Constitution/Civil  Code    Asia  Brewery  Case    -­‐  the  procedure  by  which  the  employers  were  provided  with  a  means  to  understate  their  profitability  cannot  be  countenanced  because  this  could  unduly  deprive  labor  of  its  right  to  a  just  share  in  the  fruits  of  production    -­‐  this  understatement  defeated  the  right  of  labor  to  a  just  wage  when  the  wage  award  was  inaccurate    Abbot  Laboraties  Doctrine    -­‐  compliance  alone  with  the  statutorily-­‐prescribed  due  process  would  not  suffice  in  termination  of  employment;  additionally,  there  must  be  compliance  too  with  the  company-­‐prescribed  due  process  -­‐otherwise,  the  termination  shall  be  considered  legal  and  valid  but  the  employer  will  be  penalized  with  indemnity  in  the  form  of  nominal  damages    Serrano  Doctrine  -­‐  the  subject  clause  has  a  discriminatory  intent  because  of  the  3-­‐month  cap  on  OFWs  whose  contract  periods  are  for  more  than  1  year  than  those  who  are  illegally  dismissed  with  less  than  1  year  left  in  their  contracts  who  are  entitled  to  their  salaries  for  the  unexpired  portion  *  Note  that  the  unconstitutional  rule  was  replicated  in  RA  10022;  hence,  according  to  a  case  after  the  Serrano  ruling,  

all  statutes  are  to  be  construed  as  having  only  a  prospective  application      1700  NCC  (SC  Case)  -­‐  A  contract  of  employment  is  impressed  with  public  interest;  consequently,  these  contracts  are  subject  to  police  power  of  the  state    On  construction  in  favor  of  labor  -­‐  while  the  constitution  and  the  law  tend  to  favor  the  working  man,  protection  to  labor  is  also  assured  -­‐  the  policy  of  social  justice  is  not  intended  to  countenance  wrongdoing      Principle  of  co-­‐determination  -­‐  The  grant  of  the  right  of  participation  does  not  mean  co-­‐management  of  business  nor  intrusion  into  management  prerogatives    -­‐  it  just  means  right  to  participate  in  the  discussion  of  matters  affecting  their  rights    Recruitment    Simple  illegal  recruitment  -­‐  under  RA  8042,  non-­‐possession  of  a  license  or  authority  to  recruit  is  no  longer  an  essential  ingredient  of  the  crime  of  illegal  recruitment  

-­‐  CETCHUP,  referring,  contract  services,  promising,  adveritising  -­‐  a)  charge  amount  greater  than  the  sched  of  allowable  fees;  b)  false  notice  or  info  in  relation  to  recruitment;  c)  engagement  in  recruitment  in  jobs  harmful  to  public  health  or  morality;  d)  recruitment  of  travel  agency;  e)  substitute  employment  contracts  to  the  prejudice  of  the  worker    SC:  Illegal  recruitment  as  economic  sabotage  -­‐  malum  prohibitum      SC:  No  need  for  the  directors  to  be  impleaded  because  under  RA  8042,  if  the  recruitment  agency  is  a  juridical  being,  the  directors  shall  themselves  be  solidarily  liable  with  the  corporation    SC:  Even  if  the  recruitment  agency  and  the  foreign  principal  had  already  severed  their  agency  agreement  at  the  time  the  worker  was  injured,  the  recruitment  agency  may  still  be  sued  for  violation  of  the  employment  contract  if  no  notice  of  the  termination  of  the  agency's  agreement  with  its  foreign  principal  was  given  to  the  ofw  -­‐  legal  basis:  agency  -­‐  if  the  agency  has  been  entrusted  for  the  purpose  of  contracting  with  specified  persons,  its  revocation  shall  not  prejudice  the  latter  if  they  were  not  given  notice    

Agency  -­‐  The  agency  w/c  deployed  the  employees  whose  employment  contract  were  adjudged  illegally  terminated  shall  be  jointly  and  solidarily  liable  with  the  principal  SC:  hence,  previous  owner  remains  liable  even  if  there  is  an  undertaking  to  assume  responsibility  by  the  new  owner  -­‐  RA  8042  -­‐  severance  of  relations  between  the  local  agent  and  foreign  principal  does  not  affect  the  liability  of  the  foreign  principal  (local  agency  is  solidarily  liable  with  the  foreign  principal)      Theory  of  imputed  knowledge  -­‐  knowledge  of  the  agent  is  knowledge  of  the  principal,  but  it  is  not  the  other  way  around  -­‐  why?  the  presumption  is  that  the  agent  will  perform  his  duty  and  communicate  to  his  principal  the  facts  that  the  agent  acquires      SC:  Even  if  OFWs  are  not  entitled  to  backwages,  reinstatement  and  separation  pay  because  their  employment  is  purely  fixed  term  in  character,  they  are  entitled  to  actual  or  compensatory  damages  on  the  ground  of  breach  of  contract,  i.  e.  failure  of  the  recruitment  agency  to  deploy  them  abroad    SC:  findings  of  company-­‐designated  physician  are  not  conclusive  because  the  OFW  has  the  right  to  seek  a  second  opinion  from  other  physicians    

 Salazar  vs  Achacoso  -­‐  the  exercise  by  the  DOLE  Secretary  of  his  twin  powers  to  issue  arrest  and  seizure  orders  is  unconstitutional;  however,  the  declaration  should  not  affect  the  exercise  of  other  distinct  power  to  close  violator-­‐companies'  establishments  or  entities    SC:  The  power  to  regulate  and  restrict  the  recruitment  and  placement  of  all  agencies  is  a  valid  grant  of  police  power    RA  8042  -­‐  The  state  shall  allow  the  deployment  of  OFW  only  in  countries  where  the  rights  of  Filipino  migrant  workers  are  protected.  -­‐  It  is  a  guarantee  that  the  receiving  country  has  existing  labor  and  social  laws  protecting  the  rights  of  workers  -­‐  It  is  not  a  guarantee  that  the  receiving  country  promotes  and  facilitates  re-­‐integration  of  migrants  into  the  national  mainstream    Termination  of  Employment    Remember:  Determine  first  whether  worker  is  an  employee  before  you  answer  whether  he  is  a  regular  employee    Remember:  If  a  problem  mentions  "by  laws",  most  likely  the  

issue  is  on  jurisdiction  -­‐  a  position  must  be  expressly  mentioned  in  the  by-­‐laws  to  be  an  officer;  if  so,  the  dismissal  is  not  a  labor  dispute  (not  an  illegal  dismissal  case),  but  an  intra-­‐corporate  dispute    Note:  Absence  of  contract  is  more  beneficial  of  employees  because  you  are  covered  by  the  law  for  as  long  as  you  can  prove  that  you  have  worked;  contracts  only  works  to  restrict  rights      SC:  Even  if  in  a  boundary  hulog  system,  there  is  a  dual  juridical  relationship  (E-­‐Er  and  Vendor-­‐Vendee),  one  relationship  does  not  negate  the  other    SC:  The  most  important  factor  in  determining  the  existence  of  an  employer-­‐employee  relationship  is  the  power  to  control  the  results  achieved  and  the  employee's  method  of  achieving  the  task    SC:  Elements  of  a  valid  fixed-­‐term  agreement  -­‐  voluntariness  in  entering  the  agreement  and  more  or  less  in  equal  bargaining  positions  *  Notice  of  termination  is  not  necessary    SC:  Their  is  no  labor  code  provision  on  fixed-­‐term  employment.      

SC:  Employee  is  deemed  regular  absent  any  contract  to  prove  probationary  employment.  -­‐  The  law  presumes  regularity  of  employment    SC:  2  categories  of  project  employees:  a)  job  within  the  regular  or  usual  business  of  the  employer  company,  but  which  is  distinct  from  the  company's  other  undertakings  b)  job  not  within  the  regular  business  -­‐  Project  employees  should  be  informed  of  their  status  as  such  at  the  inception  of  the  employment  relationship  -­‐  written  project  employment  contract  is  an  indispensable  requirement    Work  Pool  Principle  -­‐  Mere  membership  in  a  work  pool  does  not  result  in  becoming  regular  employees  by  reason  of  that  fact  alone,  but  such  employee  may  attain  regular  status  as  a  project  employee  and  this  kind  of  employee  us  known  as  regular  project  employee  -­‐  Consequently,  he  is  entitled  to  a  right  to  be  rehired  if  there  is  a  new  project;  otherwise,  there  is  illegal  dismissal    SC:  Outsourcing  is  a  universally  accepted  management  prerogative.  For  as  long  as  the  employer  is  motivated  by  good  faith,  it  is  not  illegal  per  se.    

Department  Circular  2012:  BPO's  removed  from  the  coverage  of  the  rules  on  contracting  arrangement  -­‐  Department  Order  18-­‐A  2011  contemplates  generic  singular  activity  in  one  contract  between  the  principal  and  the  contractor  and  does  not  contemplate  information  technology-­‐enabled  services  involving  an  entire  business  process      Department  Order  18-­‐A:  requirements  to  be  a  legitimate  job  contracting  arrangement  a)  duly-­‐registered  b)  distinct  and  independent  business  c)  substantial  capital  and  investment  (SC:  2  separate  req)  d)  service  agreement  should  ensure  compliance  with  all  the  rights  and  benefits  of  workers    SC:  (gross  and  habitual  neglect  of  duties  as  just  cause)  Habituality  may  be  disregarded  if  negligence  is  gross  or  the  damage  or  loss  is  substantial    SC:  No  hearing  is  required  to  validly  dismiss  an  employee  for  abandonment    SC:  Mere  accusations  by  the  employee  will  be  sufficient  to  dismiss  a  managerial  and  supervisorial  employee  for  loss  pf  trust  and  confidence,  but  not  eith  respect  to  rank-­‐and-­‐file.    

SC:  Religious  ground  is  the  only  exception  that  may  effectively  be  invoked  against  the  application  of  the  union  security  clause  in  the  dismissal  of  an  employee.  *  Employer  is  not  duty-­‐bound  to  immediately  implement  the  recommendation  to  terminate  made  by  the  union.  It  must  conduct  its  own  hearing  independent  and  separate  from  any  hearing  conducted  by  the  union    Commentary:  common  requisites  in  authorized  cause  -­‐  a)  good  faith  b)  last  resort  (no  other  option  available  after  resorting  to  cost-­‐cutting  measures  c)  separation  pay  is  paid  d)  fair  and  reasonable  criteria  in  ascertaining  what  positions  are  to  be  affected  by  the  termination    SC:  (Disease)  Burden  of  proof  rests  on  the  employer;  consequently,  the  medical  certificate  should  be  procured  by  the  employer  and  not  the  employee    SC:  Theory  of  increased  risks  is  irrelevant  when  the  ailment  or  sickness  is  not  classified  as  an  occupational  disease.      Perez  Doctrine  -­‐  The  ample  opportunity  to  be  heard  (meaningful  opportunity,  verbal  or  written,  to  answer  the  charges  and  submit  evidence  to  support  his  defense)  in  the  labor  code  

prevails  over  the  hearing  pr  conference  requirement  in  its  IRR.  -­‐  A  formal  hearing  becomes  mandatory  only  when  requested  by  the  employee  in  writing  or  substantial  evidentiary  disputes  exist  or  company  rule  requires  it    SC:  Separation  Pay  in  lieu  of  reinstatement  is  a  recourse  based  on  equity    Doctrine  of  Strained  Relations  -­‐  Reinstatement  is  not  possible  because  of  the  antagonism  between  the  employer  and  employee  *  No  strained  relations  should  arise  from  a  valid  and  legal  act  of  asserting  one's  right    Bustamante  Doctrine  -­‐  the  term  full  backwages  should  mean  exactly  that,  without  deducting  from  backwages  the  earnings  derived  elsewhere  by  concerned  employrr  during  the  period  of  his  illegal  dismissal    Labor  Standards    Department  Advisory  on  CWW  -­‐  Normal  workweek  reduced  to  less  than  6  days,  but  total  number  of  normal  workday  is  increased  to  more  than  8  hours  but  not  to  exceed  12  hours  -­‐  result  of  an  express  and  voluntary  agreement  of  majority  

of  the  covered  employees  or  their  duly  authorized  representatives    SC:  for  a  private  school  teacher  to  acquire  permanent  status  in  employment,  the  following  requisites  must  concur:  1)  the  teacher  is  a  full-­‐time  teacher,  2)  must  have  rendered  3  consecutive  years  of  service,  3)  satisfactory  service    SC:  A  disparity  in  wages  between  employees  holding  similar  positions  but  in  different  regions  does  not  constitute  wage  distortion.  It  is  the  hierarchy  of  positions  and  the  disparity  of  their  corresponding  wages  and  other  emoluments  that  are  sought  to  be  preserved  by  the  concept  of  wage  distortion    SC:  across-­‐the-­‐board  increase  create  more  distortions  in  the  labor  market  which  in  turn  affect  adversely  the  income  of  workers;  the  regional  board  is  deemed  to  have  exceeded  its  authority  by  extending  the  coverage  of  the  wage  order  to  wage  earners  receiving  more  than  the  prevailing  minimum  wage  rate  without  a  denominated  salary  ceiling    Non-­‐diminution  Rule  -­‐  prohibits  employers  from  eliminating  or  reducing  the  benefits  received  by  their  employees  -­‐  SC:  this  rule  applies  only  if  the  benefit  is  based  on  any:  express  policy,  written  contract  or  company  practice  

-­‐  SC:  even  if  the  employer  has  been  enjoying  certain  benefits  for  quite  a  long  period  of  time,  if  the  circumstances  have  changed  which  no  longer  justify  the  continuation  of  the  grant  of  said  benefits,  the  removal  does  not  certainly  constitute  a  violation  of  the  non-­‐diminution  of  benefits  principle    Art  124  -­‐  the  employer  cannot  be  legally  obligated  to  correct  wage  distortion  if  the  increase  in  the  wages  and  salaries  was  not  due  to  a  prescribed  law  or  wage  order    SC:  solutio  indebiti  or  payment  by  mistake  must  fail  in  the  light  of  the  Labor  Code  mandate  that  all  doubts  in  the  implementation  and  interpretation  of  this  Code,  including  its  IRR,  shall  be  resolved  in  favor  of  labor    Solo  Parental  Leave  -­‐  Catch  all  provision:  Any  person  who  solely  provides  parental  care  and  support  to  a  child  or  children    IRR  of  RA  9262  -­‐  The  employer  who  denies  the  application  for  leave  and  who  shall  prejudice  the  victim-­‐survivor  or  any  person  assisting  a  co-­‐employee  who  is  a  victim-­‐survivor  under  the  Act  shall  be  held  liable  for  discrimination  and  violation  of  RA  9262  

 SC:  Upon  acceptance  of  employment,  a  contractual  relationship  is  established  giving  the  employee  an  enforceable  vested  interest  in  the  retirement  fund    The  Superiority  of  Benefits  Rule  -­‐  once  an  employee  retires,  it  is  not  Art  287  that  is  controlling  but  the  retirement  plan  under  the  CBA  or  other  applicable  employment  contract  -­‐  SC:  but  if  the  CBA  is  below  the  requirements  set  by  law,  287  applies    Reasonable  Business  Necessity  Rule  -­‐  Used  to  strike  down  policies,  such  as  one  should  resign  if  2  employees  of  the  same  company  get  married      Anti  Sexual  Harassment  Act  -­‐  Sexual  favors  of  a  person  with  moral  ascendancy  result  in  an  intimidating,  hostile  or  offensive  environment  for  the  employee,  regardless  of  whether  the  demand,  request  or  requirement  for  submission  is  accepted  by  the  object  of  said  act    Kasambahay  Law  -­‐  requires  that  a  written  contract  of  employment  be  executed;  a  very  significant  improvement  since  not  even  the  labor  code  requires  the  execution  of  a  written  instrument  in  

order  to  create  or  establish  an  employer-­‐employee  relationship  -­‐  assignment  to  non-­‐household  work  is  prohibited  -­‐  temporary  performance  of  work  outside  the  household  is  allowed  but  it  must  be  a  product  of  a  mutual  agreement  between  the  kasambahay  and  the  employer  and  that  the  additional  pay  is  not  less  than  the  applicable  minimum  age;  and  that  the  original  employer  is  not  charging  any  amount  from  the  other  household;  not  exceeding  30  days    IRR  Conditions  for  deduction  for  lost,  destroyed  or  damaged  materials  a)  clearly  shown  to  be  responsible  b)  reasonable  opportunity  to  show  cause  why  deduction  should  not  be  made  c)  fair  and  reasonable  amount  of  deduction  d)  amount  deducted  does  not  exceed  20%  of  the  earnings  in  a  week    Labor  Relations  Law    Doctrine  of  Necessary  implication  -­‐  Art  245  does  not  directly  prohibit  confidential  employees  from  engaging  in  union  activities,  but  their  disqualification  proceeds  from  the  application  of  this  doctrine  -­‐  managerial  employees  are  the  ones  mandated  as  ineligible  

 SC:  The  right  if  the  affiliate  union  to  disaffiliate  from  its  mother  federation  or  national  union  is  a  constitutionally-­‐guaranteed  right  (freedom  of  association)  which  may  be  invoked  by  the  former  at  any  time.    Substitutionary  doctrine  -­‐  cannot  be  invoked  to  subvert  an  existing  CBA  in  derogation  of  the  principle  of  freedom  of  contract  -­‐  except  in  extraordinary  circumstances,  like  union  schism  or  split    SC:  The  duty  to  bargain  does  not  include  the  obligation  to  reach  an  agreement      Automatic  Renewal  Clause  -­‐  pending  the  renewal  of  the  CBA,  the  parties  are  bound  to  keep  the  status  quo  and  to  treat  the  conditions  in  full  force  and  effect  until  a  new  agreement  is  negotiated  and  ultimately  concluded    SC:  The  CBA  proposed  by  the  bargaining  union  may  be  adopted  as  the  new  CBA  if  employer  refused  to  negotiate    SC:  Suspension  agreement  of  the  CBA,  there  being  no  express  prohibition  in  the  labor  code,  is  a  valid  exercise  of  freedom  to  contract  

 SC:  the  right  to  abstain  from  joining  a  labor  organization  is  subordinate  to  the  policy  of  encouraging  unionism  as  an  instrument  of  social  justice    SC:  act  of  self-­‐preservation  to  maintain  industrial  peace  is  not  ULP    Note:  The  cooling-­‐off  period  is  counted  from  the  time  of  the  filing  of  the  notice  of  strike;  the  strike  ban  is  reckoned  from  the  time  the  strike  vote  report  is  submitted    Department  Order  issued  in  2013  on  Industries  Indispensable  to  the  National  Interest:  -­‐  hospital  sector  -­‐  electric  power  supply  -­‐  water  supply  services  to  exclude  small  water  supply  service  -­‐  air  traffic  control  -­‐  such  other  industries  as  may  be  recommended  by  the  National  Tripartite  Industrial  Peace  Council      SC:  return-­‐to-­‐work  order  is  compulsory  in  character  and  not  offensive  to  the  constitutional  provision  against  involuntary  servitude  because  said  order  is  in  the  nature  of  a  police  power  measure  -­‐  but  the  act  of  the  strikers  in  voluntarily  returning  to  work  does  not  result  in  the  waiver  of  their  original  demands  

 SC:  employees  who  participated  in  a  strike  are  not  entitled  to  wages  during  the  period  of  strike  pursuant  to  the  principle  of  "no  work,  no  pay"    Innocent  Bystander  Rule  -­‐  the  third  party  employers  who  have  no  employer-­‐employee  relationship  with  the  picketing  strikers,  may  apply  for  injunction  with  the  regular  courts  to  enjoin  the  conduct  of  the  picket    Procedure  and  Jurisdiction      SC:  NCMB  is  not  a  quasi-­‐  judicial  body;  they  do  not  have  any  decision-­‐making  power    SC:  if  there  is  a  CBA  between  the  foreign  employer  and  the  bargaining  union  of  the  OFWs,  the  jurisdiction  over  monetary  claims  of  OFWs  belongs  to  the  VA  and  not  to  the  LA    SC:  Claims  for  damages  arising  from  breach  of  non-­‐compete  clause  falls  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  regular  courts    Note:  LA  and  the  NLRC  have  no  power  to  grant  reliefs  in  claims  that  do  not  arise  from  employer-­‐employee  relationship  such  as  those  emanating  from  quasi-­‐delict  or  

tort  cases    Halaguena  Doctrine  -­‐  it  is  not  the  LA  but  the  regular  court  which  has  jurisdiction  to  rule  on  the  constitutionality  of  labor  contracts  such  as  the  CBA    2011  NLRC  rules  of  procedure  -­‐  2  instances  when  a  writ  of  execution  should  still  be  issued  immediately  by  the  LA  to  implement  his  order  of  reinstatement,  even  pending  appeal:  a)  when  the  employer  disobeys  the  prescribed  directive  to  submit  a  report  of  compliance  b)  employer  refuses  to  reinstate  *LA  shall  motu  proprio  issue  a  corresponding  writ    2011  nlrc  rules  -­‐  posting  of  bond  is  mandatory  and  jurisdictional,  but  government  is  exempt  (SC:  GOCCs  not  exempt)  -­‐  SC:  no  monetary  award,  no  bond  -­‐  partial  bond  needed  in  a  motion  to  reduce  bond,  which  must  not  be  inadequate    Genuino  Doctrine  -­‐  "refund  doctrine"  -­‐  disregards  the  social  justice  principles  -­‐  Follow  the  Garcia  Doctrine    Garcia  Doctrine  

-­‐  2-­‐fold  test  to  determine  the  liability  of  the  employer  to  pay  the  wages  of  the  dismissed  employee  from  the  time  he  was  ordered  reinstated  to  the  reversal  of  the  LA's  decision:  a)  actual  delay  or  reinstatement  order  pending  appeal  not  executed  prior  to  its  reversal;  and  b)  delay  not  due  to  the  employer's  unjustified  act  or  omission;  if  so,  employer  may  still  be  required  to  pay  the  salaries  notwithstanding  the  reversal    SC:  the  subject  of  the  visitorial  and  enforcement  powers  granted  to  the  DOLE  Sec  is  the  establishment  which  is  under  inspection  and  not  the  employees;  consequently,  in  case  of  an  award  from  such  violation  by  the  establishment,  all  its  existing  employees  should  be  benefited  thereby    Department  Order  issued  in  2007  -­‐  DOLE  RDs  designated  as  Ex-­‐Officio  Voluntary  Arbitrators    Article  277(b)  -­‐  Power  of  the  DOLE  Sec  to  suspend  the  effects  of  termination  when:  a)  termination  may  cause  a  serious  labor  dispute  b)  termination  is  in  implementation  of  a  mass  lay-­‐off  -­‐  termination  contemplated  need  not  be  related  to  the  exercise  of  the  right  to  self-­‐organization  -­‐  Commentary  based  on  jurisprudence:  suspension  has  the  same  effect  assumption  of  certification  as  far  as  the  

reinstatement  of  the  affected  employees  is  concerned    SC:  Does  the  DOLE  Sec  assume  the  role  of  voluntary  arbitrator  once  he  assumes  jurisdiction  over  a  labor  dispute?  No.  It  is  not  a  simple  arbitration  case,  but  which  involves  impending  strike  by  the  employees    NCMB  procedural  guidelines  in  the  conduct  of  voluntary  arbitration  -­‐  cases  cognizable  by  the  VA  in  their  original  jurisdiction  but  filed  with  the  LA,  Dole  RD  or  NCMB  should  be  disposed  of  by  referring  them  to  VA  *SC:  cases  cognizable  by  the  VA,  but  filed  with  regular  courts  should  be  dismissed    Philtranco  doctrine  -­‐  a  motion  for  reconsideration  should  be  filed  even  though  it  is  not  required  or  even  prohibited  by  the  concerned  government  office  -­‐  why?  It  is  the  tangible  representation  of  the  opportunity  given  to  the  office  to  correct  itself    Prescription  of  Actions    SC:  the  1-­‐year  prescriptive  perood  in  Section  28  of  POEA-­‐SEC  was  declared  null  and  voud  because  Art  291  is  the  law  

governing  the  prescription  of  money  claims  for  seafarers    SC:  illegal  dismissal  cases,  not  in  the  nature  of  money  claims,  the  prescriptive  period  is  4  years  under  the  civil  code  (injury  to  the  plaintiff)    Art.  247  -­‐  As  far  as  ULP  cases  are  concerned,  the  running  of  the  1  year  prescriptive  period  is  interrupted  during  the  pendency  of  the  labor  proceeding    RA  8042  a)  simple  illegal  recruitmeny  -­‐  5  b)  economic  sabotage  -­‐  20    SSS  Law  a)  against  employer  for  non-­‐remittance  of  contributions  -­‐  20  b)  disability  claims  -­‐  10    GSIS  Law  Except  for  life  and  retirement  -­‐  4    SC:  filing  of  a  case  with  grievance  machinery  tolls  the  running  of  the  prescriptive  period    SC:  promissory  estoppel  is  a  recognized  exception  to  the  3-­‐year  prescriptive  period  

-­‐  if  he  did  not  rely  on  the  promise  that  he  would  be  paid,  there  is  no  reason  why  he  would  delay  filing  the  complaint  before  the  Labor  Arbiter    Social  Welfare  and  Legislation    SSS  Law  1.  Sickness  -­‐  3  monthly  contributions  within  the  12-­‐month  period  immediately  before  the  semester  of  sickness  -­‐  sickness  benefit  for  a  max  of  120  days,  not  be  paid  for  more  than  240  2.  Maternity  -­‐  same  contributions  with  sickness  -­‐  first  4  deliveries  or  miscarriages  3.  Retirement  -­‐  monthly  pension:  paid  at  least  120  monthly  contributions,  lump  sum  if  not  paid  120  -­‐  children  not  21,  only  5,  entitled  to  dependent's  pension  4.  Disability  -­‐  monthly  pension:  36,  lump  sum  not  paid  -­‐  totally  and  permanently  disabled  will  receive  a  lifetime  pension  -­‐  dependent's  pension  not  for  partially  disabled  pensioner  5.  Death  and  funeral  -­‐  monthly  -­‐  36,  lump  sum  not  paid  -­‐  primary  and  secondary  beneficiaries;  illeg  only  50  percent  

of  the  share  of  legit    GSIS  Law  1.  Excluded  from  coverage  -­‐  uniformed  personnel,  barangay  and  sangunian  officials,  contractual  2.  Benefits  a.  Compulsory  Life  -­‐  a  policy  holder  is  entitled  to  dividends  subject  to  the  guidelines  as  approved  by  the  GSIS  board;  not  a  guaranteed  benefit  b.  Retirement  -­‐  at  least  15  years  of  service,  60  years  of  age,  not  receiving  monthly  pension  from  permanent  total  disability  c.  Separation  benefit  -­‐  at  least  3  years  service  but  less  15  d.  Unemployment  benefit  -­‐  permanent  employee  at  the  time  of  separation  and  separation  was  involuntary  due  to  abolition  of  his/her  office  or  position  resulting  from  reorganization  e.  Disability  f.  Survivorship  -­‐  primary  and  secondary  beneficiaries  except  dependent  children  g.  Funeral    Limited  Portability  Law  

-­‐  apply  to  all  worker-­‐members  of  GSIS  and/or  SSS  who  transfer  from  the  public  sector  to  the  private  or  vice-­‐versa,  or  who  wish  to  retain  their  membership  in  both  systems  -­‐  SC:  totalization  of  service  credits  is  only  resorted  to  when  the  retiree  does  not  qualify  for  benefits  in  either  or  both    Employee's  Compensation  -­‐  employer  does  not  intervene  because  the  table  of  occupational  diseases  require  no  proof  of  causation;  consequently,  benefits  are  automatically  paid  -­‐  coverage  is  compulsory  in  nature  -­‐  for  death  to  be  compensable:  cause  of  death  reasonably  connected  with  his  work,  or  accepted  occupational  disease,  or  working  conditions  increased  the  risk  of  contracting  the  disease