Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

[150] TRANS-ASIA PH. EMP. ASSOC. (TAPEA) & GALVEZ v.

NLRC & DE CASTRO pay to employees who are permitted to work on a regular holiday.
G.R. No. 118289 | December 13, 1999 | J. Kapunan They argue that this was a tacit admission of the non-payment of the
holiday pay during the period prior to the CBA.
SUMMARY: Based on a new CBA between TAPEA and Trans-Asia, TAPEA filed a claim ● TAPEA ultimately claims that the inclusion of holiday pay in the current CBA
alleging non-payment of holiday pay for the period covered by the previous CBA. Trans- is at the same time an admission by Trans-Asia of its failure to pay the same
Asia claims that its use of 286 days as its divisor for the computation of overtime pay in the past.
and daily rate is compliant with the requirements of the Labor Code. The court agreed, ● Trans-asia on the other hand asserted that the above circumstances are not
but clarified that it should use 287 instead. indicative of its non-payment of holiday pay. It argues that it has always
honored the labor law provision on holiday pay by incorporating such in the
DOCTRINE: Sec 6 (d) of IRR of RA 6727 provides that if the employee does not work monthly salary even before the current CBA
and is not paid for all Saturdays and Sundays the divisor should be “262”. But since the ○ They use the divisor of “286” days when computing employee’s
employees are required to work half day for every Sat “26” should be added to the overtime pay and daily rate deductions for absences.
divisor. However due to the fact that the employees rest day falls on a Sunday, the ( 52 x 44 ) / 8 = 286 days
number of unworked and unpaid legal holidays should be reduced from 10 to 9. ● 52 = number of weeks in a year
Therefore: 262 + 26 – 1= 287 must be used. However the “287” divisor cannot be ● 44 = number of hours per week
applied for the computation of benefits due to Sec 100 of Labor Code which prohibits ● 8 = work hours per day
diminution of benefits. The “287” adjustment can however still be used for the ● Trans-Asia claims using “286” already accounts for the (10) regular holidays
computation of deductions due to employee absences in a year since it only subtracts from the 365 calendar days the unworked and
unpaid 52 Sundays and 26 Saturdays (26 Saturdays and not 52 since
FACTS: employees are required to work half day on all Saturdays)
● TAPEA, the duly organized collective bargaining agent of the monthly-[ain ○ If the 10 holidays were not included the divisor would be “277” (only
rank-and-file employees of Trans-Asia Ph., executed a CBA with Trans-Asia, -9 since 1 holiday is always a Sunday)
effective from April 1, 1988 – March 31, 1991. It provided for holiday pay ○ The use of “286” is consistent with RA 6640 w/c has a divisor of
stipulating that compensation for work on a legal holiday is 200% of regular “262” for those with no work/pay on weekends
wage + 60% premium pay ○ Trans-asia then factors-in the 26 Saturdays hence resulting divisor
● Despite this CBA, the issue on holiday pay from January 1985 to December is “286”
1987 remained unsettled. They underwent preventive mediation meetings, ● Trans-asia also claims that the “generous” CBA provision was included to
but no amicable settlement was reached. comply with Sec 4, Rule 4, Book3 of Omnibus Rules and not an admission of
● Hence, a complaint was filed with the LA, seeking payment for their holiday non-payment in previous years
pay in arrears. Said complaint was then amended to include the payment of o It stands firm that it has honored the rules of holiday pay by
holiday pay for the previous CBA (1988-1991), unfair labor practice, damages including it in the “286” divisor
and attorney’s fees. ● LA and NLRC ruled in favor of Trans-Asia – holiday pay already included in
● TAPEA claims that their monthly pay did not include holiday pay. They stated “286” divisor
that:
○ Trans-Asia’s Employees’ Manual requires that a pre-condition for ISSUE w/ HOLDING & RATIO:
holiday pay was that Appointment papers have no stipulation on the W/N Trans-Asia included holiday pay in the “286” divisor – YES
inclusion of holiday pay in monthly salary. ● The 10 legal holidays are already accounted for in the “286” divisor
○ Under the Trans-Asia Employees Manual there was a precondition ○ If the 52 Sundays and 26 Saturdays in which there was no work done
for holiday pay: are subtracted from 365 days in a year the resulting divisor would be
■ That the employee should either have worked or on 286 (Court notes that this should actually be 287 days days)
authorized leave w/pay the day before a legal holiday. ○ The 10 regular working holidays were never subtracted from the #
○ In the current CBA, there was a provision for the payment of an of days worked
amount equivalent to 200% of the regular daily wage + 60% premium
■ Therefore the payment of holiday pay is already included
in the divisor
● TAPEA’s reliance on Chartered Bank Employees Association vs. Ople is wrong
since it is not on all 4’s

■ o Facts of Chartered show that the bank was using


different divisors for the computation of employee benefit
(251) as against the computation for deductions (365)
● Due to this difference there existed doubt as to
whether holiday pay was being incorporated –
hence resolve doubt in favor of labor
■ In the case at bar Res has been consistently using “286” for
all computations
● · The court notes that the divisor should be adjusted to “287”
■ Sec 6 (d) of IRR of RA 6727 provides that if the employee
does not work and is not paid for all Saturdays and Sundays
the divisor should be “262”
■ But since the employees are required to work half day for
every Sat “26” should be added to the divisor
■ o 262 +26 = 288 (this includes all 10 holidays)
● However due to the fact that the employees rest
day falls on a Sunday, the number of unworked
and unpaid legal holidays should be reduced from
10 to 9
● Because Nat’l Hero’s day always falls on a Sun
● Therefore: 262 + 26 – 1= 287
● However the “287” divisor cannot be applied for the computation of benefits
due to Sec 100 of Labor Code which prohibits diminution of benefits:
● The “287” adjustment can however still be used for the computation of
deductions due to employee absences
● In view of this situation, the Court rules that the adjusted divisor of “287” days
should only be used by Trans-Asia for computations which would be
advantageous to petitioners, i.e., deductions for absences, and not for
computations which would diminish the existing benefits of the employees,
i.e., overtime pay, holiday pay and leave conversions.

HELD: NLRC AFFIRMED w/ MODIFICATION