Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Labor Code was signed into Law decades after the Civil Code took
effect.
Same; Same; Same; Interpretation; Civil Code provisions must
yield to Article 110 of the Labor Code; Reason.In Herman vs.
Radio Corporation of the Philippines, this Court declared that
whenever two statutes of different dates and of contrary tenor are of
equal theoretical application to a particular case, the statute of
later date must prevail
_______________
*
FIRST DIVISION.
207
207
110 of the Labor Code and Articles 2241 to 2245 of the Civil Code
must be resolved in favor of the former. A contrary ruling would
defeat the purpose for which Article 110 was intended; that is, for
the protection of the working class, pursuant to the never-ending
quest for social justice.
Same; Same; Same; Serious financial losses as basis for
termination of the workers, not proved in case at bar.The
respondent Commission noted that AMEX failed to adduce
convincing evidence to prove that the financial reverses were indeed
serious. After a careful study of the records of the case, this Court
finds no reason to alter the findings of the respondent Commission.
Same; Same; Same; Same; No departure from the policy that
alleged losses in business operations must be proved; The term
wages, scope of.In Garcia vs. National Labor Relations
Commission, it was held that it is essentially required that the
alleged losses in business operations must be proved. This policy
was adopted to obviate the possibility of an employer fabricating
business reverses in order to ease out employees for no apparent
reason. Hence, no departure shall be
208
208
209
properties and the interests of the employer who can afford and
survive the hardships of life better than their workers. Universal
sense of human justice, not to speak of our specific social justice and
protection to labor constitutional injunctions dictate the
preferential lien that the above provision accord to labor. In line
with this policy, measures must be undertaken to ensure that such
constitutional mandate on protection to labor is not rendered
meaningless by an erroneous interpretation of the applicable laws.
210
Yrs. of
Employees
Separation
Service Rate
Pay
Backwages
1.
JoseAgripino
P1,300.00
P5,200.00
P6,l 74.96
2.
Bernardo
Bauzon
1,900.00
8,550.00
11,712.85
3.
Lucresia
Bilbao
2,300.00
8,050.00
19,247.00
4.
Teresita S.
Cruz
12
2,700.00
16,200.00
23,485.70
5.
Ma. Luisa
Cabrera
1,800.00
2,700.00
5,004.35
6.
Francis
Baaclo
3,500.00
12,550.00
32,986.90
7.
Guadalupe
Camacho
1,300.00
3,900.00
3,227.15
8.
Luz de Leon
1,300.00
3,250.00
3,110.85
9.
Mike
Villaverde
1,500.00
4,500.00
4,793.80
10. Nepomuceno
Medina
1,200.00
3,000.00
4,287.10
11. Edgardo
Mendoza
920.00
1,840.00
832.10
740.00
740.00
4,287.66
13. Amelia
Medina
740.00
740.00
6,822.81
14. Eduardo
Espejo
970.00
1,940.00
234.10
15. Ricardo
Batto
3,000.00
10,500.00
9,874.70
TOTAL
P83.360.00 P136,092.03
_______________
1
211
AMEX and its President, Tirso Revilla did not appeal from
this decision. But PNB, in its capacity as mortgageecreditor of AMEX interposed an appeal with the
respondent Commission, not being satisfied with the
outcome of the case. The appeal was primarily based on the
allegation that the workers lien covers unpaid wages only
and not the termination or severance pay which the
212
EMPLOYER.
Republic Act 6715; See Official Gazette, Manila 6,1989, page 15.
213
213
10
214
12
13
14
215
15
16
153 SCRA 639 (1987), citing National Federation of Labor Union vs.
18
19
20
216
217