Court: NLRC (National Labor and Relationship Commission)

Judge: Honorable Marita V. Padolina

Parties:

 W. Rigor vs. Phil Transmarine Carries

 N. Botor vs. Innovative Manpower Svcs. Inc.
 L. Ormillada vs. Manila North Harbour Port Inc.
 G. Pena, Jr. vs. Dela Torre Co. Inc.
 M. Lanting vs. Royal 3KL Foods Corp.
 E. Paghunasan vs. D’Jassper Arms Security Svcs. Inc.
 J. T Onel et al vs. Zodiac Security Agency Inc.
 D. Valunzuela, Jr. vs. Kaizen Security Agency Corp.

Nature of the Case/s:

 Illegal Dismissal
 Demand for payment of salary
 Demand for payment of separation pay

Observation

Sessions in a labor case hearing in the NLRC is quite unique as compared to an ordinary court
hearing on any lower courts. It is very much different as to the procedure, ambiance, setting and
demeanor of the parties.

When we talk about procedure this relates to the procedural process followed by the tribunal in
order when hearing a case, as compared to the process in the ordinary court which follows the Rules of
Court as its procedural process which is quite formal. The NLRC does not strictly follow or implement
such procedural rules but rather adopts it whenever necessary in order attain its goal in resolving the
case. This does not mean that it creates its own set of rules but rather this tribunal is very lenient on the
application of the rules of court on technical matters in order to attain the ends of justice. There was
one case wherein the MCLE No. of the lawyer was not reflected on their pleading/position paper, rather
than the Labor arbiter treating the same as a mere scratch of paper, she just requested the lawyer to
have it on the next session for verification. The NLRC as a tribunal is very keen on several aspects of the
rules of court such as acquiring jurisdiction to the parties and the implementation of its order. There
were several cases wherein issue of acquiring jurisdiction of the other party was the problem since
either the party cannot be located or has abscond or the recruitment agency has already closed down
and the complainant does not have any information on where to locate the owner nor the
representative of the said recruitment agency, thus given this the Labor arbiter was forced to
provisionally dismissed the case and advise the complaining party to exhaust all measures in order to
obtain the new address or other information about the defending party and just file another complaint
once the new information becomes available. Jurisdiction was also been raised on one of the cases we
have observed on the said day wherein the defending company was questioning the jurisdiction of the
NLRC in Quezon City since the company being complained of was registered in the province of Laguna.
Another issue that was raised was in relation to the Order of the tribunal that became final and executor
since the losing party did not made an appeal within the allowed period from which the other party now
is trying to dispute the final order of the tribunal but was rejected since the order has already became
final. On those cases we have observed that acquiring jurisdiction on the parties, the jurisdiction of the
NLRC of a specific city and reglementary period on making an appeal are being observed strictly both by
the tribunal and by the parties, all of which are procedural process enshrined in our rules of court.

The ambience relates to how the session on the NLRC hearings are conducted by the Labor
Arbiter. From the hearings that we have observed the ambience of the case sessions leans towards
more on having the case resolved through settlement or compromise agreement which is quite different
as compared to a more adversarial ambiance in an ordinary court hearing either in the RTC or MTC.
From the session we have observed the Labor Arbiter request and ask the parties to make a settlement
rather than hearing through the merits of the case. We have seen several cases wherein the case was
settled in front of us and the complaining party was paid by the opposing company which eventually put
a smile not only on the complaining parties faces but also to ours since this kind of cases assured us that
our labor system still works and it still does favors labor who are always on the losing end of the bargain.
What really impresses us is how the Labor Arbiter handles herself well on asking the parties to settle and
work something out in order to resolve their case. This does not only resolve the case but rather it help
the tribunal to free its dockets and work on other cases.

The setting relates to the actual court room itself. The room we observed in where the actual
hearing was conducted was not something we expected. It was quite different as compared to the RTC
and MTC court rooms where there seems to be a bit of order and formality wherein the Judge and his
staff sits and operates on a part of the court room while the other parties are located on the other side
of the room. In the NLRC the room we have observed with was more of an office of the Labor Arbiter
converted to a small conference room where the parties would discuss their case. The setting itself
reminds me more of a corporate meeting rather than a court hearing. There is still a sense of formality
in relation to how the parties and the Labor arbiter talks and gives respect to one another but it was not
strictly formal as compared to session in the MTC or RTC. We can probably say that sessions in the NLRC
are less formal as compared to the ones in the ordinary courts. From the ones that we have observed
we noticed that some of the lawyers were wearing casual attires as compared to formal attires we were
used to seeing them with in the ordinary court rooms. There was neither a prosecutor nor a public
attorney that would assist a party if they don’t have a lawyer to assist them.

The demeanor relates to the outward behavior of the parties and the labor arbiter with one
another. From what we have observed from several cases we have witnessed during our court visit the
demeanor of the parties and the labor arbiter was not adversarial and all of them are very much on the
promotion of resolving the cases through a settlement. All the parties were respectful in their own way
that they were amenable in resolving the issues within their own cases.
NLRC Quezon City