Labor Arbiter (1995)

1. Give the original and exclusive jurisdiction of

Labor Arbiters.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Labor Arbiters have original and exclusive
jurisdiction over:
1. unfair labor practices;
2. termination disputes;
3. cases accompanied with a claim for reinstatement, and
involving wages, rates of pay, hours of work, and other terms and
conditions of employment;
4. claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of
damages arising from employer-employee relations:
5. cases arising from any violation of Article 264 of the Labor
Code, including questions involving the legality of strikes and
lockout; and
6. except claims of Employees Compensation,
Social Security. Medicare and maternity benefits, all other claims
arising from employer-employee relations including those persons
in domestic or household service,Involving an amount exceeding
five thousand pesos (P5,000 00) regardless of whether
accompanied with a claim for reinstatement.
Labor Arbiter; Appeals (2001)
The affected members of the rank and file elevated a labor
arbiter's decision to the NLRC via a petition for review filed after
the lapse of the ten-day reglementary period for perfecting an
appeal.
Should the NLRC dismiss the petition outright or may the NLRC
take cognizance thereof? (5%).

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The NLRC should dismiss the appeal outright because the same
was filed beyond the reglementary period of appeal. Article 223 of
the Labor Code reads:
"Decisions, awards, or orders of the Labor
Arbiter are final and executory unless appealed to the
Commission by any or both parties within ten (10) calendar days
from, receipt of such decisions, awards, or orders."
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The NLRC could dismiss outright the appeal for being filed out of
time. But if there are good reasons that may justifiably explain
why there was a delay in the filing of the appeal, substantial
justice may be the basis for the NLRC to take cognizance of the
appeal.

Med-arbiter (1996)
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 P 1,000 to be deducted
from the lump sum of P10,000.00 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
filed a complaint before the Labor Arbiter for illegal deduction and
expulsion from the union. Will the complaint prosper? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The complaint will not prosper before the Labor Arbiter because
there is here an intra-union conflict which is under the Jurisdiction
of the Med-Arbiter. (See Art, 226 and Rule V of Book V of the
Rules and Regulations Implementing the Labor Code).

Natl Labor Relations Commission (1995)

3. What is the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations
Commission?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Jurisdiction of the NLRC:
1. exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by Labor
Arbiter;
2. exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by
Regional Directors or hearing officers involving the recovery of
wages and other monetary claims and benefits arising from
employer-employee relations where the aggregate money claim
of each employee or househelper does not exceed five thousand
pesos (P5,000.00);
3. original Jurisdiction to act as a compulsory arbitration body
over labor disputes certified to NLRC by the Secretary of Labor
and Employment; and
4. power to issue a labor injunction.

Natl Labor Relations Commission (2001)

Company "A" and Union "B" could not resolve their negotiations
for a new CBA. After conciliation proceedings before the NCMB
proved futile, B went on strike. Violence during the strike
prompted A to file charges against striker-members of B for their
illegal acts. The Secretary of Labor assumed Jurisdiction, referred
the strike to the NLRC and issued a return-to-work order. The
NLRC directed the parties to submit their respective position

LABOR LAW Bar Q & A (as arranged by Topics) 1994-2006

Page 19 of 108
papers and documentary evidence. At the Initial hearing before
the NLRC, the parties agreed to submit the case for resolution
after the submission of the position papers and evidence.
Subsequently, the NLRC issued an arbitral award resolving the
disputed provisions of the CBA and ordered the dismissal of
certain strikers for having knowingly committed Illegal acts during
the strike. The dismissed employees elevated their dismissal to
the Court of Appeals claiming that they were deprived of their
right to due process and that the affidavits submitted by A were
self-serving and of no probative value. Should the appeal
prosper?
State the reason(s) for your answer clearly. (5%).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The appeal should not prosper. The Supreme Court, in many
cases, has ruled that decisions made by the NLRC may be based
on position papers. In the question, it is stated that the parties
agreed to submit the case for resolution after the submission of
position papers and evidence. Given this fact, the striker
members of B cannot now complain that they were denied due
process. They are in estoppel. After voluntarily submitting a case
and encountering an adverse decision on the merits, it is too late
for the loser to question the jurisdiction or power of the court. A
party cannot adopt a posture of double dealing. (Marquez vs.
Secretary of Labor, 16 March 1989).

CBA; Appropriate Bargaining Unit (1998)

What is an appropriate bargaining unit for purposes of collective
bargaining? [5%]
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
An APPROPRIATE BARGAINING UNIT is a group of employees
of a given employer comprised of all or less than all of the entire
body of employees, which the collective interest of all the
employees, consistent with the interest of the employer, indicate
to be the best suited to serve reciprocal rights and duties of the
parties under the collective bargaining provisions of the law. (See,
e.g.,University of the Philippines v. Ferrer-Calleja, 211
SCRA 451 (1992).