7.) G.R. No.

167813 June 27,

2006
BENJAMIN L. SAROCAM, Petitioner,
vs.
INTERORIENT MARITIME ENT., INC.,
and DEMACO UNITED
LTD., Respondents.
 FACTS
• petitioner Benjamin L. Sarocam was hired by
Interorient Maritime Ent.
• With a basic monthly salary was US$450.00 on
a 48-hour work week, with a fixed overtime
pay of US$180.00 per month for 105 hours,
supplementary wage of US$70.00, and
vacation leave with pay of 2.5 days
• While the vessel was navigating to China
• petitioner suffered lumbar sprain when he
accidentally fell from a ladder
• Then he was examined and founded with
neuromyositis with the waist and diabetes
• The employer agreed repatriate him
• Then the petitioner was refered to the company-
designated physician, Dr. Teodoro F. Pidlaoan
• Petitioner was then declared 'fit for duty effective
on that day’ petitioner executed a release and
quitclaim in favor of his employers where he
acknowledged the receipt of US$405.00 as his
sickwages and freed his employers from further
liability.
• However,petitioner filed a complaint with the
labor arbitration branch of the NLRC for
disability benefit, illness
allowance/reimbursement of medical
expenses, damages and attorney's fees.
• But it was denied by the labor arbiter for the
reason because he was declared 'fit for duty’
and executed a release and quitclaim in favor
of his employers and already received his
sickness allowance.
 ISSUE :
• DOES THE EXECUTION BY PETITIONER OF A
RELEASE AND QUITCLAIM ESTOP HIM FROM
CLAIMING DISABILITY BENEFITS UNDER THE
POEA STANDARD EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
 HELD
• Since he was declared fit for work, petitioner has no more
right to claim disability benefits under the contractual
provisions of the POEA Standard Employment Contract
• The court held that they recognize legitimate waivers that
represent a voluntary and reasonable settlement of a
worker's claim which should be respected as the law
between the parties making it valid and binding.
• That the petitioner voluntarily entered to it and represents
a reasonable settlement, it is binding on the parties and
may not later be disowned simply because of a change of
mind, where It was made with full understanding on the
part of the petitioner and the consideration for the
quitclaim is credible and reasonable, the transaction must
be recognized as a valid and binding undertaking
 17.) G.R. No. 77875 February 4, 1993
PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., petitioner,
vs.
ALBERTO SANTOS, JR., HOUDIEL
MAGADIA, GILBERT ANTONIO, REGINO
DURAN, PHILIPPINE AIRLINES
EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, and THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION, respondents
 FACTS
• Individual respondents are all Port Stewards of
Catering Sub-Department, Passenger Services
Department of petitioner.
• In various occasion several deduction was
made to their salary because of the inventory
losses
• Then the respondent filed a formal grievance
where the union wanting to discuss certain
matters and was sent to Mr. Reynaldo Abad,
Manager for Catering, there was no reply for the
reason mr abad, who at the time was on vacation
leave.
• Upon his return a meeting was schedule. The
respondent then refuse to ramp the inventory.
• Mr Abad by denying the petition of individual
respondents in order to resolve the grievance and
state that it was proper that the employee was
charge and the said respondent was terminated
for 7 days to 30 days depending on the infraction
made
• Private responded file to labor arbiter under
the grounds of the illegal suspension but was
later dismiss the complaint . Then a motion to
reconsider was also denied .
 ISSUE
• whether or not public respondent NLRC acted
with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack of jurisdiction in rendering the
aforementioned decision.
 HELD
• It has not been shown that respondent NLRC has
unlawfully neglected the performance of an act which
the law specifically enjoins it to perform as a duty or
has otherwise unlawfully excluded petitioner from the
exercise of a right to which it is entitled
• to petitioner's submission, the grievance of employees
is not a matter which requires the personal act of Mr.
Abad and thus could not be delegated. Petitioner could
at least have assigned an officer-in-charge to look into
the grievance and possibly make his recommendation
to Mr. Abad
• Under the policy of social justice, the law
bends over backward to accommodate the
interests of the working class on the humane
justification that those with less privileges in
life should have more privileges in law.
• The absence of mr abad made a dire effect
on the part of the respondents and it was
clear of injustice, Thus, private respondents
should not be faulted for believing that the
effects of the CBA in their favor had already
stepped into the controversy.
 27.) G.R. No. 149629 October 4, 2004

ALAN D. GUSTILO,
Petitioner,

- versus -

WYETH PHILIPPINES, INC., FILEMON

VERZANO, JR., AURELIO MERCADO and
EDGAR EPILEPSIA,
Respondents.
 FACTS
• Alan D. Gustilo (petitioner) was employed by
Wyeth Philippines, Inc., respondent company,
as a pharmaceutical territory manager
• In the petitoners records show on various date
he was reprimanded and suspended
him habitually neglecting to submit his
periodic reports
• Then petitioner was charge with wilful
violation of company rules and regulations
and directing him to submit a written
explanation upon not achieving the objective
of the respondent company plan given to him.
• Upon recommendation of a Review Panel,
respondent company terminated the services
of petitioner
• Petitioner then file with the regional labor
arbitration a complaint for illegal suspension
illegal dismissal and payment of allowances,
other monetary benefits, damages and
attorneys fees against the respondent.
 ISSUE
• WHETHER OR NOT THE PETIONER IS
ENTINTILED OF THE SAID AWARD
 HELD
• He is not entitled for the reason It bears stressing
that petitioner did not only violate company disciplinary
rules and regulations. As found by the Court of Appeals, he
falsified his employment application form by not stating
therein that he is the nephew of Mr. Danao, respondent
Wyeths Nutritional Territory Manager. Also, on February 2,
1993, he was suspended for falsifying a gasoline
receipt. On June 28, 1993, he was warned for submitting a
false report of his trade outlet calls. On September 8,
1993, he was found guilty of unauthorized availment of
sick, vacation and emergency leaves. These infractions
manifest his slack of moral principle. In simple term, he is
dishonest.
• Its is the where the court state that to those
who invoke social justice may do so only if
their hand are clean and their motives
blameless. In the case at bar the petitioner
failed to measure up to such requirements.