for
percentage of labor under employer-employee relationship that is services it rendered as an interpreter. -YES.
covered by the Labor Code. And it is important to bring this out
because there is a sub-issue of jurisdiction and the law that is Held: It does not appear that any written contract was entered into
applicable. When you are talking about employer-employee between the parties for the employment of the plaintiff as
relationship, the law that is inquired to settle the dispute or resolve the interpreter, or that any other innominate contract was entered into;
dispute is the Labor Code. If the Labor Code is not used, then in all but whether the plaintiff's services were solicited or whether they
likelihood it is not EE-ER relationship. were offered to the defendant for his assistance, inasmuch as these
services were accepted and made use of by the latter, we must
So you have there two (2) principles: consider that there was a tacit and mutual consent as to the
1. Not all labor for another is compensated. In fact, most labor rendition of the services. This gives rise to the obligation upon the
[for another] is not compensated/uncompensated. person benefited by the services to make compensation therefor,
2. Not all labor for another that is compensable is covered by since the bilateral obligation to render service as interpreter, on the
the Labor Code. Only employer-employee relationship is one hand, and on the other to pay for the services rendered, is
covered. thereby incurred. The supreme court of Spain in its decision of
February 12, 1889, holds, among other things, "that not only is
Now when we talk about labor that is compensable under the Labor there an express and tacit consent which produces real contracts
Code and labor that is not compensable under the Labor Code, the but there is also a presumptive consent which is the basis of
demarcation line is social justice. [The] Labor Code is an quasi contracts, this giving rise to the multiple juridical relations
implementation of social justice. Long before there was a Labor Code, which result in obligations for the delivery of a thing or the
there was already labor rendered to another which is not the result of rendition of a service."
social justice. When did social justice issue? From the fore of human
existence. It was by the reason of the industrial revolution. So that is why you have in Civil Law, if there is somebody who
collapses and a doctor is passing by and the doctor attends to him…
1b. Industrial Revolution: Birth of Social Justice rushes him to the hospital and in fact saves his life. Can the doctor
The industrial revolution is the first appearance in human society of the later on bill this person? Can this person say, “I did not acquire your
person that is detached from his land. He used to be a tenant. And the services. I did not engage you”? Can he do that? One person who is
tenant-landlord relationship was very comprehensive. Tenant had the cured after the intervention of a doctor needs to pay. Why? That
right to remain in his tenanted land. He contributed his labor to the would be unjust enrichment. That is the system of quasi-contract.

IV-Manresa 2020-2021 Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde FORTES IN FIDE
 ADDU LAW LABOR LAW REVIEW with Fr. Agustin L. Nazareno__ 3

A person who takes over a business which has been abandoned and
sometime later the owner comes back and takes over. The one who 6. Comparative Tables
substituted has a right to receive compensation. That is quasi-contract.
Otherwise, there is unjust enrichment. But that is outside employee- For comparative table, if called for:
employer relationship. (Transcriber’s note: This is negotiorum gestio.
Negotiorum gestio is the voluntary administration of the property, Variable A Variable B
business or affairs of another, without his consent or authority, that Do not justify Do not used “justified”
creates an obligation for reimbursement for the necessary expenses
the gestor had spent.) Sample below (for illustration purposes only)

In the employer-employee set-up, we have the principle of

presumption of compensability in the absence of agreement. This
was brought to the fore by this technical phrase that I have kept on
hammering to you. What is that phrase? “Suffered or permitted to
work.” If you are suffered or permitted to work, even if there is no
formal engagement for you to be hired, or even if it is against the
basic policy being made known to you before that no overtime unless
there is prior approval management and the supervisor makes you
work overtime. Are you entitled to overtime pay? Yes, because you
were suffered or permitted to work by a duly designated
representative of the company. He is the representative by the
employer. That is the rule now if the service rendered is normally
compensable even without the consent of the beneficiary to serve him.

Give an example of a service that is not normally compensated. “Ako

pari. Kanang magpakumpisal ka. Maghatag kag santalanas
(Sakramento sa Pagdihog or Santalana) sa himatyon.” (I’m a priest. If
you do a confession... If you ask for a sacrament of penance and
reconciliation to be administered to a dying person...). Is that
compensable? Magpabayad ba ang pari ana? (Will the priest ask for
payment?) After I administer the last sacraments, can I say to the
relative of the person who ultimately dies, “Can you pay me for my
services?” That is not normally compensated. That is an exception to
the rule. Why? Because the nature of the service is not one that is
normally compensated. So the one that does it cannot expect
compensation.

3. Constitutional Provisions on Labor and Social Justice

Let us go to the other provisions in the Constitution. Just to point out
to you certain [things].

1987 Constitution. Article II, Section 9. – The State shall promote a just
and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and independence
of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that
provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising
standard of living, and an improved quality of life for all.

So there is this principle that a just and dynamic social order should be
the goal on the part of the state. This statement is an admission that
Philippine society is not overly just and [that it] does not have
prosperity as an inherent right. Our society is basically a society that is
defective. There is poverty, inadequate social services, and full
employment is nowhere to be seen. And the state is expected to make
it a just and dynamic society. How is this achieved? By making social
justice a living movement in Philippine society.

What is social justice? Social justice in the sense it is used in the

Constitution simply means the equalization of economic, political, and
social opportunities with special emphasis on the duty of the state to
tilt the balance of social forces in favor of the disadvantaged sector. In
the language of the 1935 Constitution , it means justice for the
common tao

Article 4. Construction. – Insert provision here and use a table. Insert a

1x1 table or you can just copy this table instead.

4. Department Orders or IRRs

DEPARTMENT ORDER 147, s. 2015

Rules on Contracting and Subcontracting

Tahoma instead since DOs and IRRs and usually lengthier than the
provisions of the law.

IV-Manresa 2020-2021 Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde FORTES IN FIDE
 ADDU LAW LABOR LAW REVIEW with Fr. Agustin L. Nazareno__ 4

Recently, in the United States, the US Supreme Court held that Title
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LABOR LAW VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against
discrimination because of their sexual orientation or gender identity:
July 3, 2020 by Reginald Matt Santiago
Principle: An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or
Article 4. Construction in Favor of Labor. – All doubts in the transgender violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
implementation and interpretation of the provisions of this Code, including
its implementing rules and regulations, shall be resolved in favor of labor. BOSTOCK v. CLAYTON COUNTY
590 U.S. _____, June 15, 2020
Civil Code. Article 1702. In case of doubt, all labor contracts shall be Penned by Justice Neil Gorsuch
construed in favor of the safety and decent living for the laborer.
Facts: In each of these cases, an employer allegedly fired a long-
Construction in Favor of Labor time employee simply for being homosexual or transgender.
Article 4 of the Labor Code enunciates the time-honored principle that Clayton County, Georgia, fired Gerald Bostock for conduct
all doubts in the implementation and interpretation of its provisions “unbecoming” a county employee shortly after he began
should be resolved in favor of labor. This rule applies not only in the participating in a gay recreational softball league. Altitude Express
interpretation of the provisions of the Labor Code but also of its IRRs. fired Donald Zarda days after he mentioned being gay. And R. G. &
It applies to all workers – whether in the government or in the private G. R. Harris Funeral Homes fired Aimee Stephens, who presented
sector – in order to give flesh and vigor to the pro-poor and pro-labor as a male when she was hired, after she informed her employer
provisions of the Constitution. It is in keeping with the constitutional that she planned to “live and work full-time as a woman.”
mandate of promotion social justice and affording protection to labor.
Thus, when conflicting interests of labor and capital are to be weighed Each employee sued, alleging sex discrimination under Title VII of
on the scales of social justice, the heavier influence of the latter should the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Eleventh Circuit held that Title VII
be counter-balanced by sympathy and compassion the law must does not prohibit employers from firing employees for being gay
accord the underprivileged worker. and so Mr. Bostock’s suit could be dismissed as a matter of law.
The Second and Sixth Circuits, however, allowed the claims of Mr.
In the area of employment bargaining, the employer stands on a Zarda and Ms. Stephens, respectively, to proceed.
higher footing than the employee. The law must protect labor to the
extent, at least, of raising him to equal footing in bargaining relations Held: An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or
with capital and to shield him from abuses brought about by the transgender violates Title VII. Title VII makes it “unlawful . . . for
necessity to survive. an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual,
But in the case of PLDT v. NLRC 164 SCRA 671 (1988) , the Supreme or otherwise to discriminate against any individual . . . because of
Court, although it is bound by social justice mandate of the such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” 42 U.
Constitution and the laws, such policy of social justice is not intended S. C. §2000e–2(a)(1).
to countenance wrongdoing.
The employers do not dispute that they fired their employees for
PLDT v. NLRC being homosexual or transgender. Rather, they contend that even
247 Phil. 681 (1988) intentional discrimination against employees based on their
homosexual or transgender status is not a basis for Title VII
Separation pay shall be allowed as a measure of social justice only liability. But their statutory text arguments have already been
in those instances where the employee is validly dismissed for rejected by this Court’s precedents. And none of their other
causes other than serious misconduct or those reflecting on his contentions about what they think the law was meant to do, or
moral character. Where the reason for the valid dismissal is, for should do, allow for ignoring the law as it is.
example, habitual intoxication or an offense involving moral
turpitude, like theft or illicit sexual relations with a follow worker, The lessons these cases hold are instructive here. First, it is
the employer may not be required to give the dismissed employee irrelevant what an employer might call its discriminatory practice,
separation pay, or financial assistance, or whatever other name it is how others might label it, or what else might motivate it. In
called, on the ground of social justice. Manhart, the employer might have called its rule a “life expectancy”
adjustment, and in Phillips, the employer could have accurately
Social Justice from Parens Patriae spoken of its policy as one based on “motherhood.” But such labels
and additional intentions or motivations did not make a difference
As to Parens Patriae Social Justice there, and they cannot make a difference here. When an employer
Historical Middle Ages when it Industrial revolution in fires an employee for being homosexual or transgender, it
Origin was the duty of the the 18th century when necessarily intentionally discriminates against individual in part
Crown to protect his the working class came because of sex.
subjects against into existence
marauding brigands. Second, the plaintiff’s sex need not be the sole or primary cause of
Assumption Everyone ins society Society is fatally flawed: the employer’s adverse action. In Phillips, Manhart, and Oncale, the
s stands on equal too many have too little, employer easily could have pointed to some other, nonprotected
footing with everyone and a few have too trait and insisted it was the more important factor in the adverse
else. much, creating a employment outcome. Here, too, it is of no significance if another
dangerous imbalance. factor, such as the plaintiff’s attraction to the same sex or
State Action By way of exception Permanent posture and presentation as a different sex from the one assigned at birth,
sustained task of might also be at work, or even play a more important role in the
granting more in law to employer’s decision.
those who have less in
life. Finally, an employer cannot escape liability by demonstrating that
Remedy if File a suit to compel Remedy is political: elect it treats males and females comparably as groups. Manhart is
State Fails government to act people who will instructive here. An employer who intentionally fires an individual
to Act implement social justice homosexual or transgender employee in part because of that
with specific legislation individual’s sex violates the law even if the employer is willing to
subject all male and female homosexual or transgender employees
to the same rule.

IV-Manresa 2020-2021 Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde FORTES IN FIDE
 ADDU LAW LABOR LAW REVIEW with Fr. Agustin L. Nazareno__ 5

IV-Manresa 2020-2021 Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde | Abcde FORTES IN FIDE