GR No.

L-1309 July 26, 1948

THE SHELL COMPANY OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, LIMITED vs. NATIONAL LABOR UNION,

Acting on a petition by the labor body called the "National Labor Union," the Industrial Relations Court has issued a ruling in which,
inter alia, the oil firm "The Shell Company of Philippine Islands, To their workers who work at night (from sunset until they get up the
next day) an additional compensation of 50% on their regular wages if they worked during the day. It seems that the comany needs the
night service of a certain number of workers, since the planes coming from abroad usually land and take off at night, which is why it is
necessary to do night work for the supply of gasoline and lubricants, and for Other things.Certiorari for us to revoke.

The appellant argues and argues that not only is there no legal provision that empowers the Industrial Relations Court to order the
payment of additional compensation to workers who work at night but, on the contrary, Commonwealth Law No. 444 Exempts the
employer from such an obligation since this law provides for cases in which the payment of overtime is compulsory, and such cases do
not include night work.

The Workers' Union, for its part, contends that the power at issue forms part of the broad and effective powers conferred upon the said
tribunal by Commonwealth Law No. 103, the Organic Charter of the Industrial Relations Tribunal; And that Commonwealth Act No.
444 invoked has no application to the present case, since it is necessarily limited in scope, referring specifically and exclusively to the
maximum daily working time allowed in industrial establishments - the day of 8 hours.

Our conclusion is that the workers' union appealed has the reason on its part. For a clear and thorough elucidation of the points discussed,
it is convenient, even at the risk of lengthening this paper, to transcribe the relevant legal provisions that are articles 1, 4 and 13 of
Commonwealth Law No. 103. Helas here:

SECTION 1. The Judge: his appointment, qualifications, compensation, tenure. - There is hereby established a Court of
Industrial Relations, which shall have jurisdiction over the entire Philippines, to consider, investigate, decide, and settle any
question, matter, controversy or dispute arising between, and / or affecting, employers and employees or laborers , And
landlords and tenants or farm-laborers, and regulate the relation between them, subject to, and in accordance with, the
provisions of this Act. The Court shall keep a record of all its proceedings and shall be presided over by a Judge to Be appointed
by the President of the Philippines with the consent of the Commission on Appointments of the National Assembly. The Judge
of the Court shall hold office during good conduct until he or she has been unable to discharge the duties of his or her office. His
qualifications shall be the same as those provided in the Constitution for members of the Supreme Court and shall receive an
annual compensation of ten thousand pesos and shall be entitled to travel expenses and per diems when performing official
duties outside the City of Manila. The Department of Justice shall have executive oversight over the Court.

SEC. 4. Strikes and lockouts. - The Court shall take cognizance for the purpose of prevention, arbitration, decision and
settlement, of any industrial or agricultural dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout, arising form as regards wages,
shares or compensation, hours of labor or conditions of Tenancy or employment, between employers and employees or between
landlords and tenants or farm-laborers, provided that the number of employees, laborers or tenants or farm-laborers involved
exceeds thirty, and such industrial or agricultural dispute is submitted to the Court by The Secretary of Labor, or by any or both
of the parties to the controversial and certified by the Secretary of Labor as existing and proper to be dealt with by the Court
for the sake of public interest. In all such cases, The Secretary of Labor or the party or parties submitting the provisions, shall
clearly and specifically state in writing the questions to be decided. Upon the submission of such a controversy or question by
the Secretary of Labor, his intervention therein as authorized by law, shall cease.

The Court shall, before hearing the dispute and in the course of such hearing, endeavor to reconcile the parties and induce them
to settle the dispute by amicable agreement. If any agreement as to the whole or any part of the dispute is reached by the parties,
a memorandum of its terms shall be made in writing, signed and acknowledged by the parties thereto before the Judge of the
Court or any official acting in his And / or before a notary public. The memorandum shall be filed in the office of the Clerk of
the Court, and, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, shall, as between the parties to the agreement, have the same effect as,
and be deemed to be, a decision or award .

SEC. 13. Character of the award . - In making an award, order or decision, under the provisions of section four of this Act, the
Court shall not be restricted to the specific relief or claims made by the parties to the industrial or agricultural dispute, but may
include in the award , Order or decision any matter or determination which shall be deemed necessary or expedient for the
purpose of setting the dispute or of further industrial or agricultural disputes.

It is evident from the provisions transcribed as follows: (a) that when a dispute arises between the principal and the employee or worker,
vgr. On matters of wages, the Industrial Relations Court has jurisdiction throughout the territory of the Philippines to consider,
investigate and resolve said dispute, setting such wages as it deems fair and reasonable; (B) that for the purposes of prevention,
arbitration, decision and settlement, the Industrial Relations Tribunal also has jurisdiction to hear any disputes - industrial or agricultural
- resulting from any differences with respect to wages, shares or compensations, hours of work, Conditions of employment or partnership
between employers and employees or workers and between owners and landowners or agricultural workers prior to the fulfillment of
certain requirements and conditions, when it is seen that said dispute causes or can cause a strike; (C) In the exercise of its powers
specified above, the Industrial Relations Court is not limited, in deciding the dispute, to grant the remedy or remedies requested by the
parties to the dispute, but may include in the order or decision Any matter or determination for the purpose of settling the dispute or to
prevent further industrial or agricultural disputes.

In the case in question, there is undoubtedly an industrial dispute. While the company, the Shell company, is not willing to pay its
workers at night higher salaries than the one-man workers, the NationalLabor Union, to which Shell's workers are affiliated, demands
another type of salary for the service Night - 50% more. This is the dispute, industrial litigation. Now, what has the Court of Industrial
Relations done after the conflict was submitted to its jurisdiction? For it is precisely what is said in the Commonwealth Law No. 103,
an organic charter of its creation and operation, namely to consider, investigate and prosecute the dispute, then resolve it in the sense in
which it has been resolved, that is, by remunerating the work At night with 50% more of the day's wages. And this is perfectly legal
both within the scope of Article 1 of said Law No. 103 which empowers the Industrial Relations Court to decide any dispute over wages
and compensation in the manner it deems reasonable and convenient, as within the framework of Article 4 of the same law that authorizes
said court to prosecute and decide any industrial or agricultural lawsuit or controversy determines the outbreak of a strike or shop to
cause it. However, what is done by the Trbunal of Industrial Relations in this case is also legal within the framework of article 13 of the
same law No. 103, an article which, as seen, not only empowers said court to grant the remedy But also to go further, that is, to grant
remedies not expressly requested,

It is evident that with these broad powers the State has proposed to equip the Industrial Relations Tribunal to the maximum extent of its
usefulness and efficiency, making it not a mere academic agency, but truly active, dynamic and efficient - in a word, the official
machinery Par excellence in the formidable and thorny task of resolving industrial, and religious conflicts of a certain kind, thereby
preventing and avoiding those strikes and strikes that both afflict and harm not only businessmen and workers but, in general,
community. In his concurrent opinion delivered in the authoritative case of Ang Tibay against Industrial Relations Tribunal 1 (RG No.
46496), the Magisterado Laurel has very rightly expressed the fundamental idea that underlies the creation of this court, with the
following pronouncement:

In Commonwealth Act No. 103, and by it, our government no longer performs the role of mere mediator or intervenor but that
of supreme arbiter . (Italics are ours.).

The appellant argues, however, that although it is true that in case of dispute the Industrial Relations Court has, by virtue of its organic
law, the power to fix wages, that power is not absolute, but is subject to certain Restrictions and cut-offs, provided by the law commonly
known by law for the eight-hour day, Commonwealth Act No. 444, the pertinent articles of which are dealt with in full below:

SECTION 1. The legal working day for any person employed by another shall be no more than eight hours daily. When the
work is not continuous, the time during which the laborer is not working and can leave his working place and can not be
completely counted.

SEC. 3. Work may be performed beyond eight hours a day in case of actual or impending emergencies caused by serious
accidents, fire, flood, typhoon, earthquake, epidemic, or other disaster or calamity in order to prevent loss to life and property
or imminent danger To public safety; Or in case of an emergency to be performed on the machines, equipment, or installations
in order to avoid a serious loss which the employer would otherwise suffer, or some other just cause of a similar nature; But in
all such cases the laborers and employees shall be entitled to receive compensation for the overtime work performed at the
same rate as their regular wages or salary, plus at least twenty-five per centum additional.

In case of national emergency the government is empowered to establish rules and regulations for the operation of the factories
and to determine the wages to be paid the laborers.

SEC. 4. No person, firm, or corporation, business establishment or place or center of labor shall compel an employee or laborer
to work during Sundays and legal holidays, unless he is paid an additional sum of at least twenty-five per cent of his regular
Remuneration: Provided however , that this prohibition shall not apply to public utilities performing some public service such
as supplying gas, electricity, power, water, or providing means of transportation or communication.

However, the lawyers of the appellant argue - these articles specify the cases in which the payment of extra or additional compensation
is authorized and are only, namely: (a) in case of "overtime" or work in excess of the Regular hours for imperative reasons of urgency
in the event of a disaster or accident, or to prevent loss or repair; (B) in case of work for Sundays and holidays; (C) in case of emergency,
and there is nothing to do with night work; Then the order in question is illegal, as it is not authorized by law. "In the absence - the
lawyers of the appellant stress - legislation authorizing the payment of extra compensation for work done at night,Expression unius est
exclusio alterius . Where, as the case may be at statute expressly specifies the cases where payment of extra compensation may be
demanded, extra compensation may be allowed in those cases only, and in no others. The provisions of the Commonwealth Act No. 444
may not be enlarged by implication or otherwise. Expressum facit cease tacitum .

The argument is wrong. Law No. 444 is not applicable to the present case, it being evident that it has a specific purpose, namely: (a) to
set the maximum working day in 8 hours; (B) to indicate certain exceptional cases in which the work can be authorized outside that
day; (C) provide a bonus, which must not be less than 25% of the regular salary, for overtime or work in excess of 8 hours.

In the case of Manila Electric, petitioner-appellant, against The Public Utities Employees' Association, 2Such restriction is an exception
to the general power of the court to set, in cases of dispute, the wages and compensation to be paid by employers to employees and
workers; And since Article 4 refers only to salary or compensation for work during the days of Sundays and official holidays, it is
obvious that it can not refer to salary or additional compensation for work outside the eight-hour period which is usually carried out
from the beginning Hours of the morning to late hours, as it is one thing to work on Sundays and official holidays, and another very
different thing is to work at night outside the eight-hour day on weekdays. Applying the legal maximum " The wages and compensation
to be paid by employers to employees and workers; And since Article 4 refers only to salary or compensation for work during the days
of Sundays and official holidays, it is obvious that it can not refer to salary or additional compensation for work outside the eight-hour
period which is usually carried out from the beginning Hours of the morning to late hours, as it is one thing to work on Sundays and
official holidays, and another very different thing is to work at night outside the eight-hour day on weekdays. Applying the legal
maximum " The wages and compensation to be paid by employers to employees and workers; And since Article 4 refers only to salary
or compensation for work during the days of Sundays and official holidays, it is obvious that it can not refer to salary or additional
compensation for work outside the eight-hour period which is usually carried out from the beginning Hours of the morning to late hours,
as it is one thing to work on Sundays and official holidays, and another very different thing is to work at night outside the eight-hour
day on weekdays. Applying the legal maximum " And since Article 4 refers only to salary or compensation for work during the days of
Sundays and official holidays, it is obvious that it can not refer to salary or additional compensation for work outside the eight-hour
period which is usually carried out from the beginning Hours of the morning to late hours, as it is one thing to work on Sundays and
official holidays, and another very different thing is to work at night outside the eight-hour day on weekdays. Applying the legal
maximum " And since Article 4 refers only to salary or compensation for work during the days of Sundays and official holidays, it is
obvious that it can not refer to salary or additional compensation for work outside the eight-hour period which is usually carried out
from the beginning Hours of the morning to late hours, as it is one thing to work on Sundays and official holidays, and another very
different thing is to work at night outside the eight-hour day on weekdays. Applying the legal maximum " And another very different
thing is to work at night out of the eight-hour day on weekdays. Applying the legal maximum " And another very different thing is to
work at night out of the eight-hour day on weekdays. Applying the legal maximum "Expresses unius est exclusio alterius , "it can be
argued, without fear of error, that a law providing a specific exception to its general provisions, such as additional compensation for
work on Sundays and official holidays, excludes any other such as compensation Additional for night work on weekdays. "Another case
in which this maxim may almost invariably be followed by statute which makes certain specific exceptions to its general provisions. Here
wemay safely assume that all other exceptions were intended to be excluded. "(Wabash R. Co., United States, 178 Fed., 5, 101 CCA
133; Cella Commision Co. v. Bohlinger, 147 Fed., 419; 78 CCA 467, Kunkalman vs. Gibson, 171 Ind., 503; 84 NE 985; Hering vs.
Clement, 133 App. Div., 293; 117 NY, Supp.

The nightly work that Shell demands from its workers is not an "overtime", in the sense that this word is used in Law No. 444, but is
a full working day , also of 8 hours: alone Which, instead of being performed by day, is done at night. In other words, the night job here
is not just an extension, an overtime or an overtime of regular day work, but it is another kind of work, absolutely independent of the
day's work. That is why there are two shifts: the shift of workers who work by day; And the shift of those who work at night. So it is
not strange that the legislator did not include this type of work among the cases of "overtime" indicated in the mentioned law No. 444.

The question that, in our opinion, must be determined is whether among the general faculties of the Court of Industrial Relations that
are admitted without dipusta, is to consider the day at night as a full day of work; That of estimating it as more burdensomeThat the
day's journey; And consequently, to provide and order that it be paid with 50% more of the regular daily wages. Our answer is
affirmative: all this is included among the general powers of the Court of Industrial Relations. If this court has, in cases of dispute, the
power to fix the wages it deems fair and reasonable for day labor, there is no reason why it should not have the same power with respect
to night wages; It is as much work as one. And with respect to the appreciation that night work is heavier and burdensome than day
work and therefore deserves higher remuneration, there are no grounds for revoking or altering it. There is no possible argument against
the universal fact that regular, normal and ordinary work is day labor, And that work at night is very exceptional and justified only by
certain imperatively unavoidable reasons. For something mankind has always worked during the day.

Reasons for hygiene, medicine, morality, culture, sociology, establish that the work of nocho has many disadvantages, and when there
is no choice but to do so, it is only fair that you pay better than usual to compensate for a certain Point to the worker of such
inconveniences. Undoubtedly, night work not only affects the worker's health in the long run, it deprives the worker of certain things
that make life relatively pleasant, such as a complete and uninterrupted rest and certain moments of solace , Leisure or spiritual and
cultural expansion that could have at the end of the work in the evening and during the early hours of the night. It is said that the worker
can rest during the day after having worked all night; But can the rest of the day give the body that tonic and that complete restorative
effect which can only provide the natural rest at night? It is also said that some prefer to work at night under our scorching weather, thus
avoiding the heat of the day. We fear, however, that this is better spoken than practiced. We believe that from time immemorial the
universal rule is that man works at night more by irremediable necessity than by pleasant convenience.

To vulgar, universal opinion, we must add the previous opinion, the expert criterion. The opinion of the writers and experts militates
decisively in favor of the thesis that night work is harder and more costly than day labor, considering for this with marked repugnance
and consequently compelling capitalist management to establish a higher scale Of wages as an incentive to the workers to accept it . We
could cite several authorities, but not to extend this paper too much we chose to transcribe only some, namely:

. . . Then, it must be remembered that it is distinctly unphysiological to turn the night into day and deprive the body of the
beneficial effects of sunshine. The human organism revolts against this procedure. Added to artificial lighting are reversed and
unnatural times of eating, resting, and sleeping. Much of the inferiority of nightwork can doubtless be traced to the failure of
the workers to secure proper rest and sleep, by day. Because of inability or lack of opportunity to sleep, nightworkers often
spend their days in performing domestic duties, joining the family in the midday meal, 'tinkering about the place', watching the
baseball game, attending the theater or taking a ride in the Car. It is not strange that nightworkers tend to be less efficient than
dayworkers and more time. . . (The Management of Labor Relations,

Nightwork. - Nightwork has gained a measure of prominence in the modern industrial system in connection with continuous
industries, that is, industries in which the nature of the processes makes it necessary to keep machinery and equipment in
constant operation. Even in continuous industries the trend is definitely in the direction of FOUR shifts of 6 hours each, with
provision for an automatic change of shift for all workers at stated intervals. Some discussion has taken place with regard to
the lengths of the period any workers should be allowed to remain on the night shift. A weekly change of shifts is common,
especially where three or four shifts are in operation; In other cases the change is made fortnightly or monthly; In still other
instances, no alternation is provided for, the workers remaining on day - or nightwork permanently,

There is a sharp difference of opinion concerning the relative merits of these systems. Advocates of the weekly change of shifts
contend that the strain of nightwork and the difficulty of getting adequate sleep during the day make it unwise for workers to
remain on the "graveyard" shift for more than a week at a time. Opponents urge that repeated changes make it more difficult
to settle down to either kind of shift and that after the first week nightwork becomes less trying while the ability to sleep by
day increases. Workers themselves react in various ways to the different systems. This much, however, is certain: Few persons
react favorably to nightwork, whether the shift is continuous or alternating. Outside of continuous industries, nightwork can
scarcely be justified, and, even in these,

Nightwork can not be regarded as desirable, either from the point of view of the employer or from the wage earner. It is
uneconomical unless overhead costs are unusually heavy. Frequently the scale of wages is higher as an inducement to
 employees to accept employment on the night shift, and the rate of production is generally lower. (Management of Labor
Relations, by Watkins & Dodd, pp. 522-524; emphasis ours.)

. . . The lack of sunlight tends to produce anemia and tuberculosis and to predispose to other ills. Nightwork brings increased
liability to eyestrain and accident. Serious moral dangers also are likely to result from the necessity of traveling the streets
alone at night, and from the interference with normal home life. From an economic point of view, moreover, the investigations
showed that nightwork was unprofitable, being inferior to day work both in quality and in quantity. Wherever it had been
abolished, in the long run the efficiency both of the management and of the workers was raised. Furthermore, it was found that
nightwork laws are a valuable aid in enforcing acts fixing the maximum period of employment. (Principles of Labor Legislation,
by Commons and Andrews, 4th Revised Edition, p. 142.)

Special regulation of nightwork for adult men is a comparatively recent development. Some European countries have adopted
laws placing special limitations on hours of nightwork for men, and others prohibit such work except in continuous
processes. (Principles of Labor legislation, 4th Revised Edition by Common & Andrews, p.

Nightwork has almost invariably been looked upon with disfavor by students of the problem because of the excessive strain
involved, especially for women and young persons, the large amount of lost time consequent upon exhaustion of the workers,
the additional strain and responsibility upon the executive staff , The tendency of excessively fatigued workers to "keep going"
on artificial stimulants, the general curtailment of time for rest, leisure, and cultural improvement, and the fact that night
workers, although precluded to an extent from the activities of day Attempt to enter into these activities, with a resultant
impairment of physical well-being. It is not contended, of course, that nightwork could be abolished in the continuous-process
industries, but it is possible to put such industries upon a three- or four-shifts basis, And to prohibit nightwork for women and
children. (Labor's Progress and Problems, Vol. I, pp. 464, by Professors Millis and Montgomery.)

Nightwork. - Civilized peoples are beginning to recognize the fact that except in cases of necessity or in periods of great
emergency, nightwork is socially undesirable. Under our modern industrial system, however, nightwork has greatly aided the
production of commodities, and has offered a significant method of cutting down the ever-increasing overhead costs of
industry. This result has led employers to believe that such work is necessary and profitable. Here again one meets the conflict
of economic and social interests. Under these circumstances it is necessary to discover whether nightwork has deleterious
effects upon the health of laborers and tends to reduce the ultimate supply of efficient labor. If it can prove that nightwork
affects adversely both the quality and quantity of productive labor, Its discontinuance will undoubtedly be sanctioned by
employers. From a social point of view, even a relatively high degree of efficiency in night operations should be forfeited if it
is purchased with rapid exhaustion of the health and energy of the workers. From an economic point of view, nightwork may
be necessary if the employer is to meet the demand for his product, or if he is to maintain his market in the face of increasing
competition or mounting variable production costs.

Industrial experience has shown that the possession of extra-ordinary physical strength and self-control facilitates the reversal
of the ordinary routine of work and night rest, with the little or no unfavorable effect on health and efficiency. Unusual vitality
and self-control, however, are not common possessions. It has been found that the most serious obstacle to a reversal of the
routine is the lack of self-discipline. Many night workers enter into the numerous activities of day life that preclude sleep, and
continue to attempt to do their work at night. Evidence gathered by the British Health of Munition Workers' Committee places
permanent night workers, whether judged on the basis of output or loss of time, in a very unfavorable positions as compared
with day workers.

Systems of nightwork differ. There is a continuous system, in which employees work by night and do not attend the
establishment at all by day, and the discontinuous system, in which the workers change to the day turn at regular intervals,
usually every other week. There are, of course, minor variations in these systems, depending on the nature of the industry and
the wishes of management. Such bodies as the British Health Munition Workers' Committee have given us valuable conclusions
concerning the effect of nightwork. Continuous nightwork is definitely less productive than the discontinuous system. The
output of the continuous day shift does not make up for this loss in production.

There is, moreover, a marked difference between the rates of output of night and day shifts on the discontinuous plan. In each
case investigated the inferiority of night work was definitely established. This inferiority is evidently the result of the night
worker's failure to secure adequate amounts of sleep and rest during the day. The system of continuous shifts, especially for
women, is regarded by all investigators as undesirable. Women on continuous nightwork are likely to perform domestic duties,
and this added strain undoubtedly accounts for the poorer results of their industrial activities.

The case against nightwork, then, may be said to rest upon several grounds. In the first place, there are the remotely injurious
effects of permanent nightwork manifested in the later years of the worker's life. Of more immediate importance to the average
worker is the disarrangement of his social life, including the recreational activities of his leisure hours and the ordinary
associations of normal family relations. From an economic point of view, nightwork is discouraged because of its adverse effect
upon efficiency and output. The moral argument against nightwork in the case of women is that the night shift forces the
workers to go to and from the factory in darkness. Recent experiences of industrial nations have added much to the evidence
against the continuation of nightwork, Except in extraordinary circumstances and unavoidable emergencies. The immediate
prohibition of nightwork for all laborers is hardly practicable; Its discontinuance in the case of women employees is
unquestionably desirable. 'The night was made for rest and sleep and not for work' is a common saying among wage-earning
people, and many of them dream of an industrial order in which there will be in the night shift. (Labor Problems, 3rd Edition,
pp. 325-328, by Watkins & Dodd.).

In the merits of the above, the appeal of certiorari interposed is denied and the judgment of the Industrial Reconstruction Court is
confirmed, with costs in charge of the appellant. That is how it is commanded. Paras, Interim Pres., Fair, Pablo, Perfecto, Bengzon,
Padilla and Tuason, MM., Are satisfied.