Labor StandardsAtty. Cesar E. Santamaria, Jr.

Assignment for August L7,2OL5,

GENERAL PROVISIONS (ArtiCICS 1.6)

* Articles 1 and 2

+ Article 3

. "protection to labor". Sanchez v. Harry Lyons Construction; G.R. No. L-2779, October 18,

1950.. Vigilla v. Philippine College of Criminology, Inc.; G.R. No. 200094,

June 10, 2013.. PLDT Co. V. NLRC; G.R. No. 80609, August 23, 1998.

. "equal work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed". Section 12, Article XIi of the Constitution. Article 40, Labor Code

, "regulate the relations betvteen workers and employers". Article 7700, Civil Code

o The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that willensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free thepeople from poverty through policies tlrat provide adequate socialservices, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, arrdan improved quality of life for all, {li*ci;l*n S, Arllcl* 11}

o The State affirms labor as a primary social econonric force. It shallprotect the rights of workers and promote their welfare.(3!*cti*n 1"fi, Arlicl* Ili

o The State shall promote the preferential use of Filipino labor,domestic materials and locally produced goods, and adopt measuresthat help make them competitive. ($u*tl*n :l?. /:,.;"licic XII)

o The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas,organized and unorganized, and promote full employment andequality of employment opportunities for all. {!ir,:r:Y)** 3, &ri"irX*:\/tYY\,\rljl

o It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization,collective bargaining and negotiations, and peaceful concertedactivities, including the right to strike in accordance witlr law. Theyshall be entitled to security of tenure, humane conditions of work, anda living wage. They shall also participate in policy and decision-makingprocesses affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided byIaw. {Jil.)

o The State shall promote the principle of shared resJronsibility betweenworkers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes irrsetLling disputes, inclurding conciliation, and shall r:nforce their rnutualcompliance therewith to foster industrial peace. {{t.:t.1

Z

.:. Article 4

. Torres v. Rural Bank of San Juan,.inc.; G.R. No. 184520, March !3,2073.. Supreme Steel Corp. v. Nagkakaisang Manggagawa ng SupremeIndependent Union; G,R. No. 185556, March 28,20!7.. Songco v, NLRC; G.R. Nos. 50999-51000, March 23,1990.

. Pioneer Texturizing Corp. v. NLRC; G.R. No, 118651, October 76, 7997.

* Article 5

. Administrative rules have the force and effect of law.. Administrative rules must not contravene/ amend, restrict or enlarge thescope of the laws they seek to implement.

Book VII of the Administrative Code of 7987

, Insular Bank of Asia and America Employees'lJnion v. Inciong; G,R. No. L-52475, October 23, 1984,

* Article 6

. Not every person working for another is an employee.. 4 types of Work Arrangements:

1. Employer-employee2. Job contracting with an individual3. Job contracting with an enterprise4. Illegitimate (labor-only) contracting

. fmportance of determining whether an employer-employeerelationship exists.

. Brotherhood Labor Unity Movement of the Philippines, et al. vs.Zamora, et al., GR 48645, January 7 , 7987; 147 SCRA 49.

1 \\*** that judicial relation spawns obligations connectedwith workmen's compensation, social security, medicare,minimum wage, termination pay, and unionism."

. Statutory Definitions of Employer and Employee. Article 97 (b), (c). Article 1731 (0, (g). Article 2182 (e), (f)

. "The question of whether an employer-employee relationshipexists in a certain situation continues to bedevil the courts."(Brotherhood Labor Unity Movement of the Philippines, et al. vs, Zamora,et al., supra).

. The Four-Fold Test

. Elements of the Four-Fold Test

t Viaffa v. Al-Lagadan and Piga; GR No. L-8967, May 31, 1956; 99Phit. 408

1 Formerly 167,2 Formerly 212.

"There is no hard and fast rule designed to establish the aforesaidelements. Any competent and relevant evidence to prove therelationship may be admitted."t Meteoro v. Creative Creatures, Inc'; G.R. No. L77275, July 13,

2009.

r First Element: Selection and Engagement of the Employee

o Selection may be done directly, or through a private recruitmentand placement agencY.

r A written contract is not required for the creation and enforceabilityof an employment relationshiP.

r An employment relationship may still exist even if the contractexpl icitly provides otherwise.

o Titles are weak indicators of ER-EE relationship

Nature of services performed not controlling.t Phil. Global Communications, Inc. v, De Vera; GR No. 15721-4,

June 7, 2005; 459 SCRA 260

not the yardstick for determining the existence of anemployment relationship."

Second Element: Payment of Wagesr Meaning of "wage" - Article 97 (t)

employee for work or for services. "capable of being expressed in terms of money"; cf. Article

702.. "however designated". "whether fixed or ascertained on a time, task, piece, or

commission basis, or other method of calculating the same"

r Jardin v. NLRC; GR 119268, February 23, 2000

only that in excess of the so-called "boundary" they pay to theowner/operator is not sufficient to withdraw the relationshipbetween them from that of employer and employee"

t Chavez v. NLRC, et al.; GR No. 146530, January 77,2005;448SCRA 478

significant. This is merely a method of computing compensationand not a basis for determining the existence or absence ofemployer-employee relationship. One may be paid on the basisof results or time expended on the work, and may or may notacquire an employment status, depending on whether theelements of an employer-employee relationship are present ornot. "

t Tan v. Lagrama, et a/.; GR No. 75L228, August 75, 2OO2; 387SCRA 393

no moment. Payment by result is a method of compensationand does not define the essence of the relation. It is a methodof computing compensation, not a basis for determining theexistence or absence of employer-employee relationship."

o Third Element: Power of Dismissal

o Chavez v. NLRC, et al.; supra.

in the fact that they engaged the services of the petitioner astruck driver. They exercised this power by terminating the

petitioner's services albeit in the guise of "severancecontractual relation" due allegedly to the latter's breach ofcontractual obligation. "

t Tan v. Lagrama, et al.; supra.

effect acknowledged Lagrama to be his employee. For the rightto hire and fire is another important element of the employer-employee relationship. "

Assignment for August 24, ?OLS.

. Fourth Element: The Right of Control

Most important element.

Right to control not only the result of the work to be done, but alsothe means and methods to accomplish it.

15, 1989.. "Logically, the line should be drawn between rules that

merely serve as guidelines towards the achievement of themutually desired result without dictating the means ormethods to be employed in attaining it, and those thatcontrol or fix the methodology and bind or restrict the partyhired to the use of such means. The first, which aim only topromote the result, create no employer-employeerelationship unlike the second, which address both theresult and the means used to achieve it."

Tongko v. Manulife; GR 167622, January 25, 2}ll.Sonza v. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp.; GR No. 138051, June70,2Q04;431 SCRA 583. Cf. Dumpit-Murillo v. CA; GR 164652, June B, 2007.Bernate v, PBA; GR 192084, September 14,2OtL.Orozco v. CA, et al.; GR No. L55207, August 13, 2008; 562SCRA 36

732

Zamora, et al., GR L-48645, January 7, 7987; 147 SCRA 49.. "Because of the nature of the petitioners' work ascargadores or pahinantes, supervision as to the means andmanner of performing the same is practically nil. For, howmany ways are there to load and unload bottles and woodenshells? The mere concern of both respondent SMC and thealleged contractor is that the job of having the bottles andwooden shells brought to and from the warehouse be done.More evident and pronounced is respondent company,s rightto control in the discipline of petitioners,,,

et al., GR 11t870, June 30, t994;233 SCRA 592.. "AMWSLAI also exercised its power of control over Salas bydefining his duties and functions as its legal counsel,,

SCRA 478

SCRA 393Cosmopolitan Funeral llomes, Inc, v. Maalat; GR No, 86693,July 2, 1990; 187 SCRA 108,Vallum Security Services vs, NLRC, ef a/., GR 97320-27, July30, 1993; 224 SCRA7B7.

ofhis

5

o "the 'control test' only requires the existence of the right to controlthe manner of doing the work not necessarily the actual exercise ofthe power by him, which he can delegate."

1999.

o When control test inaPPlicable.

. The Two-Tiered Test. Francisco v. NLRC; GR No. t70087, August 31, 2006; 500 SCRA 690

o "The better approach would therefore be to adopt a two-tiered testinvolving: (1) the putative employer's power to control theemployee with respect to the means and methods by which thework is to be accomplished; and (2) the underlying economicrealities of the activity or relationship."

Contracting

. Articles 106-109

. DOLE Department Order 1B-A, Series of 2011

. Mandaue Galleon Trade, Inc. Andales,' GR 159668, March 7, 2AO8.

. Baguio v, NLRC; GR 79004-08, October 4, 1991. Including separateopinion of J, Padilla.

. CCBPI v. Agito; GR 179546, February 13, 2009.

. Neri v. NLRC; GR 97008-09, July 23, 1993.

. SMC v. MAERC Intergrated Seruices,Inc.; GR t44672, July 10, 2003.

. Asian Alcohol Corp. v. NLRC; GR 131108, March 25, !999.

Government Workers. Employees of GOCCs

. LRTAv. Venus, Jr.; GR L63782 & 163881, March 24,2A06.

Suggested authors (in alphabetical order): Azucena, Chan, Poquiz,