Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
JUMAR BUSAING,
Complainant,
-versus- RAB-IV-06-009-16-R
x--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
I.
THE CASE
II.
THE PARTIES
III.
IV.
ISSUES
A.
B.
C.
D.
DISCUSSION/ARGUMENTS
A.
1
Bondoc v. National Labor Relations Commission, 342 Phil. 250, 262 (1997).
2
Mercury Drug Corporation v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 75662, 15
September 1969; Filipro Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 70546, 16
October 1986.
5
x x x
8
G.R. No. 171790, October 17, 2008.
9
B.
C.
D.
14
Labor Code of the Philippines, Article 279; Industrial Timber Corporation-Stanply
Operations v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 112069, 14 February 1996;
Colgate Palmolive Philippines v. Ople, G.R. No. 73681, 30 June 1988; Santos v. National
Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 76721, 21 September 1987.
13
VI.
RESERVATION
15
PRAYER
By:
RENATO Q. BELLO
Roll of Attorneys No. 31182
PTR No. 1501091; 1-28-2016; Pasig City
IBP No. 1018603; 1-06-2016; Quezon City
MCLE Compliance No. V-0012744; 12-15-15
KIM RAISA O. UY
Roll of Attorneys No. 61803
PTR No. 1464769; 1-21-2016; Pasig City
IBP No. 011767; Lifetime Member; Aurora
MCLE Compliance No. V0014712; 2-29-2016
16
Copy Furnished:
JUMAR BUSAING
Complainant
802 Kamagong Street
Napico, Manggahan
Pasig City
17
ALFONSO S. CHUA
18