U.

P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

LABOR LAW
CANONICAL DOCTRINES
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
TOPIC DOCTRINE CITED IN CITING
Presumption of The presumption is that the employer Perfecto M. Fuji Television
Inherent and the employee are on unequal Pascua v. Bank Network, Inc. v.
Inequality footing so the State has the Wise, Inc. Arlene Espiritu, G.R.
responsibility to protect the employee. No. 204944-45, Dec.
This presumption, however, must be G.R. No. 191460 | 3, 2014; citing
taken on a case-to-case basis. Jan. 31, 2018 Jaculbe v. Silliman
University, G.R. No.
156934, Mar. 16,
2007, citing Mercury
Drug Co, Inc. v. CIR,
G.R. No. L-23357,
Apr. 30, 1974; &
Philippine
Association of
Service Exporters v.
Drilon, G.R. No.
81958, June 30, 1988

RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT

TOPIC DOCTRINE CITED IN CITING
POEA- As part of a seafarer's deployment for Sharpe Sea Wallem Maritime
Standard overseas work, he and the vessel Personnel, Inc. v. Services, Inc. v.
Employment owner or its representative local Mabunay, Jr. Tanawan, G.R. No.
Contract manning agency are required to 160444, Aug. 29,
integrated in execute the POEA-SEC. Containing G.R. No. 206113 | 2012; citing Coastal
every the standard terms and conditions of Nov. 6, 2017 Safeway Marine
employment seafarers' employment, the POEA- Services, Inc. v.
contract SEC is deemed included in their Delgado, G.R. No.
contracts of employment in foreign 168210, June 17,
ocean-going vessels. 2008; citing Pentagon
International
Shipping, Inc. v.
Adelantar, G.R. No.
157373, July 27,
2004
Estafa vs. Illegal It is well-established in jurisprudence People v. Racho y People v. Chua, G.R.
Recruitment that a person may be charged and Somera No. 187052, Sept. 13,
convicted for both illegal recruitment 2012; citing People v.
and estafa.The reason therefor is not G.R. No. 227505 | Chua, G.R. No.
hard to discern: illegal recruitment is Oct. 2, 2017 184058, Mar. 10,
malum prohibitum,while estafa is 2010; citing People v.
mala in se.In the first, the criminal Comila, G.R. No.
intent of the accused is not necessary 171448, Feb. 28,
for conviction. In the second, such 2007; citing People v.
intent is imperative. Estafa under Hernandez, G.R. No.

Page 1 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

Article 315, paragraph 2 (a) of the 141221-36, Mar. 7,

Revised Penal Code is committed by 2002; citing People v.
any person who defrauds another by Sagaydo, G.R. No.
using fictitious name, or falsely 124671-75, Sept. 29,
pretends to possess power, influence, 2000 & People v.
qualifications, property, credit, Banzales, G.R. No.
agency, business or imaginary 132289, Jul. 18, 2000
transactions, or by means of similar
deceits executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission
of fraud.

LABOR STANDARDS
TOPIC DOCTRINE CITED IN CITING
Designation as Managerial employees are ranked as Asia Pacific Paper Industries
"manager" not Top Managers, Middle Managers and Chartering (Phils.) Corp. v. Laguesma,
enough to be First Line Managers. The mere fact Inc. v. Farolan G.R. No. 101738,
considered that an employee is designated April 12, 2000; citing
managerial "manager" does not ipso facto make G.R. No. 151370 | Dunlop Slazenger
employee him one-designation should be Dec. 4, 2002 (Phils.), INC., v.
reconciled with the actual job Secretary of Labor,
description of the employee for it is the G.R. No. 131248,
job description that determines the Dec. 11, 1998; citing
nature of employment. Engineering
Equipment, Inc. v.
NLRC, G.R. No. L-
59221, Dec. 26, 1984
Field Personnel The definition of a "field personnel" is Far East Auto Bus Transport
not merely concerned with the Agricultural Systems v. Bautista,
location where the employee regularly Supply, Inc. v. G.R. No. 156367,
performs his duties but also with the Lebatique May 16, 2005
fact that the employee's performance
is unsupervised by the employer. We G.R. No. 162813 |
held that field personnel are those Feb. 12, 2007
who regularly perform their duties
away from the principal place of
business of the employer and whose
actual hours of work in the field cannot
be determined with reasonable
certainty. Thus, in order to determine
whether an employee is a field
employee, it is also necessary to
ascertain if actual hours of work in the
field can be determined with
reasonable certainty by the employer.
In so doing, an inquiry must be made
as to whether or not the employee's
time and performance are constantly
supervised by the employer.
No-work-no-pay If there is no work performed by the Coca-Cola Aklan Electric
employee, there can be no wage. Bottlers, Phils., Cooperative Inc. v.
Inc. v. Iloilo Coca- NLRC, G.R. No.
Cola Plant 121439, Jan. 25,
Employees Labor 2000; citing Caltex
Union Refinery Employees
Association v.

Page 2 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

G.R. No. 195297 | Brillantes, G.R. No.

Dec. 5, 2018 123782, Sept. 16,
1997; citing Social
Security System vs.
SSS Supervisors'
Union, G.R. No. L-
31832, October 23,
1982; citing J .P.
Heilbronn Co. vs.
National Labor Union,
G.R. No. L-5121, Jan.
30, 1953
Inclusion of It is well-established in jurisprudence Philippine Spring Philippine
commission in that the determination of whether or Water Resources, Duplicators, Inc. v.
basic salary not a commission forms part of the Inc. v. Court of NLRC, G.R. No.
basic salary depends upon the Appeals 110068, Feb. 15,
circumstances or conditions for its 1995, and Boie-
payment. In Phil Duplicators, Inc. v. G.R. No. 205278 | Takeda Chemicals,
NLRC, the Court held that June 11, 2014 Inc. v. De la Serna,
commissions earned by salesmen G.R. No. 92174, Dec.
form part of their basic salary. The 10, 1993
salesmen's commissions, comprising
a pre-determined percentage of the
selling price of the goods sold by each
salesman, were properly included in
the term basic salary for purposes of
computing the 13th month pay. The
salesmen's commissions are not
overtime payments, nor profit-sharing
payments nor any other fringe benefit,
but a portion of the salary structure
which represents an automatic
increment to the monetary value
initially assigned to each unit of work
rendered by a salesman. On the other
hand, in Boie-Takeda Chemicals, Inc.
v. De la Serna, the so-called
commissions paid to or received by
medical representatives were
excluded from the term basic salary
because these were paid to the
medical representatives and rank-
and-file employees as productivity
bonuses, which were generally tied to
the productivity, or capacity for
revenue production, of a corporation
and such bonuses closely resemble
profit-sharing payments and had no
clear direct or necessary relation to
the amount of work actually done by
each individual employee.
Civil Code The exemption under Article 1708 Spouses Gaa v. CA, G.R. No.
exemption ('The laborer's wages shall not be Balanoba v. L-44169, Dec. 3,
against subject to execution or attachment, Madriaga 1985
garnishment except for debts incurred for food,
only refers to shelter, clothing and medical G.R. No. 160109 |
attendance') of the Civil Code favors Nov. 22, 2005

Page 3 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

"wages" not only laboring men or women whose

"salaries" work is manual. Belonging to this
class are the workers who usually
look to the reward of a day's labor for
immediate or present support. They,
more than any other persons, are the
ones in need of the exemption 27
which, needless to say, does not
encompass any and all workers.
Elements of Prubankers Association v. Prudential Philippine Prubankers
Wage Distortion Bank and Trust Company laid down Geothermal, Inc. Association v.
the four elements of wage distortion, Employees Union Prudential Bank &
to wit: (1) an existing hierarchy of v. Chevron Trust Co., G.R. No.
positions with corresponding salary Geothermal Phils. 131247, Jan. 25,
rates; (2) a significant change in the Holdings, Inc. 1999
salary rate of a lower pay class
without a concomitant increase in the G.R. No. 207252 |
salary rate of a higher one; (3) the Jan. 24, 2018
elimination of the distinction between
the two levels; and (4) the existence
of the distortion in the same region of
the country.

POST-EMPLOYMENT
TOPIC DOCTRINE CITED IN CITING
Test to The tests for determining employer- Tesoro v. Metro "Brotherhood" Labor
determine employee relationship are: (a) the Manila Retreaders, Unity Movement v.
employer- selection and engagement of the Inc. Zamora, G.R. No. L-
employee employee; (b) the payment of wages; 48645, Jan. 7, 1987;
relationship (c) the power of dismissal; and (d) the G.R. No. 171482 | citing Investment
employer's power to control the March 12, 2014 Planning Corp. of the
employee with respect to the means Phil. v. SSS, G.R. No.
and methods by which the work is to L-19124, Nov. 18,
be accomplished. The last is called the 1967, Manfinco
"control test," the most important Trading Corp. v.
element. Ople, G.R. No. L-
37790, Mar. 25, 1976
Determination There are two separate instances Pangilinan v. Viernes v. NLRC,
of "regular" whereby it can be determined that an General Milling G.R. No. 108405,
employee employment is regular: (1) if the Corp. April 4, 2003; citing
particular activity performed by the De Leon v. NLRC,
employee is necessary or desirable in G.R. No. 149329 | G.R. No. 70705, Aug,
the usual business or trade of the July 12, 2004 21, 1989 & Abasolo v.
employer; and, (2) if the employee has NLRC, G.R. No.
been performing the job for at least a 118475, Nov. 29,
year. 2000
Project Once a project or work pool employee Freyssinet Maraguinot, Jr. v.
Employee has been: (1) continuously, as Filipinas Corp. v. NLRC, G.R. No.
Attaining Status opposed to intermittently, rehired by Lapuz 120969, Jan. 22,
of Regular the same employer for the same tasks 1998; citing PNCC v.
Employee; or nature of tasks; and (2) these tasks G.R. No. 226722 | NLRC, G.R. No.
Requisites are vital, necessary, and March 18, 2019 85323, June 20, 1989
indispensable to the usual business or & Capitol Industrial
trade of the employer, then the Construction Groups
employee must be deemed a regular v. NLRC, G.R. No.
employee.

Page 4 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

105359, April 22,

1993;
Valid Project The Court has upheld the validity of a E. Ganzon, Inc. v. Salinas, Jr. v. NLRC,
Employment project-based contract of employment Ando, Jr. G.R. No. 114671,
provided that the period was agreed Nov. 24, 1999; citing
upon knowingly and voluntarily by the G.R. No. 214183 | Caramol v. NLRC,
parties, without any force, duress or Feb. 20, 2017 G.R. No. 102973,
improper pressure being brought to Aug. 24, 1993
bear upon the employee and absent
any other circumstances vitiating his
consent; or where it satisfactorily
appears that the employer and
employee dealt with each other on
more or less equal terms with no moral
dominance whatever being exercised
by the former over the latter; and it is
apparent from the circumstances that
the period was not imposed to
preclude the acquisition of tenurial
security by the employee.
Test to According to jurisprudence, the Omni Hauling GMA Network v.
determine principal test for determining whether Services, Inc. v. Pabriga, G.R. No.
project particular employees are properly Bon 176419, Nov. 27,
employment characterized as "project employees" 2013; citing ALU-
as distinguished from "regular G.R. No. 199388 | TUCP v. NLRC, G.R.
employees," is whether or not the Sept. 3, 2014 No. 109902, Aug. 2,
employees were assigned to carry out 1994
a "specific project or undertaking," the
duration (and scope) of which were
specified at the time they were
engaged for that project. The project
could either be (1) a particular job or
undertaking that is within the regular or
usual business of the employer
company, but which is distinct and
separate, and identifiable as such,
from the other undertakings of the
company; or (2) a particular job or
undertaking that is not within the
regular business of the corporation. In
order to safeguard the rights of
workers against the arbitrary use of the
word "project" to prevent employees
from attaining a regular status,
employers claiming that their workers
are project employees should not only
prove that the duration and scope of
the employment was specified at the
time they were engaged, but also that
there was indeed a project.
Fixed-term A fixed-term employment is valid only Regala v. Manila Brent School, Inc. v.
employment; under certain circumstances. We thus Hotel Corp. Zamora, G.R. No. L-
when valid laid down in Brent School, Inc. v. 48494, Feb. 5, 1990
Zamora parameters or criteria under G.R. No. 204684,
which a "term employment" cannot be Oct. 5, 2020
said to be in circumvention of the law
on security of tenure, namely:

Page 5 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

1) The fixed period of employment

was knowingly and voluntarily
agreed upon by the parties without
any force, duress, or improper
pressure being brought to bear
upon the employee and absent
any other circumstances vitiating
his consent; or
2) It satisfactorily appears that the
employer and the employee dealt
with each other on more or less
equal terms with no moral
dominance exercised by the
former or the latter.
Regular As with project employment, although Universal Robina Abasolo v. NLRC,
seasonal the seasonal employment Sugar Milling G.R. No. 118475,
employment arrangement involves work that is Corp. v. Acibo Nov. 29, 2000; citing
seasonal or periodic in nature, the Bacolod-Murcia
employment itself is not automatically G.R. No. 186439 | Milling Co., Inc. v.
considered seasonal so as to prevent Jan. 15, 2014 NLRC, 204 SCRA
the employee from attaining regular 155, 158 [1991];
status. To exclude the asserted Visayan Stevedore
"seasonal" employee from those Transportation
classified as regular employees, the Company v. CIR, 19
employer must show that: (1) the SCRA 426 [1967];
employee must be performing work or Industrial-
services that are seasonal in nature; Commercial
and (2) he had been employed for the Agricultural Workers'
duration of the season. Hence, when Organization
the "seasonal" workers are (ICAWO) v. CIR, 16
continuously and repeatedly hired to SCRA 562, 565-566
perform the same tasks or activities for [1966], Manila Hotel
several seasons or even after the Company v. Court of
cessation of the season, this length of Industrial Relations, 9
time may likewise serve as badge of SCRA 184, 186
regular employment. [1963]
Requirements When dealing with a probationary Enchanted Abbott Laboratories
of employer in employee, the employer is made to Kingdom, Inc. v. v. Alcaraz, G.R. No.
probationary comply with two (2) requirements: first, Verzo 192571, Jul. 23,
employment the employer must communicate the 2013; citing Section 6
regularization standards to the G.R. No. 209559 | (d), Rule I, Book VI of
probationary employee; and second, Dec. 9, 2015 the Implementing
the employer must make such Rules of the Labor
communication at the time of the Code
probationary employee's engagement.
If the employer fails to comply with
either, the employee is deemed as a
regular and not a probationary
employee.
Penalty Infractions committed by an employee Negros Slashers Sagales v. Rustan's
imposed should should merit only the corresponding v. Alvin Teng Commercial Corp.,
be penalty demanded by the G.R. No. 166554,
commensurate circumstance. The penalty must be G.R. No. 187122 | Nov. 27, 2008; citing
to infraction commensurate with the act, Feb. 22, 2012 CREA v. NLRC, G.R.
conduct or omission imputed to the No. 102993, Jul. 14,
employee and must be imposed in 1995; citing Radio
Communications of

Page 6 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

connection with the disciplinary the Phils. v. NLRC,

authority of the employer. G.R. No. 102958,
Jun. 25, 1993
Loss of With respect to rank-and-file Padrillo v. Etcuban, Jr. v.
confidence; personnel, loss of trust and confidence Bandojo Sulpicio Lines, Inc.,
managerial vs as ground for valid dismissal requires G.R. No. 148410,
rank-and-file proof of involvement in the alleged G.R. No. 224854 | Jan. 17, 2005; citing
employees events in question, and that mere March 27, 2019 Caoile v. NLRC, G.R.
uncorroborated assertions and No. 115491, Nov. 24,
accusations by the employer will not 1998
be sufficient. But as regards a
managerial employee, the mere
existence of a basis for believing that
such employee has breached the trust
of his employer would suffice for his
dismissal. Hence, in the case of
managerial employees, proof beyond
reasonable doubt is not required, it
being sufficient that there is some
basis for such loss of confidence, such
as when the employer has reasonable
ground to believe that the employee
concerned is responsible for the
purported misconduct, and the nature
of his participation therein renders him
unworthy of the trust and confidence
demanded by his position.
Resignation; A resignation must be unconditional Fortuny AZCOR
requisites and with the intent to operate as such. Garments/Johnny Manufacturing, Inc. v.
Moreover, the intention to relinquish Co v. Castro NLRC, G.R. No.
an office must concur with the overt act 117963, Feb. 11,
of relinquishment. The act of the G.R. No. 150668 | 1999
employee before and after the alleged Dec. 15, 2005
resignation must be considered to
determine whether in fact, he or she
intended to relinquish such
employment. If the employer
introduces evidence purportedly
executed by an employee as proof of
voluntary resignation and the
employee specifically denies the
authenticity and due execution of said
document, the employer is burdened
to prove the due execution and
genuineness of such document.
Dismissal for Where the dismissal is for a just cause, Spouses Maynes Agabon v. NLRC,
valid cause but as in the instant case, the lack of v. Oreiro G.R. No. 158693,
no procedural statutory due process should not Nov. 17, 2004
due process nullify the dismissal, or render it illegal G.R. No. 206109 |
liable for or ineffectual. However, the employer Nov. 25, 2020
nominal should indemnify the employee for the
damages violation of his statutory rights, as ruled
in Reta v. National Labor Relations
Commission. The indemnity to be
imposed should be stiffer to
discourage the abhorrent practice of
"dismiss now, pay later," which we

Page 7 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

sought to deter in the Serrano ruling.

The sanction should be in the nature of
indemnification or penalty and should
depend on the facts of each case,
taking into special consideration the
gravity of the due process violation of
the employer. Under the Civil Code,
nominal damages is adjudicated in
order that a right of the plaintiff, which
has been violated or invaded by the
defendant, may be vindicated or
recognized, and not for the purpose of
indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss
suffered by him.
Abandonment; To prove abandonment, two elements Stanley Fine Josan, JPS, Santiago
requisites must concur: Furniture v. Cargo Movers v.
1. Failure to report for work or Gallano Aduna, G.R. No.
absence without valid or justifiable 190794, February 22,
reason; and G.R. No. 190486 | 2012; citing Icawat v.
2. A clear intention to sever the Nov. 26, 2014 NLRC, G.R. No.
employer-employee relationship 133573, June 20,
2000; citing Artemio
Labor vs. NLRC, 248
SCRA 183 [1995],
Cindy and Lynsy
Garment vs. NLRC,
284 SCRA 38 [1998],
and Hagonoy Rural
Bank, Inc. vs. NLRC,
285 SCRA 297
[1998].
Constructive Constructive dismissal exists when Petchan v. The Central Azucarera de
dismissal there is cessation of work because Southern Cross Bais, Inc. v. Siason,
continued employment is rendered Hotel Manila, Inc. G.R. No. 215555,
impossible, unreasonable or unlikely, July 29, 2015; citing
as an offer involving a demotion in rank G.R. No. 242117 Morales v. Harbour
and a diminution in pay. (Notice) | June 3, Centre Port Terminal,
2019 Inc., G.R. No.
174208, Jan. 25,
2012; citing Globe
Telecom, Inc. v.
Florendo-Flores, 438
Phil. 756, 766 (2002);
citing Philippine
Japan Active Carbon
Corporation v. NLRC,
et al., 253 Phil. 149,
152, (1989).
Preventive Preventive suspension is justified Maula v. Ximex Artificio v. National
suspension; where the employee's continued Delivery Express, Labor Relations
when proper employment poses a serious and Inc. Commission, G.R.
imminent threat to the life or property No. 172988, July 26,
of the employer or of the employee's G.R. No. 207838 | 2010; citing
co-workers. Without this kind of threat, Jan. 25, 2017 Maricalum Mining
preventive suspension is not proper. Corp. v. Decorion,
G.R. No. 158637,
April 12, 2006 and

Page 8 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

Valiao v. CA, G.R.

No. 146621, Jul. 30,
2004; citing Secs. 8
and 9, Rule XXIII,
Implementing Book V
of the Labor Code

Note: The IRR

provisions on
preventive
suspension was
deleted after the
issuance of D.O. No.
40-03, but
jurisprudence still
cites the provisions
despite their repeal.
Due process in The holding of a formal hearing or trial Oriental Pepsi Cola Products
labor cases is discretionary with the Labor Arbiter Shipmanagement Philippines, Inc. v.
and is something that the parties Co., Inc. v. Bastol Santos, G.R. No.
cannot demand as a matter of right. 165968, April 14,
The requirements of due process are G.R. No. 186289 | 2008; citing Shoppes
satisfied when the parties are given the June 29, 2010 Manila, Inc. v.
opportunity to submit position papers National Labor
wherein they are supposed to attach Relations
all the documents that would prove Commission, G.R.
their claim in case it be decided that no No. 147125, January
hearing should be conducted or was 14, 2004; citing Mark
necessary. Roche International
v. NLRC, G.R. No.
123825, Aug. 31,
1999
Separation pay As stated, "an illegally dismissed Litex Glass and Globe-Mackay Cable
in lieu of employee is entitled to reinstatement Aluminum Supply and Radio
reinstatment; as a matter of right." But when an v. Sanchez Corporation v. NLRC,
when proper atmosphere of antipathy and G.R. No. 82511,
antagonism has already strained the G.R. No. 198465 | March 3, 1992
relations between the employer and April 22, 2015
employee, separation pay is to be
awarded as reinstatement can no
longer be equitably effected.

LABOR RELATIONS
TOPIC DOCTRINE CITED IN CITING
Right to self- The right to form or join a labor Samahan ng Reyes v. Trajano.
organization organization necessarily includes the Manggagawa sa G.R. No. 84433, June
includes the right to refuse or refrain from Hanjin Shipyard v. 2, 1992
right not to join a exercising the said right. It is self- Bureau of Labor
union evident that just as no one should be Relations
denied the exercise of a right granted
by law, so also, no one should be G.R. No. 211145 |
compelled to exercise such a Oct. 14, 2015
conferred right.
Collective Relations between private employers GSIS Family Bank Alliance of
bargaining in the and their employees are subject to the Employees Union Government Workers
public sector minimum requirements of wage laws, v. Villanueva v. Minister of Labor,

Page 9 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

labor, and welfare legislation. Beyond G.R. No. L-60403,

these requirements, private G.R. No. 210773 | Aug. 3, 1983
employers and their employees are at Jan. 23, 2019
liberty to establish the terms and
conditions of their employment
relationship. In contrast with the
private sector, the terms and
conditions of employment of
government workers are fixed by the
legislature; thus, the negotiable
matters in the public sector are limited
to terms and conditions of
employment that are not fixed by law.
Mixing of The alleged inclusion of supervisory Holy Child Samahang
supervisory and employees in a labor organization Catholic School v. Manggagawa sa
rank-and-file seeking to represent the bargaining Sto. Tomas Charter Chemical-
employees does unit of rank-and-file employees does Super v. Charter
not divest union not divest it of its status as a legitimate G.R. No. 179146 | Chemical and
of legitimate labor organization. July 23, 2013 Coating Corp., G.R.
labor No. 169717, March
organization 16, 2011; citing
status Republic v.
Kawashima Textile
Mfg., Philippines,
Inc., G.R. No.
160352, July 23,
2008
Confidential Although Article 245 of the Labor Tunay na Metrolab Industries,
employees also Code limits the ineligibility to join, form Pagkakaisa ng Inc. v. Roldan-
barred from and assist any labor organization to Manggagawa sa Confesor, G.R. No.
joining unions managerial employees, jurisprudence Asia Brewery v. 108855, February 28,
has extended this prohibition to Asia Brewery, Inc. 1996; citing Philips
confidential employees or those who Industrial
by reason of their positions or nature G.R. No. 162025, Development, Inc. v.
of work are required to assist or act in Aug. 3, 2010 NLRC, G.R. No.
a fiduciary manner to managerial 88957, June 25, 1992
employees and hence, are likewise
privy to sensitive and highly
confidential records. Confidential
employees are thus excluded from the
rank-and-file bargaining unit. The
rationale for their separate category
and disqualification to join any labor
organization is similar to the inhibition
for managerial employees because if
allowed to be affiliated with a Union,
the latter might not be assured of their
loyalty in view of evident conflict of
interests and the Union can also
become company-denominated with
the presence of managerial
employees in the Union membership.
Having access to confidential
information, confidential employees
may also become the source of undue
advantage. Said employees may act

Page 10 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

as a spy or spies of either party to a

collective bargaining agreement.
Beneficiaries of The benefits of a collective bargaining Mactan Workers Leyte Land
CBA agreement extend to the laborers and Union v. Aboitiz Transportation v.
employees in the collective bargaining Leyte Farmers' and
unit, including those who do not G.R. No. L-30241 | Laborers' Union, 80
belong to the chosen bargaining labor June 30, 1972 Phil. 842 (1948);
organization. Land Settlement and
Development
Corporation v.
Caledonia Pile
Workers' Union, 90
Phil. 817 (1952);
Price Stabilization
Corporation v. Prisco
Workers' Union, 104
Phil. 1066 (1958) and
International Oil
Factory Workers
Union v. Martinez,
110 Phil. 595 (1960).
Community or The basic test for determining the Ang Lee v. University of the
Mutuality of appropriate bargaining unit is the Samahang Phils. v. Ferrer-
Interests Test in application of a standard whereby a Manggagawa ng Calleja, G.R. No.
determining unit is deemed appropriate if it affects Super Lamination 96189, July 14, 1992;
appropriate a grouping of employees who have citing Democratic
bargaining unit substantial, mutual interests in wages, G.R. No. 193816 | Labor Association v.
hours, working conditions, and other Nov. 21, 2016 Cebu Stevedoring
subjects of collective bargaining. Company, Inc., G.R.
No. L-10321, Feb. 28,
1958
Factors in The fundamental factors in Sta. Lucia San Miguel Corp. v.
determining determining the appropriate collective Commercial Corp. Laguesma, G.R. No.
bargaining unit bargaining unit are: (1) the will of the v. Secretary of 100485, Sept. 21,
employees (Globe Doctrine); 6 (2) Labor and 1994
affinity and unity of the employees' Employment
interest, such as substantial similarity
of work and duties, or similarity of G.R. No. 162355 |
compensation and working conditions Aug. 14, 2009
(Substantial Mutual Interests Rule);
(3) prior collective bargaining history;
and (4) similarity of employment
status.
Right to A local union which has affiliated itself National Union of MSMG-UWP v. Hon.
disaffiliate with a federation is free to sever such Bank Employees Ramos, G.R. No.
affiliation anytime and such v. Philnabank 113907, Feb. 28,
disaffiliation cannot be considered Employees 2000; citing Ferrer vs.
disloyalty. In the absence of specific Association National Labor
provisions in the federation's Relations
constitution prohibiting disaffiliation or G.R. No. 174287 | Commission, 224
the declaration of autonomy of a local Aug. 12, 2013 SCRA 410; People's
union, a local may dissociate with its Industrial and
parent union. Commercial
Employees and
Workers
Organization (FFW)
vs. People's

Page 11 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

Industrial and
Commercial Corp.,
112 SCRA 440
Disaffiliation of A local union which is not Abaria v. National Villar v. Inciong, Nos.
affiliated union independently registered cannot, Labor Relations L-50283-84, April 20,
without upon disaffiliation from the federation, Commission 1983
independent exercise the rights and privileges
registration; granted by law to legitimate labor G.R. Nos. 154113,
effect organizations; thus, it cannot file a 187778, 187861 &
petition for certification election. 196156 | Dec. 7,
2011
Fraud and For fraud and misrepresentation to De Ocampo Mariwasa Siam
misrepresenta- constitute grounds for cancellation of Memorial Schools, Ceramics, Inc. v.
tion as ground union registration under the Labor Inc. v. Bigkis Secretary of the
for cancellation Code, the nature of the fraud and Mangga-gawa sa Department of Labor
of union misrepresentation must be grave and De Ocampo and Employment
registration compelling enough to vitiate the Memorial School,
consent of a majority of union Inc. G.R. No. 183317 |
members. Dec. 21, 2009
G.R. No. 192648 |
March 15, 2017
Attorney's fees The general rule is that attorney's Mariño, Jr. v. BPI Employees
only chargeable fees, negotiation fees, and other Gamilla Union-ALU v. NLRC
to union funds; similar charges may only be collected
exception from union funds, not from the G.R. No. 149763 | G.R. Nos. 69746-47,
amounts that pertain to individual July 7, 2009 76842-44, 76916-17 |
union members. As an exception to March 31, 1989
the general rule, special assessments
or other extraordinary fees may be
levied upon or checked off from any
amount due an employee for as long
as there is proper authorization by the
employee.
A deadlock A 'deadlock' is . . . the counteraction Tabangao Shell Capitol Medical
presupposes of things producing entire stoppage; . Refinery Center Alliance of
reasonable . . There is a deadlock when there is a Employees Concerned
effort at good complete blocking or stoppage Association v. Employees-UFSW v.
faith bargaining resulting from the action of equal and Pilipinas Shell Laguesma, G.R. No.
opposed forces . . . . The word is Petroleum Corp. 118915, February 4,
synonymous with the word impasse, 1997; citing Divine
which . . . 'presupposes reasonable G.R. No. 170007 | Word University of
effort at good faith bargaining which, April 7, 2014 Tacloban v.
despite noble intentions, does not Secretary of Labor
conclude in agreement between the and Employment,
parties.' G.R. No. 91915,
September 11, 1992
Labor contracts Article 1702 of the New Civil Code Bank of the Holy Cross of Davao
construed in provides that, in case of doubt, all Philippine Islands College, Inc. v. Holy
favor of labor labor legislation and all labor v. Bank of the Cross of Davao
contracts shall be construed in favor Philippine Islands Faculty Union-
of the safety and decent living of the Employees Union- KAMAPI, G.R. No.
laborer. Thus, this Court has ruled Metro Manila 156098, June 27,
that any doubt or ambiguity in the 2005, 461 SCRA 319,
contract between management and G.R. No. 175678 | Babcock-Hitachi
the union members should be Aug. 22, 2012 (Phils.), Inc. v.
resolved in favor of the latter. Babcock Hitachi
(Phils.), Inc., Makati

Page 12 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

Employees Union,
G.R. No. 156260,
March 10, 2005, 453
SCRA 156, 161;
Mindanao Steel
Corporation v.
Minsteel Free
Workers
Organization
Cagayan de Oro,
G.R. No. 130693,
March 4, 2004, 424
SCRA 614, 618 and
Plastic Town Center
Corporation v.
National Labor
Relations
Commission, G.R.
No. 81176, April 19,
1989, 172 SCRA 580,
587.
Preconditions The mechanics of collective Associated Labor Kiok Loy v. NLRC,
for collective bargaining are set in motion only Unions v. Ferrer- G.R. No. L-54334,
bargaining when the following jurisdictional Calleja Jan. 22, 1986
preconditions are present, namely, (1)
possession of the status of majority G.R. No. 77282 |
representation by the employees' May 5, 1989
representative in accordance with any
of the means of selection and/or
designation provided for by the Labor
Code; (2) proof of majority
representation; and (3) a demand to
bargain.
ULP; how In the past, we have ruled that "unfair Culili v. Eastern Great Pacific Life
committed labor practice refers to 'acts that Telecommunica- Employees Union v.
violate the workers' right to organize.' tions Philippines, Great Pacific Life
The prohibited acts are related to the Inc. Assurance Corp.,
workers' right to self-organization and G.R. No. 126717,
to the observance of a CBA." We have G.R. No. 165381 | February 11, 1999
likewise declared that "there should Feb. 9, 2011
be no dispute that all the prohibited
acts constituting unfair labor practice
in essence relate to the workers' right
to self-organization." Thus, an
employer may only be held liable for
unfair labor practice if it can be shown
that his acts affect in whatever
manner the right of his employees to
self-organize.
Dismissal based To validly terminate the employment Slord General Milling
on union of an employee through the Development Corporation v. Casio,
security clause enforcement of the union security Corp. v. Noya G.R. No. 149552,
clause, the following requisites must March 10, 2010;
concur: (1) the union security clause G.R. No. 232687 | citing Alabang
is applicable; (2) the union is Feb. 4, 2019 Country Club, Inc. v.
requesting for the enforcement of the National Labor
union security provision in the CBA; Relations

Page 13 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

and (3) there is sufficient evidence to Commission, G.R.

support the decision of the union to No. 170287,
expel the employee from the union. February 14, 2008
Procedural It is settled that [the procedural Pilipino Telephone CCBPI Postmix
requirements for requirements for a valid strike] are Corp. v. Pilipino Workers Union v.
strike are mandatory in nature and failure to Telephone NLRC, G.R. No.
mandatory comply therewith renders the strike Employees 114521, November
illegal. Association 27, 1998

G.R. Nos. 160058

&160094 | June 22,
2007
Good faith as Generally, a strike based on a "non- National Union of Panay Electric Co.,
defense against strikeable" ground is an illegal strike: Workers in Hotels, Inc. vs. National
illegal strike corollarily, a strike grounded on ULP Restaurants and Labor Relations
is illegal if no such acts actually exist. Allied Industries v. Commission, et al, G
As an exception, even if no ULP acts National Labor R. No. 102672,
are committed by the employer, if the Relations October 4, 1995, 248
employees believe in good faith that Commission SCRA 688; Master
ULP acts exist so as to constitute a Iron Labor Union
valid ground to strike, then the strike G.R. No. 125561 | (MILU), et al. vs.
held pursuant to such belief may be March 6, 1998 National Labor
legal. Relations
Commission, et al.,
G.R No. 92009,
February 17, 1993,
219 SCRA 47;
People's Industrial
and Commercial
Employee's and
Workers
Organization (FFW),
et al. vs. People's
Industrial and
Commercial
Corporation, et al., L-
37687, March 15,
1982, 112 SCRA 440

MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVE
TOPIC DOCTRINE CITED IN CITING
Rights of While our laws endeavor to give life to St. Luke’s Medical Duncan Association
Management the constitutional policy on social Center Employees of Detailman-
justice and the protection of labor, it Association - AFW PTGWO v. Glaxo
does not mean that every labor v. National Labor Wellcome
dispute will be decided in favor of the Relations Philippines, Inc., G.R.
workers. The law also recognizes that Commission No. 162994,
management has rights which are September 17, 2004;
also entitled to respect and G.R. No. 162053 | citing Sta. Catalina
enforcement in the interest of fair play. March 7, 2007 College v. NLRC,
G.R. No. 144483,
Nov. 19, 2003; citing
Sosito v. Aguinaldo
Development Corp.,
G.R. No. L-48926,
Dec. 14, 1987

Page 14 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

Management The right of an employer to regulate St. Luke's Medical Philippine Industrial
Prerogative all aspects of employment, aptly Center, Inc. v. Security Agency
called "management prerogative," Sanchez Corp. v. Aguinaldo,
gives employers the freedom to G.R. No. 149974,
regulate, according to their discretion G.R. No. 212054 | June 15, 2005; citing
and best judgment, all aspects of March 11, 2015 Mendoza vs. Rural
employment, including work Bank of Lucban, G.R.
assignment, working methods, No. 155421, July 7,
processes to be followed, working 2004; citing Metrolab
regulations, transfer of employees, Industries, Inc. vs.
work supervision, lay-off of workers Roldan-Confesor,
and the discipline, dismissal and G.R. No. 108855,
recall of workers. In this light, courts Feb. 28, 1996; &
often decline to interfere in legitimate Bontia vs. NLRC, 325
business decisions of employers. In Phil. 443 (1996)
fact, labor laws discourage
interference in employers' judgment
concerning the conduct of their
business.
Validity of It is well recognized that company China Banking Alcantara, Jr. v. CA,
Company Policy policies and regulations are, unless Corp. v. Borromeo G.R. No. 143397,
shown to be grossly oppressive or Aug., 2, 2002; citing
contrary to law, generally binding and G.R. No. 156515| San Miguel Corp. v.
valid on the parties and must be Oct.19, 2004 Ubaldo, G.R. No.
complied with until finally revised or 92859, Feb. 1, 1993;
amended unilaterally or preferably citing GTE
through negotiation or by competent Directories
authority. Corporation vs.
Sanchez, G.R. No.
76219, May 27, 1991
Management Although jurisprudence recognizes Hongkong Bank Morales v. Harbour
Prerogative the validity of the exercise by an Independent Centre Port Terminal,
subject to CBA employer of its management Labor Union v. G.R. No. 174208,
prerogative and will ordinarily not Hongkong and Jan. 25, 2012; citing
interfere with such, this prerogative is Shanghai Banking Norkis Trading v.
not absolute and is subject to Corp. Limited NLRC, G.R. No.
limitations imposed by law, collective 168159, Aug, 19,
bargaining agreement, and general G.R. No. 218390 | 2005; citing
principles of fair play and justice. Feb. 28, 2018 Philippine Airlines,
Inc. v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 85985, 13 August
1993; citing UST v.
NLRC, G.R. No.
89920, Oct. 18, 1990;
citing Abbott
Laboratories [Phil.]
Inc. v. NLRC, 154
SCRA 713 [1987];
Transfer is valid We have long recognized the Duldulao v. Court Sentinel Security
management prerogative of management to of Appeals Agency, G.R. No.
prerogative transfer an employee from one office 122468, September
to another within the same business G.R. No. 164893, 3, 1998; citing Asis v.
establishment, as the exigency of the March 1, 2007 NLRC, G.R. No.
business may require, provided that 82478, Sept. 7, 1989,
the transfer does not result in a Chu v. NLRC, G.R.
demotion in rank or a diminution in No. 106107 Jun. 2,
salary, benefits and other privileges of 1994, Pocketbell

Page 15 of 16
abon3298
U.P LAW BOC abon3298 LABOR LAW

the employee; or is not unreasonable, Phils., Inc. v. NLRC,

inconvenient or prejudicial to the G.R. No. 10683, Jan.
latter; or is not used as a subterfuge 20, 1995, and
by the employer to rid himself of an Philippine Telegraph
undesirable worker. and Telephone Co. v.
Laplana, G.R. No.
76645, Jul. 23, 1991
Enforceability of For a bonus to be enforceable, it must American Wire Philippine Appliance
Bonus have been promised by the employer and Cable Daily Corp. v. CA, G.R. No.
and expressly agreed upon by the Rated Employees 149434, June 3,
parties, or it must have had a fixed Union v. American 2004; citing Globe
amount and had been a long and Wire and Cable Mackay Cable v.
regular practice on the part of the Co. NLRC, G.R. No.
employer. To be considered a "regular 74156, June 29,
practice," the giving of the bonus G.R. No. 155059 | 1988; citing Oceanic
should have been done over a long April 29, 2005 Pharmacal
period of time, and must be shown to Employees Union v.
have been consistent and deliberate. Inciong, G.R. No. L-
50568, Nov. 7, 1979
Bona fide To justify a bona fide occupational Capin-Capiz v. Star Paper Corp. v.
occupational qualification, the employer must prove Brent Hospital and Simbol, G.R. No.
qualification two factors: (1) that the employment Colleges, Inc. 164774, April 12,
qualification is reasonably related to 2006; citing
the essential operation of the job G.R. No. 187417 | Philippine Telegraph
involved; and, (2) that there is a Feb. 24, 2016 & Telephone Co. v.
factual basis for believing that all or NLRC, G.R. No.
substantially all persons meeting the 118978, May 23,
qualification would be unable to 1997
properly perform the duties of the job.

JURISDICTION AND REMEDIES

TOPIC DOCTRINE CITED IN CITING
"Reasonable The money claims within the original Paredes v. Feed Portillo v. Rudolf Lietz,
Causal and exclusive jurisdiction of labor the Children Inc., G.R. No. 196539,
Connection" and arbiters are those which have some Phils., Inc. October 10, 2012;
the jurisdiction reasonable causal connection with citing San Miguel v.
of labor tribunals the employer-employee relationship. G.R. No. 184397 | NLRC, G.R. No.
Sept. 9, 2015 80774, May 31, 1988

Page 16 of 16
abon3298