Docstoc

EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONS WITH LABOR LAWS AND CBA Lecture notes PART II GENERAL LABOR CONCEPTS

Document Sample
EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONS WITH LABOR LAWS AND CBA Lecture notes PART II GENERAL LABOR CONCEPTS Powered By Docstoc
					   EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE
RELATIONS WITH LABOR LAWS
         AND CBA
       Lecture notes PART II

  GENERAL LABOR
    CONCEPTS
   ATTY. ANGELINE MAY TOGADE CABRERA
              TOPICAL GUIDE

   1. ART 4 LC, Construction in Favor of Labor
   2. Management Prerogatives
   3. “No Work- No Pay” principle
   4. “Last in, First Out” (LIFO) Rule
   5. “One Union-One Company” Policy
   6. “Equal Pay Equal Work” Principle
   7. Non-Diminution of Benefits
ART 4: CONSTRUCTION IN FAVOR
OF LABOR
 In interpreting Labor Code provisions, the workingman’s
  welfare should be the primordial and paramount
  consideration.
 In the interpretation of contracts relating to employment,
  the constitutional policy of according utmost protection
  and justice to labor should be upheld.
    Employment contracts being in the nature of contracts of
     adhesion , ambiguities should be resolved in favor of labor as an
     employment status of a person is defined by law and not by the
     parties.
    Ex. One year of continuous service to qualify for separation
     benefits – it did not require the service to be immediately prior
     the day of separation
ART 4: CONSTRUCTION IN FAVOR
OF LABOR
 CASES:
 1. PLDT V NLRC , 276 CSRA 1 [1997
 2. Cherry J. Price et al v Innodata Phils Inc, G.R. 178505,
  30 Sept 2008
 3. Marcopper Mining Corp v NLRC, 255 SCRA 322 [1996]
 4. Asuncion v NLRC, 362 SCRA 56 [2001]
 5. Penaflor v Outdoor Clothing Manufacturing Corp. GR
  177114, Jan 21, 2010
 6. Fukitsa Computer Products Corp of the Phil v Court of
  Appeals, 494 Phil 697 [2005]
 7. PNCC v NLCR, 277 SCRA 91 [1997]
    MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES

 The free will of management to conduct its
  own affairs to achieve its purpose cannot be
  denied except as limited by special laws,
  CBAs or the general principles of justice and
  fair play
 Employer is given leeway to manage his
  business and control the variables for profit
  purposes as long as the same is done in good
  faith and without circumventing the rights of
  employees.
    MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES

 Examples:
 1. The reduction of personnel
 2. Reasonable terms and conditions upon hiring of
  personnel is prescribed by employer; must not be
  discriminatory; Bona fide occupational qualification
   A. BAN OF SPOUSES IN SAME COMPANY – to be valid, it
    should be a bonafide occupational qualification exception;
    not discriminatory; employer must prove two factors: (1)
    the qualification is reasonably related to the essential
    operation of the job involved and (2) there is a factual basis
    for believing that the persons meeting the qualification
    would be unable to perform the duties of the job
    MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES

 Examples:
 Bona fide occupational qualification
   The SC held valid the policy of a pharmaceutical
    company prohibiting employees of any competitor
    company to protect trade secrets and processes.
   Obesity of an international flight steward is a ground
    for termination for failure to adhere to weight
    standard of airline company. His obesity may be
    unintended but is voluntary. A common carrier is
    required to observe extraordinary diligence for the
    safety of its passengers and must rely of its crew to
    carry out that diligence so they must be physically fit.
    MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES

 Examples:
 Bona fide occupational qualification
   The “exclusivity clause” of Avon in prohibiting its
    supervisors from selling products other than those
    manufactured by Avon is valid.
   The State is justified in requiring x-ray technicians
    to have passed the required examination and
    obtain the corresponding registration from the
    Board of Radiologic Technology.
 MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES

Examples…
4. Discipline of employees but penalty must be
   commensurate to the act and due process is
   observed.
5. Transfer of employees where he can be most
   useful is allowed as long as done in good faith.
6. Abolition of position due to company re-
   organization or streamlining operations to avert
   losses is allowed
7. Change of working hours if necessary for its
   operations
  MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES

Examples…
8. Grant of bonus
BONUS – an amount granted and paid to an
employee for his industry and loyalty which
contributed to the success of the employer’s
business and made possible the realization of profits.
It is an act of generosity by an enlightened employer
to spur the employee to greater efforts for the
success of the business and realization of bigger
profits. It is not demandable unless part of the wage
or integrated in the CBA
  MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES

CASES:
1. Bisig sa Tryco et al v Tryco Pharma Corp et al, G.R. No. 151309, 15 Oct
2008
2. Manila Jockey Club Employees Labor Union (PTGWO) v Manila Jpckey
      Club Inc, G.R. No. 166760, 07 March 2007
3.    Capitol Medical Center v Meris, G.R. No. 155098, 470 SCRA 125 [2005]
4. Phil Airline Inc v NLRC, 225 SCRA 301 [1993]
5.    Sorreda v Cambridge Electronics Corp, G.R. No. 172927, 11 Feb 2010
6. Star Paper v Simbol, G.R. No. 154774, 487 SCRA 228 [2006]
7.    Duncan Association of Detailman-PTGWO v Glaxo Wellcome Phils ,
      G.R. No. 162994, 17 Sept 2004, 438 SCRA 343
8. Armando Yrasuegui v PAL, G.R. No. 168081, 17 Oct 2008
9. Acon Cosmetics v Leticia Luna, G. R. No. 153674, 20 Dec 2006
10. St. Lukes Medical Center Employees Union-AFW v NLRC, G.R. No.
      162053, 517 SCRA 677 [2007]
“NO WORK – NO PAY” PRINCIPLE

 “A FAIR DAY’S WAGE FOR A FAIR DAY’S
  LABOR” remains a basic factor in
  determining wages of employees unless the
  laborer who is willing and able is locked out,
  suspended, dismissed or illegally prevented
  from working or the pay relates for holiday
  pays.
“NO WORK – NO PAY” PRINCIPLE

 CASES:
 1. Neeland v Villanueva, 364 SCRA 2004
  [2001]
 2. University of Pangasinan Faculty Union v
  Univ of Pangasinan, 127 SCRA 691 [1984]
 3. Serrano v NLRC, 323 SCRA 445 [2000]
‘LAST IN- FIRST OUT’ [LIFO]
            RULE

 Basis of termination of work and is usually
  provided in CBAs . Otherwise, the LIFO
  method yields to the sound discretion of
  management prerogative
‘LAST IN- FIRST OUT’ [LIFO]
            RULE

 CASES:
 1. Maya Farms Employees Organization v
  NLRC, 239 SCRA 508 [1994]
 2. Dela Salle University v Dela Salle
  Employees Association, 330 SCRA 363 [2000]
  ‘ONE UNION – ONE COMPANY’
           POLICY
 The proliferation of unions in one employer
  unit should be discouraged to give the
  employees a more potent voice.
 EXCEPTIONS:
 1. If there is substantial differences between
  the employee groups in the company
 The policy should yield to the Constitutional
  right of the employees to form unions or
  associations not contrary to law
   ‘ONE UNION – ONE COMPANY’
            POLICY
 CASES:
 1. Philtranco Service Enterprises v BLR, 174 SCRA 388
  [1989]
 2. General Rubber and Footwear Corp V BLR, 155 SCRA 283
  [1987]
 3. Knitjoy Manufacturing Inc v Ferrer-Calleja, 214 SCRA 174
  [1992]
 4. Barbizon Phil Inc NAFLU, 261 SCRA 738 [1996]
 5. Pagkakaisa ng mga Manggagawa sa trimph Int’l- United
  Lumber and Gen Workers of the Phil v Ferrer-Calleja, 181
  SCRA 119 [1990]
 6. Int’l School Alliance of Educators [ISAE} v Quisumbing,
  333 SCRA 13 [2000]
 ‘EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK’
          PRINCIPLE

 Persons who work with substantially equal
  qualifications, skill, effort and responsibility,
  ceteris paribus, should be paid similar salaries.
 ‘EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK’
          PRINCIPLE

 CASES:
 1. International School Alliance of Educators
  v Quisumbing, 333 SCRA 13 [2000]
 2. Philex Gold Phil Inc v Philex Bulawan
  Supervisors Union, 468 SCRA 111 [2005]
 NON-DIMINUTION OF BENEFITS

 ART 100 , LC - Prohibition against
  elimination or diminution of benefits –
  Nothing is this Book shall be construed to
  eliminate or in any way diminish supplements,
  or other employee benefits being enjoyed at
  the time of promulgation of this Code
 NON-DIMINUTION OF BENEFITS

 Voluntary employer practices cannot be
  unilaterally withdrawn subject to the ff
  requisites:
   1. it should have been practiced over a long period
    of time
     - no hard-and-fast rule as to length of time
   2. It must be shown to have been consistent and
    deliberate
     The benefit is an act of liberality of the ER and not
      by reason of a legal or contractual obligation
 NON-DIMINUTION OF BENEFITS

 CASES:
 1. Sevilla Trading Co v Semana, 428 SCRA 239
  [2004]
 2. Gloce Mackay Cable and Radio Corp v NLRC, 163
  SCRA 71 [1988]
 3. Oceanic Phramacal Employees Union (FFW) v
  Inciong, 94 SCRA 270 [1979]
 4. Davao Fruits Corp v Assocaited Labor Unions, 225
  SCRA 562 [1993]
 5. Tiangco v Leogardo Jr, 122 SCRA 267 [1983]
 6. Pag-asa Steel Works Inc v CA, 486 SCRA 475
  [2006]
REFERENCES
 Abad, Jr., Antonio H. (2011). (4th ed).
  Compendium on labor law. 4th ed. Manila: Rex.
 Azucena, Jr. A. C. (2010). (7th ed.). The labor
  code with comments and cases. Manila: Rex.
 Azucena, C.A., Jr. (2007). (5th ed.). Everyone's
  Labor Code. Manila:Rex.
 Rex case digest. (2006). Labor law and social
  legislation, legal ethics, mercantile law. Quezon
  City: Rex.
 Salao, Ernesto C. (2009). Law dictionary. Manila:
  Rex.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:17
posted:9/25/2013
language:
pages:23