Labor2_midterms

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: roposal
 and
 was
 accepted
 and
 implemented
 by
 SMC.
 He
 demanded
 a
 cash
 award
 of
 60k.
 SMC
 refused
to
pay.
 Claim
 should
 be
 filed
 with
 a
 regular
 court.
 Money
 claims
 of
 workers
 which
 now
 fall
 within
 the
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 are
 those
 money
claims
which
have
some
reasonable
 causal
 connection
 with
 the
 employer­ employee
relationship.
The
money
claim
of
 Rustico
 arouse
 out
 of
 employer­employee
 relationship.
 However,
 such
 fact
 is
 not
 enough
 to
 bring
 such
 money
 claim
 within
 the
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
labor
arbiters.
 Where
 the
 claim
 to
 the
 principal
 relief
 sought
is
to
be
resolved
not
by
reference
to
 the Labor
 Code
 or
 other
 labor
 relations
 statute
 or
 a
 CBA
 but
 by
 the
 general
 civil
 law,
 the
 jurisdiction
 over
 the
 dispute
 belongs
to
the
regular
courts
of
justice
and
 not
to
the
labor
arbiter
and
the
NLRC.
 Money
claims
of
coop
employees
 o Coop
 argues
 that
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 has
 no
 jurisdiction
 because
the
complainants
failed
to
submit
their
dispute
to
 the
grievance
machinery
under
PD
175
and
because
of
the
 8
 9. non‐issuance
of
a
Certificate
of
Non‐Resolution
under
the
 Coop
Development
Authority
Law.
The
argument
does
not
 hold.
 The
 provisions
 apply
 to
 members,
 officers
 and
 directors
 of
 the
 coop
 involved
 in
 disputes
 within
 a
 cooperative
 or
 between
 cooperatives.
 There
 is
 no
 evidence
 that
 private
 respondents
 are
 members
 of
 the
 cooperative,
 and
even
if
they
are,
the
dispute
is
about
payment
of
wages,
 overtime
 pay,
 rest
 day
 and
 termination
 of
 employment.
 Dispute
 with
 the
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 labor
arbiter.
 • Jurisdiction
over
claims
for
damages
(Suario
v.
BPI)
 o Money
 claims
 of
 workers
 over
 which
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 has
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 are
 comprehensive
 enough
to
include
claims
for
moral
damages
of
a
dismissed
 employee
 against
 his
 employer.
 Labor
 arbiters
 and
 the
 NLRC
 has
 jurisdiction
 to
 award
 all
 kinds
 of
 damages
 in
 cases
arising
from
employer­employee
relations.
Legislative
 intent
appears
clear
to
allow
recovery
in
proceedings
before
 Labor
Arbiters
of
moral
and
other
forms
of
damages,
in
all
 cases
or
matters
arising
from
employer­employee
relations
 • Splitting
of
actions
not
allowed
 o Employee
who
has
been
illegally
dismissed
so
as
to
cause
 him
 moral
 damages
 has
 a
 cause
 of
 action
 for
 reinstatement,
 backwages
 and
 damages.
 When
 he
 institutes
proceedings
before
the
Labor
Arbiter,
he
should
 make
a
claim
for
all
said
relief.
 o The
grant
of
jurisdiction
to
the
labor
arbiter
is
sufficiently
 comprehensive
to
include
claims
for
moral
and
exemplary
 damages
sought
to
be
recovered
from
an
employer
by
an
 employee
 upon
 the
 theory
 of
 his
 illegal
 dismissal.
 A
 contrary
 rule
 would
 result
 in
 the
 splitting
 of
 actions
 and
 the
consequent
multiplication
of
suits.
 o Hence,
 the
 judgment
 of
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 granting
 separation
pay
operated
as
a
bar
to
his
subsequent
action
 for
 the
 recover
 of
 damages
 before
 the
 CFI
 under
 the
 doctrine
of
res
judicata.
 • Employer’s
complaint
for
damages
 o Employer’s
 claim
 for
 damages
 against
 an
 employee
 may
 be
 filed
 as
 counterclaim
 in
 the
 illegal
 dismissal
 case
 filed
 by
the
employee.
Such
claim
for
jurisdiction,
arising
from
 employment
relationship,
is
outside
the
jurisdiction
of
the
 regular
courts
 Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:
strikes
and
lockouts
 • Questions
 relating
 to
 work
 stoppage
 fall
 within
 the
 labor
 arbiter’s
 jurisdiction
 • Labor
arbiter
may
be
called
upon
to
decide
–

 o Whether
the
alleged
reason
for
the
strike
is
“strikeable”
 o Whether
the
required
strike
procedure
is
followed
 o Whether
 the
 strikers
 committed
 prohibited
 acts
 during
 a
 strike
 Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 BUT
the
power
to
issue
injunction
is
lodged
with
the
NLRC
division
 National
 interest
 cases
 are
 handled
 differently
 
 DOLE
 secretary
 or
 the
President
to
assume
juri...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/11/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online