ESSAY / CASE PROBLE Emilio Aguinaldo College – Dasmarinas, Cavite School of Law and

Jurisprudence
Mid-Term Exam in Labor Law I First Semester, SY 2021-2022

Name: Solon, Donnie Ray O______

Fiscal Eugene P. Kho Date : November 11, 2021MS.

Discuss the issue and make your argument and conclusion based on the given question. Make your
answer Accurate, Brief and Concise. Read each item carefully.

1. Provide short answers for these questions: (10 points)

a. What are the rights and privileges of disabled persons? (Please relate Articles 78-81 to
Republic Act 7277 or the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons.)
- As provided by RAS 7277 or the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons, they are
given opportunity for suitable employment. A qualified disabled person shall
have the same terms and condition of employment as well as same compensation
and benefits afforded to a qualified able body. However, as provided by the
Labor code, a handicapped person can be hired as apprentices or learners
provided that it will not impede the performance of a job operation.

b. Why is labor only contracting prohibited under the Labor Code. Please give a clear
example why this type of arrangement is not permissible?
- Labor only contracting was prohibited under Labor Code because of its attempt
to evade the obligation of an employer. On its face, Labor only contracting is a
scheme by an employer on its attempt to evade their obligation to respect the
rights of the laborer. It practically removes the rights of the employees to form
union, rights to employment standards, and more importantly the right of an
employee to security of tenure.

c. Explain the concept of attorney's fees under Article 111 of the Labor Code. Provide an
illustrative example.
- Article 111 of labor code provides two concepts of attorney’s fee. The first
concept refers to the fees afforded to an attorney as a reasonable compensation
on the lawyer’s service paid by his client for the legal service he had rendered.
On the other hand, the second concept refers to the attorney’s fees as deemed as
a form of indemnity for damages ordered by the court to be paid by the losing
party in litigation. This kind of attorney’s fees is payable by the losing party not
to the lawyer but to the client unless such was already agreed upon by the client
and the attorney as a part of additional compensation.

d. When are the remedies available to rectify wage distortion?

- There are two means to rectify wage distortion, on companies with organized
union, wage distortion are to be rectify thru means embodied on their collective
bargaining agreement. If still not resolved, the issue will be subjected to a
voluntary arbitration. On the otherhand, on companies without an organized
union, the management and labor sector will discuss and agree on the method to
correct wage distortion. If a dispute still arises, it settled through the National
 Conciliation and Mediation Board. If the negotiation still fail, a compulsory
arbitration will be instituted.

e. How is power of determining employer-employee relationship of Department of Labor

and Employment exemplified in Article 128?
- The power of determining employer-employee relationship of Department of
Labor and Employment exemplified thru the imposition Labor Standard
Enforcement Frame work which produced a three approaches such as self
assessment, inspection and advisory service. Through this approach, companies
are encouraged to build a culture of compliance thru voluntariness not through
compulsion.

2. TESDA Law. (5 points)

a. Illustrate the incentive schemes being implemented by TESDA. Provide the bases and
justifications. Up to what extent should government participate in providing these
incentive schemes for technical education. Discuss.
- The incentive scheme of TESDA provides an additional deduction from taxable
income of about 50% of the value of labor training expenses for developmental
programs will be granted to the person or enterprise. to encourage government
and private industries and institutions to provide high-quality technical
education and skills development opportunities and to further illuminate job
mismatches.

3. The laws applicable for apprenticeship programs are Republic Act 7796 (TESDA law);
Presidential Decree 442 (Labor Code of the Philippines); Executive Order 111 issued on
December 24, 1986 (Rules to Implement the Labor Code). (10 points)
a. Provide the distinctions in the definition of terms in so far as the following:
apprenticeship, apprentice, apprenticeable occupation, apprenticeship agreement.
- Appreticeship involves the practical training on the actual job being supported
by related theoretical instructions. Apprentice on the other hand is the actual
worker being covered by apprenticeship agreement under a recognized
institution or company. Apprenticeable occupation is the trade or employment
from which requires at least three months apprenticeship coupled with
theoretical instructions. Apprenticeship agreement is the binding agreement
between the company and apprentice from which the company will bind itself to
train the apprentice and the apprentice bind himself to abide the regulation of the
company in return.
b. Discuss extensively the distinctions and similarities of Apprenticeship and Learnership
with respect to the period of training, type of work, salary and qualifications.
- Period of training on apprenticeship requires more than three months but not to
exceed six months practical training as compared to learners that only requires 3
months of practical training. With respect to the type of work, apprenticeship is
a highly technical industry as compared to learners that a semi-skilled industries.
As to the salary, both apprenticeships and learners salary requires not less than
75% of the applicable minimum wage. As to qualifications to work, both are
essentially similar because they both requires training periods for jobs requiring
skills that can be acquired through actual work experience

4. Matibay Shoe and Repair Store, as added service to its customers, devoted a portion of its
store to a shoe shine stand. The shoe shine boys were tested for their skill before being
allowed to work and given ID cards. They were told to be present from the opening of the
 store up to closing time and were· required to follow the company rules on cleanliness and
decorum. They bought their own shoe shine boxes, polish, and rags. The boys were paid
by their customers for their services but the payment is coursed through the store's cashier,
who pays them before closing time. They were not supervised in their work by any
managerial employee of the store but for a valid complaint by a customer or for violation
of any company rule, they can be refused admission to the store. Were the boys employees
of the store? Explain. (5 points)
- Yes, the boys were employee of the store. As provided by the Labor Code, an
employer-employee relationship exists where the person for whom the services
are performed reserves the right to control not only the end to be achieved but
also the means to be used in reaching such end. It is also provided by
jurisprudence that to establish Employer-employee relationship there was a four-
fold test.: 1.) selection of employee; 2.) payment of wages; 3.) power to dismiss
from employment; and 4.) control and supervision. On the Case at bar, the boys
were tested by the company whether their skills fits to the requirement or not.
There was also wages as evident that every end of the day, they were paid for
their services. There was also power of dismissal from which the store will
refuse the admission of the Boys if there is a valid complaint or violation on
their policy. Lastly, the store has a control over the Boys from which they
require them to be present at the store from opening to closing and abide to their
rules and regulation. Thus this satisfies the control test regardless of the absence
of managerial supervision over the Boys.

5. Gregorio was hired as an insurance underwriter by the Guaranteed Insurance Corporation

(Guaranteed). He does not receive any salary but solely relies on commissions earned for
every insurance policy approved by the company. He hires and pays his own secretary but
is provided free office space in the office of the company. He is, however, required to
meet a monthly quota of twenty (20) insurance policies, otherwise, he may be terminated.
He was made to agree to a Code of Conduct for underwriters and is supervised by a Unit
Manager.
a. Is Gregorio an employee of Guaranteed? Explain. (5 points)
- No. As provided by jurisprudence that to establish Employer-employee
relationship there was a four-fold test.: 1.) selection of employee; 2.) payment of
wages; 3.) power to dismiss from employment; and 4.) control and supervision.
On the case at bar, the element of wages was not satisfied to establish an
employer-employee relationship. Considering that he does not receive any form
of salary from Guaranteed, Gregorio is not considered an employee.
b. Suppose Gregorio is appointed as Unit Manager and assigned to supervise several
underwriters. He holds office in the company premises, receives an overriding
commission on the commissions of his underwriters, as well as a monthly
allowance from the company, and is supervised by a branch manager. He is
governed by the Code of Conduct for Unit Managers. Is he an employee of
Guaranteed? Explain. (5 points)
- Yes, this time Gregorio is considered an employee of Guaranteed. As provided
by Jurisprudence, considering that he was receiving overriding commission over
the commission of his underwriters and allowance coming from the company,
this qualifies him as an employee together with the other requirements seet by
the four-fold test. Since there was: 1.) selection of employee; 2.) payment of
wages; 3.) power to dismiss from employment; and 4.) control and supervision,
Gregorio and Guaranteed have established an employer-employee relationship
 therefore Gregorio is an Employee.

6. Inggo is a drama talent hired on a per drama "participation basis" by DJN Radio
Company. He worked from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., six days a week, on a gross rate of
P80.00 per script, earning an average of P20,000.00 per month. Inggo filed a complaint
before the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) against DJN Radio for illegal
deduction, non-payment of service incentive leave, and 13th month pay, among others.
On the basis of the complaint, the DOLE conducted a plant level inspection. The DOLE
Regional Director issued an order ruling that Inggo is an employee of DJN Radio, and
that Inggo is entitled to his monetary claims in the total amount of P30,000.00. DJN
Radio elevated the case to the Secretary of Labor who affirmed the order. The case was
brought to the Court of Appeals. The radio station contended that there is no employer-
employee relationship because it was the drama directors and producers who paid,
supervised, and disciplined him. Moreover, it argued that the case falls under the
jurisdiction of the NLRC and not the DOLE because Inggo's claim exceeded P5,000.00.
a. May DOLE make a prima facie determination of the existence of an employer-
employee relationship in the exercise of its visitorial and enforcement powers? (5
points)
- Yes, as provided RA 7730, the DOLE is empowered to make a determination as
to the existence of an employer-employee relationship in the exercise of its
visitorial and enforcement power, which is subject to judicial review.
b. If the DOLE finds that there is an employee-employer relationship, does the case
fall under the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter considering that the claim of Inggo
is more than Php 5,000.00. Explain. (5 points)
- As a general Rule, cases form which the money claims of an employee is more
than Php 5,000.00, the Labor arbiter has the jurisdiction as provided by RA
7730. However this would only apply in the course of regular conduct of
inspection of DOLE. On the case at Bar, the action originated from a complaint.
Therefor the jurisdiction still falls to the DOLE not the Labor Arbiter regardless
of the amount of money claims.