You are on page 1of 5

1. Linda was employed by Sectarian University (SU) to cook (A). Yes.

The segregated votes should be counted as valid


for the members of a religious order who teach and live votes. Probationary employees are not among the
inside the campus. While performing her assigned task, employees who are ineligible to vote. Likewise, the
Linda accidentally burned herself. Because of the extent of pendency of the appeal of the six dismissed employees
her injuries, she went on medical leave. Meanwhile, SU indicates that they have contested their dismissal before a
engaged a replacement cook. Linda filed a complaint for forum of appropriate jurisdiction; hence, they continue to be
illegal dismissal, but her employer SU contended that Linda employees for purposes of voting in a certification election
was not a regular employee but a domestic househelp. (D.O. 40-03).
Decide.
(B). Yes. The certification election is valid because it is not a
Linda is a regular employee. barred election and majority of the eligible voters cast their
votes.
SU’s contention that Linda is a domestic helper is without
basis because the latter did not minister to the personal (C). No. Union A should not be declared the winner because
comfort of the members of any household. Although a cook, it failed to garner majority of the valid votes. The majority of
hence listed, she cannot be classified as a Kasambahay 500 votes, representing valid votes, is 251 votes. Since Union
because she rendered services for resident religious teachers A received 200 votes only, it did not win the election.
in a university which was not a household.
(D) None of the participating unions can represent the rank-
2. Lucy was one of approximately 500 call center agents at and-file employees for purposes of collective bargaining
Hambergis, Inc. She was hired as a contractual employee because none of them enjoys majority representative status.
four years ago. Her contracts would be for a duration of five
(5) months at a time, usually after a one month interval. Her (E) If the 10 votes were segregated on the same grounds,
re-hiring was contingent on her performance for the Union A cannot still be certified as the bargaining
immediately preceding contract. Six (6) months after the representative because its vote of 250 is still short of the
expiration of her last contract, Lucy went to Hambergis majority vote of 251. However, if the 10 votes were validly
personnel department to inquire why she was not yet being segregated, majority vote would be 246 votes. Since Union
recalled to work. She was told that her performance during a received more than majority vote then it won the election.
her last contract was "below average." Lucy seeks your
legal advice about her chances of getting her job back. What 4. Lina has been working as a steward with a Miami, U.S.A.-
will your advice be? based Loyal Cruise Lines for the past 15 years. She was
recruited by a local manning agency, Macapagal Shipping,
I will advise Lucy to file a complaint for constructive and was made to sign a 10-month employment contract
dismissal, with prayer for reinstatement, because her everytime she left for Miami. Macapagal Shipping paid for
floating status has exceeded six (6) months. Lina’s round-trip travel expenses from Manila to Miami.
Because of a food poisoning incident which happened
By virtue of the nature of her job, Lucy attained tenure on during her last cruise assignment, Lina was not re-hired.
the first day of her employment. As a regular employee, Lina claims she has been illegally terminated and seeks
therefore, she could only be dismissed for a just or separation pay. If you were the Labor Arbiter handling the
authorized cause. Expiration of her last contract was neither case, how would you decide?
a just nor authorized cause. Hence, she was illegally
dismissed. Moreover, her term employment contracts were I will dismiss the complaint for illegal dismissal.
contracts of adhesion; hence, they should be taken against
Hambergis Inc. because of its obvious intent to use periods Lina is a seafarer. As such, she is a contractual employee who
to bar her regularization. cannot require her employer to enter into another contract
of employment with her under the Principle of Freedom of
3. Liwayway Glass had 600 rank-and-file employees. Three Contracts. In effect, Lina cannot be awarded separation pay.
rival unions – A, B, and C – participated in the certification As an alternative relief, separation pay is proper only when
elections ordered by the Med-Arbiter. 500 employees there is a finding of illegal dismissal.
voted. The unions obtained the following votes: A-200; B-
150; C-50; 90 employees voted "no union"; and 10 were 5. Non-lawyers can appear before the Labor Arbiter if:
segregated votes. Out of the segregated votes, four (4)
were cast by probationary employees and six (6) were cast (A) they represent themselves
by dismissed employees whose respective cases are still on (B) they are properly authorized to represent their legitimate
appeal. labor organization or member thereof
(C) they are duly-accredited members of the legal aid office
(A) Should the votes of the probationary and dismissed recognized by the DOJ or IBP
employees be counted in the total votes cast for the (D) they appear in cases involving an amount of less than
purpose of determining the winning labor union? Php5,000
(B) Was there a valid election?
(C) Should Union A be declared the winner? 6. As a result of a bargaining deadlock between Lazo
(D) Suppose the election is declared invalid, which of the Corporation and Lazo Employees Union, the latter staged a
contending unions should represent the rank-and-file strike. During the strike, several employees committed
employees? illegal acts. Eventually, its members informed the company
(E) Suppose that in the election, the unions obtained the of their intention to return to work.
following votes: A-250; B-150; C-50; 40 voted "no union";
1

and 10 were segregated votes. Should Union A be certified (A) Can Lazo Corporation refuse to admit the strikers?
Page

as the bargaining representative? (B) Assuming the company admits the strikers, can it later
on dismiss those employees who committed illegal acts?
(C) If due to prolonged strike, Lazo Corporation hired However, she was not accorded statutory due process. For
replacements, can it refuse to admit the replaced strikers? this reason, I will award her nominal damages of Php 30,000.

(A) No. A strike is a temporary stoppage of work only. 9. Lionel, an American citizen whose parents migrated to
Therefore, strikers can go back to their work in the event of the U.S. from the Philippines, was hired by JP Morgan in
a voluntary abandonment of their strike. New York as a call center specialist. Hearing about the
phenomenal growth of the call center industry in his
(B) After admission, the company can hold the strikers parents’ native land, Lionel sought and was granted a
behind the illegalities accountable for their acts. If found to transfer as a call center manager for JP Morgan’s operations
have committed acts justifying a dismissal, said employees in Taguig City. Lionel’s employment contract did not specify
can be terminated after due process. a period for his stay in the Philippines. After three years of
working in the Philippines, Lionel was advised that he was
(C) No. The positions left behind by strikers are deemed being recalled to New York and being promoted to the
legally unoccupied. Moreover, the hiring of replacement position of director of international call center operations.
workers does not terminate employer-employee However, because of certain "family reasons," Lionel
relationship because a strike is a temporary stoppage of advised the company of his preference to stay in the
work only. Finally, replacement workers are deemed to have Philippines. He was dismissed by the company. Lionel now
accepted their engagement subject to the outcome of the seeks your legal advice on:
strike.
(A) Whether he has a cause of action
7. Luisa Court is a popular chain of motels. It employs over (B) Whether he can file a case in the Philippines
30 chambermaids who, among others, help clean and (C) What are his chances of winning
maintain the rooms. These chambermaids are part of the
union rank-and-file employees which has an existing (A) Lionel has a cause of action. He has a right to be secure in
collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the company. his job; his employer has the correlative obligation to respect
While the CBA was in force, Luisa Court decided to abolish that right; his dismissal constitutes a violation of his tenurial
the position of chambermaids and outsource the cleaning right; and said violation caused him legal injury.
of the rooms to Malinis Janitorial Services, a bona fide
independent contractor which has invested in substantial (B) Lionel can file an illegal dismissal case in the Philippines.
equipment and sufficient manpower. The chambermaids Being a resident corporation, J P Morgan is subject to
filed a case of illegal dismissal against Luisa Court. In Philippine Labor Laws. And, although hired abroad, Lionel’s
response, the company argued that the decision to place of work is Taguig. Hence, he can lodge his complaint
outsource resulted from the new management’s directive with the NLRC-NCR which has territorial jurisdiction over his
to streamline operations and save on costs. If you were the workplace (Sec. 1, Rule IV, NLRC Rules of Procedure, as
Labor Arbiter assigned to the case, how would you decide? amended).

I would declare the chambermaids to have been illegally (C) Lionel has reasonable chances of winning. His recall to the
dismissed. USA was not a lawful lateral transfer that he could not refuse.
On the contrary, it was a scalar transfer amounting to a
The chambermaids are regular employees for performing promotion which he could validly refuse. Absent willful
work necessary or desirable to the main trade of the Luisa disobedience, therefore, his termination is groundless.
Court. As such, they enjoy security of tenure. The job
contracting arrangement between Luisa Court and Malinis 10. Which of the following groups does not enjoy the right
Janitorial Services is prohibited by D.O. 18-A because it has to self-organization?
the effect of introducing workers to displace Luisa Court’s
regular workers. (A) Those who work in a non-profit charitable institution
(B) Those who are paid on a piece-rate basis
8. Luisa was hired as a secretary by the Asian Development (C) Those who work in a corporation with less than 10
Bank (ADB) in Manila. Luisa’s first boss was a Japanese employees
national whom she got along with. But after two years, the (D) Those who work as legal secretaries - Legal secretaries
latter was replaced by an arrogant Indian national who did are confidential employees.
not believe her work output was in accordance with
international standards. One day, Luisa submitted a draft 11. Our Lady of Peace Catholic School Teachers and
report filled with typographical errors to her boss. The Employees Labor Union (OLPCS-TELU) is a legitimate labor
latter scolded her, but Luisa verbally fought back. The organization composed of vice principals, department
Indian boss decided to terminate her services right then and heads, coordinators, teachers, and non-teaching personnel
there. Luisa filed a case for illegal dismissal with the Labor of Our Lady of Peace Catholic School (OLPCS).
Arbiter claiming arbitrariness and denial of due process. If
you were the Labor Arbiter, how would you decide the OLPCS-TELU subsequently filed a petition for certification
case? election among the teaching and non-teaching personnel of
OLPCS before the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) of the
I will dismiss the complaint for illegal dismissal. Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). The Med-
Arbiter subsequently granted the petition and ordered the
Luisa committed serious misconduct. Her Indian boss, conduct of a joint certification election for the teaching and
regardless of his arrogant nature, had the clear right to non-teaching personnel of OLPCS.
reprimand her for her poor performance. Absent
2

justification for verbally fighting back, Luisa’s act amounted May OLPCS-TELU be considered a legitimate labor
Page

to serious misconduct. Therefore, her dismissal was valid. organization?


Yes, OLPCS-TELU is a legitimate labor organization. Its mixed- Hence, they cannot resort to strikes and similar concerted
membership which includes supervisors and rank-and-filers activities to compel concessions from the government.
does not affect its legitimacy. The only effect of such
membership is that the supervisors in the persons of vice- 14. The procedural requirements of a valid strike include:
principals and department heads are deemed automatically
removed (RA 9481). (A) A claim of either unfair labor practice or deadlock in
collective bargaining
Comment: Another tricky question. The body of the problem (B) Notice of strike filed at least 15 days before a ULP-
leads one to “appropriateness of a CBU”. Hence, he might grounded strike or at least 30 days prior to the deadlock in a
apply the Substantial Mutuality of Interest Principle based on bargaining grounded strike
his observation that the employees perform separate but (C) Majority of the union membership must have voted to
interdependent tasks. Actually, the question is legitimacy of stage the strike with notice thereon furnished to the National
status only (LLO status). So the fact to tackle is mixed- Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) at least 24 hours
membership. before the strike vote is taken
(D) Strike vote results must be furnished to the NCMB at least
12. Samahang East Gate Enterprises (SEGE) is a labor seven (7) days before the intended strike
organization composed of the rank-and-file employees of
East Gate Enterprises (EGE), the leading manufacturer of all 15. Lincoln was in the business of trading broadcast
types of gloves and aprons. equipment used by television and radio networks. He
employed Lionel as his agent. Subsequently, Lincoln set up
EGE was later requested by SEGE to bargain collectively for Liberty Communications to formally engage in the same
better terms and conditions of employment of all the rank business. He requested Lionel to be one of the
-and-file employees of EGE. Consequently, EGE filed a incorporators and assigned to him 100 Liberty shares.
petition for certification election before the Bureau of Lionel was also given the title Assistant Vice-President for
Labor Relations (BLR). Sales and Head of Technical Coordination. After several
months, there were allegations that Lionel was engaged in
During the proceedings, EGE insisted that it should "under the table dealings" and received "confidential
participate in the certification process. EGE reasoned that commissions" from Liberty’s clients and suppliers. He was,
since it was the one who filed the petition and considering therefore, charged with serious misconduct and willful
that the employees concerned were its own rank-and-file breach of trust, and was given 48 hours to present his
employees, it should be allowed to take an active part in explanation on the charges. Lionel was unable to comply
the certification process. with the 48 -hour deadline and was subsequently barred
from entering company premises. Lionel then filed a
Is the contention of EGE proper? Explain. complaint with the Labor Arbiter claiming constructive
dismissal. Among others, the company sought the dismissal
EGE could file the petition for certification election because of the complaint alleging that the case involved an intra-
it was requested to collectively bargain and it could not do corporate controversy which was within the jurisdiction of
so because SEGE was not the EBR. After it filed the petition, the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
however, it reverted to its standby status. Therefore, it could
not interfere with the selection process which was the If you were the Labor Arbiter assigned to the case, how
exclusive prerogative of its workers. It could only participate would you rule on the company’s motion to dismiss?
in the inclusion-exclusion proceedings, and nowhere else.
I will deny the motion to dismiss.
13. Philhealth is a government-owned and controlled
corporation employing thousands of Filipinos. Because of Lionel is not a corporate officer but a corporate employee
the desire of the employees of Philhealth to obtain better only because:
terms and conditions of employment from the government, (a) His office is not a creation of the Corporation
they formed the Philhealth Employees Association (PEA) Code;
and demanded Philhealth to enter into negotiations with (b) It is not shown that his office is a corporate
PEA regarding terms and conditions of employment which position under Liberty’s Articles of Incorporation;
are not fixed by law. and
(c) It is not shown that there is a board resolution
(A) Are the employees of Philhealth allowed to self- investing his position with the status of a corporate
organize and form PEA and thereafter demand Philhealth office.
to enter into negotiations with PEA for better terms and
conditions of employment? Absent corporate controversy, the Office of the Labor Arbiter
(B) In case of unresolved grievances, can PEA resort to has jurisdiction to hear and resolve Lionel’s complaint for
strikes, walkouts, and other temporary work stoppages to illegal dismissal.
pressure the government to accede to their demands?

(A) Under E.O. 180, Philhealth employees can organize. Thru


their organization, they can negotiate with Philhealth over
terms and conditions of employment not fixed by its charter,
Civil Service Law, or applicable salary standardization law.

(B) No. Although the right to organize implies the right to


3

strike, law may withhold said right. E.O. 180 is that law which
Page

withholds from government employees the right to strike.


16. An accidental fire gutted the JKL factory in Caloocan. JKL criminal complaint for grave defamation against Lanz. The
decided to suspend operations and requested its prosecutor found probable cause and filed an information
employees to stop reporting for work. After six (6) months, in court. Lobinsons decided to terminate Lanz for
JKL resumed operations but hired a new set of employees. committing a potential crime and other illegal acts
The old set of employees filed a case for illegal dismissal. If prejudicial to business. Can Lanz be legally terminated by
you were the Labor Arbiter, how would you decide the the company on these grounds?
case?
As to the first ground, crime to be a just cause for dismissal
I will decide in favor of the employees. must be against the employer, members of his immediate
family or representative (Article 288, LC, as renumbered).
The fire has not resulted in complete destruction of Since the potential crime of Lanz is not against Lobinsons or
employer-employee relationship. Said relationship has its duly authorized representatives, it cannot of itself justify
temporarily ceased only. When JKL resumed operations, his termination.
therefore, it became its obligation to recall its old employees
instead of replacing them with new employees. As to the second ground, Lanz’s dysfunctional conduct has
made the work environment at Lobinsons hostile as to
Withholding of work beyond six (6) months amounts to adversely affect other employees, like Lee. Therefore, he can
constructive dismissal. Hence, I will order J KL to pay the be dismissed on the ground of serious misconduct and loss
complainants’ full backwages, separation pay because of trust and confidence.
their positions are occupied already, nominal damages
for non-observance by J KL of prescribed pre-termination Comment: There are two separate grounds for dismissal.
procedure, moral and exemplary damages for its bad faith One is a just cause, the other is not. To the question “Can
(Lynvil Fishing Enterprises, Inc., et al. vs. Ariola, et al., G.R. Lanz be legally terminated on these grounds?” one should not
No. 181974, 1 February 2012), and 10% attorney’s fees for give an answer that treats the two as though they were one
compelling its employees to litigate against it (Art. 111, LC). and the same. This is because, based on the crafting of
previous questions, it should be obvious that the examiner
17. Despite a reinstatement order, an employer may has a clinical mind.
choose not to reinstate an employee if:
Alternative Answer:
(A) There is a strained employer-employee relationship
(B) The position of the employee no longer exists As to the first ground, crime to be a just cause for dismissal
(C) The employer’s business has been closed must be against the employer, members of his immediate
(D) The employee does not wish to be reinstated. family or representative (Article 288, LC, as renumbered).
Since the potential crime of Lanz is not against Lobinsons or
18. Luningning Foods engaged the services of Lamitan its duly authorized representatives, it cannot of itself justify
Manpower, Inc., a bona fide independent contractor, to his termination. However, it can be treated as a cause
provide "tasters" that will check on food quality. analogous to serious misconduct or loss of trust and
Subsequently, these "tasters" joined the union of rank - confidence. Therefore, Lanz can be dismissed on this ground.
and-file employees of Luningning and demanded that they
be made regular employees of the latter as they are As to the second ground, Lanz’s dysfunctional behavior has
performing functions necessary and desirable to operate made the work environment at Lobinsons hostile as to
the company’s business. Luningning rejected the demand adversely affect other employees, like Lee. Therefore, he can
for regularization. On behalf of the "tasters", the union be dismissed also on the ground of serious misconduct and
then filed a notice of strike with the Department of Labor loss of trust and confidence.
and Employment (DOLE). In response, Luningning sought a
restraining order from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) 20. Liwanag Corporation is engaged in the power
arguing that the DOLE does not have jurisdiction over the generation business. A stalemate was reached during the
case since it does not have an employer-employee collective bargaining negotiations between its
relationship with the employees of an independent management and the union. After following all the
contractor. If you were the RTC judge, would you issue a requisites provided by law, the union decided to stage a
restraining order against the union? strike. The management sought the assistance of the
Secretary of Labor and Employment, who assumed
I will not issue a TRO. jurisdiction over the strike and issued a return-to-work
order. The union defied the latter and continued the strike.
The dispute brought to the RTC is a labor dispute despite the Without providing any notice, Liwanag Corporation
fact that the disputants may not stand in the proximate declared everyone who participated in the strike as having
relation of employer and employee (Art. 212, LC). Moreover, lost their employment.
the issue of regularization is resolvable solely thru the
application of labor laws. Under both Reasonable Causal (A) Was Liwanag Corporation’s action valid?
Connection Rule and (B) If, before the DOLE Secretary assumed jurisdiction, the
Reference to Labor Law Rule, the dispute is for labor striking union members communicated in writing their
tribunals to resolve. desire to return to work, which offer Liwanag Corporation
refused to accept, what remedy, if any, does the union
For lack of jurisdiction, therefore, I will dismiss the case. have?

19. Lanz was a strict and unpopular Vice-President for Sales (A) Yes, the action of Liwanag Corporation is valid.
4

of Lobinsons Land. One day, Lanz shouted invectives against


Page

Lee, a poor performing sales associate, calling him, among The DOLE Secretary can assume jurisdiction in the event of a
others, a "brown monkey." Hurt, Lee decided to file a labor dispute likely to result in a strike in an industry
involving national interest, like energy production (Art.
263(g); D.O. 40-H-13). His AJ O, once duly served on the
union, will produce an injunctive effect. Hence, if ignored,
the union’s strike would be illegal even if it may have
complied with pre-strike procedure. As a consequence,
Liwanag Corporation may declare all the strikers as having
lost their employment as a consequence of their
intransigence (Sarmiento v. Tuico, 27 J une 1988).

(B) The union may file a complaint for illegal lockout, with
prayer for immediate reinstatement. The refusal of Liwanag
Corporation to admit the strikers back is an illegal lockout
because it is not preceded by compliance with prescribed
pre-lockout procedure. If the lockout is unreasonably
prolonged, the complaint may be amended to charge
constructive dismissal.

21. The jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations


Commission does not include:

(A) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by


the Labor Arbiter
(B) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by
Regional Directors or hearing officers involving the recovery
of wages and other monetary claims and benefits arising
from employer-employee relations where the aggregate
money claim of each does not exceed five thousand pesos
(Php5,000)
(C) Original jurisdiction to act as a compulsory arbitration
body over labor disputes certified to it by the Regional
Directors - Regional Directors do not have assumption
power; hence, they cannot certify cases to the NLRC.
(D) Power to issue a labor injunction

5
Page

You might also like