Case

San Juan vs NLRC

MONTHLY PAID
Insular vs Inciong

Rule Applicable
Art 93: (a) Where an employee is made or
permitted to work on his scheduled rest day, he
shall be paid an additional compensation of at
least thirty percent (30%) of his regular wage.
An employee shall be entitled to such additional
compensation for work performed on Sunday
only when it is his established rest day.

Daily-paid employees and not paid their

wages on unworked regular holidays.
The law clearly states that every worker shall be
paid their regular holiday pay.

Mantrad vs Bacungan

Union vs Vivar

Allegation: Mantrade is not under legal

obligation to pay holiday pay (as provided
in Art. 94) to its monthly paid employees who
are uniformly paid by the
month, irrespective of the number of working
days therein, with a salary of
not less than the statutory or established
minimum wage.

Oceanic vs Inciong

OCEANIC discontinued the payment to regular

employees of regular holiday pays. As to the
reason for discontinuance, it took into
consideration Section 2, Rule IV, Book III of the
Rules and Regulation Implementing the Labor
Code and Policy Instructions No. 9.

Citibank vs Mole

Voluntary Arbitrator rendered an Award ordering

respondent to pay the employees their holiday
pay on the basis of his finding that the monthly
salary of said employees does not include their
pay for unworked holidays.
Through Policy Instructions No. 9, the
respondent stopped such payment.

Chartered Bank vs Ople

PET instituted an action for the payment of ten

(10) unworked legal holidays, as well as for
premium and overtime differentials for worked
legal holidays from November 1, 1974.
its work force consists of 149 regular
employees, all of whom are paid by the month.

FIELD PERSONNEL
Far East vs Labatique

Lebatique was hired as a driver and complained

of nonpayment of overtime work.

Issue
WON the hospital employees are
entitled to a full week salary with
paid 2 days off if they have completed
the 40-hr/5-day workweek?
WON they are entitled to compensation
for rest day?
Weekly off - 2 days per week.

WON they are entitled for Holiday Pay?

WON the Union members are entitled to

holiday pay?

W/N the Company may discontinue the

holiday pay

WON Citibank employees are legally

entitled of regular holiday pay provided
under Article 208 of the Labor Code,
considering their contractual wage scale

W/N the monthly salary of the

petitioners members already includes
holiday pay. NO

Whether or not Lebatique is a field

personnel?

WON the school faculty who according

to their contracts are paid per lecture
hour are entitled to unworked holiday
pay.

Ruling
NO>
There is nothing in the law that supports then
Secretary of Labors assertion that personnel in subject hospitals and
clinics are entitled to a full weekly wage for 7 days if they have completed
the 40-hour/5-day workweek in any given workweek.
The sole purpose of RA 5901 is
to shorten the working hours of health personnel and not to dole out 2days off with pay.

YES.
Monthly paid employees are not excluded from the benefits of
holiday pay. However, the implementing rules on holiday pay promulgated
by then Secretary of Labor excludes monthly paid employees from the
said benefits by inserting, under Rule IV, Book Ill of the implementing rules,
Sec. 2, which provides that: "employees who are uniformly paid by the
month, irrespective of the number of working days therein, with a salary of not
less than the statutory or established minimum wage shall be presumed to be
paid for all days in the month whether worked or not."
The provisions of LC on the entitlement to the benefits of holiday pay
are clear and explicit - it provides for both the coverage of and exclusion
from the benefits. In Policy Instruction #9, then Secretary of Labor went as
far as to categorically state that the benefit is principally intended for daily
paid employees, when the law clearly states that every worker shall be
paid their regular holiday pay. This is a flagrant violation of the mandatory
directive of Article 4.

YES.
Monthly paid employees are not excluded from the benefits of
holiday pay.
The questioned Sec. 2, Rule IV, Book III of the Integrated Rules and the
Secretarys Policy Instruction No. 9 add another excluded group, namely
employees who are uniformly paid by the month. While the additional exclusion
is only in the form of a presumption that all monthly paid employees have
already been paid holiday pay, it constitutes a taking away or a deprivation which
must be in the law if it is to be valid. An administrative interpretation which
diminishes the benefits of labor more than what the statute delimits or withholds
is obviously ultra vires."

The company may not discontinue the holiday pay to its employees.
Since the said rules and policy instructions were already existing and
effective prior to the execution of the Supplementary Agreement on April
27, 1976, it is clear that respondent company agreed to continue giving holiday
pay to its monthly paid employees knowing fully well that said employees are not
covered by the law requiring payment of holiday pay.
Even granting arguendo that the said issuance were promulgated after the
execution of the agreement, there is still no justification for withdrawal of holiday
pay benefits by respondent. company, in view of Section 11, Rule IV, Book III of
the Implementing Rules and Regulations, which explicitly provides:
Sec. 11. Relation to agreements. Nothing in this Rule shall justify an employer
in withdrawing or reducing any benefits, supplements or payments for unworked
holidays as provided it) existing individual or collective agreement or employer
practice or policy."

Yes. The CBA between the parties provides that monthly paid employees shall be
entitled to the additional holiday pay. This provision under the CBA cannot be
impaired by a subsequent rule of the Minister of Labor who refused to further
implement the Arbitrator's award.
It should be clear that the terms and conditions of a collective bargaining
agreement constitute the sacred law between the parties as long as they do not
contravene public order, interest or policy.
Stated differently, the arbitrator's award when stipulated by the parties to be
conclusive becomes part and parcel of the CBA.
In this case, the private respondent premises its action on the invalidated rule (PI
9) and policy instruction, hence, it is clear that the employees belonging to the
petitioner association are entitled to the payment of ten (10) legal holidays
under Articles 82 and 94 of the Labor Code, aside from their monthly salary.
They are not among those excluded by law from the benefits of such holiday pay.
The 251 working days divisor is the result of subtracting all Saturdays, Sundays
and the ten (10) legal holidays from the total number of calendar days in a year.
If the employees are already paid for all non-working days, the divisor should be
365 and not 251.

Drivers, like Lebatique, are under the control and supervision of management
officers. Lebatique, therefore, is a regular employee whose tasks are usually
necessary and desirable to the usual trade and business of the company. Thus,
he is entitled to the benefits accorded to regular employees of Far East, including
overtime pay and service incentive leave pay.

YES
Subject holiday pay is provided for in the Labor Code

Regular
Reg Hol

OT

RegHol
Rest
RHRD Rate
OT

100
200%

Absences
200

30%
60.0%
260.0%

60
260
260

200%
30%
260.0%
30%
338.00%

200
60
260
78
338

Is he absent with pay?

YES
shall be
entitled to
the
benefit
provided
herein

bsent with pay?

NO

d he work on the day immediately preceding the HOLIDAY?