Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COURT JURISPRUDENCE
ON LABOR STANDARD
CASES
ATTY. LR LUMBAY
NCMB
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
LABOR STANDARDS
and LABOR
RELATIONS
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
LABOR
STANDARDS
the
minimum requirements prescribed
by
existing
laws,
rules
and
regulations relating to wages, hours
of work, cost of living allowance,
and other monetary and welfare
benefits,
including
occupational,
safety, and health standards.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
LEGAL DOCTRINES
ON LABOR
STANDARDS
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
and/or
CELESTINO
BARRETO
vs
MARIO
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
QUIT CLAIMS -
Generally, deeds of release, waiver
or quitclaims cannot bar employees
from demanding benefits to which they
are legally entitled or from contesting
the legality of their dismissal since
quitclaims are looked upon with disfavor
and are frowned upon as contrary to
public policy.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
the
arrangement
was
temporary, it was a more humane solution
instead of a retrenchment of personnel, there
was notice and consultations with the
workers and supervisors, a consensus were
reached on how to deal with deteriorating
economic conditions and it was sufficiently
proven that the company was suffering from
losses. (LINTON COMMERCIAL CO., INC. and DESIREE
ONG vs ALEX A. HELLERA et al., G.R. No. 163147
,October 10, 2007)
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
7. Those
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
CHARLITO PEARANDA,
- versusBAGANGA PLYWOOD
CORPORATION
HUDSON
and
CHUA,
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
FACTS:
Allegation of Complainant:
On
March
1999,
complainant
Pearanda was hired as Foreman/Boiler
Head/Shift Engineer of Baganga Plywood
Corporation (BPC).
Alleges that he was a regular
employee and was illegally terminated
on December 2000 and was not paid his
overtime pay, premium pay for working
during holiday/rest days and night shift
differentials.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Allegation of Respondent:
BPC alleges that complainants
separation from service was due to the
temporary closure of the company for
its repair and general maintenance and
that he insisted to be paid his
separation benefits .
Consequently, when BPC partially
reopened in January 2001, complainant
failed to reapply.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Dismissed complainants
Petition for Certiorari
due to
technicalities.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
ISSUES:
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Complainant is not a
managerial employee but a
member of the managerial
staff, which also takes him
out of the coverage of labor
standards.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Complainant
supervised
the
engineering section of the steam plant
boiler.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
SLL INTERNATIONAL
CABLES SPECIALIST and
SONNY L. LAGON,
- versusNATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS
COMMISSION, 4TH
DIVISION, ROLDAN
LOPEZ, EDGARDO
ZUIGA and DANILO
CAETE,
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
FACTS:
Allegation of the Complainants:
Complainants
were
hired
by
respondent as apprentice or trainee
cable/lineman in 1996.
After their training, complainants were
engaged as project employees by
respondents in their Islacom project in
Bohol from March 15, 1997 until
December 1997, after which their
employment were terminated.
Complainants
were >>receiving
their
>> 0
>> 1
>> 2
3
>> 4
>>
Sometime
in
March
1998
to
September 1998, Complainants were
engaged again byrespondent as project
employees for its PLDT Antipolo, Rizal
project.
As a consequence, complainants
employment was terminated.
Complainants were receiving their
salary below the minimum wage.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
The Camarin project was not
completed on the scheduled date of
completion due to delay in the delivery
of imported materials .
Respondent was constrained to cut
down the overtime work of its workers,
including complainants.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Thus,
when
requested
by
complainants on February 28, 2000 to
work overtime, respondent refused and
told them that if they insist, they would
have to go home at their own expense
and that they would not be given
anymore time nor allowed to stay in
the quarters.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Allegation of Respondent:
Complainants were only project
employees, for their services were
merely engaged for a specific project or
undertaking and the same were covered
by contracts duly signed by them.
Food allowance of P63.00 per day as
well as allowance for lodging house,
transportation, electricity, water and
snacks allowance should be added to
complainants basic pay.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Complainants
were
regular
employees because they were
repeatedly hired by respondents and
they performed activities which were
usual, necessary and desirable in
the business or trade of the
employer.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
An
undertaking
in
the
employment contract by the
employer to pay completion
bonus to the project employee as
practiced by most construction
companies.
(f)
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Complainants
were
regular
employees performing functions
which were the regular and usual
business of respondent.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
ISSUE:
1) Whether or not the value of the
facilities that the complainants
enjoyed should be included in the
computation of the wages received
by them.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
The
allowances
allegedly
enjoyed by the complainants are
supplements.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
C. PLANAS COMMERCIAL
and/or MARCIAL COHU
- versusNATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS COMMISSION
(Second Div.), ALFREDO
OFIALDA, DIOLETO
MORENTE and RUDY
ALLAUIGAN
G.R. No. 144619
November 11, 2005
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
FACTS:
On
September
14,
1993,
complainants,
who
are
laborers/helpers, filed a complaint for
underpayment of wages, nonpayment
of overtime pay, holiday pay, service
incentive leave pay and premium pay
for holiday and rest day and night shift
differential against respondents.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Allegation
of Complainants:
Respondent
Cohu, owner of C. Planas
Commercial, is engaged in wholesale of
plastic products and fruits of different kinds
with more than 24 employees;
Paid below the minimum wage law for the
past 3 years;
Required to work for more than 8 hours a
day without overtime pay;
Never enjoyed holiday pay and did not
have a rest day as they worked for 7 days a
week; and
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
ISSUE:
1) Whether or not complainants
are entitled to the money claims.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
End.
>> 0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>