Labor relations reviewer

Art. 227. Technical Rules not binding The Labor arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission are not bound by the technical rules of procedure in adjudication of cases. In connection therewith, these quasi-judicial bodies may decide on the basis of position papers and other documents submitted. But there must be a process, the opportunity to be heard. What the law prohibits is the absolute lack of opportunity to be heard. So there is no denial of due process where the employer was duly presented by the counsel and was given sufficient opportunity to be heard and present his evidence, nor where the employer’s failure to be heard was due to the various postponements granted to it or his repeated failure to appear during the hearings. Now, a formal or trial-type hearing is not at all times and all circumstances essential to due process. The requirements of which are satisfied where the parties are accorded fair and reasonable opportunity to explain their side on the controversy at hand. But although technical rules of procedure are not binding in the proceedings before the Labor Arbiter or NLRC, there are certain rules that should be strictly followed: 1. Service of Summons The valid service of summons is necessary for the labor arbiter to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the respondent. 2. Period to Appeal Compliance with the prescribed period to appeal is mandatory. And you cannot exempt yourself from complying with the reglementary period to appeal by simply stating or defending or setting an argument that technical rules of procedure are not binding in labor labor. 3. Payment of Appeal Fee The payment of appeal fee is an essential requirement in the perfection of the appeal. 4. The Payment of the Appeal Bond and the rule with respect to substitution or employment of additional counsel.

COMPROMISE AGREEMENT It is required for the Labor arbiter to persuade the parties to settle amicably. Even if what was resorted by the parties is the so called, compulsory nature of resolving dispute. But labor arbiter is required to persuade the parties to settle the case amicably and to ensure that the compromise agreement entered into by them is a fair one and that the same was forged freely, voluntarily and with full understanding of the terms and conditions embodied therein as well as the consequences thereof. That’s why in 2011 Rules of Procedure of the National Labor Relations Commission, conciliation and mediation are mandatory.

EFFECT OF NON-APPEARANCE Non-appearance of the complainant of petitioner during the conciliation and mediation shall be a ground for the dismissal of the case without prejudice. And if it is the respondent who failed to appear, the labor arbiter shall allow the complainant or petitioner to file his position paper and submit evidence thereof in support of his cause of action and thereupon renders decision on the basis of the evidence on record.

Question: Can the union in behalf of the individual members compromise the claims of their individual members? Answer: No. Money claims due to the laborers cannot be an object of settlement or compromise without the individual consent of each laborer concerned. For the union officers to compromise the individual claims of its members, they must be authorized to do so by a Special Powers of Attorney. Question: Deeds of release or quitclaim, can it bar employees from demanding additional benefits? Answer: No. It cannot bar employees from demanding benefits to which they are legally entitled or from contesting the legality of the dismissal and the acceptance of those benefits would not amount to estoppel. NB: If the person signing the waiver, the quitclaim, has done so voluntarily, with full understanding thereof and the consideration of the quitclaim is credible and reasonable, the transaction must be recognized as a valid and binding undertaking. Ma’am: Timan-e ha ang rule with respect to Deeds of release or quitclaim. As a general rule it cannot bar the employees for demanding higher benefits. Take not of the case of University of Sto. Tomas vs. Samahang Manggagawa ng UST The Supreme Court in that case ruled that: Individual acceptance of the award and the resulting payments made by the petitioner DO NOT OPERATE AS A RATIFICATION of the DOLE Secretaries award.

Also, Jag & Jaggar Jeans & Sporswear Corp. This still pertains to compromise agreement.

BAR QUESTIONS: May the NLRC of the courts take jurisdiction or cognizance over compromise agreements, settlements involving labor matters? Answer: Yes, especially if there is non-compliance of compromise agreement. How sacrosanct are statements, data made at conciliation proceedings in the Dept. of Labor and Employment? What is the philosophy behind the answer? Answer: The statements made at the conciliation proceedings are privileged communications. They are privileged communications that cannot be used as evidence nor can conciliators testify on any matters taken up in the proceedings. The philosophy is to ascertain the truth about the controversy which the parties may be afraid to divulge. So it’s a privileged communication. True or False: Deeds of release, waiver or quitclaim are always valid and binding Answer: False. They’re not always valid and binding. GR, it cannot bar the employees to claim higher benefits except when it was voluntarily executed and the consideration, the quitclaim are credible and reasonable.

Art. 228: Appearance and Fees Maam: Kani importante ning Art. 228 class because there were questions in the bar exam under Art. 228. The validity of the appearance of non-lawyer before the commission or the Labor Arbiter. MEMORIZE!!! Under the law, non-lawyers may commission or labor arbiter. When is it allowed?

appear

before

the

1. If they represent themselves. 2. If they represent a legitimate labor organization which is a party to the case. 3. If they represent a member of members of a legitimate labor organization which is existing within the employer’s establishment, who are parties to the case. 4. If he is a duly-accredited member of any legal aid office. 5. If he is the owner or president of a corporation or establishment which is a party to the case.

But the appearance of non-lawyers must be with authorization especially during the settlement. To settle individual claims of employees, there must be a Special Power of Attorney to that effect. The 2nd paragraph of Art. 228 pertains to attorney’s fees. Attorney’s fees are proper in Art. 111 cases arising from withholding of wages and Art. 288 arising from CBA negotiations that may be charged against union funds in an amount to be agreed upon by the parties. The prohibition with respect to the payment of attorney’s fees is only is when it is effected thru forced contributions from the worker’s own funds as distinguished from union funds. So actually class, there is no prohibition with respect to the payment of attorney’s fees during CBA negotiations. Ang prohibition lang is when it is effected thru union funds. But take note of Art. 249 (o). Sa Art. 249 (o) niingon ang balaod, “No attorney’s fees may be checked off from any amount due to the employee without an individual written authorization duly signed by the employee”. So the payment of attorney’s fees should come from union funds. Nya dis-a man na gikan ang union funds? Of course gikan sa mga empleyado. Niingon ang labor code nga, “No attorney’s fees may be checked off”. Meaning, may be deducted from the salary of the employee without the individual written authorization duly signed by the employee. So in order for the employer to validly check off an amount from the employees pay or salary, there should be an individual written authorization duly signed by the employee concerned.

BAR QUESTIONS: (Ms. Paler) May non-lawyers appear before the NLRC or Labor arbiter? May they charge attorney’s fees for such appearance provided, it is charged against union funds and in an amount freely agreed upon by the parties? Discuss fully. Answer: Art. 228. Yes non-lawyers may appear before the commission or any labor arbiter only. So you have to enumerate the circumstances or the situations under Art. 228. Non-lawyers may not charge attorney’s fees though charged against the union funds and agreed upon because attorney’s fees requires the existence of attorney-client relationship. They are not lawyers. (Ms. Paler) Non-lawyers can appear before the labor arbiter if: a. They represent themselves b. They are properly authorized to represent their legitimate labor organization or member thereof c. They are accredited members of the legal aid office recognized by the DOJ or IBP d. They appeared in cases involving an amount of less than 5,000.00. Answer: Best answer is letter A. Why? Because in letter B, the labor organization must be a party to the case and the member must be of a labor

organization existing within the employer’s establishment who are parties to the case. So in other words, same with letter C, Art. 228 provides that the labor organization must be a party to the case which is not available in the choices. That’s why letter A is the best answer. So learning ani nga question sa BAR exam as well as the previous bar examination is you have to memorize or at least familiarize Art. 228. (Ms. Paler) The union’s by-laws provided for burial assistance to the family of a member who dies. When Carlos, a member dies, the union denied his wife’s claim for burial assistance, compelling her to hire a lawyer to pursue the claim. Assuming the wife wins, may she also claim attorney’s fees? Answer: Letter d. Yes, since award of attorney’s fee is not limited to cases of withholding of wages. Ma’am: (I cannot find jurisprudence but the answer given by the examiner is letter D). So ingana ang Bar exam.

Art. 230. Execution Writ of execution may be issued by any officials who has jurisdiction in labor cases. The writ of execution or a judgment may be issued motu propio or on motion of any interested party within 5 years from the date it becomes final and executory. NB: In Art. 129, (money claims not more than 5,000.00). It can be delegated to an officer who is authorized to hear the dispute but that authorized hearing officer does not have the power to issue writ of execution. Kana ra siya nga person and dili authorized to issue writ of execution in labor cases. But the med-arbiter, the secretary of labor, the labor arbiter, the NLRC and any of the officers who has jurisdiction in any of the labor cases can issue writ of execution except that authorized hearing officer under Art. 129. That’s 5 years validity for the date it becomes final and executory.

How to execute a labor judgment which on appeal had become final and executory? Answer: By filing a motion for execution In the case of Dario Nacar vs. Gallery Frames. Recomputation is allowed even if the judgment has already become final and executory.

Art. 231: CONTEMPT POWERS OF THE SEC. OF LABOR (not important)

Title III

Art. 232. Bureau of Labor Relations You cannot understand the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Labor Relations in inter-union and intra-union dispute without reading DO-40-03. DO-40-03 is the implementing rules and regulations of Title III. NB: BLR no longer exercise all the functions under Art. 232 of the Labor Code.

Question: Who has the jurisdiction over inter-union and intra-union dispute? Answer: Med-arbiter. Third quasi-judicial body that has jurisdiction on labor cases, one of which is inter/intra-union dispute. You cannot find this on the Labor Code, anhi rani nimo siya makit-an sa DO-40-03 particularly Sec. 7 and 16 of Rule XI. Question: What is a med-arbiter? Answer: Just read definition of terms section (l), Rule 1

Question: What are the cases under the original jurisdiction of the Med-arbiter? Answer: 1. Petition for certification election When to file? If you want to negotiate or f want to bargain collectively with an employer and there are two or more unions existing within a bargaining unit, you have to file a petition for certification election to determine who among the existing legitimate labor organization can represent the employees in the bargaining unit. Ma’am: Now, asa man nimo i-appeal and decision sa Med-arbiter with respect to certification election? Answer: appealable to the secretary of labor. (Legal basis: Sec. 17, Rule 8 DO-40-03)

2. Inter-union/Intra-union What is an inter-union dispute and what is an intra-union dispute? Sa kinaraan nga definition, inter-union dispute is between/among unions. Ang intra-union dispute is within and among the members. But there is a new definition introduced by DO-40-03. Although you have to take note of the old definition because that is still appealable. Take note of the definition introduced by DO-40-03. Sec. 1 Rule XI of 40-03 enumerates or provides the long list of what are considered inter/intra union disputes. Now in the long list, it includes application and cancellation of union registration and its registration and deregistration of CBA.

Ok ani ha, and DO-40-03 naghimo ug lain nga definition sa inter/intra-union dispute. Among the list included is registration and cancellation of union registration, registration and deregistration of CBA. Now registration of labor organization and registration and deregistration are inter/intra union dispute but these disputes does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Med-arbiter, it belongs to the Regional Director. So kani rang upat. Mga kaso man ni sila. You file a petition to register the labor organization. So ga kaso ni sila. These are inter/intra-union disputes but the jurisdiction of these does not belong to the Med-arbiter. So if there is a question: Who has jurisdiction over inter/intra union dispute? Answer: Med-arbiter except those 4 cases, which belong to the Regional Director. Ma’am: Dili na ninyo makit-an sa libro. Paler: Kanang Regional Director of DOLE? Ma’am: O, naa rana sa DO-40-03. In other words, under DO-40-03, inter-union dispute is no longer limited to disputes between and among labor organizations. Although naa gihapon na siya nga definition but it was enhanced by DO-40-03. Now, sa kani pa jud siya class, it’s the Regional Director who has jurisdiction kung independent labor organization. Kung mag-involve na pod ug federation (registration of federation), still that is an intra-union dispute but the jurisdiction is with the BLR. I-explain pa ni naho inig abot nato sa registration. Primer ra ba. Kani siya kani rang mga union ba, independent union ra pero kung federation na, BLR ang dapat naay jurisdiction. (Paler): Ang Med-Arbiter ma’am ba di na sija under sa BLR? Ma’am: Actually naa na sila anang mga opisinahapero mga independent body na sila, murag nag connect2 lang ba, naa na sila’y independent jurisdiction. So ayaw anang under under, basta naa na silay kaugalingong jurisdiction kay mura rana silag mga kintahay attached ra kintahay nga agency ba.

APPEAL Question: Asa maka-appeal sa decision sa Med-arbiter of inter/intra-union dispute? Answer: File an appeal to the Bureau of Labor Relations. That is within 10 days from receipt thereof, copy furnished the opposing party in the form of memorandum of appeal.

The decision of the BLR shall be final and executory after 10 calendar days but of course you still have an option to CA under Rule 65. Before filing an action to CA (Special civil action for certiorari), parties must file first one motion for reconsideration before the Bureau of Labor Relations. Ma’am: Niingon ko ganina nga when it involves a federation, original jurisdiction is with the BLR. Where, asa man ka mo appeal sa decision sa BLR? Answer: Secretary of Labor

Power of Secretary of Labor The power of Secretary of labor to review the decision of the BLR is only limited to the decisions of the BLR exercising its original jurisdiction. The Sec. of labor has no more jurisdiction to review decisions of the BLR in the exercise of it appellate jurisdiction.

THE PRINCIPLE The authority of the Secretary of Labor to review the decision of the BLR is only limited to decisions exercised in its original jurisdiction. But if it’s a decision exercised as a result of its exercise sa iyahang appellate jurisdiction, the Sec. of Labor has no more authority to review the decisions of the BLR.

Lee: Ma’am ang sa petition for certification election, di na mo-appeal sa BLR? Ma’am: Later nana siya pag-abot na nato didto. Lee: Di kay murag human na man lagi basig…. Ma’am: Mobalik ra ko diha. Ako laman sang gi-enumerate. Pagreview ninyo tagaan man mo nahog kanag murag diagram ba.

PRINCIPLES THA WE HAVE TO TAKE NOTE RE INTRA/INTER-UNION DISPUTE The filing or pendency of inter/intra-union dispute is not a prejudicial question to any petition for certification election and shall not be a ground for the dismissal of petition for certification election or suspension of proceedings for certification election.

For example, petition for certification election and there is a separate case, say cancellation of registration. So dili na prejudicial question, the certification election will proceed. The cases that I assigned to you. Kapisanan ng Samahang Pinagyakap vs. Trajano, this pertains to an intra-union dispute. Expulsion or suspension of officers. The BLR instead of deciding the dispute refers back the matter to the members for them to decide. Thai is NOT ALLOWED. Ingon ang Supreme Court: The BLR has no authority to order the referendum among union members to decide whether to expel or suspend the union officers. So in other words, the Med-arbiter should decide the issue W/N to expel the union officers. They are not allowed to refer it back to the members and let them vote, kay naa man nila ang jurisdiction. Katarungang Pambarangay Law is not applicable in labor disputes.

BAR QUESTIONS: (Ms. Damole) The National Council of X Union, the exclusive bargaining representative of all daily paid workers of Z Corp., called a general meeting and passed a resolution which provides that each union member was to be assessed P1,000 to be deducted from the lump sum of P10,000 which each employee was to receive under the CBA. Sergio, a Union member, protested and refused to sign the authorization slip for the deduction. X Union then passed a resolution expelling Sergio from the union. Sergio files a complaint before the Labor Arbiter for illegal deduction and expulsion from the union. Will the complaint prosper? Explain. Answer: The complaint will not prosper. This is an intra-union dispute, jurisdiction is with the Med-arbiter.

(Ms. Damole) Which of the following is cognizable by the Bureau of Labor Relations Med-Arbiters? a. Unfair labor practice for violation of the CBA files by the Workers Union of Company X against Company X; b. Claim for backwages filed by overseas contract worker Xena against her Saudi Arabian employer; c. Contest for the position of MG Union President brought by Ka Joe, the losing candidate in the recent elections; d. G contesting his removal as Chief Executive Officer of Company Z. Answer: c

COMPROMISE AGREEMENT Pareha rana siya sa Art. 227. Under the law, or labor laws recognize compromise agreement as a mode of settling labor/industrial disputes.

Requisites:    

Must be reduced into writing Must be voluntarily entered into Must represent a reasonable settle of claims Must be signed in the presence of Regional Director or Labor Arbiter or his duly authorized representative. A compromise cannot be later on be disowned or set aside because of a change of mind. It cannot be set aside on the ground that the employee was constrained to sign the same because of extreme necessity. Dire necessity is not an acceptable ground for annulling a compromise agreement especially when there is no showing that the employee was forced to enter into such compromise. If the compromise agreement was entered into by a counsel or a lawyer or by union officers, the counsel, the union officer, must be equipped with Special Power of Attorney.

Art. 234. Issuance of a Subpoena Art 235. Appointment of Bureau Personnel

Art 236. Question: Is it necessary to register the collective bargaining agreement for it to be valid? Answer: No. Registration of a CBA is not a requisite for its validity. For, once it is entered into and signed by the parties, it becomes effective as between the parties. Question: Why is it that you have to register the CBA? Answer: For the Contract-Bar-Rule to apply under Art. 237. Memorize what is a Contract-Bar-Rule. The Contract-Bar-Rule states that: While a valid and registered CBA is subsisting, the bureau is not allowed to hold an election contesting the majority status of the incumbent union. The existence of the CBA does not allow, that is, it bars the holding of inter-union electoral contest. The election is legally allowed only during the freedom period which refers to the last 60 days of the 5th year of the effectivity of the CBA. Otherwise stated, if there is a VALID and REGISTERED CBA, the majority status of the incumbent union is protected for 5 years. Ang election allowed lang during the freedom period, which is the last 60 days of the 5th year. So bisan pa class ug within the bargaining unit dunay mosulbong nga usa ka union which will claim that: “I have more members, I have most of the

employees in the bargaining unit. Kang union nga certified as the exclusive bargaining representative wala na siya, gamay na lang na siya ug miyembro.” That ground will not suffice for the conduct of certification election kay protected gihapon iyang status for 5 years. That is if the CBA is registered. If the CBA is not registered, a certification election can be conducted anytime. So that’s the importance of registering the CBA.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE CONTRACT-BAR-RULE  Those entered into with a labor organization which has not been certified as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative but merely accorded voluntary recognition by the management despite the existence of another labor organizations seeking recognition.  Those which are not duly registered with BLR or the appropriate regional office of DOLE.  Those which are incomplete, specifically those which does not provide economic benefits for the employees.  Those which was hastily entered into prior to or durng the 60-day freedom period.  Those which can no longer foster industrial peace and stability

Art. 238. Privileged Communication BAR Question: (Ms. Damole) A Collective Bargaining Agreement was signed between the Ang Sarap Kainan Company and the Ang Sarap Kainan Workers Union. Should the Collective Bargaining Agreement be registered with the Bureau of Labor Relations? If so, why? Answer: GR: For CBA to be valid, registration is no essential. But it is necessary to be registered for the Contract-Bar-Rule to apply.

MJE (September. 6, 2015 2:24 PM)