Chapter Two

RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT

TOPICS PER SYLLABUS

II.
RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT
A. Recruitment of local and migrant workers
1. Illegal recruitment (Sec. 5, R.A. No. 10022)
a) License vs. authority
b) Essential elements of illegal recruitment
c) Simple illegal recruitment
d) Illegal recruitment in large scale
e) Illegal recruitment as economic sabotage
f) Illegal recruitment vs. estafa
g) Liabilities
(i) Local recruitment agency
(ii) Foreign employer
(a) Theory of imputed knowledge
(iii) Solidary liability
h) Pre-termination of contract of migrant worker
2. Direct hiring
B. Regulation and enforcement
1. Suspension or cancellation of license or authority (Art. 35, Labor Code)
2. Regulatory and visitorial powers of the DOLE secretary
3. Remittance of foreign exchange earnings
4. Prohibited activities

A.
RECRUITMENT OF
LOCAL AND MIGRANT WORKERS

1. INTRODUCTION.
The Syllabus speaks of recruitment of:
1. Local workers; and
2. Migrant or overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) .
Notably, the rules are different for the two (2) situations mentioned above. Hence, discussion herein shall
be divided in accordance with these two classifications.
I.
RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT
FOR LOCAL EMPLOYMENT1
1. DEFINITION OF IMPORTANT TERMS.
The following definitions are relevant to the rules governing local employment:
 1. Private Recruitment and Placement Agency (PRPA) or Agency refers to any individual,
partnership, corporation or entity engaged in the recruitment and placement of persons for local
employment.
2. PRPA Branch refers to any extension office of a licensed PRPA.
3. Representative refers to a person acting as an agent of a licensed PRPA registered with the Regional
Office and granted Authority in the recruitment of persons for local employment.
4. Recruitment and Placement refers to any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting,
utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contract services, promising or advertising
for local employment, whether for profit or not; provided, that any person or entity which in any
manner, offers or promises employment for a fee, to two (2) or more persons shall be deemed engaged
in recruitment and placement.
5. Recruit refers to any individual promised, contracted, or enlisted for employment for a fee.
6. License refers to the certificate issued by the DOLE authorizing an individual, partnership,
corporation, or entity to operate a private recruitment and placement agency.
7. Authority to Operate Branch Office refers to the document granted by the DOLE authorizing the
licensed PRPA to establish and operate a branch office.
8. Authority to Recruit refers to the document granted by the DOLE Regional Office authorizing a
person to conduct recruitment activities in the region.
9. Licensee refers to any person or entity duly licensed and authorized by the DOLE to operate a private
recruitment and placement agency.
10. Recruitment Contract refers to the agreement entered into between a licensed PRPA or its
authorized representative and a recruit stating clearly the terms and conditions of the recruitment in a
language known and understood by the recruit.
11. Employment Contract refers to the agreement entered into between the employer and a recruit
stating clearly the terms and conditions of the employment in a language known and understood by the
recruit.
12. Placement Fee refers to the amount charged by a PRPA from a recruit as payment for placement
services.
13. Service Fee refers to the amount charged by a PRPA from an employer as payment for employment
services.2
2. APPLICATION/RENEWAL OF LICENSE OF PRIVATE RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT
AGENCY FOR LOCAL EMPLOYMENT.
a. Qualifications.
An applicant for a license to operate a private recruitment and placement agency must possess the
following:
1. Must be a Filipino citizen, if single proprietorship. In case of a partnership or a corporation, at least
seventy-five percent (75%) of the authorized capital stock must be owned and controlled by Filipino citizens;
2. Must have a minimum net worth of P200,000.00 in the case of single proprietorship and partnership or a
minimum paid-up capital of P500,000.00 in the case of a corporation.
3. The owner, partners or the officers of the corporation must be of good moral character and not otherwise
disqualified by law;
4. Must have an office space with a minimum floor area of fifty (50) square meters. 3
b. Place to file application.
Application for license shall be filed with the Regional Office having jurisdiction over the place where the
applicant wishes to establish its main office.4
c. Requirements for application.
 The applicant for a license shall submit a duly accomplished application form, and in support thereof, the
following requirements:
a. A filing fee of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) ; if single proprietor; and P3,000 if corporation or
partnership;
b. Certified copy of the Certificate of Registration of firm or business name from the Department of Trade
and Industry (DTI) , in the case of single proprietorship; or a certified copy of the Articles of
Partnership or Incorporation duly registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) , in
the case of a partnership or a corporation;
c. A sworn statement of assets and liabilities and/or a duly audited financial statement, as the case may be;
d. Owner's certificate/title of office location or contract of lease of office space for at least two (2) years;
e. NBI clearance of the applicant, or the partners in the case of a partnership or all the officers and members
of the Board of Directors, in the case of a corporation;
f. Income Tax Returns for the last two (2) years;
g. A verified undertaking that the applicant shall:
(1) not engage in the recruitment of children below 15 years of age or place children below 18 years old
in hazardous occupation in accordance with R.A No. 7610, as amended by R.A. No. 7658, and other
related laws; and
(2) assume full responsibility for all claims and liabilities which may arise in connection with the use of
the license;
h. Organizational structure and list of all officers and personnel with their respective bio-data, two (2)
passport-size ID pictures and a detailed description of their duties and responsibilities; and
i. Specific address and location map of the office/proposed office;
j. List of all authorized representatives, if any, who must be at least high school graduate, with their
corresponding bio-data, two (2) passport-size ID pictures, high school diploma or other proof of
educational attainment duly authenticated, NBI clearance and Special Power of Attorney (SPA) .
No application shall be accepted, unless all the requirements have been complied with. 5
d. Action on the application.
1. Upon receipt of the application, the Regional Director or his duly authorized representative shall
evaluate the documents submitted and conduct an ocular inspection of the applicant's office;
2. Within fifteen (15) working days after the ocular inspection, the Regional Director shall act on the
application, and immediately notify the applicant of the action taken; and
3. Applications which do not meet the requirements set forth in the rules shall be denied.6
e. Posting of cash and surety bonds and payment of license fee. - Prior to the approval of the license, the
applicant shall post cash and surety bonds of Twenty-Five Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) and One Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) respectively, valid for two (2) years and then pay a license of Six Thousand Pesos
(P6,000.00) . The bonds shall answer for all valid and legal claims arising from the illegal use of the license and
shall likewise guarantee compliance with the provisions of the Labor Code and its implementing Rules.
In case of loss of license, the licensee shall pay Six Hundred Pesos (P600.00) as payment for the issuance
of a certified copy of the license upon presentation of proof of loss. 7
f. Publication. The Agency shall publish once in a newspaper of general circulation the license number
of the agency, names and pictures of authorized representatives within fifteen (15) days from the issuance of the
license and shall submit a copy of said publication to the DOLE.8
g. Validity of the license. - The license shall be valid all over the Philippines for two (2) years from the
date of issuance, upon submission of proof of publication, unless sooner suspended, cancelled or revoked by the
DOLE Regional Director.9
h. Non-transferability. - No license shall be transferred, conveyed or assigned to any other person or
entity.10
i. Display of license. - The original license or a copy shall be displayed conspicuously at all times in the
office premises of the PRPA.11
 j. Renewal of license. - An application for renewal of license shall be filed not later than thirty (30) days
before expiration of the same. No agency shall be allowed to renew its license if it has been convicted by the regular
courts for violation of the Labor Code, as amended, and its implementing Rules, or if its license has been previously
revoked.12
k. Requirements for renewal. - The Agency shall submit its existing license together with the requirement
specified in the Rules.13
l. Change of ownership. - Any Agency which desires to transfer ownership shall surrender its license to
the issuing Regional Office.14
m. Change of business address. - An Agency which desires to transfer to a new business address shall
notify the Regional Office which issued the license at least thirty (30) working days prior to the intended date of
transfer. It shall likewise notify the Regional Office which has jurisdiction over the new business address and submit
a sketch of the new office and a copy of the contract of lease, if any. 15
3. GRANTING/RENEWAL OF AUTHORITY TO RECRUIT, RECRUITMENT PROCEDURE,
PLACEMENT AND OTHER RELATED ACTIVITIES.
a. Authority to recruit. - A licensed Agency or its authorized representative shall secure an authority to
recruit from the DOLE Regional Office having jurisdiction over the place where recruitment activities will be
undertaken. Such authority shall be coterminus with the license unless sooner revoked/cancelled by the issuing
DOLE Regional Office or terminated by the Agency.16
b. Documents required. - The following documents shall be submitted by the applicant/agency for the
issuance/renewal of an Authority to Recruit:
1) Letter request by the Agency;
2) Copy of current license;
3) Certification under oath of licensee of the proposed recruitment activities of the representative;
4) NBI clearance and bio-data of the representative with two (2) ID pictures; Clearance from previous
agency, if applicable; and
5) Previous Authority to Recruit, in case of renewal.
No application shall be accepted unless all the requirements have been complied with. 17
c. Action on the application for the issuance/renewal of an Authority to Recruit.
1) Within ten (10) working days from receipt of complete documents, the Regional Director shall act on
the application;
2) In case of denial, the Regional Director shall state the reasons for denial;
A new application/renewal may be denied on any of the following grounds:
Non-compliance with the requirements;
Applicant's record of unresolved illegal recruitment case; or presence of any pending case against
the applicant and/or the agency.
3) Upon approval of application/renewal, the applicant shall pay a fee of P1,500.00 to the Regional
Office concerned.18
d. Recruitment by representative. - Only representatives duly authorized to recruit and whose names are
registered with the Regional Office can engage in recruitment activities. 19
e. Termination of authority of representatives. - The authority of the representatives may be revoked or
terminated by the Agency or cancelled by the issuing Regional Office.
The Agency shall publish in a newspaper of general circulation the names and pictures of representatives
whose authority have been revoked or terminated and the Regional Office shall be furnished a copy of the said
publication.
 The Regional Office shall keep a record of the authorities issued, revoked or terminated. 20
f. Steps to be followed in the recruitment of persons. - The following procedures shall be followed by
the licensed Agency or its duly authorized representative in the recruitment of persons;
1. The Agency or its duly authorized representative shall present to the Public Employment Service Office
(PESO) , Provincial and District Office where the recruitment activity is to be undertaken, a copy of
existing license, and original copy of Authority to Recruit issued by the Regional Office concerned.
2. The representative shall require the recruit to submit a copy each of the following:
a) Birth certificate from the local civil registrar; and
b) Medical certificate issued by a government physician or by a reputable private medical
practitioner.
3. The Agency or its authorized representative and the recruit shall enter into a recruitment contract which
should be duly notarized, a copy of which shall be submitted to the Regional Office where recruitment
activity was undertaken.
4. The Agency or its duly authorized representative shall submit a list of the names and addresses of its
recruits, together with copy of documents specified above, to the Regional Office or the appropriate
Provincial/District Office where recruitment was undertaken for appropriate authentication and
validation; copies of these documents shall be furnished the Regional Office of destination of the
recruit.
5. After the recruitment activity, the Regional Office of origin shall issue a certification to the Agency or
its duly authorized representative that the recruitment activity has been in accordance with this Rule,
copy furnished the Marine Police/Coast Guard/Philippine National Police, as the case may be.
6. Provide the recruit with a stamped envelope and form indicating the name, address of recruit and the
name, address, telephone number of his/her employer to be sent to the parent.
7. Prior to deployment, the Regional Office of origin shall notify the Regional Office of destination of the
arrival of the recruits, and the latter shall see to it that the terms and conditions of the recruitment
contract are followed strictly.21
g. Replacement of worker without cost. - An employer shall be entitled to replace a worker without
additional cost only once, within one (1) month from the first day the worker reported for work, on any of the
following grounds:
1. The worker is found to be suffering from an incurable or contagious disease as certified by a competent
physician;
2. The worker is physically or mentally incapable of discharging the minimum normal requirements of the
job, as specified in the employment contract; or
3. The worker abandons the job, voluntarily resigns, commits theft or any other acts prejudicial to the
employer.22
h. Refund of service fee. - The employer is entitled to a refund of seventy five (75%) percent of the
service fee if the Agency failed to provide a replacement after the lapse of one (1) month from receipt of the request
for the replacement based on any of the grounds enumerated above. 23
i. Forfeiture of rights. - The employer is deemed to have forfeited his right for a replacement without cost
or refund of the service fee, if he failed to avail of the same within one (1) month from the date of engagement of the
worker.24
4. ESTABLISHMENT OF BRANCH OFFICE/RENEWAL OF AUTHORITY TO OPERATE BRANCH
OFFICE.
a. Establishment of Branch Office. - The application to establish a branch office shall be filed with the
Regional Office having jurisdiction over the place where the branch office is to be established. 25
b. Requirements. - A licensee who desires to establish a branch office shall submit the following
requirements:
 1. Filing fee of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) ;
2. Certified copy of the current license;
3. Organizational structure of the branch office, including duly notarized appointments;
4. NBI clearance, bio-data and two (2) passport-size ID pictures of the branch manager and staff members;
5. Certification that the branch office has office space with a minimum floor area of fifty (50) square
meters;
6. Certification that the licensee has no pending case with the Regional Office issuing the license or where
it has established branch office; and
7. List of all authorized representatives, if any, who must be at least high school graduate, with their
corresponding bio-data, two (2) passport-size ID pictures, high school diploma or other proof of
educational attainment, NBI clearance and Special Power of Attorney (SPA) issued by the licensee.
No application shall be accepted, unless all the requirements have been complied with. 26
c. Action on the application.
1. Upon receipt of the application, the Regional Director or his duly authorized representative shall evaluate
the documents submitted and conduct an ocular inspection of the PRPA branch.
2. Within fifteen (15) working days from the date of filing, the Regional Director shall either deny or
approve the application and immediately notify the applicant of the action taken. 27
d. Posting of additional surety bond and payment of registration fee. - Prior to approval of the authority
to establish a branch office, the licensee/applicant shall post an additional surety bond of Fifty Thousand Pesos
(P50,000.00) and pay a registration fee of Three Thousand Pesos (P3,000.00) .
In case of loss, the licensee shall pay Six Hundred Pesos (P600.00) as payment for the issuance of a
certified copy of the authority upon presentation of proof of loss. 28
e. Validity of the Authority. - The authority to operate a branch office shall be coterminus with the
validity of the license of the Agency, subject to renewal upon submission of the original authority and requirements
provided for under Section 25 of the Rules (supra) , as well as the original authority. 29
5. PLACEMENT FEE, SERVICE FEE, AND OTHER CHARGES.
a. Placement fee. - A licensed PRPA may charge workers a placement fee which shall not exceed twenty
percent (20%) of the worker's first month's basic salary; in no case shall such fee be charged prior to the actual
commencement of employment.30
b. Service fee. - A licensed PRPA may charge employers a service fee which shall not exceed twenty
percent (20%) of the annual basic salary of the worker. In no case shall the service fee be deducted from the
worker's salary.31
c. Transportation. - Transportation expenses of the worker from the place of origin to the place of work
shall be charged against the employer, and shall in no case be deducted from the worker's salary. 32
d. Issuance of official receipt. - All payments made or fees collected by a licensed Agency shall be
covered by an official receipt indicating the amount paid and the purpose of such payment. 33
6. SUSPENSION, REVOCATION/CANCELLATION OF LICENSE.
a. Grounds for suspension of a license. - Any of the following shall constitute a ground for suspension of
a license:
1. Violation of any of the provisions of the Rules;34
2. Violation of Department Order No. 21, Series of 1994, regarding publication of job vacancies;
3. Non-issuance of official receipt for every fee collected;
4. Non-submission of monthly report as provided in the Rules; 35
5. Charging or accepting directly or indirectly, any amount in excess of what is prescribed by the Rules;
6. Disregard of lawful orders and notices issued by the DOLE Secretary or his duly authorized
representative; or
7. Non-observance of the procedures on recruitment as stated in the Rules.36
 b. Grounds for cancellation/revocation of a license. - Any of the following shall constitute a ground for
the cancellation/revocation of license:
1. Violation/s of the conditions of license;
2. Engaging in act or acts of misrepresentation for the purpose of securing a license or renewal thereof;
3. Continuous operation despite due notice that the license has expired;
4. Incurring two (2) suspensions by a PRPA based on final and executory orders;
5. engaging in labor-only contracting as defined in Article 106 of the Labor Code, as amended;
6. Recruitment and placement of workers in violation of R.A. No. 7610, as amended by R.A. No. 7658;
7. Transferring, conveying or assigning of license/authority to any person or entity other than the one in
whose favor it was issued;
8. Violation of any of the provisions, particularly, Article 34 of the Labor Code, as amended, and its
Implementing Rules and Regulations.37
c. Table of penalties and fines. - The commission of any of the afore-cited grounds for suspension,
cancellation/revocation shall merit imposition of fine and penalties provided in the Table of Penalties and Fines
provided in the Rules.38
7. CESSATION OF OPERATION OF THE AGENCY/BRANCH.
a. Notice of closure of the Agency or its Branch. - The Agency or its branch office which ceases to
operate prior to the expiration of its license or its authority to operate shall notify the Regional Office concerned,
stating the justification for such closure, accompanied by the original receipt of cash bond and the license, or the
authority to operate, as the case may be.39
b. Refund of cash bond. - An Agency which voluntarily surrenders its license shall be entitled to the
refund of its deposited cash bond only after posting a surety bond of similar amount from a bonding company
accredited by the Insurance Commission. The surety bond is valid for three (3) years from expiration of the
license.40
II.
RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT
FOR OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT
1. RELEVANT LAWS ON RECRUITMENT FOR OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT.
1. The Labor Code;
2. Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 [R. A. No. 8042], as amended by R.A. No. 10022
(March 8, 2010) .
2. DEFINITION OF RELEVANT TERMS.
1. Overseas Filipinos refer to migrant workers, other Filipino nationals and their dependents abroad. 41
2. Overseas Filipino Worker or Migrant Worker refers to a person who is to be engaged, is engaged, or
has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a state of which he or she is not a citizen or on board a
vessel navigating the foreign seas other than a government ship used for military or non-commercial
purposes, or on an installation located offshore or on the high seas. A person to be engaged in a
remunerated activity refers to an applicant worker who has been promised or assured employment
overseas.42
3. Regular/Documented Filipino Migrant Workers refer to the following:
(a) Those who possess valid passports and appropriate visas or permits to stay and work in the receiving
country; and
(b) Those whose contracts of employment have been processed by the POEA, or subsequently verified
and registered on-site by the Philippine Overseas Labor Office (POLO) , if required by law or
regulation.43
4. Seafarer refers to any person who is employed or engaged in overseas employment in any capacity on
board a ship other than a government ship used for military or non-commercial purposes. The definition
 shall include fishermen, cruise ship personnel and those serving on mobile offshore and drilling units in
the high seas.44
5. Skilled Filipino Workers refer to those who have obtained an academic degree, qualification, or
experience, or those who are in possession of an appropriate level of competence, training and
certification, for the job they are applying, as may be determined by the appropriate government
agency.45
6. Underage Migrant Workers refer to those who are below 18 years or below the minimum age
requirement for overseas employment as determined by the DOLE Secretary. 46
7. Overseas Filipino in Distress refers to an overseas Filipino who has a medical, psycho-social or legal
assistance problem requiring treatment, hospitalization, counselling, legal representation as specified in
the Rules47 or any other kind of intervention with the authorities in the country where he or she is found.
48

8. Rehires refer to land-based workers who renewed their employment contracts with the same
principal.49
3. PRIVATE (FEE-CHARGING) EMPLOYMENT AGENCY (PEA) .
A Private Fee-Charging Employment Agency or Private Recruitment/Employment Agencyrefers
to any person, partnership or corporation duly licensed by the DOLE Secretary to engage in the recruitment and
placement of workers for overseas employment for a fee which is charged, directly or indirectly, from the workers
or employers or both50 or from the workers who renewed their employment contracts with the same principal. 51
4. PRIVATE RECRUITMENT ENTITY (PRE) .
A private recruitment entity refers to any person or association engaged in the recruitment and
placement of workers without charging, directly or indirectly, any fee from the workers or employers. 52
An example is a Filipino Service Contractor licensed as such to recruit workers for its accredited projects
or contracts overseas. 53 This being so, it will recruit and place workers without charging any fee.
5. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PEA AND PRE.
A PEA technically may be distinguished from a PRE as follows:
1. A PEA has a right duly recognized in law to charge a fee, directly or indirectly, from the workers or the
employers or from both; while a PRE does not charge any fee either directly or indirectly from the
workers or employers to which they would be deployed;
2. The former is authorized to recruit only for overseas placement or deployment; while the latter is
allowed to recruit for both local and overseas deployment.
3. The former derives its authority to recruit and place workers from a document denominated as a
license; while the latter sources its authority from a document called authority. 54
6. ENTITIES AUTHORIZED TO ENGAGE IN RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT OF WORKERS.
The following are authorized to engage in recruitment and placement of workers:
a. Public employment offices;
b. Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) ;
c. Private recruitment entities;
d. Private employment agencies;
e. Shipping or manning agents or representatives;
f. Such other persons or entities as may be authorized by the DOLE Secretary; and
g. Construction contractors.
7. OTHER RELEVANT TERMS.
Filipino Service Contractor refers to any person, partnership or corporation duly licensed as a private
recruitment agency by the DOLE Secretary to recruit workers for its accredited projects or contracts overseas. 55
 Manning Agency refers to any person, partnership or corporation duly licensed by the DOLE Secretary
to engage in the recruitment and placement of seafarers for ships plying international waters and for related
maritime activities.56
Non-Licensee refers to any person, partnership or corporation with no valid license to engage in
recruitment and placement of overseas Filipino workers or whose license is revoked, cancelled, terminated, expired
or otherwise delisted from the roll of licensed recruitment/manning agencies registered with the POEA.57
Placement Fees refer to any and all amounts charged by a private recruitment agency from a worker
for its recruitment and placement services as prescribed by the DOLE Secretary. 58
8. TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT GOVERN THE EMPLOYMENT OF OFWs.
In cases involving employment of OFWs, the rights and obligations among and between the OFWs, the
local recruiter/agent, and the foreign employer/principal are governed by the employment contract. A contract freely
entered into is considered the law between the parties and, therefore, should be respected. In formulating the
contract, the parties may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem convenient,
provided they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
9. RULES AFFECTING OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN LAND-
BASED OVERSEAS WORKERS AND SEAFARERS.
The rules on overseas employment are divided into two, namely:
1. POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Land-Based Overseas
Workers;59 and
2. POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Seafarers.60
The obvious intent for the two (2) separate issuances is to distinguish between the rules applicable to land-
based overseas workers and those applicable to seafarers (formerly termed as seamen) . This is as it should be
because of the unique and peculiar distinguishing features of maritime employment.
II-A.
LICENSING AND REGULATION
FOR OVERSEAS RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT
1. QUALIFICATIONS.
Only those who possess the following qualifications may be permitted to engage in the business of
recruitment and placement of overseas Filipino workers:
1. Filipino citizens, partnerships or corporations at least seventy five percent (75%) of the authorized
capital stock of which is owned and controlled by Filipino citizens;
2. A minimum capitalization of Two Million Pesos (P2,000,000.00) in case of a single proprietorship or
partnership and a minimum paid-up capital of Two Million Pesos (P2,000,000.00) in case of a
corporation; Provided, that those with existing licenses shall, within four (4) years from effectivity
hereof, increase their capitalization or paid up capital, as the case may be, to Two Million Pesos
(P2,000,000.00) at the rate of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P250,000.00) every year; and
3. Those not otherwise disqualified by law or other government regulations to engage in the recruitment
and placement of workers for overseas employment. 61
2. DISQUALIFICATIONS.
The following are not qualified to engage in the business of recruitment and placement of Filipino workers
overseas:
a. Travel agencies and sales agencies of airline companies;
b. Officers or members of the Board of any corporation or members in a partnership engaged in the
business of a travel agency ;
c. Corporations and partnerships, when any of its officers, members of the board or partners, is also an
officer, member of the board or partner of a corporation or partnership engaged in the business of a
travel agency ;
 d. Persons, partnerships or corporations which have derogatory records, such as, but not limited to, the
following:
1) Those certified to have derogatory record or information by the NBI or by the Anti-Illegal
Recruitment Branch of the POEA;
2) Those against whom probable cause or prima facie finding of guilt for illegal recruitment or other
related cases exists;
3) Those convicted for illegal recruitment or other related cases and/or crimes involving moral
turpitude; and
4) Those agencies whose licenses have been previously revoked or cancelled by the POEA for violation
of R.A. No. 8042, the Labor Code (PD 442, as amended) , and their implementing rules and
regulations.
All applicants for issuance/renewal of license shall be required to submit clearances from the NBI
and Anti-Illegal Recruitment Branch of the POEA, including clearances for their respective officers
and employees.
e. Any official or employee of the DOLE, POEA, Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) ,
Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and other government agencies directly involved in the
implementation of R.A. No. 8042 and/or any of his/her relatives within the fourth (4 ) civil degree of
th

consanguinity or affinity; and

f. Persons or partners, officers and directors of corporations whose licenses have been previously cancelled
or revoked for violation of recruitment laws.62
3. PROVISIONAL LICENSE.
Applicants for new license shall be issued a provisional license which shall be valid for a limited period of
one (1) year within which the applicant should be able to comply with its undertaking to deploy one hundred (100)
workers to its new principal. The license of a complying agency shall be upgraded to a full license entitling it to
another three (3) years of operation. Non-complying agencies will be notified of the expiration of their license.63
4. VALIDITY OF THE LICENSE.
Except in case of a provisional license, every license shall be valid for four (4) years from the date of
issuance unless sooner cancelled, revoked or suspended for violation of applicable Philippine law, the Rules and
other pertinent issuances. Such license shall be valid only at the place/s stated therein and when used by the licensed
person, partnership or corporation.64
5. NON-TRANSFERABILITY OF LICENSE.
No license shall be transferred, conveyed or assigned to any person, partnership or corporation. It shall not
be used directly or indirectly by any person, partnership or corporation other than the one in whose favor it was
issued.
In case of death of the sole proprietor and to prevent disruption of operation to the prejudice of the interest
of legitimate heirs, the license may be extended upon request of the heirs, to continue only for the purpose of
winding up the business operations.65
7. CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP/RELATIONSHIP OF SINGLE PROPRIETORSHIP OR PARTNERSHIP.
Transfer or change of ownership of a single proprietorship licensed to engage in overseas employment shall
cause the automatic revocation of the license.
A change in the relationship of the partners in a partnership duly licensed to engage in overseas
employment which materially interrupts the course of the business or results in the actual dissolution of the
partnership shall likewise cause the automatic revocation of the license. 66
8. UPGRADING OF SINGLE PROPRIETORSHIPS OR PARTNERSHIPS.
License holders which are single proprietorships or partnerships may, subject to the guidelines of the
POEA, convert into corporations for purposes of upgrading or raising their capabilities to respond adequately to
developments/ changes in the international labor market and to enable them to better comply with their
responsibilities arising from the recruitment and deployment of workers overseas.
 The approval of merger, consolidation or upgrading shall automatically revoke or cancel the licenses of the
single proprietorships, partnerships or corporations so merged, consolidated or upgraded. 67
9. DEROGATORY RECORD AFTER ISSUANCE/RENEWAL OF LICENSE.
The license of a single proprietorship or a partnership shall be suspended until cleared by the POEA should
any derogatory record be found to exist against the single proprietorship or any or all of the partners, as the case may
be. The appointment of any officer or employee of any licensed agency may be cancelled or revoked at any time
with due notice to the agency concerned, whenever said officer or employee is found to have any derogatory
record.68
10. APPOINTMENT/CHANGE OF OFFICERS AND PERSONNEL.
Every appointment of agents or representatives of a licensed agency shall be subject to prior approval or
authority of the POEA. The acknowledgment or approval may be issued upon submission of or compliance with the
following:
a. Proposed appointment or special power of attorney;
b. Clearances of the proposed representative or agent from the NBI and Anti-Illegal Recruitment Branch of
the POEA; and
c. Sworn or verified statement by the designating or appointing person or company assuming full
responsibility for all acts of the agent or representative done in connection with the recruitment and
placement of workers.
Every change in the composition of the Board of Directors of a corporation, appointment or termination of
officers and personnel shall be registered with the POEA within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of such
change. The agency shall be required to submit the minutes of proceedings duly certified by the SEC in case of
election of new members of the Board of Directors with their bio-data, ID pictures and clearances.
The POEA reserves the right to deny the acknowledgment or appointment of officers, employees and
representatives who were directly involved in recruitment irregularities. 69
11. PUBLICATION OF CHANGE OF DIRECTORS/OTHER OFFICERS AND
PERSONNEL; REVOCATION OR AMENDMENT OF APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVES.
In addition to the requirement of registration with and submission to the POEA, every change in the
membership of the Board of Directors, termination for cause of other officers and personnel, revocation or
amendment of appointment of representatives shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation,
in order to bind third parties. Proof of such publication shall be submitted to the POEA. 70
12. TRANSFER OF BUSINESS ADDRESS.
Any transfer of business address shall be effected only with prior authority or approval of the POEA. The
approval shall be issued only upon formal notice of the intention to transfer with the following attachments:
a. In the case of a corporation, a Board Resolution duly registered with the SEC authorizing the transfer of
business address; and
b. Copy of the contract of lease or proof of building ownership.
The new office shall be subject to the regular ocular inspection procedures by duly authorized
representatives of the POEA.
A notice to the public of the new address shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation. 71
13. ESTABLISHMENT OF ADDITIONAL/EXTENSION OFFICES.
Additional/extension offices may be established subject to the prior approval of the POEA. 72
14. CONDUCT OF RECRUITMENT OUTSIDE OF REGISTERED OFFICE.
No licensed agency shall conduct any provincial recruitment, jobs fair or recruitment activities of any form
outside of the address stated in the license or approved additional office(s) without first securing prior authority from
the POEA.73
15. RENEWAL OF LICENSE.
An agency shall submit an application for the renewal of its license on or before its expiration. Such
application shall be supported by the following documents:
 a. Renewed or revalidated surety bond amounting to One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00) ;
b. Renewed escrow agreement in the amount of P1,000,000.00 with a commercial bank to primarily answer
for valid and legal claims of recruited workers as a result of recruitment violations or money claims;
c. Audited financial statements for the past two (2) years with verified corporate or individual tax returns.
In case the equity of the agency is below the minimum capitalization requirement, it shall be given thirty
(30) days from release of the renewed license to submit proof(s) of capital infusion, such as SEC
certification of such infusion or bank certification corresponding to the amount infused and treasurers
affidavit duly received by the SEC. Otherwise, the license shall be suspended until it has complied with
the said requirement;
d. Clearances from the NBI and the POEA Anti-Illegal Recruitment Branch for the Board of Directors and
responsible officers; and
e. Other requirements as may be imposed by the POEA. 74
16. NON-EXPIRATION OF LICENSE.
Where the license holder has made timely and sufficient application for renewal, the existing license shall
not expire until the application shall have been finally determined by the POEA. For this purpose, an application
shall be considered sufficient if the applicant has substantially complied with the requirements for renewal. 75
1.
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT
(Section 5, R.A. No. 10022)
1. CONCEPT OF ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT.
The term illegal recruitment is defined as any recruitment activities, including the prohibited practices
enumerated under Article 34 of the Labor Code, to be undertaken by non-licensees or non-holders of authority.76
Based on paragraph [a] of Article 38,77 illegal recruitment as defined therein, in relation to Articles 13 [b]78 and 3479
and penalized under Article 3980 of the Labor Code, may be committed only by non-licensees or non-holders of
authority.
R.A. No. 8042, otherwise known as the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, as
amended,81 and its Implementing Rules, have broadened this concept of illegal recruitment as far as overseas
placement and recruitment activities are concerned. Consequently, the acts described in the following provision of
this law82 that may be committed by any person, constitute illegal recruitment, regardless of whether such person is
a non-licensee, non-holder, licensee or holder of authority:
SEC. 6. Definition. - For purposes of this Act, illegal recruitment shall mean any act of
canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers
and includes referring, contract services, promising or advertising for employment
abroad, whether for profit or not, when undertaken by non-licensee or non-holder of
authority contemplated under Article 13(f) 83 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended,
otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines: Provided, That any such non-licensee
or non-holder who, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee employment abroad to two or
more persons shall be deemed so engaged. It shall likewise include the following acts,
whether committed by any person, whether a non-licensee, non-holder, licensee or
holder of authority:
(a) To charge or accept, directly or indirectly, any amount greater than that specified in the
schedule of allowable fees prescribed by the Secretary of Labor and Employment, or to
make a worker pay or acknowledge any amount greater than that actually received by
him as a loan or advance;
(b) To furnish or publish any false notice or information or document in relation to recruitment
or employment;
(c) To give any false notice, testimony, information or document or commit any act of
misrepresentation for the purpose of securing a license or authority under the Labor
Code, or for the purpose of documenting hired workers with the POEA, which include the
 act of reprocessing workers through a job order that pertains to non-existent work, work
different from the actual overseas work, or work with a different employer whether
registered or not with the POEA;
(d) To induce or attempt to induce a worker already employed to quit his employment in order
to offer him another unless the transfer is designed to liberate a worker from oppressive
terms and conditions of employment;
(e) To influence or attempt to influence any person or entity not to employ any worker who
has not applied for employment through his agency or who has formed, joined or
supported, or has contacted or is supported by any union or workers' organization;
(f) To engage in the recruitment or placement of workers in jobs harmful to public health or
morality or to the dignity of the Republic of the Philippines;
(g) To fail to submit reports on the status of employment,placement vacancies, remittance of
foreign exchange earnings, separation from jobs, departures and such other matters or
information as may be required by the Secretary of Labor and Employment;
(h) To substitute or alter to the prejudice of the worker, employment contracts approved and
verified by the Department of Labor and Employment from the time of actual signing
thereof by the parties up to and including the period of the expiration of the same without
the approval of the Department of Labor and Employment;
(i) For an officer or agent of a recruitment or placement agency to become an officer or
member of the Board of any corporation engaged in travel agency or to be engaged
directly or indirectly in the management of travel agency;
(j) To withhold or deny travel documents from applicant workers beforedeparture for
monetary or financial considerations, or for any other reasons, other than those
authorized under the Labor Code and its implementing rules and regulations;
(k) Failure to actually deploy a contracted worker without valid reason as determined by the
Department of Labor and Employment;
(l) Failure to reimburse expenses incurred by the worker in connection with his
documentation and processing for purposes of deployment, in cases where the
deployment does not actually take place without the worker's fault. Illegal recruitment
when committed by a syndicate or in large scale shall be considered an offense
involving economic sabotage; and
(m) To allow a non-Filipino citizen to head or manage a licensed recruitment/manning
agency. 84

(a)
LICENSE VS. AUTHORITY
License refers to the document issued by the DOLE Secretary authorizing a person, partnership or
corporation to operate a private recruitment/manning agency.85
Authority refers to the document issued by the DOLE Secretary authorizing the officers, personnel,
agents or representatives of a licensed recruitment/manning agency to conduct recruitment and placement
activities in a place stated in the license or in a specified place.86
(b)
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT
The essential elements of illegal recruitment vary in accordance with the following classifications:
(1) Simple illegal recruitment;
(2) When committed by a syndicate; or
 (3) When committed in large scale.
When illegal recruitment is committed under either Nos. 2 or 3 above or both, it is considered an offense
involving economic sabotage.87
These classifications are discussed below, in accordance with the presentation in the Syllabus.
(c)
SIMPLE ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT
1. TWO (2) ELEMENTS.
According to the 2011 case of Delia D. Romero v. People,88 the two (2) elements of the crime of simple
illegal recruitment are:
(1) The offender has no valid license or authority required by law to enable one to lawfully engage in
recruitment and placement of workers; and
(2) He undertakes either any activity within the meaning of recruitment and placement defined under
Article 13(b) ,89 or any prohibited practices enumerated under Article 34 90 of the Labor Code.91
2. FIRST ELEMENT: NON-LICENSEE OR NON-HOLDER OF AUTHORITY.
Under the first element, a non-licensee or non-holder of authority is any person, corporation or entity
which has not been issued a valid license or authority to engage in recruitment and placement by the DOLE
Secretary, or whose license or authority has been suspended, revoked or cancelled by the POEA or the DOLE
Secretary.92
The acts mentioned in Article 13(b) of the Labor Code can lawfully be undertaken only by licensees or
holders of authority to engage in the recruitment and placement of workers. 93
As far as agents or representatives appointed by licensees or holders of authority are concerned, they shall
be considered as falling within the ambit of the term non-licensee or non-holder of authority if their
appointments were not previously authorized by the POEA. Consequently, their activities shall be considered illegal
recruitment.94
Non-possession of a license to recruit is, under the law, an essential ingredient of the crime of illegal
recruitment penalized under the Labor Code.95
A person who promised a job placement abroad to another, for a consideration, when he is not duly
licensed nor authorized to engage in recruitment, is criminally liable for illegal recruitment. 96
Any person, whether a non-licensee, non-holder, licensee or holder of authority, may be held liable
for illegal recruitment. Under R.A. No, 8042, as amended by R.A. No. 10022, license or authority of
the illegal recruiter is immaterial.
Under R.A. No. 8042, the crime of illegal recruitment may be committed by any person, whether a non-
licensee, non-holder, licensee or holder of authority. Even with a license or authority, illegal recruitment could still
be committed under Section 6 [supra] of said law.97 It is clear that under this law, in order to prove illegal recruitment,
there is no need to establish whether the accused is a licensee or holder of authority or not because it is no longer an
element of the crime.98
Recruiter may be a natural or juridical person.
Accused-appellant in People v. Saulo, 99 contends that he could not have committed the crime of illegal
recruitment in large scale since Nancy Avelino, a labor and employment officer at the POEA, testified that licenses
for recruitment and placement are issued only to corporations and not to natural persons. Holding that this
argument is specious and illogical, the Supreme Court ratiocinated that any person, whether natural or juridical, that
engages in recruitment activities without the necessary license or authority shall be penalized under Article 39 100 of
the Labor Code.
3. SECOND ELEMENT: PERFORMANCE OF RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT ACTIVITIES.
The phrase recruitment and placement refers to the acts described in paragraph [b] of Article 13 of the
Labor Code, viz:
[b] Recruitment and placement refers to any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting,
transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contract services, promising or
 advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not: Provided, That any person or
entity which, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee, employment to two or more persons shall be
deemed engaged in recruitment and placement. 101
4. SOME PRINCIPLES ON ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT.
Mere impression that a person could deploy workers overseas is sufficient to constitute illegal recruitment. 102
But if no such impression is given, the accused should not be convicted for illegal recruitment. 103
Mere promise or offer of employment abroad amounts to recruitment. 104
There is no need to show that accused represented himself as a licensed recruiter.105
Referrals may constitute illegal recruitment.106
It is illegal recruitment to induce applicants to part with their money upon false misrepresentations and
promises in assuring them that after they paid the placement fee, jobs abroad were waiting for them and that
they would be deployed soon.107
Recruitment whether done for profit or not is immaterial.108
The act of receiving money far exceeding the amount as required by law is not considered as recruitment and
placement as this phrase is contemplated under the law. 109
Actual receipt of fee is not an element of the crime of illegal recruitment.110
Conduct of interviews amounts to illegal recruitment.111
Absence of receipt is not essential to hold a person guilty of illegal recruitment. 112
Conviction for illegal recruitment may be made on the strength of the testimonies of the complainants. 113
Absence of documents evidencing the recruitment activities strengthens, not weakens, the case for illegal
recruitment.114
Only one person recruited is sufficient to convict one for illegal recruitment. 115
Non-prosecution of another suspect is immaterial. 116
Execution of affidavit of desistance affects only the civil liability but has no effect on the criminal liability for
illegal recruitment.117
Defense of denial cannot prevail over positive identification. 118 Positive identification where categorical and
consistent and not attended by any showing of ill motive on the part of the eyewitnesses on the matter prevails
over alibi and denial.119 Between the categorical statements of the prosecution witnesses, on the one hand, and
bare denials of the accused, on the other hand, the former must prevail. 120

Conspiracy in illegal recruitment cases, how proved.

Conspiracy to defraud aspiring OFWs is evident from the acts of the malefactors whose conduct before,
during and after the commission of the crime clearly indicated that they were one in purpose and united in its
execution. Direct proof of previous agreement to commit a crime is not necessary as it may be deduced from the
mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated, or inferred from the acts of the accused pointing to a joint
purpose and design, concerted action and community of interest. As such, all the accused are equally guilty of the
crime of illegal recruitment since in a conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all.121 To reiterate, in establishing
conspiracy, it is not essential that there be actual proof that all the conspirators took a direct part in every act. It is
sufficient that they acted in concert pursuant to the same objective. 122
(d)
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT IN LARGE SCALE

(e)
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT AS ECONOMIC SABOTAGE123
These two (2) topics shall be discussed jointly in view of their close interrelation.
1. ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT, WHEN CONSIDERED A CRIME INVOLVING ECONOMIC
SABOTAGE.
 Illegal recruitment is considered a crime involving economic sabotage when the commission thereof is
attended by the following qualifying circumstances:
1. when committed by a syndicate; or
2. when committed in large scale.
2. ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT COMMITTED BY A SYNDICATE.
Illegal recruitment is deemed committed by a syndicate if it is carried out by a group of three (3) or more
persons conspiring or confederating with one another.
Elements of illegal recruitment by a syndicate.
The essential elements of the crime of illegal recruitment committed by a syndicate are as follows:
1. There are at least three (3) persons who, conspiring and/or confederating with one another, carried out
any unlawful or illegal recruitment and placement activities as defined under Article 13(b) or committed
any prohibited activities under Article 34 of the Labor Code; and
2. Said persons are not licensed or authorized to do so, either locally or overseas.124
The law, it must be noted, does not require that the syndicate should recruit more than one (1) person in
order to constitute the crime of illegal recruitment by a syndicate. Recruitment of one (1) person would suffice to
qualify the illegal recruitment act as having been committed by a syndicate. 125
3. ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT IN LARGE SCALE.
Illegal recruitment is deemed committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more persons
individually or as a group .
Elements of illegal recruitment in large scale.
The elements of illegal recruitment in large scale, as distinguished from simple illegal recruitment, are as
follows:
1. The accused engages in the recruitment and placement of workers as defined under Article 13(b) 126 or
committed any prohibited activities under Article 34 127 of the Labor Code; and
2. The accused commits the same against three (3) or more persons, individually or as a group.128
Distinguished from illegal recruitment by a syndicate.
As distinguished from illegal recruitment committed by a syndicate, illegal recruitment in large scale may
be committed by only one (1) person. What is important as qualifying element is that there should be at least three
(3) victims of such illegal recruitment, individually or as a group. 129
4. SOME PRINCIPLES ON ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT INVOLVING ECONOMIC SABOTAGE.
The number of persons victimized is determinative of the crime. A conviction for large scale illegal recruitment
must be based on a finding in each case of illegal recruitment of three (3) or more persons having been
recruited, whether individually or as a group.130
Failure to prove at least 3 persons recruited makes the crime a case of simple illegal recruitment. 131
There is no illegal recruitment in large scale based on several informations filed by only one complainant. 132
The number of offenders is not material in illegal recruitment in large scale. 133
Recruitment in large scale or by a syndicate is malum prohibitum and not malum in se.134
(f)
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT VS. ESTAFA
1. A PERSON, FOR THE SAME ACT AND ON THE BASIS OF SAME EVIDENCE, MAY BE CHARGED
AND CONVICTED SEPARATELY FOR BOTH ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT AND ESTAFA.
The crime of estafa is defined under paragraph 2(a) of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code, viz:
Article 315. Swindling (estafa) . Any person who shall defraud another by any means mentioned
hereinbelow
xxx
 2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the fraud:
(a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications,
property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions; or by means of other similar
deceits.
The elements of estafa in general are: (1) that the accused defrauded another (a) by abuse of confidence, or
(b) by means of deceit; and (2) that damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended
party or third person.135
Deceit is the false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or conduct, by false or misleading
allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed; and which deceives or is intended to
deceive another so that he shall act upon it, to his legal injury.
The 2010 case of People v. Gallo, 136 best illustrates the case where the accused-appellant was convicted not
only for illegal recruitment but also for estafa because all the elements of estafa are present: the accused-appellant,
together with the other accused at large, deceived the complainants into believing that the agency had the power and
capability to send them abroad for employment; that there were available jobs for them in Korea as factory workers;
that by reason or on the strength of such assurance, the complainants parted with their money in payment of the
placement fees; that after receiving the money, accused-appellant and his co-accused went into hiding by changing
their office locations without informing complainants; and that complainants were never deployed abroad.
2. CONVICTION UNDER THE LABOR CODE DOES NOT PRECLUDE CONVICTION FOR ESTAFA
OR OTHER CRIMES UNDER OTHER LAWS.
In cases where some other crimes or felonies like estafa are committed in the process of illegal recruitment,
conviction under the Labor Code does not preclude punishment under other statutes.137 Illegal recruitment is
penalized under the Labor Code138 which is a special law, and not under the Revised Penal Code. 139
It bears emphasis, however, that not all acts which constitute the felony of estafa under the Revised Penal
Code necessarily establish the crime of illegal recruitment under the Labor Code. Estafa is wider in scope and covers
deceits whether related or not related to recruitment activities.140
3. SOME PRINCIPLES ON ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT AND ESTAFA AS SEPARATE CRIMES.
Same evidence to prove illegal recruitment may be used to prove estafa. 141
Conviction for both illegal recruitment and estafa, not double jeopardy. 142

(g)
LIABILITIES
(i) LOCAL RECRUITMENT AGENCY
(ii) FOREIGN EMPLOYER
(a) Theory Of Imputed Knowledge
(iii) SOLIDARY LIABILITY
In view of their close interrelation, the above topics shall be discussed hereunder jointly.

1. LIABILITY FOR MONEY CLAIMS.

Joint and several liability is the nature of the liability of the principal/employer and the
recruitment/manning agency, for any and all claims arising out of the implementation of the employment contract
involving Filipino workers for overseas deployment. This liability is required to be incorporated in the contract for
overseas employment and is a condition precedent for its approval. 143
If the recruitment/manning agency is a juridical being, the corporate officers and directors or partners, as
the case may be, shall themselves be jointly and severally liable with the corporation or partnership for the aforesaid
claims and damages.144
Such liabilities shall continue during the entire period or duration of the employment contract and shall not
be affected by any substitution, amendment or modification made locally or in a foreign country of the said
contract.145
 Relevant cases.
Jurisprudence has already affirmed the validity of said provision on joint and solidary liability.
The 2004 case of Phil. Employ Services and Resources, Inc. v. Paramio, 146 ruled that under the law,147
the agency which deployed the employees whose employment contracts were adjudged illegally terminated, is
jointly and solidarily liable with the principal for the money claims awarded to the aforesaid employees which
consist of the payment of the salaries due to the OFWs corresponding to the unexpired portion of their contract as
well as the reimbursement of their placement fees.
However, in order to hold the officers of the agency solidarily liable, it is required that there must be proof
of their cculpability therefor. Thus, in the 2012 case of Hon. Sto. Tomas v. Salac,148 while the Supreme Court has
affirmed the constitutionality of the last sentence of the 2 paragraph of Section 10, R.A. 8042, which states: If
nd

therecruitment/placement agency is a juridical being, the corporate officers and directors and partners as the
case may be, shall themselves be jointly and solidarily liable with the corporation or partnership for the
aforesaid claims and damages, it ruled in this wise:
But the Court has already held, pending adjudication of this case, that the liability of corporate
directors and officers is not automatic. To make them jointly and solidarily liable with their company,
there must be a finding that they were remiss in directing the affairs of that company, such as
sponsoring or tolerating the conduct of illegal activities. In the case of Becmen and White Falcon, while
there is evidence that these companies were at fault in not investigating the cause of Jasmins death,
there is no mention of any evidence in the case against them that intervenors Gumabay, et al. ,
Becmens corporate officers and directors, were personally involved in their companys particular
actions or omissions in Jasmins case.
As a final note, R.A. 8042 is a police power measure intended to regulate the recruitment and
deployment of OFWs. It aims to curb, if not eliminate, the injustices and abuses suffered by numerous
OFWs seeking to work abroad. The rule is settled that every statute has in its favor the presumption of
constitutionality. The Court cannot inquire into the wisdom or expediency of the laws enacted by the
Legislative Department. Hence, in the absence of a clear and unmistakable case that the statute is
unconstitutional, the Court must uphold its validity.
The above ruling was reiterated in the 2013 case of Gagui v. Dejero, 149 where the Court of Appeals
affirmed the finding of the NLRC that petitioner Elizabeth M. Gagui, although not impleaded in the original
complaints filed by respondents,150 is solidarily liable with the placement agency, PRO Agency Manila, Inc. , to pay
respondents all the money claims awarded by virtue of their illegal dismissal. The CA cited Section 10 of R.A. 8042
in stating that there was no need for petitioner to be impleaded xxx because by express provision of the law, she is
made solidarily liable with PRO Agency Manila, Inc. , for any and all money claims filed by private respondents.
The Supreme Court upheld petitioners contention based on its earlier ruling in Hon. Sto. Tomas v. Salac,151 that
while it is true that R.A. 8042 and the Corporation Code provide for solidary liability, this liability must be so stated
in the decision sought to be implemented. Absent this express statement, a corporate officer may not be impleaded
and made to personally answer for the liability of the corporation.
Some principles on money claims of OFWs.

Solidary liability exists even if the foreign principal is a foreign government instrumentality;
immunity from suit cannot be invoked to defeat the solidary nature of the liability. 152
Extension of term of employment of OFW without knowledge of local agent does not bind the
latter.153
Effect on liability of severance of relations between local agent and foreign principal. Even if the
recruitment agency and the foreign principal had already severed their agency agreement at the time
the worker was injured, the recruitment agency may still be sued for violation of the employment
contract if no notice of the termination of the agencys agreement with its foreign principal was given
to the OFW, pursuant to Article 1921 of the Civil Code which states that if the agency has been
entrusted for the purpose of contracting with specified persons, its revocation shall not prejudice the
latter if they were not given notice thereof.154
Previous owner remains liable to its employees even if there is an undertaking to assume
responsibility by the new owner. The liability of the former owner of the recruitment agency is not
 extinguished by an undertaking made by the new owner thereof assuming responsibility therefor. Such
undertaking does not bind the employees as would release the former from its liability to the latter. 155
2. Liability for illegal recruitment.
The persons criminally liable for illegal recruitment are:
1. In case of natural persons
a. Principals;
b. Accomplices; and
c. Accessories.
2. In case of juridical persons
a. Officers having ownership, control, management or direction of their business who are responsible for
the commission of the offense; and
b. Responsible employees/agents thereof.156
Some principles on the persons liable for illegal recruitment.
1. Employees of a licensed recruitment agency may be held liable for illegal recruitment as principal by
direct participation, together with his employer, if it is shown that he actively and consciously
participated in illegal recruitment.157
2. Good faith and merely following orders of superiors are not valid defenses of an employee. 158
3. A manager of a recruitment/manning agency is not a mere employee. As such, he receives job
applications, interviews applicants and informs them of the agencys requirement of payment of
performance or cash bond prior to the applicants deployment. As the crewing manager, he was at
the forefront of the companys recruitment activities.159
Administrative liability of licensee or holder of authority, separate and distinct from criminal
liability for illegal recruitment.
The institution of the criminal action is without prejudice to any administrative action against the licensee
or holder of authority cognizable by the POEA which could proceed independently of the criminal action. 160

(a)
THEORY OF IMPUTED KNOWLEDGE
The theory of imputed knowledge is a rule that any information material to the transaction, either possessed
by the agent at the time of the transaction or acquired by him before its completion, is deemed to be the knowledge
of the principal, at least insofar as the transaction is concerned, even though the knowledge, in fact, is not
communicated to the principal at all.
Imputed knowledge means the knowledge attributed to a party because of his position, or his
relationship with or responsibility for another party. Such knowledge is attributed for the reason that the facts in
issue were open to discovery and it was that person's duty to apprise him of such facts. 161
CIT Group/Equipment Financing, Inc. v. Roberts, 162 observed that knowledge of one person is
generally only imputed to another where there exists a special legal relationship between the two, such as where the
knowledge of an agent may be imputed to the principal, the knowledge of an attorney is imputed to his client, or the
knowledge of one partner in a partnership is imputed to all the partners. Even in those relationships, though,
imputation of knowledge may only be found under certain circumstances. The theory, known as the 'imputed
knowledge rule, upon which imputation of knowledge from an agent to its principal rests is that, when the agent
acts within the scope of the agency relationship, there is identity of interests between the principal and agent. The
presumption upon which imputation rests is that the agent will perform his duty and communicate to his principal
the facts that the agent acquires while acting within the scope of the agency relationship.
The relationship of the local recruitment/manning agency vis-a-vis its foreign principal is that of agent-
principal, the former being the agent and the latter, the principal. Consequently, the theory of imputed knowledge
ascribes the knowledge of the agent to the principal but not the other way around.
 Thus, the violations of the terms and conditions of an extension contract, the execution of which the local
recruiter did not know and did not consent to, shall not make said local recruiter solidarily liable for the reason that
knowledge by his foreign principal of said contract cannot be imputed to him.
Sunace International Management Services, Inc. v. NLRC,163 where the High Court has the opportunity
to discuss the application of the theory of imputed knowledge. Here, the OFW (Divina) , a domestic helper in
Taiwan, has extended her 12-month contract, after its expiration, for two (2) more years after which she returned to
the Philippines. It was established by evidence that the extension was without the knowledge of the local recruitment
agency, petitioner Sunace. The Court of Appeals, however, affirmed the Labor Arbiters and NLRCs finding that
Sunace knew of and impliedly consented to the extension of Divinas 2-year contract. It went on to state that It is
undisputed that [Sunace] was continually communicating with [Divinas] foreign employer. It thus concluded that
[a]s agent of the foreign principal, petitioner cannot profess ignorance of such extension as obviously, the act of
the principal extending complainant (sic) employment contract necessarily bound it.
In finding that the application by the CA of this theory of imputed knowledge was misplaced, the High
Court ruled that this theory ascribes the knowledge of the agent, Sunace, to the principal, employer Xiong, not the
other way around. The knowledge of the principal-foreign employer cannot, therefore, be imputed to its agent,
Sunace. There being no substantial proof that Sunace knew of and consented to be bound under the 2-year
employment contract extension, it cannot be said to be privy thereto. As such, Sunace and its owner cannot be held
solidarily liable for any of Divinas claims arising from the 2-year employment extension. As the New Civil Code
provides: Contracts take effect only between the parties, their assigns, and heirs, except in case where the rights and
obligations arising from the contract are not transmissible by their nature, or by stipulation or by provision of law.
164
Furthermore, as Sunace correctly points out, there was an implied revocation of its agency relationship with
its foreign principal when, after the termination of the original employment contract, the foreign principal directly
negotiated with Divina and entered into a new and separate employment contract with her in Taiwan. Article 1924
of the New Civil Code reading: The agency is revoked if the principal directly manages the business entrusted to
the agent, dealing directly with third persons thus applies.
As defined, a principal refers to an employer or foreign placement agency hiring or engaging Filipino
workers for overseas employment through a licensed private recruitment/manning agency. 165
(h)
PRE-TERMINATION OF CONTRACT OF MIGRANT WORKER
1. WHY THE TERM USED IS PRE-TERMINATION AND NOT SIMPLY TERMINATION OF
CONTRACT.
The syllabus uses the term pre-termination in describing the termination of employment of OFWs. This
is understandable in the light of the prevailing rule that an OFWs employment contract is always for a fixed term
and thus, he can never acquire regularity of employment. Being fixed-term, any termination prior to its expiration is
more appropriately to be considered and denominated as pre-termination and not simply termination of
employment.
2. VARIOUS FORMS OF PRE-TERMINATION.
Pre-termination of employment may mean any of the following:
1. The OFW has requested for an early termination of employment;
2. The OFW and his employer mutually agreed on an early termination of employment;
3. The OFW has been discharged for just cause or disciplinary reasons or authorized cause;
4. The OFW suffered injury or illness; or
5. The OFW has died.
3. TOPICAL DISCUSSION.
For an orderly presentation, the disquisition on this particular topic in the syllabus shall be in accordance
with the following order:
(1) Nature of Employment of OFWs;
(2) Pre-termination by the OFWs and Its Effects;
 (3) Pre-termination by the Employer and Its Consequences;
(4) Award of Monetary Claims and Damages to OFWs; and
(5) Claims for Disability and Death Benefits of OFWs.
I
NATURE OF EMPLOYMENT OF OFWs
1. OFWs CAN NEVER ACQUIRE REGULAR EMPLOYMENT.
The prevailing rule is that OFWa are contractual, not regular, employees. In fact, they can never attain
regularity of employment.
The case of Brent School, Inc. v. Zamora,166 was the first to declare that OFWs are not covered by the
term regular employment as defined in Article 280 of the Labor Code.
Coyoca v. NLRC,167 more pointedly enunciated the rule that the employment of Filipino seamen is
governed by the Rules and Regulations of the POEA168 which states that the contract of seafarers shall be for a fixed
period. In no case should their contract be longer than twelve (12) months.
The 2002 Resolution on the Motion for Reconsideration in the case of Millares v. NLRC,169 which
reversed its first ruling in the same case promulgated on March 14, 2000, 170 clearly cited as reason for its holding
that OFWs cannot acquire regular employment, the fact that their employment is governed by the contracts they sign
everytime they are re-hired and their employment is terminated when the contract expires. Their employment is
contractually fixed for a certain period of time.171
2. SOME RELEVANT PRINCIPLES.
Consequent to the above rulings, the following principles are worth noting:
1. Indefinite period of employment of OFWs is not valid as it contravenes the explicit provision of the
POEA Rules and Regulations on fixed-period employment.172
2. OFWs do not become regular employees by reason of nature of work, that is, that they are made to
perform work that is usually necessary and desirable in the usual business or trade of the
employer. The exigencies of their work necessitate that they be employed on a contractual basis. 173
This notwithstanding the fact that they have rendered more than twenty (20) years of service.174
3. Regular employment does not result from the series of re-hiring of OFWs.175
4. The fixed-period employment of OFWs is not discriminatory against them nor does it favor foreign
employers. It is for the mutual interest of both the seafarer and the employer why the employment status
must be contractual only or for a certain period of time. Seafarers spend most of their time at sea and
understandably, they cannot stay for a long and an indefinite period of time at sea. Limited access to
shore society during the employment will have an adverse impact on the seafarer. The national,
cultural and lingual diversity among the crew during the contract of employment is a reality that
necessitates the limitation of its period.176
5. The expiration of the employment contracts of OFWs marks its ending. 177
3. EFFECT OF HIRING OF SEAFARER FOR OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT BUT ASSIGNING HIM TO
LOCAL VESSEL.
In point is OSM Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC,178 where the petitioner does not deny hiring private
respondent Guerrero as master mariner. However, it argues that since he was not deployed overseas, his employment
contract became ineffective because its object was allegedly absent. Petitioner contends that using the vessel in
coastwise trade and subsequently chartering it to another principal had the effect of novating the employment
contract. The Supreme Court was not persuaded by this argument. Contrary to petitioners contention, the contract
had an object which was the rendition of service by private respondent on board the vessel. The non-deployment of
the ship overseas did not affect the validity of the perfected employment contract. After all, the decision to use the
vessel for coastwise shipping was made by petitioner only and did not bear the written conformity of private
respondent. A contract cannot be novated by the will of only one party. The claim of petitioner that it processed the
contract of private respondent with the POEA only after he had started working is also without merit. Petitioner
cannot use its own misfeasance to defeat his claim.
4. EFFECT ON THE STATUS OF A SEAFARER HIRED FOR OVERSEAS DEPLOYMENT BUT LATER
ASSIGNING HIM TO DOMESTIC OPERATIONS AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF HIS OVERSEAS
CONTRACT.
The case of Delos Santos v. Jebsen Maritime, Inc. ,179 presents a situation different from the said case of
OSM Shipping. The husband of petitioner, Gil Delos Santos, was hired by respondent Jebsen Maritime, Inc. , for
and in behalf of Aboitiz Shipping Co. , as third engineer of MV Wild Iris. The POEA-approved contract of
employment was for a fixed period of one (1) month and for a specific undertaking of conducting said vessel to and
from Japan. On the vessels return to the Philippines a month after, Delos Santos remained on board, respondent
having opted to retain his services while the vessel underwent repairs in Cebu. After its repair, MVWild Iris, this
time renamed/registered as MV Super RoRo 100, sailed within domestic waters, having been meanwhile issued by
the Maritime Industry Authority a Certificate of Vessel Registry and a permit to engage in coastwise trade on the
Manila-Cebu-Manila-Zamboanga-General Santos-Manila route. During this period of employment, Delos Santos
was paid by and received from respondent his salary in Philippine peso. Later, Delos Santos got sick and filed a
complaint with the Labor Arbiter for recovery of disability benefits, and sick wage allowance and reimbursement of
hospital and medical expenses.
The principal issue to be resolved boils down to which between the POEA-Standard Employment
Contract (POEA-SEC) and the Labor Code, governs the employer-employee relationship between Delos Santos and
respondent after MV Wild Iris, as later renamed Super RoRo 100, returned to the country from its one-month
conduction voyage to and from Japan.
The Supreme Court ruled that the POEA-SEC should no longer apply after the expiration of the one-month
contract which was doubtless fixed to coincide with the pre-determined one-month long Philippines-Japan-
Philippines conduction-voyage run. After the lapse of the said period, his employment under the POEA-approved
contract may be deemed as functus oficio and Delos Santos employment pursuant thereto considered automatically
terminated, there being no mutually-agreed renewal or extension of the expired contract. After said period, Delos
Santos ceased to be an OFW as his employment on board an inter-island vessel should already be considered as
domestic employment.
5. EFFECT OF NON-DEPLOYMENT OF OFWs TO OVERSEAS ASSIGNMENT.
Petitioner-seafarer, in Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc. 180 was not deployed overseas
despite the signing of a POEA-approved employment contract.181 One of his contentions is that such failure to
deploy was an act designed to prevent him from attaining the status of a regular employee. The Supreme Court,
however, disagreed and ruled that seafarers are considered contractual employees and cannot be considered as
regular employees under the Labor Code. Their employment is governed by the contracts they sign every time they
are rehired and their employment is terminated when the contract expires. The exigencies of their work necessitate
that they be employed on a contractual basis.
II
PRE-TERMINATION BY OFWS AND ITS EFFECTS
1. EFFECT WHEN OFW PRE-TERMINATES HIS EMPLOYMENT.
When the voluntary pre-termination of the employment contract is initiated by the employee, it is akin or
equivalent to voluntary resignation, a form of termination by employee of his employment contract under Article
285 of the Labor Code. However, if the employer fails to present evidence of voluntariness, say the resignation
letter, the employee is deemed illegally dismissed.
Skippers United Pacific, Inc. v. Doza. 182 - In this case, there was no written notice furnished to
respondent seafarers regarding the cause of their dismissal. Cosmoship MV Wisdom, their foreign employer,
furnished a written notice (telex) to Skippers, the local manning agency, claiming that respondents were repatriated
because the latter voluntarily pre-terminated their contracts. This telex was given credibility and weight by the Labor
Arbiter and NLRC in deciding that there was pre-termination of the employment contract akin to resignation and
no illegal dismissal. However, as correctly ruled by the CA, the telex message is a biased and self-serving
document that does not satisfy the requirement of substantial evidence. If, indeed, respondents voluntarily pre-
terminated their contracts, then they should have submitted their written resignations.
2. CONCEPT OF RESIGNATION UNDER THE LABOR CODE, APPLICABLE TO OFWs.
Article 285183 of the Labor Code recognizes termination by the employee of the employment contract by
serving written notice on the employer at least one (1) month in advance. Given that provision, the law
contemplates the requirement of a written notice of resignation. In the absence of a written resignation, it is safe to
presume that the employer terminated the seafarers.
3. CONCEPT OF INVOLUNTARY RESIGNATION OR CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL UNDER THE
LABOR CODE, APPLICABLE TO OFWS.
(NOTE: Please see discussion on this point under the topic IV. TERMINATION OF
EMPLOYMENT, xxx E. Constructive Dismissal, infra)

III
PRE-TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT OF OFWs
AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
1. OFWs DESERVE TO BE PROTECTED BY OUR LAWS.
OFWs belong to a disadvantaged class. Most of them come from the poorest sector of our society. Their
profile shows they live in suffocating slums, trapped in an environment of crimes. Hardly literate and in ill health,
their only hope lies in jobs they can hardly find with difficulty in our country. Their unfortunate circumstance makes
them easy prey to avaricious employers. They will climb mountains, cross the seas, endure slave treatment in
foreign lands just to survive. Out of despondence, they will work under sub-human conditions and accept salaries
below the minimum. The least we can do is to protect them with our laws. 184
There is an extreme need for the strict enforcement of the law and the rules and regulations governing
Filipino contract workers abroad. Many hapless citizens of this country who have sought foreign employment to
earn a few dollars to ensure for their families a life worthy of human dignity and provide proper education and a
decent future for their children have found themselves enslaved by foreign masters, harassed or abused and deprived
of their employment for the slightest cause. No one should be made to unjustly profit from their suffering. Hence,
recruiting agencies must not only faithfully comply with government-prescribed responsibilities; they must impose
upon themselves the duty, borne out of a social conscience, to help citizens of this country sent abroad to work for
foreign principals. They must keep in mind that this country is not exporting slaves but human beings, and above
all, fellow Filipinos seeking merely to improve their lives. 185
2. OFWS AND THEIR FOREIGN EMPLOYERS MAY FREELY ENTER INTO A CONTRACT OF
EMPLOYMENT.
A contract freely entered into is considered the law between the parties who can establish stipulations,
clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem convenient, including the laws which they wish to govern their
respective obligations, as long as they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public
policy.186
3. PARTY INVOKING THE FOREIGN LAW HAS THE BURDEN TO PROVE IT; APPLICATION OF
THE DOCTRINE OF PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION.
The hornbook principle is that the party invoking the application of a foreign law has the burden of proving
the law, under the doctrine of processual presumption. 187
Presumed-identity approach or processual presumption is an International Law doctrine which
dictates that where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that foreign law
is the same as Philippine law. Thus, under this situation, Philippine labor laws should apply in determining the
issues presented in a case.188
 It must be noted that the Philippines does not take judicial notice of foreign laws; hence, they must not
only be alleged, they must be proven. To prove a foreign law, the party invoking it must present a copy thereof and
comply with Sections 24189 and 25190 of Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of Court.
In the 2010 case of ATCI Overseas Corporation v. Echin,191 petitioners contend that Philippine labor
laws on probationary employment are not applicable since it was expressly provided in respondents employment
contract which she voluntarily entered into, that the terms of her engagement shall be governed by prevailing
Kuwaiti Civil Service Laws and Regulations as in fact POEA Rules accord respect to such rules, customs and
practices of the host country. To prove the Kuwaiti law, petitioners submitted the following: MOA between
respondent and her foreign employer, the Ministry of Public Health of Kuwait (the Ministry) , as represented by
ATCI, which provides that the employee is subject to a probationary period of one (1) year and that the host
countrys Civil Service Laws and Regulations apply; a translated copy (Arabic to English) of the termination letter
to respondent stating that she did not pass the probation terms, without specifying the grounds therefor, and a
translated copy of the certificate of termination, both of which documents were certified by Mr. Mustapha Alawi,
Head of the Department of Foreign Affairs-Office of Consular Affairs Islamic Certification and Translation
Unit; and respondents letter of reconsideration to the Ministry, wherein she noted that in her first eight (8) months
of employment, she was given a rating of Excellent albeit it changed due to changes in her shift of work
schedule.
The Supreme Court, however, ruled that these documents, whether taken singly or as a whole, do not
sufficiently prove that respondent was validly terminated as a probationary employee under Kuwaiti civil service
laws. Instead of submitting a copy of the pertinent Kuwaiti labor laws duly authenticated and translated by Embassy
officials thereat, as required under the Rules, what petitioners submitted were mere certifications attesting only to
the correctness of the translations of the MOA and the termination letter which does not prove at all that Kuwaiti
civil service laws differ from Philippine laws and that under such Kuwaiti laws, respondent was validly terminated.
4. DUE PROCESS.
a. In the absence of proof of applicable foreign law, OFWs are entitled to due process in accordance
with Philippine laws.
As a general rule, in the absence of proof of the applicable laws of the foreign employer, it is the provisions
of the Labor Code which govern termination of employment of OFWs. This was the holding in the case of EDI-
Staffbuilders International, Inc. v. NLRC,192 where no proof of the Saudi laws was presented. In such absence,
Philippine labor laws and regulations shall govern the relationship between the OFW and his employer. Our laws
and rules on the requisites of due process relating to termination of employment should therefore apply.193
In Philemploy Services and Resources, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 194 the respondent employee was hired as a
domestic helper in Taiwan under a one-year contract, with 40 days probationary period before she would become a
regular domestic helper. Terminated after ten (10) days of work, she filed an illegal dismissal case. The Supreme
Court affirmed the validity of her termination within the probationary period but noted that the twin requirements of
notice and hearing were not observed. Respondent is therefore entitled to the award of P30,000.00 as nominal
damages for failure to observe due process.
b. Due process in case of termination of employment of seafarers.
PCL Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC. 195 - Contrary to petitioners contention that the twin requirements
of notice and hearing apply strictly only when the employment is within the Philippines and that the same need
not be strictly observed in cases of international maritime or overseas employment, the provisions of the
Constitution as well as the Labor Code which afford protection to labor apply to Filipino employees whether
working within the Philippines or abroad. Moreover, the principle of lex loci contractus (the law of the place where
the contract is made) governs in this jurisdiction.
Talidano v. Falcon Maritime & Allied Services, Inc. , 196 also declares that the minimum requirement of
due process in termination proceedings must be complied with even with respect to seamen on board a foreign
vessel.197
Centennial Transmarine, Inc. v. Dela Cruz,198 however, is more categorical in declaring that for officers
and crew who are working in foreign vessels involved in overseas shipping, there must be compliance with the
applicable laws on overseas employment as well as with the regulations issued by the POEA, such as those
embodied in the Standard Contract for Seafarers Employed Abroad (Standard Contract) . 199
 Skippers Pacific, Inc. v. Mira,200 instructs that under the said Standard Contract, the two-notice rule is
indicated. An erring seafarer is given a written notice of the charge against him and is afforded an opportunity to
explain or defend himself. Should sanctions be imposed, then a written notice of penalty and the reasons for it
should be furnished the erring seafarer. It is only in the exceptional case of clear and existing danger to the safety
of the crew or vessel that the required notices are dispensed with; but just the same, a complete report should be
sent to the manning agency, duly supported by substantial evidence of the findings.201
5. AWARD OF INDEMNITY IN THE FORM OF NOMINAL DAMAGES IN CASE OF DISMISSAL OF
OFWs FOR JUST OR AUTHORIZED CAUSE BUT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.
The Agabon doctrine202 of awarding indemnity in the form of nominal damages in cases of valid
termination for just or authorized cause203 but without procedural due process also applies to termination of OFWs.
The amount of indemnity of P30,000.00 was awarded in DMA Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. Cabillar,204 and
P10,000.00 in the case of PCL Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC. 205
Most relevant to cite as example on this poinr is the 2011 case of Dela Rosa v. Michaelmar Philippines,
Inc. ,206 which applied Agabon since petitioner was not accorded procedural due process prior to his termination.
There was no showing here that respondents complied with the required procedural due process. The only notice
allegedly given to Dela Rosa was a letter warning dated March 16, 2003. Such letter, however, did not cite the
particular acts constituting Dela Rosas alleged poor performance. Likewise, there was no formal investigation of
the charges. Certainly, respondents failed to observe the necessary procedural safeguards. Consequently, petitioner
was awarded P30,000.00 as indemnity in the form of nominal damages in accordance with the ruling in
Agabonbecause his dismissal was for just cause but without due process.
6. ONUS PROBANDI.
a. Burden of proof devolves on both recruitment agency and its foreign principal.
In termination cases, where the employer-employee relationship has been established, the onus probandi
(burden of proof) that the dismissal of an employee is for a just cause, lies with the employer. Failure to do so would
necessarily mean that the dismissal is not justified.207
Because of the joint and solidary nature of the liability of the foreignbased employer and the local
recruitment agency, the burden of proof to show that the dismissal of the OFW is legal and valid devolves upon the
both of them.208
b. Quantum of evidence required.
A fact is deemed established in cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies like the NLRC or
POEA, if it is supported by substantial evidence. They are not bound by the technical rules of procedure and
evidence and the rules obtaining in the courts of law. Their proceedings are non-litigious in nature.209
IV
AWARD OF MONETARY CLAIMS AND DAMAGES TO OFWs
1. THE RELIEFS UNDER ARTICLE 279 OF THE LABOR CODE ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO OFWs;
LEGAL BASIS FOR THEIR RELIEFS IS SECTION 10, R.A. NO. 8042, AS AMENDED.
Any and all money claims arising from the employment of OFWs, including those for death, disability or
illness benefits, are not rooted in the Labor Code.210 It is R.A. No. 8042, otherwise known as the Migrant
Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995,211 and not Article 279212 of the Labor Code, which is the
appropriate legal basis for such claims, thus:
SEC. 10. Money Claims. - Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the Labor Arbiters
of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) shall have the original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear
and decide, within ninety (90) calendar days after the filing of the complaint, the claims arising out of an
employer-employee relationship or by virtue of any law or contract involving Filipino workers for
overseas deployment including claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damage.
Consistent with this mandate, the NLRC shall endeavor to update and keep abreast with the developments
in the global services industry.
 The liability of the principal/employer and the recruitment/placement agency for any and all
claims under this section shall be joint and several . This provision shall be incorporated in the contract for
overseas employment and shall be a condition precedent for its approval. The performance bond to be filed
by the recruitment/ placement agency, as provided by law, shall be answerable for all money claims or
damages that may be awarded to the workers. If the recruitment/placement agency is a juridical being, the
corporate officers and directors and partners as the case may be, shall themselves be jointly and solidarily
liable with the corporation or partnership for the aforesaid claims and damages.
Such liabilities shall continue during the entire period or duration of the employment contract and
shall not be affected by any substitution, amendment or modification made locally or in a foreign country of
the said contract.
Any compromise/amicable settlement or voluntary agreement on money claims inclusive of damages
under this section shall be paid within thirty (30) days from approval of the settlement by the appropriate
authority.
In case of termination of overseas employment without just, valid or authorized cause as
defined by law or contract, or any unauthorized deductions from the migrant worker's salary, the
worker shall be entitled to the full reimbursement of his placement fee and the deductions made with
interest at twelve percent (12%) per annum, plus his salaries for the unexpired portion of his
employment contract or for three (3) months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less.
In case of a final and executory judgement against a foreign employer/principal, it shall be
automatically disqualified, without further proceedings, from participating in the Philippine Overseas
Employment Program and from recruiting and hiring Filipino workers until and unless it fully satisfies the
judgement award.
Non-compliance with the mandatory periods for resolutions of case provided under this section shall
subject the responsible officials to any or all of the following penalties:
(a) The salary of any such official who fails to render his decision or resolution within the prescribed
period shall be, or caused to be, withheld until the said official complies therewith;
(b) Suspension for not more than ninety (90) days; or
(c) Dismissal from the service with disqualification to hold any appointive public office for five (5)
years.
"Provided, however, That the penalties herein provided shall be without prejudice to any liability which
any such official may have incurred under other existing laws or rules and regulations as a consequence of
violating the provisions of this paragraph.
A plain reading of said Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042 readily shows that it applies only to cases of illegal
dismissal or dismissal without any just, authorized or valid cause and finds no application in cases where the OFW
was not illegally dismissed.213
To reiterate, the remedies under Article 279, such as reinstatement or separation pay in lieu of
reinstatement or full backwages, are not available to OFWs. This is as it should be since OFWs are contractual
employees whose rights and obligations are governed primarily by the POEA Standard Employment Contract
(POEA-SEC) , the Rules and Regulations Governing Overseas Employment and more importantly, by said R.A. No.
8042, as lately amended by R.A. No. 10022. 214
2. A VALIDLY DISMISSED OFW IS NOT ENTITLED TO HIS SALARY FOR THE UNEXPIRED
PORTION OF HIS EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT.
An OFW who is dismissed from employment for a valid cause is not entitled to any salary for the
unexpired portion of his employment contract. However, if he is dismissed without observance of procedural due
process, he is entitled to an indemnity in the form of nominal damages. 215
3. THE SERRANO DOCTRINE: ILLEGALLY DISMISSED OFWs ARE NOW ENTITLED TO ALL THE
SALARIES FOR THE ENTIRE UNEXPIRED PORTION OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS,
IRRESPECTIVE OF THE STIPULATED TERM OR DURATION THEREOF.
Prior to the Serrano doctrine which was enunciated in the en banc ruling in the 2009 case of Antonio M.
Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc. ,216 the following provision of the 5 paragraph of Section 10 of R.A.
th

No. 8042 which is again quoted below for ready reference, viz:
In case of termination of overseas employment without just, valid or authorized cause as defined
by law or contract, or any unauthorized deductions from the migrant worker's salary, the worker shall be
entitled to the full reimbursement of his placement fee and the deductions made with interest at twelve
 percent (12%) per annum, plus his salaries for the unexpired portion of his employment contract or
for three (3) months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less.
has been interpreted to mean that the entitlement to monetary claims of an illegally dismissed OFW depends on the
duration of his contract.217 Basically, the rule then may be stated as follows:
1. If the duration of the employment contract is less than one (1) year , an illegally dismissed OFW shall
be entitled to all his salaries for the unexpired portion thereof;218 or
2. If the duration of the employment contract is at least one (1) year219 or more,220 an illegally dismissed
OFW shall be entitled to whichever is less between his salaries for the unexpired portion of his
employment contract or his salariesfor three (3) months for every year of the unexpired term. 221
The foregoing rule has been rendered nugatory by the Serrano rulingwhich declared the afore-quoted
qualification - or for three months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less in paragraph 5,
Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042 null and unconstitutional for being discriminatory and violative of the equal protection
of the law clause, among other significant reasons cited therein, thusly:
The Court concludes that the subject clause contains a suspect classification in that, in the computation of the
monetary benefits of fixed-term employees who are illegally discharged, it imposes a 3-month cap on the claim of OFWs
with an unexpired portion of one year or more in their contracts, but none on the claims of other OFWs or local workers
with fixed-term employment. The subject clause singles out one classification of OFWs and burdens it with a peculiar
disadvantage.
Consequent to the Serrano ruling, an illegally dismissed OFW is now entitled to all the salaries for the
entire unexpired portion of their employment contracts, irrespective of the stipulated term or duration thereof.222
Resultantly, all past decisions subjecting the monetary award to the afore-mentioned qualifying clause no longer
apply.
4. SERRANO DOCTRINE GIVEN RETROACTIVE EFFECT.
The Serrano doctrine was given retroactive effect in the 2011 case of Yap v. Thenamaris Ships
Management,223 which was pending before the Supreme Court when the Serrano ruling was promulgated.
5. THE PROBLEM IS THE SAME UNCONSTITUTIONAL RULE WAS REPLICATED IN THE
AMENDATORY R.A. NO. 10022 (MARCH 8, 2010) .
Despite the 2009224 en banc declaration of the Supreme Court in Serrano that the said qualifying provision
in the 5 paragraph of Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042 is unconstitutional, R.A. No. 10022 that was passed in 2010 225 to
th

amend the said 5 paragraph still contained the same qualifying provision.
th

The insistence by Congress on this provision despite its earlier declaration of unconstitutionality and
nullity, certainly creates a constitutional issue. Did such replication result in curing its patent nullity and
unconstitutionality?
In the light of the rationale behind such pronouncement of unconstitutionality and nullity which was
eloquently ventilated and articulated in Serrano, it is opined that such replication does not operate to cure the nullity
and unconstitutionality of the provision. Notably, the very raison d etre for so nullifying it cannot be wiped out by
the simple expedience of re-enacting it in the new law.
6. REFUSAL OF SUPREME COURT TO RULE ON THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF AMENDMENT TO
THE 5 PARAGRAPH INTRODUCED BY R.A. NO. 10022.
TH

The Supreme Court, in the following cases, refused to rule on the constitutionality of the amendment by
R.A. No. 10022 of the 5 paragraph of Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042:
th

(1) The 2012 case of Skippers United Pacific, Inc. v. Doza, 226 where the said unconstitutionality was
invoked and cited and the amendatory reiteration of the same provision was acknowledged. Nevertheless, said the
Supreme Court, since the termination occurred on January 1999 before the passage of the amendatory RA 10022,
we shall apply RA 8042, as unamended, without touching on the constitutionality of Section 7 of RA 10022.
(2) In another 2012 case, Pert/CPM Manpower Exponent Co. , Inc. v. Vinuya, 227 the recruitment
agency posits that the Serrano ruling has been nullified by R.A. No. 10022. It argues that R.A. 10022, which lapsed
into law (without the signature of the President) on March 8, 2010, restored the subject clause in the 5 paragraph, th
Section 10 of R.A. 8042. It was, however, held that this argument fails to persuade. Laws shall have no retroactive
effect, unless the contrary is provided. By its very nature, the amendment introduced by R.A. 10022 restoring a
provision of R.A. 8042 declared unconstitutional cannot be given retroactive effect, not only because there is no
express declaration of retroactivity in the law, but because retroactive application will result in an impairment of a
right that had accrued to the respondents by virtue of the Serrano ruling - entitlement to their salaries for the
unexpired portion of their employment contracts. All statutes are to be construed as having only a prospective
application, unless the purpose and intention of the legislature to give them a retrospective effect are expressly
declared or are necessarily implied from the language used. 228 There is thus no reason to nullify the application of
the Serrano ruling in the present case. Said the Supreme Court: Whether or not R.A. 10022 is constitutional is not
for us to rule upon in the present case as this is an issue that is not squarely before us. In other words, this is an issue
that awaits its proper day in court; in the meanwhile, we make no pronouncement on it.
7. SOME PRINCIPLES ON MONETARY AWARDS TO OFWs.
Monetary award to OFW is not in the nature of separation pay or backwages but a form of indemnity.229
Only salaries are to be included in the computation of the amount due for the unexpired portion of the contract.
Overtime, holiday and leave pay230 and allowances are not included.231 However, this rule on exclusion of
allowance does not apply in case it is encapsulated in the basic salary clause. 232
Entitlement to overtime pay of OFWs. - As far as entitlement to overtime pay is concerned, the correct
criterion in determining whether or not sailors are entitled to overtime pay is not whether they were on board
and cannot leave ship beyond the regular eight (8) working hours a day, but whether they actually rendered
service in excess of said number of hours. 233 An OFW is not entitled to overtime pay, even if guaranteed,234 if he
failed to present any evidence to prove that he rendered service in excess of the regular eight (8) working hours
a day.235
In case of unauthorized deductions from OFWs salary , he shall be entitled to the full reimbursement of the
deductions made with interest at twelve percent (12%) per annum. This is in addition to the full reimbursement
of his placement fee with the same interest of twelve percent (12%) per annum plus his salaries for the
unexpired portion of his employment contract if he is terminated without just, valid or authorized cause as
defined by law or contract.236
Costs of repatriation and transport of personal belongings should be included in the monetary award to an
illegally dismissed OFW.237
Right of the employer to recover cost of repatriation from OFWs wages hinges on whether the latter was
legally or illegally dismissed. If validly discharged, employer has the right to recover therefrom; otherwise, he
cannot so recover.238
Unauthorized substitution or alteration of POEA-approved employment contract from the time of actual
signing thereof by the parties up to and including the period of their expiration without the approval of the
POEA is prohibited.239
Effect of a final and executory judgment against a foreign employer/principal. - It shall be automatically
disqualified, without further proceedings, from participating in the Philippine Overseas Employment Program
and from recruiting and hiring Filipino workers until and unless it fully satisfies the judgment award. 240
8. OFWs ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THE RELIEFS OF BACKWAGES, REINSTATEMENT OR
SEPARATION PAY IN LIEU THEREOF.
OFWs are not entitled to backwages, reinstatement or separation pay in lieu thereof since these reliefs
provided under Article 279 of the Labor Code, as earlier pointed out, are not available to them. Their employment
being purely fixed term in character, they are entitled only to ALL the salaries for the unexpired portion of their
employment contract per Serrano doctrine.241
9. OFWs ARE ENTITLED TO ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES.
In the following cases, the OFWs were awarded actual or compensatory damages because of the failure of
the recruitment agency to deploy them abroad, after signing a POEA-approved employment contract, an act
constitutive of breach of contract:
 (1) Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc. , 242 where respondent recruitment agency was held
liable to pay petitioner actual and compensatory damages of US$4,635.00 in the form of the loss of nine
(9) months worth of salary as provided in the contract.
(2) Bright Maritime Corporation v. Fantonial,243 where petitioner company was held liable for actual
damages for the loss of respondents one-year salary as provided in the contract.244
10. OFWs ARE ENTITLED TO MORAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES AND ATTORNEYS FEES.
Because of the attendant bad faith and breach of contract, an illegally dismissed OFW is entitled to moral
and exemplary damages and attorneys fees. Additionally, because the OFW was compelled to litigate and thus
incur expenses to protect his rights and interests, he is entitled to attorneys fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of
the total award.245
Thus, in the same case of Bright Maritime, respondent, in addition to the actual and compensatory
damages, was awarded moral damages in the amount of P30,000.00, 246 exemplary damages of P50,000.00247 and
10% of all recoverable amounts as attorneys fees.248
Similarly, based on the same grounds of breach of contract and bad faith, the respondent in Athenna
International Manpower Services, Inc. v. Villanos,249 was awarded P50,000 as moral damages and P50,000 as
exemplary damages, in addition to attorneys fees of ten percent (10%) of the aggregate monetary awards.250
11. OTHER REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO OFWs.
a. Repatriation as a remedy.
Whatever ground is cited for the pre-termination of employment, the OFW has the right to insist that he be
repatriated to the Philippines. The only exception is when he is charged for certain crimes or cases in foreign courts
and thus may not be allowed to go home until the case is terminated in his favor.
b. Repatriation when an OFW requests for early termination.
A seafarer who requests for early termination of his contract shall be liable for his repatriation cost as well
as the transportation cost of his replacement. 251
c. Compulsory insurance policy covers repatriation due to illegal termination or death of OFW.
The compulsory insurance policy coverage for an agency-hired OFW includes the payment of repatriation
cost of the worker when his employment is terminated by the employer without any valid cause, or by the employee
with just cause, including the transport of his personal belongings.
In case of death, the insurance provider shall arrange and pay for the repatriation or return of the worker's
remains.252
d. Proportionate return of premium for compulsory insurance coverage.
When the worker decides to voluntarily pre-terminate his employment contract abroad and returns to the
Philippines out of his own volition and free will, there shall be a proportionate amount of return of premium for the
benefit of the recruitment/manning agency corresponding to the unexpired term of the insurance contract. 253
V
CLAIMS FOR DISABILITY AND DEATH BENEFITS OF OFWs
1. ON JURISDICTION.
a. Labor Arbiters have jurisdiction over claims for disability, death and other benefits of OFWs.
Being a money claim by their very nature which may have arisen out of an employer-employee relationship
or by virtue of a law or contract, the Labor Arbiters of the NLRC have jurisdiction to hear and decide claims for
disability, death and other benefits.
b. Labor Arbiter has jurisdiction even if the case is filed by the heirs of the deceased OFW.
Medline Management, Inc. v. Roslinda,254 Contrary to the claim of petitioner, the Labor Arbiter has
jurisdiction to hear even if there is no employer-employee relationship between the parties because herein
respondents who filed the complaint, are the wife and son of Juliano Roslinda, the deceased OFW. As heirs of
Juliano Roslinda, they have the personality to file the claim for death compensation, reimbursement of medical
expenses, damages and attorney's fees before the Labor Arbiter of the NLRC.
2. ON DISABILITY CLAIMS.
a. Disability, not similar to illness or sickness.
"Disability" is generally defined as the "loss or impairment of a physical or mental function resulting from
injury or sickness. " Clearly, "disability" is not synonymous with "sickness" or "illness," the former being a
potential effect of the latter.255
b. Claims of OFWs for disability, death and burial benefits, distinguished from similar claims under
the Labor Code.
The claims for disability, death and burial benefits involving seafarers or OFWs over which the Labor
Arbiters of the NLRC have jurisdiction, are not the same as the claims against the State Insurance Fund under Title
II, Book IV of the Labor Code for the same benefits, over which the Employees Compensation Commission (ECC)
has jurisdiction. 256
c. The Labor Codes concept of permanent total disability applies to claims of OFWs.
But as far as the permanent total disability of OFWs is concerned, the concept of this kind of disability
under Article 192 of the Labor Code is applicable to them. 257
The 2013 case of Kestrel Shipping Co. , Inc. v. Munar, 258 declared that it is now well-settled that the
provisions of the Labor Code and Amended Rules on Employee Compensation (AREC) implementing Title II, Book
IV of the Labor Code on disabilities are applicable to the case of seafarers such that the POEA-Standard
Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) is not the sole issuance that governs their rights in the event of work-related
death, injury or illness.
d. Compensation and benefits for injury or illness.
The latest POEA-SEC issued in 2010259 prescribes the following compensation and benefits for injury or
illness:
SECTION 20. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS
A. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR INJURY OR ILLNESS
The liabilities of the employer when the seafarer suffers work-related injury or illness during the
term of his contract are as follows:
1. The employer shall continue to pay the seafarer his wages during the time he is on board the
ship;
2. If the injury or illness requires medical and/or dental treatment in a foreign port, the employer
shall be liable for the full cost of such medical, serious dental, surgical and hospital treatment as well
as board and lodging until the seafarer is declared fit to work or to be repatriated. However, if after
repatriation, the seafarer still requires medical attention arising from said injury or illness, he shall be so
provided at cost to the employer until such time he is declared fit or the degree of his disability has been
established by the company-designated physician.
3. In addition to the above obligation of the employer to provide medical attention, the seafarer
shall also receive sickness allowance from his employer in an amount equivalent to his basic wage
computed from the time he signed off until he is declared fit to work or the degree of disability
has been assessed by the company-designated physician. The period within which the seafarer
shall be entitled to his sickness allowance shall not exceed 120 days. Payment of the sickness
allowance shall be made on a regular basis, but not less than once a month.
The seafarer shall be entitled to reimbursement of the cost of medicines prescribed by the
company-designated physician. In case treatment of the seafarer is on an out-patient basis as
determined by the company-designated physician, the company shall approve the appropriate mode
of transportation and accommodation. The reasonable cost of actual traveling expenses and/or
accommodation shall be paid subject to liquidation and submission of official receipts and/or proof of
expenses.
 For this purpose, the seafarer shall submit himself to a post-employment medical examination
by a company-designated physician within three working days upon his return except when he
is physically incapacitated to do so, in which case, a written notice to the agency within the
same period is deemed as compliance. In the course of the treatment, the seafarer shall also report
regularly to the company-designated physician specifically on the dates as prescribed by the company-
designated physician and agreed to by the seafarer. Failure of the seafarer to comply with the
mandatory reporting requirement shall result in his forfeiture of the right to claim the above
benefits.
If a doctor appointed by the seafarer disagrees with the assessment, a third doctor may be
agreed jointly between the employer and the seafarer. The third doctor's decision shall be final
and binding on both parties.
4. Those illnesses not listed in Section 32 of this Contract are disputably presumed as work-related.
5. In case a seafarer is disembarked from the ship for medical reasons, the employer shall bear the
full cost of repatriation in the event the seafarer is declared (1) fit for repatriation; or (2) fit to work but
the employer is unable to find employment for the seafarer on board his former ship or another ship of
the employer.
6. In case of permanent total or partial disability of the seafarer caused by either injury or illness
the seafarer shall be compensated in accordance with the schedule of benefits enumerated in Section
32 of his Contract. Computation of his benefits arising from an illness or disease shall be governed by
the rates and the rules of compensation applicable at the time the illness or disease was contracted.
The disability shall be based solely on the disability gradings provided under Section 32 of this
Contract, and shall not be measured or determined by the number of days a seafarer is under treatment
or the number of days in which sickness allowance is paid.
7. It is understood and agreed that, the benefits mentioned above shall be separate and
distinct from, and will be in addition to whatever benefits which the seafarer is entitled to under
Philippine laws such as from the Social Security System, Overseas Workers Welfare
Administration, Employees' Compensation Commission, Philippine Health Insurance
Corporation and Home Development Mutual Fund (Pag-IBIG Fund) .
e. Requisites for compensability of injury or illness.
Based on the above provision, an injury or illness is compensable when, first, it is work-related and,
second, the injury or illness existed during the term of the seafarers employment contract.
f. Requisites for occupational diseases.
An occupational disease and the resulting disability to be compensable, the following need to be
satisfied: (1) the seafarer's work must involve the risks described; (2)
the disease was contracted as a result of the seafarer's exposure to the described risks; (3)
the disease was contracted within a period of exposure and under such other factors necessary to contract it; and
(4) there was no notorious negligence on the part of the seafarer. 260
The unqualified phrase during the term of employment covers all injury or illness occurring during the
lifetime of the contract. The injury or illness need not be shown to be work-related. The important factor to
consider is that there must be a showing that the injury or illness and the ensuing disability occurred during the
effectivity of the employment contract.261
g. Some principles on disability claims.
The POEA-SEC is the law between the parties.262
Injury is not the one compensated but the incapacity to work resulting in the impairment of ones
earning capacity. 263 Disability should be understood not more on its medical significance, but on the
loss of earning capacity.264
Disability arising from pre-existing illness is not compensable.265
Self-inflicted injury is not compensable.266
Strict rules of evidence are not applicable to compensation and disability claims cases of OFWs.267
 Misrepresentation on disability claims on the part of the claimant would defeat the claim for total
permanent disability.268
When the benefit under the law of registry of the vessel is higher than Philippine law, it is correct to
resolve the award based on the law of registry of the vessel providing greater benefit.269
Failure to submit for post-employment medical examination by company-designated physician within
three (3) working days from repatriation which is a condition sine qua non, bars the filing of a claim
for disability benefits.270
The company-designated physician should make a definite assessment of the seafarers fitness to work
or permanent disability within the period of 120 or 240 days. If the company-designated physician fails
to arrive at a definite assessment of the seafarer's fitness to work or permanent disability within the
period of 120 or 240 days, the latter shall be deemed totally and permanently disabled. On the other
hand, an employee's disability becomes permanent and total even before the lapse of the statutory 240-
day treatment period, when it becomes evident that the employee's disability continues and he is unable
to engage in gainful employment during such period because, for instance, he underwent surgery and it
evidently appears that he could not recover therefrom within the statutory period. 271
Accreditation with the POEA of the company-designated physician is not necessary.272
Findings of company-designated physician are not conclusive.273
OFW has the right to present controverting evidence. 274
OFW has the right to seek a second opinion from physicians other than company-designated
physician.275
The procedure in jointly engaging a third doctor whose decision is final and binding on both parties
should be complied with.276
In case of conflict of opinions, that which is favorable to the OFW should be adopted. 277
When opinion from an independent third physician is not secured by the parties, the NLRC has
authority to evaluate the credibility of the findings of their respective doctors on the basis of their
inherent merits.278
Moral and exemplary damages may be awarded in disability claims cases filed by OFWs for their
physical suffering and mental anguish.279
Attorneys fees may be granted if OFW is compelled to litigate or to incur expenses to protect his
interest or in any other case where the court deems it just and equitable to grant. 280
3. ON DEATH BENEFITS.
a. Basis of the computation for death benefits of OFWs.
The latest POEA-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) issued in 2010281 prescribes the following
compensation and benefits for death:
B. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR DEATH
1. In case of work-related death of the seafarer, during the term of his contract, the employer shall pay
his beneficiaries the Philippine currency equivalent to the amount of Fifty Thousand US dollars
(US$50,OOO) and an additional amount of Seven Thousand US dollars (US$7,000) to each child
under the age of twenty-one (21) but not exceeding four (4) children, at the exchange rate prevailing
during the time of payment.
2. Where death is caused by warlike activity while sailing within a declared war zone or war risk area,
the compensation payable shall be doubled. The employer shall undertake appropriate war zone
insurance coverage for this purpose.
3. It is understood and agreed that the benefits mentioned above shall be separate and distinct from,
and will be in addition to whatever benefits which the seafarer is entitled to under Philippine
laws from the Social Security System, Overseas Workers Welfare Administration, Employee's
Compensation Commission, Philippine Health Insurance Corporation and Home Development
Mutual Fund (Pag-IBIG Fund) .
4. The other liabilities of the employer when the seafarer dies as a result of work-related injury or illness
during the term of employment are as follows:
 a. The employer shall pay the deceased's beneficiary all outstanding obligations due the seafarer
under this Contract.
b. The employer shall transport the remains and personal effects of the seafarer to the
Philippines at employer's expense except if the death occurred in a port where local
government laws or regulations do not permit the transport of such remains. In case death
occurs at sea, the disposition of the remains shall be handled or dealt with in accordance with the
master's best judgment. In all cases, the employer/master shall communicate with the manning
agency to advise for disposition of seafarer's remains.
c. The employer shall pay the beneficiaries of the seafarer the Philippine currency equivalent to the
amount of One Thousand US dollars (US$1,000) for burial expenses at the exchange rate
prevailing during the time of payment.
b. Requisites for entitlement.
Clearly, to be entitled for death compensation benefits from the employer, the death of the seafarer (1)
must be work-related; and (2) must happen during the term of the employment contract. Under the Amended
POEA Contract, work-relation is now an important requirement. The qualification that death must be work-related
has made it necessary to show a causal connection between a seafarers work and his death to be compensable. 282
Therefore, if the seafarer dies after the termination of his contract of employment, his beneficiaries are not entitled
to the death benefits.283
But even if the seafarer was merely on shore leave when he died, his death is not compensable.
In the 2013 case of Sy v. Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. ,284 petitioners husband, Alfonso N. Sy,
was hired as an Able Seaman (AB) on board M/V Chekiang on June 23, 2005 and was found dead on October 1,
2005, with drowning as the cause of death while he was on shore leave while the vessel was at the Port of Jakarta,
Indonesia. In denying petitioners claim for death benefits, the High Court ruled:
Notably, at the time of the accident, AB Sy was on shore leave and there was no showing that he
was doing an act in relation to his duty as a seaman or engaged in the performance of any act
incidental thereto. It was not also established that, at the time of the accident, he was doing work
which was ordered by his superior ship officers to be done for the advancement of his employer's
interest. On the contrary, it was established that he was on shore leave when he drowned and
because of the 20% alcohol found in his urine upon autopsy of his body, it can be safely presumed that
he just came from a personal social function which was not related at all to his job as a seaman.
Consequently, his death could not be considered work-related to be compensable.
c. Some principles on death benefits.
Death, to be compensable, should be shown to have been caused by an illness acquired during
the term of his employment. Indeed, the death of a seaman several months after his repatriation for
illness does not necessarily mean that: (a) the seaman died of the same illness; (b) his working
conditions increased the risk of contracting the illness which caused his death; and (c) the death is
compensable, unless there is some reasonable basis to support otherwise. 285
If death is caused by the OFW himself, it is not compensable. 286
Even in case of death of a seafarer, the grant of benefits in favor of the heirs of the deceased is
not automatic. Without a post-medical examination or its equivalent to show that the disease for
which the seaman died was contracted during his employment or that his working conditions increased
the risk of contracting the ailment, the employer cannot be made liable for death compensation. 287 In
fact, the death of a seaman even during the term of employment does not automatically give rise
to compensation.288
2.
DIRECT HIRING
1. DEFINITION.
Direct Hiring refers to the process of directly hiring workers by employers for overseas employment as
authorized by the DOLE Secretary and processed by the POEA, including:
1. Those hired by international organizations;
 2. Those hired by members of the diplomatic corps;
3. Name hires or workers who are able to secure overseas employment opportunity with an employer
without the assistance or participation of any agency.289
2. OPTIONAL INSURANCE COVERAGE.
For migrant workers classified as rehires, name hires or direct hires, they may opt to be covered by this
insurance coverage by requesting their foreign employers to pay for the cost of the insurance coverage or they may
pay for the premium themselves. To protect the rights of these workers, the DOLE and POEA shall provide them
adequate legal assistance, including conciliation and mediation services, whether at home or abroad. 290

B.
REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT

1.
SUSPENSION OR CANCELLATION
OF LICENSE OR AUTHORITY
(Article 35, Labor Code)
1. ARTICLE 35 OF THE LABOR CODE.
This provision states:
Article 35. Suspension and/or Cancellation of License or Authority. The Minister of Labor shall
have the power to suspend or cancel any license or authority to recruit employees for overseas
employment for violation of rules and regulations issued by the Ministry of Labor, 291 the Overseas
Employment Development Board,292 or for violation of the provisions of this and other applicable laws,
General Orders and Letters of Instructions.
2. RECRUITMENT VIOLATIONS AND RELATED CASES.
a. Jurisdiction of the POEA over recruitment violations and related cases.
The POEA has original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide:
(a) All cases which are administrative in character, involving or arising out of violation of rules and
regulations relating to licensing and registration of recruitment and employment agencies or entities,
including refund of fees collected from workers and violation of the conditions for the issuance of
license to recruit workers.293
(b) Disciplinary action cases and other special cases which are administrative in character, involving
employers, principals, contracting partners and Filipino migrant workers. 294
It must be emphasized that even without a written complaint from an aggrieved party, the POEA can
initiate proceedings against an erring private placement agency and, if the result of its investigation so warrants,
impose the corresponding administrative sanction thereon. 295
b. Cases not falling within the jurisdiction of the POEA.
1) Money claims cases of OFWs. The POEA had ceased to have any jurisdiction over claims arising out
of an employer-employee relationship or by virtue of any law or contract involving Filipino workers for overseas
deployment including claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages. The jurisdiction over these
claims was transferred to the Labor Arbiters of the NLRC by virtue of Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042, as amended. 296
2) Quasi-delict or tort cases. The POEA has no jurisdiction over tort cases where the complaint alleges
claims under the Civil Code and not under the Labor Code as when the matters demanded are not labor benefits such
as wages, overtime or separation pay.297
Even Labor Arbiters and the NLRC have no jurisdiction over quasi-delict or tort cases per Article 2176 of
the Civil Code that have no reasonable causal connection to any of the claims provided in the Labor Code, other
labor statutes, or collective bargaining agreements.298 These cases are cognizable by the regular courts.
 3) Enforcement of foreign judgment. The POEA, being an administrative body performing adjudicatory
or quasi-judicial functions, has no jurisdiction to hear and decide a claim for enforcement of a foreign judgment.
Such claim must be brought before the regular courts.299
4) Local employment. The POEA has no jurisdiction where the cause of action rests upon the local
employment contract and not the overseas contract. The jurisdiction thereover lies with the Labor Arbiters of the
NLRC.300
c. Nature of POEA proceeding, administrative not criminal.
The administrative determination of facts and the consequent imposition of the suspension or revocation of
authority or license does not make the proceedings criminal. It remains administrative in character.301
d. Closure order.
The DOLE Secretary or the POEA Administrator or the DOLE Regional Director of the appropriate
regional office outside the National Capital Region, or their duly authorized representatives, may conduct an ex-
parte preliminary examination to determine whether the activities of a non-licensee constitute a danger to national
security and public order or will lead to further exploitation of job seekers. If upon such preliminary examination or
surveillance, the DOLE Secretary, the POEA Administrator or DOLE Regional Director is satisfied that such danger
or exploitation exists, a written order may be issued for the closure of the establishment being used for illegal
recruitment activity.302
e. Power to issue arrest and search and seizure orders, unconstitutional.
It was declared in Salazar v. Achacoso,303 that the exercise by the DOLE Secretary of his twin powers to
issue arrest and search and seizure orders provided under Article 38[c] of the Labor Code is unconstitutional. This
declaration of nullity and unconstitutionality, however, should not affect the exercise of the other distinct power to
close violator-companies, establishments or entities.304
3. GROUNDS FOR THE IMPOSITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS AGAINST RECRUITERS
AND THEIR FOREIGN PRINCIPALS/EMPLOYERS.
a. For land-based overseas workers under the 2002 POEA Rules.
1. Charging, imposing or accepting directly or indirectly, any amount of money goods or services, or any fee
or bond for any purpose whatsoever before employment is obtained for an applicant worker;
2. Charging or accepting directly or indirectly any amount greater than that specified in the schedule of
allowable fees prescribed by the DOLE Secretary, or making a worker pay any amount greater than that
actually received by him as a loan or advance;
3. Charging or collecting placement fee for deployment to countries where the prevailing system, either by
law, policy or practice, does not allow the charging or collection of placement and recruitment fees.
4. Collecting any fee from a worker without issuing the appropriate receipt clearly showing the amount paid
and the purpose for which payment was made;
5. Engaging in act/s of misrepresentation in connection with recruitment and placement of workers, such as
furnishing or publishing any false notice, information or document in relation to recruitment or
employment;
6. Inducing or attempting to induce an already employed worker to transfer from or leave his employment for
another unless the transfer is designed to liberate a worker from oppressive terms and conditions of
employment;
7. Influencing or attempting to influence any person or entity not to employ any worker who has not applied
for employment through his agency;
8. Obstructing or attempting to obstruct inspection by the Secretary, the Administrator or their duly
authorized representatives;
9. Substituting or altering to the prejudice of the worker, employment contracts approved and verified by the
Department from the time of actual signing thereof by the parties up to and including the period of the
expiration of the same without the approval of the Department;
10. Failure to submit reports related to overseas recruitment and employment within the specified time, as
may be required by the Secretary or the Administration;
11. For the owner, partner, or officer/s of any licensed agency to become an officer or member of the Board
of any corporation or partnership engaged directly or indirectly in the management of a travel agency;
12. Withholding or denying travel or other pertinent documents from workers for considerations other than
those authorized under existing laws and regulations;
13. Engaging in recruitment activities in places other than that specified in the license without previous
authorization from the Administration;
14. Appointing or designating agents, representatives or employees without prior approval from the
Administration;
15. Falsifying or altering travel documents of applicant worker in relation to overseas recruitment activities;
16. Deploying workers whose employment and travel documents were not processed by the Administration
or those agencies authorized by it;
17. Deploying workers to principals not accredited/registered by the Administration;
18. Failure to deploy a worker within the prescribed period without valid reason;
19. Disregard of orders, notices and other legal processes issued by the Administration;
20. Coercing workers to accept prejudicial arrangements in exchange for certain benefits that rightfully
belong to the workers;
21. Withholding of workers salaries or remittances without justifiable reasons or shortchanging of
remittances;
22. Deploying underage workers;
23. Engaging in act/s of misrepresentation for the purpose of securing a license or renewal thereof, such as
giving false information or documents;
24. Engaging in the recruitment or placement of workers in jobs harmful to public health or morality or to the
dignity of the Republic of the Philippines,
25. Transfer or change of ownership of a single proprietorship licensed to engage in overseas employment;
26. Failure to reimburse expenses incurred by the worker in connection with his documentation and
processing for purposes of deployment, where deployment does not take place without the workers
fault;
27. Failure to comply with the undertaking to deploy the required number of workers within the period
provided in the Rules;
28. Failure to comply with the undertaking to provide Pre-Departure Orientation Seminar to workers;
29. Non-compliance with any other undertaking in connection with the issuance or renewal of the license;
30. Allowing persons who are otherwise disqualified to participate in the overseas employment program
under existing laws, rules and regulations to participate in the management and operation of the
agency; and
31. Violation of other pertinent provisions of the Code and other relevant laws, rules and regulations,
guidelines and other issuances on recruitment and placement of workers for overseas employment and
the protection of their welfare.305
b. For seafarers under the 2003 POEA Rules.
1. Charging, imposing or accepting directly or indirectly, any amount of money goods or services, or any fee
or bond for any purpose from an applicant seafarer;
2. Engaging in acts of misrepresentation, such as furnishing or publishing any false or deceptive notices or
information in connection with the recruitment and employment of seafarers;
3. Inducing or attempting to induce an already employed seafarer to transfer from or leave his employment
for another unless the transfer is designed to liberate the seafarer from oppressive terms and conditions
or employment;
4. Influencing or attempting to influence any person or entity not to employ any seafarer who has not applied
for employment through his agency;
5. Obstructing or attempting to obstruct inspection by the Secretary, the Administrator or their duly
authorized representatives;
6. Substituting or altering to the prejudice of the seafarer employment contracts and other documents
approved and verified by the Department from the time of actual signing thereof by the parties up to and
including the period of expiration of the same without the Departments approval;
7. Failure to submit reports related to overseas recruitment and employment within the specified time, as
may be required by the Secretary or the Administration;
8. For the owner, partner, or officer/s of any licensed agency to become an officer or member of the Board of
any corporation or partnership engaged directly or indirectly in the management of a travel agency;
 9. Withholding or denying travel or other pertinent documents from seafarers for reasons other than those
authorized under existing laws and its implementing rules and regulations;
10. Engaging in recruitment activities in places other than that specified in the license without previous
authorization from the Administration;
11. Appointing or designating agents, representatives or employees without prior approval from the
Administration;
12. Falsifying or altering travel documents of applicant seafarer;
13. Deploying seafarers whose employment and travel documents were not processed by the Administration
or those agencies authorized by it;
14. Deploying seafarers to principals not accredited by the Administration or to vessels not enrolled with the
deploying agency;
15. Failure to deploy a seafarer within the prescribed period without valid reason;
16. Disregard of lawful orders, notices and other processes issued by the Administration;
17. Coercing a seafarer to accept prejudicial arrangements in exchange for certain benefits that rightfully
belong to the seafarer;
18. Withholding of seafarers salaries or remittances without justifiable reasons or shortchanging of
remittances;
19. Engaging in act/s of misrepresentation for the purpose of securing a license or renewal thereof, such as
giving false testimonies or information or falsified documents;
20. Engaging in the recruitment or deployment of seafarers in jobs harmful to public health or morality or to
dignity of the Republic of the Philippines;
21. Allowing persons who are otherwise disqualified to participate in the overseas employment program
under existing laws, rules and regulations to participate in the management and operation of the agency;
22. Transfer or change of ownership of a single proprietorship licensed to engage in overseas employment;
23. Failure to comply with its undertaking to provide Pre-Departure Orientation Seminar to its seafarers;
24. Failure to comply with the undertaking to deploy the required number of seafarers within the period,
provided in the Rules;
25. Non-compliance with any other undertaking in connection with the issuance or renewal of the license;
26. Failure to reimburse expenses incurred by the seafarer in connection with his documentation and
processing for purposes of deployment, where deployment does not take place without the seafarers
fault; and
27. Violation of other pertinent provisions of the Code and other relevant laws, rules and regulations,
guidelines and other issuance on recruitment and deployment of seafarers for overseas employment
and the protection of their welfare.306
4. CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES OF RECRUITERS AND THEIR FOREIGN
PRINCIPALS/EMPLOYERS AND SCHEDULE OF PENALTIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE
RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT OF LAND-BASED WORKERS AND SEAFARERS.
a. Classification of offenses for both land-based overseas workers and seafarers.
Under the POEA Rules,307 administrative offenses are classified into (1) serious,(2) less serious and (3)
light, depending on their gravity. The POEA imposes the appropriate administrative penalties for every recruitment
violation.308
b. Serious offenses in the recruitment of land-based overseas workers with corresponding penalty.
1. Deploying underage workers:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
2. Engaging in acts of misrepresentation for the purpose of securing a license or renewal thereof, such as
giving false information or documents:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
3. Engaging in the recruitment or placement of workers in jobs harmful to public health or morality or to
dignity of the Republic of the Philippines:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
4. Transfer or change of ownership of a single proprietorship licensed to the engage in overseas
employment:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
5. Charging or collecting placement fee for deployment to countries where the prevailing system, either by
law, policy or practice, does not allow the charging or collection of placement and recruitment fees:
 1st Offense Cancellation of License plus refund of the placement fee charged or collected from the
worker
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of refund of the fee collected from the worker.
6. Charging or accepting directly or indirectly any amount greater than that specified in the schedule of
allowable fees prescribed by the Secretary, or making a worker pay any amount greater than that actually
received by him as a loan or advance:
1st Offense Cancellation of License plus refund of the placement fee charged or collected from the
worker
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of refund of the excessive fee charged or collected from the
worker.309
c. Serious offenses in the recruitment of seafarers.
1. Engaging in act/s of misrepresentation for the purpose of securing a license or renewal thereof, such as
giving false information or documents:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
2. Engaging in the recruitment or placement of seafarers in jobs harmful to public health or morality or to
dignity of the Republic of the Philippines:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
3. Transfer or change of ownership of a single proprietorship licensed to engage in overseas employment:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
4. Charging or accepting directly or indirectly any amount of money, goods or services, or any fee or bond
for any purpose from the seafarers:
1st Offense Cancellation of License
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of refund of the fee charged or collected from the worker. 310
d. Less serious offenses in the recruitment of land-based overseas workers.
1. Charging, imposing or accepting, directly or indirectly, any amount of money goods or services, or any fee
or bond for any purpose whatsoever before employment is obtained for an applicant worker:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of refund of the fee charged or collected from the worker,
in case of non-deployment.
2. Collecting any fee from a worker without issuing the appropriate receipt clearly showing the amount paid
and the purpose for which payment was made:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
3. Engaging in acts of misrepresentation in connection with recruitment and placement of workers, such as
furnishing or publishing any false notice, information or document in relation to recruitment or
employment:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
4. Obstructing or attempting to obstruct inspection by the Secretary, the Administrator or their duly
authorized representatives:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
5. Substituting or altering to the prejudice of the worker, employment contracts approved and verified by the
Department from the time of actual signing thereof by the parties up to and including the period of the
expiration of the same without the approval of the Department:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
6. Withholding or denying travel or other pertinent documents from workers for reasons other than those
authorized under existing laws and regulations:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
7. Engaging in recruitment activities in places other than that specified in the license without previous
authorization from the Administration:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
8. Appointing or designating agents, representatives or employees without prior approval from the
Administration:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
9. Falsifying or altering travel documents of applicant worker in relation to recruitment activities:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
10. Deploying workers whose employment and travel documents were not processed by the Administration
or those agencies authorized by it:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
11. Deploying workers to principals not accredited/registered by the Administration:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
12. Withholding of workers salaries or remittances without justifiable reasons or shortchanging of
remittances:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of immediate release of the salaries or remittances being
claimed.
13. Allowing persons who are otherwise disqualified to participate in the overseas employment program
under existing laws, rules and regulations to participate in the management and operation of the agency:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense - Cancellation of License
14. Failure to reimburse expenses incurred by the worker in connection with his documentation and
processing for purposes of deployment, where deployment does not take place without the workers fault:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of immediate refund of expenses incurred by the worker.
15. Failure to comply with the undertaking to provide Pre-Departure Orientation Seminar to workers:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
16. Non-compliance with any other undertaking in connection with the issuance or renewal of the license:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License311
e. Less serious offenses in the recruitment of seafarers.
1. Engaging in acts of misrepresentation in connection with recruitment and placement of seafarers, such as
furnishing or publishing any false notice, information or document in relation to recruitment or
employment:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
2. Obstructing or attempting to obstruct inspection by the Secretary, the Administrator or their duly
authorized representatives:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
3. Substituting or altering to the prejudice of the seafarer, employment contracts approved and verified by
the Department from the time of actual signing thereof by the parties up to and including the period of the
expiration of the same without the approval of the Department:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
4. Withholding or denying travel or other pertinent documents from seafarers for reasons other than those
authorized under existing laws and regulations:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty for immediate return of the documents withheld.
5. Engaging in recruitment activities in places other than that specified in the license without previous
authorization from the Administration:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
6. Appointing or designating agents, representatives or employees without prior approval from the
Administration:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
7. Falsifying or altering travel documents of an applicant seafarer in relation to recruitment activities:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
8. Deploying seafarers whose employment and travel documents were not processed by the Administration
or those agencies authorized by it:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
9. Deploying seafarers to principals not accredited/registered by the Administration or to vessels not enrolled
to the deploying agency:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
10. Withholding of seafarers salaries or remittances without justifiable reasons or shortchanging of
remittances:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of release of the salaries or remittances being claimed.
11. Allowing persons who are otherwise disqualified to participate in the overseas employment program
under existing laws, rules and regulations to participate in the management and operation of the agency:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
12. Failure to reimburse expenses incurred by the seafarers in connection with his documentation and
processing for purposes of deployment, where deployment does not take place without the seafarers
fault:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
The penalty shall carry the accessory penalty of immediate refund of expenses incurred by the worker.
13. Failure to comply with the undertaking to provide Pre-Departure Orientation Seminar to seafarers:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License
14. Non-compliance with any other undertaking in connection with the issuance or renewal of the license:
1st Offense Suspension of License (Two Months to Six Months)
2nd Offense Suspension of License (Six Months and One day to One year)
3rd Offense Cancellation of License312
 f. Light offenses in the recruitment of land-based overseas workers and seafarers.
1. For the owner, partner, or officer/s of any licensed agency to become an officer or member of the Board of
any corporation or partnership engaged directly or indirectly in the management of a travel agency:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
2. Inducing or attempting to induce an already employed worker to transfer from or leave his employment for
another unless the transfer is designed to liberate a worker from oppressive terms and conditions of
employment:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
3. Influencing or attempting to influence any person or entity not to employ any worker who has not applied
for employment through his agency:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
4. Failure to deploy a worker within the prescribed period without valid reason:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
5. Coercing workers to accept prejudicial arrangements in exchange for certain benefits that rightfully belong
to the workers:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
6. Disregard of orders, notices and other legal processes issued by the Administration:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
7. Failure to submit reports related to overseas recruitment and employment within the specified time as
may be required by the Secretary or the Administration:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
8. Violation of other pertinent provisions of the Code and other relevant laws, rules and regulations,
guidelines and other issuances on recruitment and placement of workers for overseas employment and
the protection of their welfare:
1st Offense Reprimand
2nd Offense Suspension of License (One Month to Three Months)
3rd Offense Suspension of License (Three Months and One day to Six Months)
4th Offense Cancellation of License
g. Money claims in addition to administrative penalties.
Money claims arising from recruitment violations may be awarded in addition to the administrative
penalties imposed.313
h. Imposition of fines.
In addition or in lieu of the penalty of suspension of license, the Administration (POEA) may impose the
penalty of fine which shall be computed at P10,000.00 for every month of suspension. 314
i. Mitigating, aggravating or alternative circumstances.
 In the determination of the penalties to be imposed, the following mitigating, aggravating and alternative
circumstances attendant to the commission of the offense shall be considered:
a. First Offender;
b. Admission of guilt and voluntary restitution, where applicable;
c. Good faith;
d. Exemplary Performance;
e. Recidivism;
f. Prejudice to the worker;
g. Gross negligence;
h. Other analogous circumstances.315
j. Cancellation of license, proper penalty for cases involving five (5) or more complainants.
A respondent recruitment agency found guilty of committing an offense, regardless of the number or nature
of charges, against five (5) or more complainants in a single case shall be imposed the penalty of cancellation of
license.316
5. DISCIPLINARY ACTION CASES AGAINST FOREIGN PRINCIPALS/EMPLOYERS OF LAND-
BASED WORKERS AND SEAFARERS.
a. Grounds for disciplinary action against foreign principals or employers.
The following are the grounds for disciplinary action against foreign principals or employers: 317
a. Default on its contractual obligations to the migrant worker (or seafarer) and/or to its Philippine agent;
b. Gross violation of laws, rules and regulations on overseas employment;
c. Gross negligence leading to serious injury or illness or death of the worker (or seafarer) ;
d. Grave misconduct;
e. Conviction of an offense involving moral turpitude;
f. Any other case analogous to the foregoing.318
b. Temporary disqualification of foreign principal or employer.
A foreign employer or principal against whom a complaint for disciplinary action has been filed shall be
temporarily disqualified from participating in the overseas employment program for land-based overseas workers (or
maritime employment program in case of seafarers) until the respondent submits to the jurisdiction of the
Administration (POEA) .319
c. Preventive suspension.
A principal or employer may be suspended from participating in the overseas employment program
pending investigation of the disciplinary action case when the evidence of guilt is strong and there is reasonable
ground to believe that the continued deployment to the principal or employer will result to further violation or
exploitation of migrant workers.
The Overseas Employment Adjudicator (OEA) shall, within sixty (60) calendar days from the filing of the
case, submit his findings and recommendations in the form of a draft order.320
d. Disqualification of foreign principals or employers.
Foreign principals or employers against whom the penalty of suspension or disqualification had been
imposed through an order, decision or resolution shall be disqualified from participating in the overseas employment
program for land-based overseas workers (or maritime employment program in case of seafarers) unless cleared by
the Administration (POEA) or the penalty imposed is lifted. 321

2.
REGULATORY AND VISITORIAL POWERS
OF THE DOLE SECRETARY

1. TWO (2) SEPARATE PROVISIONS IN THE LABOR CODE.

 As far as recruitment and placement of workers for local and overseas employment are concerned, the
Labor Code contains two (2) separate provisions on the regulatory and visitorial powers of the DOLE Secretary,
namely:
1. Article 36 - Regulatory Power; and
2. Article 37 Visitorial Power.
2. REGULATORY POWER.
a. Article 36, Labor Code.
The regulatory power is embodied in Article 36, to wit:
Article 36. Regulatory Power. The Secretary of Labor shall have the power to restrict and
regulate the recruitment and placement activities of all agencies within the coverage of this Title and is
hereby authorized to issue orders and promulgate rules and regulations to carry out the objectives and
implement the provisions of this Title.
b. Nature of regulatory power.
The power to regulate and restrict the recruitment and placement activities of all agencies conferred by
Article 36 to the DOLE Secretary is a valid grant of police power.322
Being regulatory, the DOLE Secretary may validly issue rules and regulations restricting or otherwise
regulating the recruitment and placement activities of persons and entities engaged in the recruitment and placement
of workers locally or overseas.
c. Exercise of the regulatory power.
Pursuant to Article 36 and in accordance with other pertinent and related provisions of the Labor Code, the
DOLE Secretary has issued several implementing rules, circulars, guidelines and regulations. 323
3. VISITORIAL POWER.
a. Article 37, Labor Code.
The visitorial power is found in Article 37, viz:
Article 37. Visitorial Power. The Secretary of Labor or his duly authorized representatives may,
at any time, inspect the premises, books of accounts and records of any person or entity covered by
this Title, require it to submit reports regularly on prescribed forms, and act on violation of any
provisions of this Title.
b. Distinctions of the visitorial powers of the DOLE Secretary under Articles 274 and 128 of the
Labor Code.
The visitorial power of the DOLE Secretary or his duly authorized representatives described in Article 37
of the Labor Code should be distinguished from the other visitorial powers granted to him by other provisions of the
Labor Code such as the ones provided for under Article 128 and Article 274 thereof.
Here, the visitorial power pertains to the inspection of the premises, books of accounts and records of
persons and entities engaged in the recruitment and placement of workers for local or overseas employment. It also
includes the power to require the submission of reports regularly on certain prescribed forms and to act on any
violation of Title I, Book I of the Labor Code. 324
The visitorial and enforcement power of the DOLE Secretary or the DOLE Regional Directors, his duly
authorized representatives, treated in Article 128 pertains to the inspection of premises, books of accounts and
records of local employers to determine violations of the Labor Code and any labor laws, wage orders or rules and
regulations issued pursuant thereto.325
Article 274 dwells on the visitorial power of the DOLE Secretary to inquire into the financial activities of
legitimate labor organizations.
c. Effect of obstruction of exercise of visitorial power.
The act of any person, whether a non-licensee, non-holder, licensee or holder of authority, in obstructing or
attempting to obstruct inspection by the DOLE Secretary or by his duly authorized representative under Article 37 of
the Labor Code is one of the prohibited practices and unlawful acts which constitutes illegal recruitment. 326
3.
 REMITTANCE OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE EARNINGS
1. REMITTANCE OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE EARNINGS IS MANDATORY.
It shall be mandatory for all Filipino workers abroad to remit a portion of their foreign exchange earnings
to their families, dependents, and/or beneficiaries in the country in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed
by the DOLE Secretary.327 It should be made through the Philippine banking system.328
The obligation to remit is required to be stipulated in the following documents:
(1) Contract of employment and/or service between a foreign-based employer and a worker;
(2) Affidavit of undertaking whereby a worker obligates himself to remit a portion of his earnings to his
beneficiaries;
(3) Application for a license or authority to recruit workers;
(4) Recruitment agreement and/or service contract between a licensed agency or authority holder and its
foreign employer or principal; and
(5) Application for accreditation of a principal or project. 329
2. REASON WHY OBLIGATION IS MANDATORY.
Remittance to the Philippines of foreign exchange earnings of Filipino workers abroad is necessary to
protect the welfare of their families, dependents and beneficiaries and to ensure that their foreign exchange earnings
are remitted through authorized financial institutions of the Philippine government in line with the countrys
economic development program. Non-compliance with the laws and regulations on remittance of foreign exchange
earnings and recourse to the use of unauthorized and unofficial financing institutions had led to the detriment of the
countrys balance of payments and economic development program. Consequently, it is imperative that the
mandatory remittance requirement be fully complied with by all concerned through the institution of appropriate
remittance facilities and the imposition of effective sanctions.330
3. COVERAGE.
This mandatory requirement applies to every OFW recruited and placed in overseas employment. It also
applies to licensed agencies and authority holders.331
4. AMOUNT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE REMITTANCES.
The percentage of foreign remittance shall be as follows:
1. Seamen and mariners: Eighty percent (80%) of the basic salary;
2. Workers of Filipino contractors and construction companies: Seventy percent (70%) of the basic salary;
3. Doctors, engineers, teachers, nurses and other professional workers whose employment contracts provide
for free board and lodging facilities: Seventy percent (70%) of the basic salary;
4. All other professionals whose employment contracts do not provide free board and lodging facilities:
Fifty percent (50%) of the basic salary;
5. Domestic and other service workers: Fifty percent (50%) of the basic salary;
6. All other workers not falling under the afore-mentioned categories: Fifty percent (50%) of the basic
salary.332
7. Performing artists overseas are required to remit at least fifty percent (50%) of their monthly salary to
the Philippines. 333
5. FORM OF REMITTANCE.
Remittance of foreign exchange may be done individually by a worker or collectively through an employer
under a payroll deduction scheme, to be approved by the DOLE. 334
6. PROCEDURE OF REMITTANCE.
(a) The OFW, prior to departure, is required to open a deposit account for his mandatory remittance in
favor of his beneficiary in any Philippine bank. A foreign currency account may also be opened by the worker to be
funded by savings in excess of the mandatory remittance. The applicant should inform the POEA of his deposit
account number.
(b) In the case of seamen/seafarer, construction workers and other organized work crews involving at least
twenty five (25) workers, the foreign currency/peso account should be opened by the employee with any Philippine
bank upon the signing of the employment contract. The account shall be accompanied by a covering letter of
nomination of beneficiaries and the date of payment of the allotment to the beneficiaries as may be stipulated by the
employee and the licensed agency, manning agency or construction contractor.
(c) At the end of every period as may be stipulated in the notice as payment, the licensed agency,
construction contractor or manning agent shall prepare a payroll sheet indicating the names of the workers covered
by the scheme, their beneficiaries, their individual bank account numbers, the amount of foreign currency remitted
and the peso equivalent thereof. This payroll sheet, together with the peso check representing the remittance, shall
be forwarded to the bank concerned with instructions to credit the account of the worker or beneficiaries. A copy of
the payroll sheet shall be furnished the POEA on a monthly basis.
(d) No local agent or representative shall pay directly the beneficiaries of the worker. The agent or
representative shall submit to the POEA copies of the reports which the bank may require him to submit and payroll
sheets on or before the end of the succeeding month of the payroll period together with the bank credit advice
evidencing remittance of foreign exchange.335
7. FAILURE OR REFUSAL TO REMIT AND TRAFFICKING IN FOREIGN CURRENCY.
A licensed agency, authority holder, or manning agent or a worker who wilfully fails or refuses to remit the
assigned portion of his foreign exchange earnings or is found to have engaged or is engaging in the illegal traffic or
blackmarket of foreign exchange, shall be liable under the Labor Code and existing Central Bank rules. 336
8. RESPONSIBILITY OF EMPLOYER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE.
The employer or his representative shall undertake the proper implementation of the law, 337 by providing
facilities to effect the remittance and monitoring of foreign exchange earnings. Failure to do so shall be subject to
appropriate sanctions specified in the Labor Code and regulations issued by the Central Bank of the Philippines
(now Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas) .338
9. OBLIGATION TO REPORT.
Agencies shall submit periodic reports to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas on their foreign exchange
earnings, copies of which shall be furnished the POEA. 339
10. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE MANDATORY REMITTANCE REQUIREMENT; EFFECT ON
ISSUANCE, RENEWAL AND EXTENSION OF PASSPORT.
Under the law,340 it is declared that no passport shall be issued, renewed or extended by the Department of
Foreign Affairs (DFA) unless proof of applicants substantial compliance with the mandatory remittance
requirement in the percentages provided under the law is submitted.341
Passports issued to Filipino contract workers shall have an initial period of validity of one (1) year. The
DFA may, however, adjust, as circumstances may require, the initial passport validity period. 342
The passport shall be renewable every year upon submission of usual requirements and presentation of
documentary proof of compliance to the remittance requirement. 343
11. SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE, EXPLAINED.
The Inter-Agency Committee344 created to implement the law, clarified345 the foregoing effect of non-
compliance with the mandatory remittance requirement on the issuance, renewal and extension of passport. Said
Committee declared that in accordance with the normal duration of contracts of employment and taking into account
the provisions of some issuances346 mandating the DFA to adjust, as circumstances may require, the initial validity
period, passports issued to OFWs shall be valid for two (2) years, renewable for another two (2) years, subject to
compliance with the mandatory remittance requirement.
An OFW shall be deemed to have substantially complied with the mandatory requirement if, at the time he
applies for renewal of passport or renewal of his employment contract during the period cited above, he can show
proof that he has remitted and sold for pesos at least one-half (1/2) of the amount of foreign exchange corresponding
to the mandatory remittance required of him.
The requirement to remit on a monthly basis need not be strictly applied during the initial period of
implementation provided that the amount remitted and sold for pesos through authorized financing institutions shall
at least be equal to one-half of the amount corresponding to the mandatory percentage requirement defined under the
Executive Order.
For example, if the salary of a contract worker is US$200 a month or US$2,400 a year, such worker is
required to remit 50% thereof or US$1,200 annually under the law. 347 Pursuant to the substantial compliance
formula, a contract worker needs only to show proof that he has at least remitted and sold for pesos 50% of
US$1,200 thereof or US$600.00 a year.
The substantial compliance rule as defined, applies to contract workers remitting on an individual basis.
It does not apply to OFWs already remitting or who will be remitting under the payroll system, or on a monthly
basis.348
12. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE MANDATORY REMITTANCE REQUIREMENT, EFFECTS.
a. On accreditation of employer, issuance of license or authority and approval/renewal of contracts of
employment.
No accreditation shall be issued to an employer, and no license or authority shall be granted to an agency or
entity by the DOLE unless they submit proof that they have provided facilities to effect the remittance of foreign
exchange earnings of Filipino workers under their employ. 349
No contracts of employment and/or service agreement shall be approved or renewed by the DOLE unless
proof of compliance with the mandatory remittance requirement is submitted. 350
b. On the OFW.
An OFW who fails to comply with the mandatory remittance requirement shall be suspended or excluded
from the list of eligible workers for overseas employment and in case of subsequent violations, he shall be
repatriated at his own expense or at the expense of his employer, as the case may be.351
c. On foreign employers.
Foreign employers and/or their representatives who fail to comply with the law shall be excluded from the
overseas employment program.352
d. On private employment agencies.
In the case of local private employment agencies and other similar entities, their failure to comply with the
mandatory remittance requirement shall be a ground for cancellation of their authority to recruit workers for
overseas employment without prejudice to their liabilities under existing laws and regulations.353
13. CONFLICT IN MANDATORY REMITTANCE REQUIREMENT AND HOST COUNTRYS
REGULATIONS ON THE MATTER.
Should there be a conflict in complying with the mandatory remittance requirement in view of the host
countrys regulations on the matter, the percentages of remittance shall be, within allowable limits, set down by
local laws.354
14. EFFECT IF BENEFICIARIES ARE LIVING WITH OFWs ABROAD.
An OFW whose immediate family members, dependents or beneficiaries are residing with him abroad, is
not compelled to comply with the mandatory remittance requirement except if the dependents themselves are
contract workers, subject to verification of his family status by the DFA and/or DOLE. He should be encouraged,
nevertheless, to remit a portion of his foreign earnings to the Philippines. 355
15. PUNITIVE PROVISIONS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 857, REPEALED.
Executive Order No. 1021 [On Encouraging the Inward Remittances of Contract Workers Earnings
Through Official Channels] issued on May 1, 1985 by President Ferdinand E. Marcos, repealed the punitive
provisions of Executive Order No. 857.
16. ROLE OF EMBASSY AS CHANNEL FOR REMITTANCE.
The role of the Embassy356 is only temporary, in the absence of banking facilities in the jobsite and pending
the establishment of appropriate arrangements by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. In exercising this function, the
Embassy shall abide by customary local laws and regulations of the host country.357
17. REMITTANCES OF OFWs, NOT DEEMED PERSONAL DEDUCTIONS FOR INCOME TAXATION
PURPOSES.
The obligations of OFWs to remit portions of their foreign exchange earnings under the law358 are separate
and distinct from the personal deductions defined under gross income taxation laws. 359

4.
PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES

1. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES.
Besides illegal recruitment, the law360 additionally provides that it shall also be unlawful for any person or
entity to commit the following prohibited acts:
(1) Grant a loan to an overseas Filipino worker with interest exceeding eight percent (8%) per annum, which
will be used for payment of legal and allowable placement fees and make the migrant worker issue,
either personally or through a guarantor or accommodation party, post-dated checks in relation to the
said loan;
(2) Impose a compulsory and exclusive arrangement whereby an overseas Filipino worker is required to
avail of a loan only from specifically designated institutions, entities or persons;
(3) Refuse to condone or renegotiate a loan incurred by an overseas Filipino worker after the latter's
employment contract has been prematurely terminated through no fault of his or her own;
(4) Impose a compulsory and exclusive arrangement whereby an overseas Filipino worker is required to
undergo health examinations only from specifically designated medical clinics, institutions, entities or
persons, except in the case of a seafarer whose medical examination cost is shouldered by the
principal/shipowner;
(5) Impose a compulsory and exclusive arrangement whereby an overseas Filipino worker is required to
undergo training, seminar, instruction or schooling of any kind only from specifically designated
institutions, entities or persons, except for recommendatory trainings mandated by principals/shipowners
where the latter shoulder the cost of such trainings;
(6) For a suspended recruitment/manning agency to engage in any kind of recruitment activity including the
processing of pending workers' applications; and
(7) For a recruitment/manning agency or a foreign principal/employer to pass on the overseas Filipino
worker or deduct from his or her salary the payment of the cost of insurance fees, premium or other
insurance related charges, as provided under the compulsory worker's insurance coverage.

------------oOo------------

Endnotes:

1 The discussion under this topic is based on the provisions of the Rules and Regulations Governing Private
Recruitment and Placement Agency for Local Employment issued on June 5, 1997 by former DOLE Secretary
Leonardo A. Quisumbing. This was promulgated to govern and regulate the activities of all individuals and entities
engaged in the recruitment and placement of persons for local employment.
2 Section 1, Rule I, Rules and Regulations Governing Private Recruitment and Placement Agency for Local
Employment [June 5, 1997].
3 Section 2, Rule II, Ibid.
4 Section 3, Rule II, Ibid.
5 Section 4, Rule II, Ibid.
6 Section 5, Rule II, Ibid.
7 Section 6, Rule II, Ibid.
8 Section 7, Rule II, Ibid.
9 Section 8, Rule II, Ibid.
10 Section 9, Rule II, Ibid.
11 Section 10, Rule II, Ibid.
12 Section 11, Rule II, Ibid.
13 Section 12, Rule II, Ibid. , in relation to Section 4 thereof.
14 Section 13, Rule II, Ibid.
15 Section 14, Rule II, Ibid.
16 Section 15, Rule III, Ibid.
17 Section 16, Rule III, Ibid.
18 Section 17, Rule III, Ibid.
19 Section 18, Rule III, Ibid.
20 Section 19, Rule III, Ibid.
21 Section 20, Rule III, Ibid.
22 Section 21, Rule III, Ibid.
23 Section 22, Rule III, Ibid.
24 Section 23, Rule III, Ibid.
25 Section 24, Rule IV, Ibid.
26 Section 25, Rule IV, Ibid.
27 Section 26, Rule IV, Ibid.
28 Section 27, Rule IV, Ibid.
29 Section 28, Rule IV, Ibid.
30 Section 29, Rule V, Ibid.
31 Section 30, Rule V, Ibid.
32 Section 31, Rule V, Ibid.
33 Section 32, Rule V, Ibid.

34 See Sections 7, 13, or 14 thereof.

35 See Section 61 thereof.

36 Section 33, Rule VI, Ibid. , in relation to Section 20 thereof.

37 Section 34, Rule VI, Ibid.
38 Section 35, Rule VI, Ibid.
39 Section 57, Rule VIII, Ibid.
40 Section 58, Rule VIII, Ibid.

41 Section 1[hh], Rule II, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos
Act of 1995, as Amended by R. A. No. 10022 (March 08, 2010) .

42 Section 1[JJ], Rule II, Ibid.

43 Section 1[rr], Rule II, Ibid.

44 Section 1[ss], Rule II, Ibid.

45 Section 1[tt], Rule II, Ibid.

46 Section 1[vv], Rule II, Ibid.

47 Rule IX thereof.

48 Section 1[II], Rule II, Ibid.

49 Section 1[qq], Rule II, Ibid.

50 See Article 13 [c] of the Labor Code.

51 Section 1[pp], Rule II, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos
Act of 1995, As Amended by R. A. No. 10022 (March 08, 2010)

52 According to Article 13 [e] of the Labor Code.

53 Section 1[p], Rule II, Ibid.

54 As defined in Article 13 of the Labor Code.

55 Section 1[p], Rule II, Ibid.

56 Section 1[y], Rule II, Ibid.

57 Section 1[cc], Rule II, Ibid.

58 Section 1[ll], Rule II, Ibid.

59 Issued by DOLE Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas on Feb. 4, 2002.

60 Issued on May 23, 2003.

61 Section 1, Rule I, Part II, 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers; Section 1, Rule I, Part II, 2003
POEA Rules for Seafarers.

62 Section 2, Rule I, Part II, Id. , Id.

63 Section 5, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

64 Section 6, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

65 Section 7, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

66 Section 8, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

67 Section 9, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

68 Section 10, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

69 Section 11, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

70 Section 12, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

71 Section 13, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

72 Section 14, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

73 Section 15, Rule II, Part II, 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers. Note: There is no similar
provision in the POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Seafarers, May 23,
2003. But this certainly applies to the cases contemplated thereunder.

74 Section 16, Rule II, Part II, 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers; Section 15, Rule II, Part II, 2003
POEA Rules for Seafarers.

75 Section 18, Rule II, Part II, Id. , Id.

76 People v. Cabacang, G.R. No. 113917, July 17, 1995, 246 SCRA 530.

77 Article 38 of the Labor Code provides:

Article 38. Illegal Recruitment. (a) Any recruitment activities, including the prohibited practices enumerated under
Article 34 of this Code, to be undertaken by non-licensees or non-holders of authority, shall be deemed illegal and
punishable under Article 39 of this Code. The Department of Labor and Employment or any law enforcement officer
may initiate complaints under this Article. It must be noted that the definition of illegal recruitment under Article 38
of the Labor Code applies to both local and overseas employment. The law is clear in its coverage that any
recruitment activities including the commission of the prohibited practices enumerated under Article 34 of the Labor
Code, to be undertaken by non-licensees or non-holders of authority, shall be deemed illegal and punishable under
Article 39 of this Code.

78 Paragraph (b) of this article provides: Article 13. Definitions. (a) Worker means any member of the labor force,
whether employed or unemployed. (b) Recruitment and placement refers to any act of canvassing, enlisting,
contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring or procuring workers, and includes referrals, contract services, promising
or advertising for employment, locally or abroad, whether for profit or not: Provided, That any person or entity
which, in any manner, offers or promises for a fee, employment to two or more persons shall be deemed engaged
in recruitment and placement.

79 This article states: Article 34. Prohibited Practices. It shall be unlawful for any individual, entity, licensee, or
holder of authority:

(a) To charge or accept, directly or indirectly, any amount greater than that specified in the schedule of allowable fees
prescribed by the Secretary of Labor, or to make a worker pay any amount greater than that actually received by
him as a loan or advance;

(b) To furnish or publish any false notice or information or document in relation to recruitment or employment;

(c) To give any false notice, testimony, information or document or commit any act of misrepresentation for the
purpose of securing a license or authority under this Code.

(d) To induce or attempt to induce a worker already employed to quit his employment in order to offer him to another
unless the transfer is designed to liberate the worker from oppressive terms and conditions of employment;

(e) To influence or to attempt to influence any person or entity not to employ any worker who has not applied for
employment through his agency;
(f) To engage in the recruitment or placement of workers in jobs harmful to public health or morality or to the dignity of
the Republic of the Philippines;

(g) To obstruct or attempt to obstruct inspection by the Secretary of Labor or by his duly authorized representatives;

(h) To fail to file reports on the status of employment, placement vacancies, remittance of foreign exchange
earnings, separation from jobs, departures and such other matters or information as may be required by the
Secretary of Labor.

(i) To substitute or alter employment contracts approved and verified by the Department of Labor from the time of
actual signing thereof by the parties up to and including the periods of expiration of the same without the approval
of the Secretary of Labor;

(j) To become an officer or member of the Board of any corporation engaged in travel agency or to be engaged
directly or indirectly in the management of a travel agency; and

(k) To withhold or deny travel documents from applicant workers before departure for monetary or financial
considerations other than those authorized under this Code and its implementing rules and regulations.

80 This provision states: Article 39. Penalties. (a) The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of One Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P1000,000.00) shall be imposed if illegal recruitment constitutes economic sabotage as defined
herein;

(b) Any licensee or holder of authority found violating or causing another to violate any provision of this Title or its
implementing rules and regulations shall, upon conviction thereof, suffer the penalty of imprisonment of not less
than two years nor more than five years or a fine of not less than P10,000 nor more than P50,000, or both such
imprisonment and fine, at the discretion of the court;

(c) Any person who is neither a licensee nor a holder of authority under this Title found violating any
provision thereof or its implementing rules and regulations shall, upon conviction thereof, suffer the penalty of
imprisonment of not less than four years nor more than eight years or a fine of not less than P20,000 nor more than
P100,000 or both such imprisonment and fine, at the discretion of the court;

(d) If the offender is a corporation, partnership, association or entity, the penalty shall be imposed upon the officer or
officers of the corporation, partnership, association or entity responsible for violation; and if such officer is an alien,
he shall, in addition to the penalties herein prescribed, be deported without further proceedings;

(e) In every case, conviction shall cause and carry the automatic revocation of the license or authority and all the
permits and privileges granted to such person or entity under this Title, and the forfeiture of the cash and surety
bonds in favor of the Overseas Employment Development Board or the National Seamen Board, as the case may
be, both of which are authorized to use the same exclusively to promote their objectives.

81 As amended by R.A. No. 10022 (March 8, 2010) .

82 As described in Section 6 of R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5 of R.A. No. 10022.

83 Article 13(f) provides: (f) Authority means a document issued by the Department of Labor authorizing a person or
association to engage in recruitment and placement activities as a private recruitment entity.
84 Underscoring supplied.

85 Section 1[w], Rule II, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos
Act of 1995, as Amended by R. A. No. 10022 (March 08, 2010) .

86 Section 1[b], Rule II, Ibid.

87 Section 6 (m) , R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5 of R.A. No. 10022. See People v. Gallo, G.R. No. 187730,
June 29, 2010.

88 G.R. No. 171644, Nov. 23, 2011, penned by Mr. Justice Diosdado M. Peralta. This case arose in 2000, at a time
when R.A. No. 8042 is already in effect.

89 Supra. Now defined under Section 6, R.A. No. 8043, as amended by R.A. No. 10022, thus: "SEC. 6. Definition. -
For purposes of this Act, illegal recruitment shall mean any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting,
utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers and includes referring, contract services, promising or advertising for
employment abroad, whether for profit or not, when undertaken by non-licensee or non-holder of authority
contemplated under Article 13(f) of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code
of the Philippines: xxx

90 Supra. Now enumerated under Section 6, R.A. No. 8043, as ameded by Section 5, R.A. No. 10022. .

91 Citing People v. Naparan, Jr. , G.R. No. 98443, Aug. 30, 1993, 225 SCRA 714, 723.

92 Section 1 [d], Rules Implementing P.D. No. 1920, July 12, 1984. Delia D. Romero v. People, G.R. No. 171644, Nov. 23,
2011; Abaca v. CA and People, G.R. No. 127162, June 5, 1998, 290 SCRA 657, 663; People v. Cabacang, G.R.
No. 113917, July 17, 1995, 246 SCRA 530; People v. Coral, G.R. Nos. 97849-54, March 1, 1994, 230 SCRA 499.

93 People v. Bodozo, G.R. No. 96621. Oct. 21, 1992, 215 SCRA 33.

94 2nd paragraph, Section 1, Rule V, Book II, POEA Rules and Regulations on Overseas Employment [May 21, 1985.

95 People v. Taguba, G.R. Nos. 95207-17, Jan. 10, 1994, 229 SCRA 188; People v. Sendon, G.R. Nos. L-101579-82, Dec.
15, 1993, 228 SCRA 489.

96 People v. Alforte, G.R. Nos. 91711-15, March 3, 1993, 219 SCRA 458.

97 People v. Gallo, G.R. No. 187730, June 29, 2010.

98 People v. Jimmy Ang, G.R. No. 181245, Aug. 06, 2008; People v. Nogra, G.R. No. 170834, Aug. 29, 2008; People v.Gasacao, G. R. No.
168445, Nov. 11, 2005.

99 G.R. No. 125903. Nov. 15, 2000.

100 Now provided under Section 7 of R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 6 of R.A. No. 10022.

101 See also Section 6, R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5, R.A. No. 10022; People v. Goce, G.R. No. 113161,
Aug. 29, 1995, 247 SCRA 780; People v. Bautista, G.R. No. 113547, Feb. 9, 1995, 241 SCRA 216.
102 Lapasaran v. People, G.R. No. 179907, Feb. 12, 2009; People v. Manungas, Jr. , G.R. Nos. 91552-55, March 10,
1994, 231 SCRA 1.

103 Darvin v. CA, G.R. No. 125044. July 13, 1998.

104 People v. Gallardo, G.R. Nos. 140067-71, Aug. 29, 2002, 436 Phil. 698, 711; People v. Delmo Valle, G.R. No. 126933,
Feb. 23, 2001.

105 People v. Ballesteros, G.R. Nos. 116905-908, Aug. 6, 2002.

106 Article 13 [b] of the Labor Code; Rodolfo v. People, G.R. No. 146964, Aug. 10, 2006.

107 People v. Gallo, G.R. No. 187730, June 29, 2010.

108 People v. Jamilosa G.R. No. 169076, Jan. 23, 2007, 512 SCRA 340, 352; People v. Valenciano, G.R. No. 180926, Dec.
10, 2008.

109 People v. Gaoat, G.R. No. 97028, May 21, 1993, 222 SCRA 385.

110 People v. Ballesteros, G.R. Nos. 116905-908, Aug. 6, 2002; People v. Arabia, G.R. Nos. 138431-36, Sept. 12, 2001.

111 Section 6 of R.A. No. 8042; C.F. Sharp Crew Management, Inc. v. Hon. Espanol, Jr. , G.R. No. 155903, Sept. 14,
2007.

112 People v. Juego, G.R. No. 123162. Oct. 13, 1998.

113 People v. Saulo, G.R. No. 125903, Nov. 15, 2000; People v. Remullo, G.R. Nos. 124443-46, June 6, 2002.

114 People v. Pantaleon, G.R. No. 108107, June 19, 1997. .

115 People v. Panis, G.R. Nos. L-58674-77, July 11, 1986, 142 SCRA 664.

116 People v. Sendon, G.R. Nos. 101579-89, Dec. 15, 1993, 228 SCRA 489.

117 People v. Laurel, G.R. No. 120353, Feb. 12, 1998.

118 People v. Gallo, G.R. No. 187730, June 29, 2010.

119 People v. Abolidor, G.R. No. 147231, Feb. 18, 2004, 423 SCRA 260.

120 People v. Carizo, G.R. No. 96510, July 6, 1994, 233 SCRA 687; People v. Miranda, G.R. No. 92369, Aug. 10, 1994, 235
SCRA 202. ; People v. Bello, G.R. No. 92597, Oct. 4, 1994, 237 SCRA 347.

121 People v. Gamboa, G.R. No. 135382, Sept. 29, 2000, 341 SCRA 451; People v. Ballesteros, G.R. Nos. 116905-
908, Aug. 6, 2002.

122 People v. Gallo, G.R. No. 187730, June 29, 2010; Fortuna v. People, G.R. No. 135784, Dec. 15, 2000.

123 This is the topic title per syllabus. It is opined that the proper title thereof should have been Illegal Recruitment By a
Syndicate since the immediately preceding topic is titled Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale. In any event, both
constitute illegal recruitment involving economic sabotage.
124 Id. ; Id. ; Id. ; People v. Bodozo, G.R. No. 96621. Oct. 21, 1992, 215 SCRA 33.

125 People v. Hernandez, G.R. Nos. 141221-36. March 7, 2002.

126 Now defined under Section 6, R.A. No. 8043, as amended by Section 5, R.A. No. 10022.

127 Now enumerated under Section 6, R.A. No. 8043, as ameded by Section 5, R.A. No. 10022. .

128 Section 6(m) , R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5 of R.A. No. 10022.

129 Section 6(m) , R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5 of R.A. No. 10022; People v. Bautista, G.R. No. 113547,
Feb. 9, 1995, 241 SCRA 216; People v. Taguba, G.R. Nos. 95207-17, Jan. 10, 1994, 229 SCRA 188.

130 People v. Honrada, G.R. Nos. 112178-79, April 21, 1995, 243 SCRA 640; People v. Reyes, G.R. No. 105204, March 9,
1995, 242 SCRA 264.

131 People v. Hu, G.R. No. 182232, Oct. 06, 2008.

132 People v. Hernandez, G.R. Nos. 141221-36. March 7, 2002.

133 People v. Laurel, G.R. No. 120353, Feb. 12, 1998.

134 People v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 127159, May 5, 1999], citing People v. Reyes, G.R. Nos. 104739-44, Nov. 18, 1997, 282
SCRA 105.

135 People v. Soliven, G.R. No. 125081, Oct. 3, 2001.

136 G.R. No. 187730, June 29, 2010.

137 People v. Turda, G.R. Nos. 97044-46, July 6, 1994, 233 SCRA 702.

138 Also under Section 6 of R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5 of R.A. No. 10022.

139 People v. Duque, G.R. No. 100285, Aug. 13, 1992, 212 SCRA 607.

140 People v. Turda, G.R. Nos. 97044-46, July 6, 1994, 233 SCRA 702.

141 People v. Alzona, G.R. No. 132029, July 30, 2004; People v. Gallo, G.R. No. 187730, June 29, 2010.

142 People v. Billaber, G.R. Nos. 114967-68, Jan. 26, 2004.

143 Section 10 (Money Claims) , R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 7, R.A. No. 10022; Section 1[s] of Rule II
(Definition of Terms) and Section 3, Rule VII (Money Claims) Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant
Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, as Amended by R. A. No. 10022 (March 08, 2010) . See also Section 10,
Rule V of Book I of the Rules to Implement the Labor Code, where it is provided that a recruitment agency is
solidarily liable with a foreign principal for the unpaid salaries of a worker recruited for employment abroad. Said
provision of the Rules states: Before recruiting any worker, the private employment agency shall submit the
following documents: xxx (a) [2] Power of the agency to sue and be sued jointly and solidarily with the principal or
foreign-based employer for any violations of the recruitment agreement and the contract of employment. (Coyoca
v. NLRC, G.R. No. 113658, March 31, 1995, 243 SCRA 190; Royal Crown Internationale v. NLRC, G.R. No.
 78085, Oct. 16, 1989; Catan v. NLRC, G.R. No. 77279, April 15, 1988) . The POEA Rules likewisde define joint
and solidary liability as referring to the nature of liability of the principal/employer and the recruitment/placement
agency (or manning agency, in the case of seafarers) , for any and all claims arising out of the implementation of
the employment contract involving Filipino workers (or seafarers) for overseas deployment. It likewise refers to the
nature of liability of officers, directors, partners with the company over claims arising from employer-employee
relationship. (See Rule II, Part I, POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of
Land-Based Overseas Workers, Feb. 4, 2002; See also Rule II, Part I, POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the
Recruitment and Employment of Seafarers, May 23, 2003) .

144 Id. , Id.

145 Id. , Id.

146 G.R. No. 144786, April 15, 2004.

147 Paragraph 2, Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042.

148 G.R. Nos. 152642, 152710, 167590, 182978-79 & 184298-99, Nov. 13, 2012. Three cases were consolidated in this
case, namely: Republic of the Philippines v. Philippine Association of Service Exporters, Inc. (PASEI) , G.R. No. 167590,
Nov. 13, 2012; Becmen Service Exporter and Promotion, Inc. v. Spouses Cuaresma, G.R. 182978-79, Nov. 13, 2012;
and Spouses Cuaresma v. White Falcon Services, Inc. and Becmen Services Exporter and Promotion, Inc. , G.R.
184298-99, Nov. 13, 2012.

149 G.R. No. 196036, Oct. 23, 2013.

150 The original separate complaints for illegal dismissal, nonpayment of salaries and overtime pay, refund of
transportation expenses, damages, and attorneys fees filed by respondents Simeon Dejero and Teodoro Permejo,
were only against PRO Agency Manila, Inc. , and Abdul Rahman Al Mahwes. Herein petitioner Elizabeth Gagui
was not impleaded as respondent in the complaints. It was only when the writ of execution and alias writs of
execution issued by the Labor Arbiter were returned unsatisfied that herein petitioner Gagui was impleaded in her
capacity as Vice-President/Stockholder/Director of PRO Agency, Manila, Inc. Bank accounts of petitioner were
garnished and several properties were levied upon as a result thereof.

151 Supra.

152 ATCI Overseas Corporation v. Josefina Echin, G.R. No. 178551, Oct. 11, 2010.

153 Sunace International Management Services, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 161757, Jan. 25, 2006.

154 Catan v. NLRC, G.R. No. 77279, April 15, 1988; OSM Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 138193, March
5, 2003.

155 Philimare Shipping & Equipment Supply, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 126764, Dec. 23, 1999; Skippers United Pacific,
Inc. v. Maguad, G.R. No. 166363, Aug. 15, 2006.

156 Section 6, R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5, R.A. No. 10022.

157 People v. Cabais, G.R. No. 129070, March 16, 2001, 354 SCRA 553, 561.
158 People v. Gutierrez G.R. No. 124439, Feb. 5, 2004, 422 SCRA 32, 43-44.

159 People v.Gasacao, G. R. No. 168445, Nov. 11, 2005.

160 Section 12, Republic Act No. 8042; Section 12, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and
Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 dated Feb. 29, 1996; Section 2, Rule I, Part V, POEA Rules and Regulations Governing
the Recruitment and Employment of Seafarers, May 23, 2003.

161 Imputed Knowledge Law & Legal Definition, U.S. Legal, Inc., uslegal.com at http://definitions.uslegal.com/i/imputed-
knowledge/ Last accessed: May 10, 2014.

162 885 So. 2d 185 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003) . See full text featured in findlaw.com at http://caselaw.findlaw.com/al-court-of-civil-
appeals/1182206.html.

163 G.R. No. 161757, Jan. 25, 2006.

164 See also Rovels Enterprises , Inc. v. Ocampo, G.R. No. 136821, Oct. 17, 2002, 391 SCRA 176.

165 Section 1[oo], Rule II, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos
Act of 1995, as Amended by R. A. No. 10022 (March 08, 2010) .

166 G.R. No. 48494, Feb. 5, 1990, 181 SCRA 702.

167 G.R. No. 113658, 31 March 31, 1995, 243 SCRA 190, 194.

168 More particularly, Part I, Section C of the Standard Employment Contract governing the Employment of All Filipino
Seamen on Board Ocean-Going Vessels of the POEA.

169 G.R. No. 110524, July 29, 2002, 385 SCRA 306.

170 328 SCRA 79 (2000) .

171 That overseas Filipino workers cannot acquire regularity of employment was reiterated in the 2004 case of Gu-Miro v.
Adorable, G.R. No. 160952, Aug. 20, 2004; Ravago v. Esso Eastern Marine, Ltd. , G.R. No. 158324, March 14, 2005;
Petroleum Shipping Limited v. NLRC, G.R. No. 148130, June 16, 2006; Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc. ,
G.R. No. 162419, July 10, 2007 and a plethora of other cases.

172 Pentagon International Shipping, Inc. v. Adelantar, G.R. No. 157373, July 27, 2004.

173 Gu-Miro v. Adorable, G.R. No. 160952, Aug. 20, 2004.

174 Millares v. NLRC, G.R. No. 110524, July 29, 2002, 385 SCRA 306.

175 Gu-Miro v. Adorable, supra.

176 Ravago v. Esso Eastern Marine, Ltd. , G.R. No. 158324, March 14, 2005.

177 Ravago v. Esso Eastern Marine, Ltd. , supra; Millares v. NLRC, supra.

178 G.R. No. 138193, March 5, 2003.

179 G.R. No. 154185, Nov. 22, 2005.

180 G.R. No. 162419, July 10, 2007.

181Petitioner here had been working as a seafarer for Smith Bell Management, Inc. (respondent) for about five (5)
years. On 3 Feb. 1998, petitioner signed a new contract of employment with respondent, with the duration of nine
(9) months which was approved by the POEA. He was assured of a monthly salary of US$515.00, overtime pay
and other benefits. He was to be deployed on board the "MSV Seaspread" which was scheduled to leave the port
of Manila for Canada on 13 Feb. 1998. His departure was cancelled because of certain phone calls, one of which
was from petitioners wife in Masbate, that if allowed to depart, he will jump ship in Canada like his brother
Christopher Santiago, O/S who jumped ship from the C.S. Nexus in Kita-kyushu, Japan last Dec. , 1997.
182 G.R. No. 175558, Feb. 8, 2012.

183 Article 285. Termination by Employee. (a) An employee may terminate without just cause the employee-
employer relationship by serving a written notice on the employer at least one (1) month in advance. The employer
upon whom no such notice was served may hold the employee liable for damages. (b) An employee may put an
end to the relationship without serving any notice on the employer for any of the following just causes:

1. Serious insult by the employer or his representative on the honor and person of the employee;

2. Inhuman and unbearable treatment accorded the employee by the employer or his representative;

3. Commission of a crime or offense by the employer or his representative against the person of the employee or any
of the immediate members of his family; and

4. Other causes analogous to any of the foregoing.

184 Yap v. Thenamaris Ships Management, G.R. No. 179532, May 30, 2011, citing Olarte v. Nayona, G.R. No.
148407, Nov. 12, 2003; Chavez v. Bonto-Perez, G.R. No. 109808, March 1, 1995, 242 SCRA 73, 82, 312 Phil. 88.

185 JSS Indochina Corp. v. Ferrer, G.R. No. 156381, Oct. 14, 2005 citing Teknika Skills and Trade Services, Inc. v.
NLRC, G.R. No. 100399, Aug. 4, 1992, 212 SCRA 132.

186 ATCI Overseas Corporation v. Echin, G.R. No. 178551, Oct. 11, 2010.

187 Id.

188 Id. , citing EDI-Staffbuilders International, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 14558, Oct. 26, 2007.

189 SEC. 24. Proof of official record. - The record of public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19,
when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the
officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the
Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign
country, the certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul,
or consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which
the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office.

190 SEC. 25. What attestation of copy must state. Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for the
purpose of the evidence, the attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a
 specific part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if
there be any, or if he be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such court.

191 G.R. No. 178551, Oct. 11, 2010.

192 G.R. No. 14558, Oct. 26, 2007.

193 See Oriental Shipmanagement Co. , Inc. v. Hon. CA, G.R. No. 153750, Jan. 25, 2006.

194 G.R. No. 152616, March 31, 2006.

195 G.R. No. 153031, Dec. 14, 2006.

196 G.R. No. 172031, July 14, 2008.

197 See also De La Cruz v. Maersk Filipinas Crewing, Inc. , G.R. No. 172038, April 14, 2008.

198 G.R. No. 180719, Aug. 22, 2008.

199 See Section 17 thereof which prescribes the Disciplinary Procedures to be followed in termination of seafarers.

200 G.R. No. 144314, Nov. 21, 2002, 392 SCRA 371.

201 See also Dela Rosa v. Michaelmar Philippines, Inc. , G.R. No. 182262, April 13, 2011; NFD International Manning
Agents v. NLRC, G.R. No. 165389, Oct. 17, 2008; Centennial Transmarine, Inc. v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 180719, Aug. 22,
2008.

202 Agabon v. NLRC, G.R. No. 158693, Nov. 17, 2004.

203 Also per Jaka doctrine based on Jaka Food Processing Corporation v. Pacot, G.R. 151378, March 28, 2005.

204 G.R. No. 155389, Feb. 28, 2005.

205 G.R. No. 148418, July 28, 2005.

206 G.R. No. 182262, April 13, 2011.

207 Stolt-Nielsen Marine Services [Phils. ], Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 105396, Nov. 19, 1996; Wallem Maritime Services,
Inc. , v. NLRC, G.R. No. 108433, Oct. 15, 1996; Ranises v. NLRC, G.R. No. 111914, Sept. 24, 1996; Prieto v.
NLRC, G.R. No. 93699, Sept. 10, 1993, 226 SCRA 232; Philippine Manpower Services, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No.
98450, July 21, 1993, 224 SCRA 691; Molave Tours Corporation v. NLRC, G.R. No. 112909, Nov. 24, 1995, 250
SCRA 325; Magnolia Corporation v. NLRC, G.R. No. 116813, Nov. 24, 1995, 250 SCRA 332.

208 EDI-Staffbuilders International, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 14558, Oct. 26, 2007.

209 Rase v. NLRC, G.R. No. 110637, Oct. 7, 1994, 237 SCRA 523; Manalo v. Roldan-Confesor, G.R. No. 102358,
Nov. 19, 1992, 215 SCRA 808.

210 NYK-Fil Ship Management, Inc. v. The NLRC, G.R. No. 161104, Sept. 27, 2006; See also Sealanes Marine
Services, Inc. , v. NLRC, G.R. No. 84812, Oct. 5, 1990, 190 SCRA 337, 346.
211 See Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042 which was amended on March 8, 2010 by Section 7 of R.A. No. 10022.

212 It provides: Article 279. Security of Tenure. In cases of regular employment, the employer shall not terminate
the services of an employee except for a just cause or when authorized by this Title. An employee who is unjustly
dismissed from work shall be entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other privileges and to his
full backwages, inclusive of allowances, and to his other benefits or their monetary equivalent computed from the
time his compensation was withheld from him up to the time of his actual reinstatement.

213 Poseidon International Maritime Services, Inc. v. Tamala, G.R. No. 186475, June 26, 2013; See also International
Management Services v. Logarta, G.R. No. 163657, April 18, 2012, 670 SCRA 22, 36-37; Sadagnot v. Reinier
Pacific International Shipping, Inc. , G.R. No. 152636, Aug. 8, 2007, 556 Phil. 252, 262; and Dela Rosa v.
Michaelmar Philippines, Inc. , G.R. No. 182262, April 13, 2011, 648 SCRA 721, 731.

214 Skippers United Pacific, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 148893, July 12, 2006; Gu-Miro v. Adorable, G.R. No. 160952,
Aug. 20, 2004; Pentagon International Shipping, Inc. v. Adelantar, G.R. No. 157373, July 27, 2004; Ravago v.
ESSO Eastern Marine, Ltd, G.R. No. 158324, March 14, 2005, 453 SCRA 381, 402.

215 Dela Rosa v. Michaelmar Philippines, Inc. , supra; Sadagnot v. Reiner Pacific International Shipping, Inc. , supra;
Philemploy Services and Resources, Inc. v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 152616, March 31, 2006.

216 G.R. No. 167614, March 24, 2009.

217 See for instance: Skippers Pacific, Inc. v. Mira, G.R. No. 144314, Nov. 21, 2002, 392 SCRA 371; Athenna International
Manpower Services, Inc. v. Villanos, G.R. No. 151303, April 15, 2005; Marsaman Manning Agency, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 127195, Aug. 25, 1999, 313 SCRA 88; Phil. Employ Services and Resources, Inc. v. Paramio, G.R. No. 144786,
April 15, 2004; Bahia Shipping Services, Inc. v. Chua, G.R. No. 162195, April 8, 2008.

218 See for example: Skippers United Pacific, Inc. v. Maguad, G.R. No. 166363, Aug. 15, 2006; Skippers Pacific, Inc. v.
Mira, supra; Phil. Employ Services and Resources, Inc. v. Paramio, supra.

219 See for example: Oriental Shipmanagement Co. , Inc. v. Hon. CA, G.R. No. 153750, Jan. 25, 2006; Olarte v.
Nayona, G.R. No. 148407, Nov. 12, 2003; Talidano v. Falcon Maritime & Allied Services, Inc. , G.R. No. 172031,
July 14, 2008.

220 Universal Staffing Services, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 177576, July 21, 2008; Flourish Maritime Shipping v.
Almanzor, G.R. No. 177948, March 14, 2008; JSS Indochina Corporation v. Ferrer, G.R. No. 156381, Oct. 14,
2005, 473 SCRA 120; Athenna International Manpower Services, Inc. v. Villanos, G.R. No. 151303, April 15, 2005.

221 Id.

222 In other words, the Supreme Court reverted to the old rule prior to the effectivity of R.A. No. 8042 on August 25,
1995.

223 G.R. No. 179532, May 30, 2011.

224 March 24, 2009.

225 March 8, 2010.

226 G.R. No. 175558, Feb. 8, 2012.

227 G.R. No. 197528, Sept. 5, 2012.

228 Citing A.M. Tolentino, Civil Code ofthe Philippines, Commentaries and Jurisprudence, 1990, Vol. 1, p. 28.

229 Skippers United Pacific, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 148893, July 12, 2006.

230 Antonio M. Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc. , G.R. No. 167614, March 24, 2009; See also Philippine
Transmarine Carriers, Inc. v. Carilla, G.R. No. 157975, June 26, 2007.

231 PCL Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 153031, Dec. 14, 2006.

232 Yap v. Thenamaris Ships Management, G.R. No. 179532, May 30, 2011.

233 Stolt-Nielsen Marine Services (Phils. ) , Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 105396, Nov. 19, 1996, 264 SCRA 307; 332 Phil.
340, 352.

234 Bahia Shipping Services, Inc. v. Chua, G.R. No. 162195, April 8, 2008; Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management,
Inc. , G.R. No. 162419, July 10, 2007; and the earlier case of Stolt-Nielsen Marine Services (Phils. ) , Inc. v. NLRC,
supra.

235 PCL Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 153031, Dec. 14, 2006; See also Centennial Transmarine, Inc. v.
Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 180719, Aug. 22, 2008.

236 Section 10, R.A. No. 8042, as amrnded by Section 7, R.A. No. 10022.

237 Sevillana v. I.T. [International] Corp. , G.R. No. 99047, April 16, 2001.

238 PCL Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 153031, Dec. 14, 2006.

239 See Sec. 6[i], R.A. No. 8042; Placewell International Services Corp. v. Camote, G.R. No. 169973, June 26, 2006;
Chavez v. Bonto-Perez, G.R. No. 109808, March 1, 1995, 242 SCRA 73, 82; 312 Phil. 88.

240 Section 10, R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 7, R.A. No. 10022 [March 8, 2010.

241 In a 2001 case, however, ATCI Overseas Corporation v. CA, G.R. No. 143949, Aug. 9, 2001, the two private
respondent OFWs were granted backwages and separation pay by the Supreme Court on the basis of its ruling
that they were regular employees. However, because of the 2nd ruling in the 2002 case of Millares v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 110524, July 29, 2002, 385 SCRA 306, where the Court ruled that OFWs can never become regular
employees, the decision in this case of ATCI may no longer hold its validity.

242 G.R. No. 162419, July 10, 2007.

243 G.R. No. 165935, Feb. 8, 2012.

244 The monthly salary stipulated in the contract is US$670, inclusive of allowance.

245 See also Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc. , G.R. No. 162419, July 10, 2007; PCL Shipping
Philippines, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 153031, Dec. 14, 2006.
246 Based on its finding that the breach of contract was tainted with bad faith, considering that respondents Medical
Certificate stated that he was fit to work on the day of his scheduled departure, yet he was not allowed to leave
allegedly for medical reasons.

247 This was imposed by way of example or correction for the public good in view of petitioners act of preventing
respondent from being deployed on the ground that he was not yet declared fit to work on the date of his departure,
despite evidence to the contrary. Such act, if tolerated, would prejudice the employment opportunities of our
seafarers who are qualified to be deployed, but prevented to do so by a manning agency for unjustified reasons.
Exemplary damages are imposed not to enrich one party or impoverish another, but to serve as a deterrent against
or as a negative incentive to curb socially deleterious actions.

248 This award is based on the fact that because of petitioners' failure to deploy respondent based on an unjustified
ground, respondent was forced to file this case.

249 G.R. No. 151303, April 15, 2005.

250 See also Oriental Shipmanagement Co. , Inc. v. Hon. CA, G.R. No. 153750, Jan. 25, 2006; ATCI Overseas
Corporation v. CA, G.R. No. 143949, Aug. 9, 2001, 414 Phil. 883, 893.

251 Section 19.G, Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers on Board Ocean-
Going Vessels.

252 See paragraph (d) of the new Section 37-A of R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 23 of R.A. No. 10022. See
also Section 2(d) , Rule XVI (Compulsory Insurance Coverage of Agency-Hired Workers) and Section 1, Rule XIII
(Repatriation of Workers) , Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas
Filipinos Act of 1995, as Amended by R. A. No. 10022 (March 08, 2010) .

253 Section 3, Guidelines VI, Insurance Guidelines on Rule XVI of the Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing
R.A. No. 8042 (The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995) , as amended by R.A. No. 10022,
Relative to Compulsory Insurance Coverage for Agency-Hired Overseas Filipino Workers (September 8, 2010) .

254 G.R. No. 168715, Sept. 15, 2010.

255 Article 167(n) , Labor Code; Remigio v. NLRC, G.R. No. 159887, April 12, 2006.

256 Inter-Orient Maritime Enterprises, Inc. , v. NLRC, G.R. No. 115497, Sept. 10, 1996.

257 Remigio v. NLRC, G.R. No. 159887, April 12, 2006, 487 SCRA 190.

258 G.R. No. 198501, Jan. 30, 2013.

259 Memorandum Circular No. 10, Series of 2010, October 26, 2010 [Amended Standard Terms and Conditions
Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Ships.

260 Vetyard Terminals & Shipping Services, Inc. v. Suarez, G.R. No. 199344, March 5, 2014.

261 Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. v. Nazam, G.R. No. 190804, Oct. 11, 2010.
262 Sea Power Shipping Enterprises, Inc. v. Salazar, G.R. No. 188595, Aug. 28, 2013; Panganiban v. Tara Trading
Shipmanagement, Inc. , G.R. No. 187032, Oct. 18, 2010; Cootauco v. MMS Phil. Maritime Services, Inc. , G.R. No.
184722, March 15, 2010, 615 SCRA 529.

263 Phil-Pride Shipping Company, Inc. v. Balasta, G.R. No. 193047, March 3, 2014. Valenzona v. Fair Shipping
Corporation, G.R. No. 176884, Oct. 19, 2011, 659 SCRA 642, 652-653, citing Quitoriano v. Jebsens Maritime, Inc. , G.R.
No. 179868, Jan. 21, 2010, 610 SCRA 529, 536; Iloreta v. Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. , G.R. No. 183908, Dec.
4, 2009, 607 SCRA 796, 804, citing Philimare, Inc. /Marlow Navigation Company, Ltd. v. Suganob, 579 Phil. 706, 715
(2008) .

264 Bejerano v. ECC, G.R. No. 84777, Jan. 30, 1992, 205 SCRA 598.

265 Francisco v. Bahia Shipping Services, Inc. , G.R. No. 190545, Nov. 22, 2010; NYK-Fil Ship Management, Inc. v.
NLRC, G.R. No. 161104, Sept. 27, 2006.

266 Inc Shipmanagement, Inc. v. Moradas, G.R. No. 178564, Jan. 15, 2014.

267 NFD International Manning Agents, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 107131, March 13, 1997, 269 SCRA 486, 494.

268 Vetyard Terminals & Shipping Services, Inc. v. Suarez, G.R. No. 199344, March 5, 2014; Ayungo v. Beamko
Shipmanagement Corporation, G.R. No. 203161, Feb. 26, 2014; OSM Shipping Phil. , Inc. v. de la Cruz, G.R. No.
159146 Jan. 28, 2005.

269 Norse Management Co. [PTE] v. National Seamen Board, G.R. No. L-54204, Sept. 30, 1982, 217 SCRA 486;
Principe v. Philippine-Singapore Transport Service, Inc. , G.R. No. 80918, Aug. 16, 1989.

270 Musnit v. Sea Star Shipping Corp. , G.R. No. 182623, Dec. 4, 2009; Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. v.
Nazam, G.R. No. 190804, Oct. 11, 2010.

271 Phil-Pride Shipping Company, Inc. v. Balasta, G.R. No. 193047, March 3, 2014; See also Alpha Ship Management
Corp. v. Calo, G.R. No. 192034, Jan. 13, 2014.

272 German Marine Agencies, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 142049, Jan. 30, 2001.

273 Seagull Maritime Corp. v. Dee, G.R. No. 165156, April 2, 2007; Remigio v. NLRC, G.R. No. 159887, April 12, 2006;
United Philippine Lines, Inc. v. Beseril, G.R. No. 165934, April 12, 2006.

274 Cadornigara v. NLRC, G.R. No. 15807, Nov. 23, 2007.

275 Nazareno v. Maersk Filipinas Crewing, Inc. , G.R. No. 168703, Feb. 26, 2013; Daniel M. Ison v. Crewserve, Inc. ,
G.R. No. 173951, April 16, 2012, 669 SCRA 481; HFS Philippines, Inc. v. Pilar, G.R. No. 168716, April 16, 2009;
Maunlad Transport, Inc. v. Manigo, Jr. , G.R. No. 161416, June 13, 2008, 554 SCRA 446.

276 Philippine Hammonia Ship Agency, Inc. v. Dumadag, G.R. No. 194362, June 26, 2013; Ayungo v. Beamko
Shipmanagement Corporation, G.R. No. 203161, Feb. 26, 2014.

277 Nazareno v. Maersk Filipinas Crewing, Inc. , G.R. No. 168703, Feb. 26, 2013.

278 Andrada v. Agemar Manning Agency, Inc. , G.R. No. 194758, Oct. 24, 2012.
279 Cabuyoc v. Inter-Orient Navigation Shipmanagement, Inc. , G.R. No. 166649, Nov. 24, 2006; German Marine
Agencies, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 142049, Jan. 30, 2001.

280 Cabuyoc v. Inter-Orient Navigation Shipmanagement, Inc. , supra; NFD International Manning Agents, Inc. v.
Illescas, G.R. No. 183054, Sept. 29, 2010; German Marine Agencies, Inc. v. NLRC, supra.

281 Memorandum Circular No. 10, Series of 2010, October 26, 2010 [Amended Standard Terms and Conditions
Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Ships].

282 Sy v. Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. , G.R. No. 191740, Feb. 11, 2013; Southeastern Shipping v. Federico
Navarra, Jr. G.R. No. 167678, June 22, 2010.

283 Estate of Posedio Ortega v. CA, G.R. No. 175005, April 30, 2008, 553 SCRA 649, 655-656.

284 G.R. No. 191740, Feb. 11, 2013.

285 Medline Management, Inc. v. Roslinda, G.R. No. 168715, Sept. 15, 2010.

286 Crewlink, Inc. v. Teringtering, G.R. No. 166803, Oct. 11, 2012.

287 Rivera v. Wallem Maritime Services, Inc. , G.R. No. 160315, Nov. 11, 2005, 474 SRA 714, 723.

288 Mabuhay Shipping Services, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 94167, Jan. 21, 1991, 193 SCRA 141, 145.

289 Section 1[i], Rule II, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos
Act of 1995, as Amended by R. A. No. 10022 (March 08, 2010) .

290 Sec. 14. (Optional Coverage) Rule XVI, Ibid.

291 Now renamed as Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) .

292 The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) has taken over the functions of the Overseas
Employment Development Board [OEDB] and the National Seamen Board [NSB] and the overseas employment
functions of the Bureau of Employment Services (BES) by virtue of Executive Order No. 797 issued on May 1,
1982.

293 Section 1, Rule I, Part VI, 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers; Section 1, Rule II, Part V, 2003
POEA Rules for Seafarers; Section 28, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing Migrant Workers and
Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 dated Feb. 29, 1996.

294 Ibid. ; Id. ; Id.

295 Philsa International Placement and Services Corporation v. Hon. Secretary of Labor and Employment, G.R. No.
103144, April 4, 2001.

296 As amended lately by R.A. No. 10022 [March 8, 2010].

297 McKenzie v. Cui, G.R. No. 48831, Feb. 6, 1989.

298 Tolosa v. NLRC, G.R. No. 149578, April 10, 2003.

299 Rances v. NLRC, G.R. No. 101135, July 14, 1995, 246 SCRA 250; Pacific Asia Overseas Shipping Corporation v.
NLRC, G.R. No. 76595, May 6, 1988.

300 Erectors, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 79174, June 29, 1988.

301 Manalo v. Roldan-Confesor, G.R. No. 102358, Nov. 19, 1992, 215 SCRA 808.

302 Section 7, Rule X, Part II, 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers; Section 8, Rule I, Part V, 2003
POEA Rules for Seafarers; See also Section 19, Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant
Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 dated Feb. 29, 1996.

303 G.R. No. 81510, March 14, 1990.

304 See Article 301, Labor Code. The Labor Code is clear in its mandate that if any of its provisions or part thereof or
the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Code, or the application
of such provision or part thereof to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected by the same.

305 Section 2, Rule I, Part VI, POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Land-
Based Overseas Workers, Feb. 4, 2002.

306 Section 2, Rule II, Part V, POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Seafarers,
May 23, 2003.

307 See 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers and the 2003 POEA Rules for Seafarers.

308 Section 1, Rule IV, Part VI, 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers; Section 1, Rule V, Part V, 2003
POEA Rules for Seafarers.

309 Section 1, Rule IV, Part VI, Ibid.

310 Section 1, Rule V, Part V, Ibid.

311 Section 1, Rule IV, Part VI, Ibid.

312 Section 1, Rule V, Part V, Ibid.

313 Section 1, Rule IV, Part VI, 2002 POEA Rules on Land-Based Overseas Workers; Section 1, Rule V, Part V, 2003
POEA Rules for Seafarers.

314 Section 2, Rule IV, Part VI, Ibid. ; Section 2, Rule V, Part V, Ibid.

315 Section 3, Rule IV, Part VI, Ibid. ; Section 3, Rule V, Part V, Ibid.

316 Section 5, Rule IV, Part VI, Ibid. ; Section 5, Rule V, Part V, Ibid.

317 Section 5, Rule IV, Part VI, Ibid. ; Section 5, Rule V, Part V, Ibid.

318 Section 1, Rule II, Part VII, 2002 POEA Rules for Land-Based Overseas Workers; Section 1, Rule III, Part VI, 2003
POEA Rules for Seafarers.

319 Section 4, Rule II, Part VII, Ibid. ; Section 4, Rule III, Part VI, Ibid.
320 Section 6, Rule II, Part VII, Ibid. ; Section 6, Rule III, Part VI, Ibid.

321 Section 8, Rule II, Part VII, Ibid. ; Section 7, Rule III, Part VI, Ibid.

322 Philippine Association of Service Exporters, Inc. v. Torres, G.R. No. 101279, Aug. 6, 1992, 212 SCRA 298.

323 Such as, inter alia, the POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and Employment of Land-Based
Overseas Workers issued on February 4, 2002; POEA Rules and Regulations Governing the Recruitment and
Employment of Seafarers issued on May 23, 2003; and Memorandum Circular No. 10, Series of 2010, October 26, 2010
[Amended Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-
Going Ships.

324 Article 37, Labor Code.

325 Article 128, Ibid. ; San Jose v. NLRC, G.R. No. 121227, Aug. 17, 1998.

326 See Article 34 [g], Ibid; Section 6, R.A. No. 8042; Section 9 [VI], Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the
Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 dated Feb. 29, 1996.

327 Article 22, Labor Code.

328 Section 2, Rule XIII, Book I, Rules to Implement the Labor Code; Section 1, Executive Order No. 857; Section 2, Rule
III, Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No. 857.

329 Section 2, Rule XIII, Book I, Rules to Implement the Labor Code.

330 Whereas clauses, Executive Order No. 857; Section 1, Rule II, Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order
No. 857.

331 Section 1, Rule XIII, Book I, Rules to Implement the Labor Code.

332 Section 2, Executive Order No. 857 [Section 2 (a) was amended by Executive Order No. 925, issued on Nov. 22,
1983 and became effective on Jan. 1, 1984; Section 4, Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No.
857; Section 3, Rule VIII, Book VIII, POEA Rules and Regulations Governing Overseas Employment, as amended
in 1991.

333 Section B [7], DOLE Order No. 35, Series of 1994.

334 Section 4, Rule XIII, Book I, Rules to Implement the Labor Code; Section 6, Executive Order No. 857.

335 Section 5, Rule XIII, Book I, Rules to Implement the Labor Code.

336 Section 8, Rule XIII, Book I, Rules to Implement the Labor Code.

337 Referring to the relevant provisions of the Rules to Implement the Labor Code.

338 Section 7, Rule XIII, Book I, Rules to Implement the Labor Code; Section 6, Executive Order No. 857; Section 1, Rule V,
Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No. 857.
339 Section 2, Rule VIII, Book VIII, POEA Rules and Regulations Governing Overseas Employment, as amended in 1991;
Section 3, Rule III, Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No. 857.

340 Executive Order No. 857 [December 13, 1982] as well as its Implementing Rules.

341 Section 3, Executive Order No. 857; Section 1, Rule IV, Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No. 857.

342 Id. ; Section 2, Rule IV, Ibid.

343 Id. ; Section 3, Rule IV, Ibid.

344 The Inter-Agency Committee is composed of the Central Bank, Ministry (now Department) of Labor and Ministry (now
Department) of Foreign Affairs. It was created to implement Executive Order No. 857.

345 This clarification was made by the Inter-Agency Committee in its Resolution No. 1-83 passed on February 9, 1983.

346 Referring to Executive Orders Nos. 855 and 857.

347 Executive Order No. 857.

348 Item I Guidelines], Resolution No. 1-83 dated Feb. 9, 1983 issued by the Inter-Agency Committee of the Central Bank,
Ministry of Labor and Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the Implementation of Executive Order No. 857.

349 Section 4, Executive Order No. 857; Section 1, Rule V, Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No. 857.

350 Section 4, Ibid. ; Section 2, Rule V, Ibid.

351 Section 9, Ibid. ; Section 3, Rule V, Ibid.

352 Section 9, Ibid. ; Section 4, Rule V, Ibid.

353 Section 9, Ibid. ; Section 5, Rule V, Ibid.

354 Item I Guidelines], [1.5], Resolution No. 1-83 dated Feb. 9, 1983 issued by the Inter-Agency Committee of the Central
Bank, Ministry of Labor and Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the Implementation of Executive Order No. 857.

355 Item I Guidelines], [1.6], Resolution No. 1-83 dated Feb. 9, 1983, Ibid.

356 As defined in Section 7 of Rule III of the Implementing Rules of Executive Order No. 857.

357 Item I Guidelines], [1.7], Resolution No. 1-83 dated Feb. 9, 1983, Ibid.

358 Executive Order No. 857.

359 Item I Guidelines], [1.8], Resolution No. 1-83 dated Feb. 9, 1983,Ibid.

360 Section 6 of R.A. No. 8042, as amended by Section 5 of R.A. No. 10022 (March 8, 2010) .