7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.
docx
MARCOPPER MINING CORPORATION, petitioner vs. NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS COMMISSION and NATIONAL MINES AND ALLIED WORKERS
UNION (NAMAWU-MIF), respondents.
G.R. No. 10 !"!. Ma#$% "&, 1&&'
FACTS
On August 23, 1984, Marcopper Mining Corporation (a corporation duly
organized and existing under the la s o! the "hilippines, engaged in the
#usiness o! $ineral prospecting, exploration and extraction% and
pri&ate respondent 'AMA )M*+ (a la#or !ederation duly organized and
registered ith the epart$ent o! -a#or and .$ploy$ent, to hich the
Marcopper .$ployees )nion is a!!iliated% entered into a
Collecti&e /argaining Agree$ent (C/A% e!!ecti&e !ro$ May 1, 1984
until April 30, 198 On uly 2 , 1985, prior to the expiration o! the a!
orestated Agree$ent, the petitioner and pri&ate respondent
executed a Me$orandu$ o! Agree$ent herein the ter$s o! the C/A,
speci!ically
on $atters o! age increase and !acilities allo ance ere $odi!ied On
une 1, 198 , .xecuti&e Order (. O % 'o 1 8 as pro$ulgated
$andating the integration o! the cost o! li&ing allo ance under age
Orders 'os 1, 2, 3, and 5 into the #asic age o! or6ers, its e!!ecti&ity
retroacti&e to May 1, 198
Conse7uently, the #asic age rate o! petitioner s la#orers categorized as
non agricultural or6ers as increased #y "9 00 per day +urther$ore,
the petitioner i$ple$ented the second !i&e percent ( :% age increase due
on the sa$e date and therea!ter added the integrated CO-A ;o e&er, the
pri&ate respondent assailed the $anner in hich the second age increase
as a!!ected *t argued that the CO-A should !irst #e integrated into the
#asic age #e!ore the : age increase is co$puted
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 1/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
ISSUE
hat should #e the #asis !or the co$putation o! the C/A increase,
the #asic age ithout the CO-A or the so called <integrated< #asic
age hich, #y $andate o! . O 'o 1 8, includes the CO-A
ELD
=es >he principle that the C/A is the la #et een the contracting parties
stands strong and true ;o e&er, the present contro&ersy in&ol&es not
$erely an interpretation o! C/A pro&isions More i$portantly, it re7uires
a deter$ination o! the e!!ect o! an executi&e order on the ter$s and the
conditions o! the C/A >his is, and should #e, the !ocus o! the instant
case
*t is unnecessary to del&e too $uch on the intention o! the parties as to
hat they allegedly $eant #y the ter$ <#asic age< at the ti$e the C/A
and MOA ere executed #ecause there is no 7uestion that as o! May
1, 198 , as $andated #y . O 'o 1 8, the #asic age o! or6ers, or the
statutory $ini$u$ age, as increased ith the integration o! the CO-A
As o! said date, then, the ter$ <#asic age< includes the CO-A >his
is hat the la ordains and to hich the collecti&e #argaining
agree$ent o! the parties $ust con!or$
"etitioner s argu$ents e&entually lose stea$ in the light o! the !act that
co$pliance ith the la is $andatory and #eyond contractual stipulation #y
and #et een the parties? thus, hether or not petitioner intended the #asic
age to include the CO-A #eco$es i$$aterial >here is e&idently nothing to
construe and to interpret #ecause the la is clear and una$#iguous @adly
!or petitioner, said la , #y so$e uncanny coincidence, retroacti&ely too6
e!!ect on the sa$e date the C/A increase
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 2/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
#eca$e e!!ecti&e >here!ore, there cannot #e any dou#t that the
co$putation o! the C/A increase on the #asis o! the <integrated< age
does not constitute a &iolation o! the C/A hile the ter$s and conditions
o! the C/A constitute the la #et een the parties, it isn t an ordinary
contract to hich is applied the principles o! la go&erning ordinary
contracts A C/A, as a la#or contract ithin the conte$plation o! Article 1
00 o! the Ci&il Code o! the "hilippines that go&erns the relations #et een
la#or and capital, is not $erely contractual in nature #ut i$pressed ith
pu#lic interest, hence, it $ust yield to the co$$on good
As such, it $ust #e construed li#erally rather than narro ly and
technically, and the courts $ust place a practical and realistic
construction upon it, gi&ing due consideration to the context in
hich it is negotiated and purpose hich it is intended to ser&e
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 3/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
*MM P#o+o on and Mana /+/n , In$. . Co2# o3 A44/a5
G.R. No. 1"00&!. A2 2 !, 1&&'
"'0 SCRA 1&
(Labor Standards – Artist Record Book as a requirement for overseas
employment contract)
FACTSB
>he deploy$ent o! !e$ale entertainers to apan as controlled #y the
go&ern$ent through epart$ent Order 'o 3, herein said entertainers ere
re7uired an Artist ecord /oo6 as a precondition to the processing #y the
"O.A o! any contract !or o&erseas e$ploy$ent "etitioners contends that
o&erseas e$ploy$ent is a property right ithin the $eaning o! the
Constitution and a&ers that the alleged depri&ation thereo! through
the onerous re7uire$ent o! an A / &iolates due process and
constitutes an in&alid exercise o! police po er
ISSUEB
hether or not an Artist ecord /oo6 is a &alid re7uire$ent !or
o&erseas e$ploy$ent
ELDB
=es >he A / re7uire$ent and the 7uestioned epart$ent order related
to its issuance ere issued pursuant to a &alid exercise o! police po
er, hich considers the el!are o! +ilipino per!or$ing artists,
particularly the o$en
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 4/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
P% 5 44 n/ A o$ a on o3 S/# $/ E64o# /# In$ . D# 5on
G.R. NO. L-71&!7
*UNE 0, 1&77
FACTS
>he petitioner, "hilippine Association o! @er&ice .xporters, *nc ("A@.*, !
or short%, a !ir$ <engaged principally in the recruit$ent o! +ilipino
or6ers, $ale and !e$ale, !or o&erseas place$ent,< challenges the
Constitutional &alidity o! epart$ent Order 'o 1, @eries o! 1988, o!
the epart$ent o! -a#or and .$ploy$ent, in the character o! <D)* .-*'.@
DOE. '*'D >;. >.M"O A = @)@".'@*O' O+ ."-O=M.'> O+ +*-*"*'O
OM.@>*C A' ;O)@.;O-O F. @,< in this petition !or certiorari and
prohi#ition >he $easure
is assailed !or <discri$ination against $ales or !e$ales,< that it does not
apply to all +ilipino or6ers #ut only to do$estic helpers and !e$ales
ith si$ilar s6ills,< and that it is &iolati&e o! the right to tra&el *t as
li6e ise held to #e an in&alid exercise o! the la $a6ing po er, police
po er #eing legislati&e, and not executi&e, in character
*n its supple$ent to the petition, "A@.* in&o6es @ection 3, o! Article
G***, o! the Constitution, pro&iding !or or6er participation <in policy
and decision $a6ing processes a!!ecting their rights and #ene!its
as $ay #e pro&ided #y la < *n addition, it as contended that
epart$ent Order 'o 1 as passed in the a#sence o! prior
consultations *t as clai$ed to #e in &iolation o! the Charter s non
i$pair$ent clause, in addition to the <great and irrepara#le inHury<
that "A@.* $e$#ers !ace should the Order #e !urther en!orced
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 5/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
>he @olicitor Deneral, on #ehal! o! the respondent @ecretary o!
-a#or and Ad$inistrator o! the "hilippine O&erseas .$ploy$ent
Ad$inistration, in&o6es the police po er o! the "hilippine @tate
ISSUE
hether or not deploy$ent #an !or !e$ale do$estic helpers is &alid
under our Constitution
ELD
=es *t is a &alid exercise o! police po er >he concept o! police po er is
ell esta#lished in this Hurisdiction *t has #een de!ined as the <state
authority to enact legislation that $ay inter!ere ith personal li#erty or
property in order to pro$ote the general el!are < As de!ined, it consists
o! (1% an i$position o! restraint upon li#erty or property, (2% in order to
!oster the co$$on good *t is not capa#le o! an exact de!inition #ut
has #een, purposely, &eiled in general ter$s to underscore its all
co$prehensi&e e$#race
<*ts scope, e&er expanding to $eet the exigencies o! the ti$es, e&en to
anticipate the !uture here it could #e done, pro&ides enough roo$ !or an
e!!icient and !lexi#le response to conditions and circu$stances
thus assuring the greatest #ene!its <
*t constitutes an i$plied li$itation on the /ill o! ights According to +ernando,
it is <rooted in the conception that $en in organizing the state and i$posing
upon its go&ern$ent li$itations to sa!eguard constitutional rights did not
intend there#y to ena#le an indi&idual citizen or a group o! citizens to
o#struct unreasona#ly the enact$ent o! such salutary $easures
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 6/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
calculated to ensure co$$unal peace, sa!ety, good order, and el!
are < @igni!icantly, the /ill o! ights itsel! does not purport to #e an
a#solute guaranty o! indi&idual rights and li#erties <.&en li#erty
itsel!, the greatest o! all rights, is not unrestricted license to act
according to one s ill < *t is su#Hect to the !ar $ore o&erriding
de$ands and re7uire$ents o! the greater nu$#er
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 7/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
L8N PICTURES, INC. . P ILIPPINE MUSICIANS G2 5d (FFW) 9 COURT OF
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SAMPAGUITA PICTURES, INC. . P ILIPPINE
MUSICIANS G2 5d (FFW) 9 COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
G.R. No. L-1"!7". *an2a#: "7, 1&'1
FACTS
espondent "hilippine Musicians Duild (++ % is a duly registered
legiti$ate la#or organization -E' "ictures, *nc , @a$paguita "ictures,
*nc , and "re$iere "roductions, *nc are corporations, duly
organized under the "hilippine la s, engaged in the $a6ing o!
$otion pictures and in the processing and distri#ution thereo!
"etitioner co$panies e$ploy $usicians !or the purpose o! $a6ing $usic
recordings !or title $usic, #ac6ground $usic, $usical nu$#ers, !inale
$usic and other incidental $usic, ithout hich a $otion picture is
inco$plete 'inety !i&e(9 :% percent o! all the $usicians playing !or the
$usical recordings o! said co$panies are $e$#ers o! the Duild
>he Duild has no 6no ledge o! the existence o! any other legiti$ate la#or
organization representing $usicians in said co$panies "re$ised upon
these allegations, the Duild prayed that it #e certi!ied as the sole and
exclusi&e #argaining agency !or all $usicians or6ing in the a!ore$entioned
co$panies *n their respecti&e ans ers, the latter denied that they ha&e any
$usicians as e$ployees, and alleged that the $usical nu$#ers in the !iling o!
the co$panies are !urnished #y independent contractors >he lo er court
sustained the Duild s theory Are consideration o! the order co$plained o!
ha&ing #een denied #y the Court en #anc, -E' "ictures,
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 8/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
inc , and @a$paguita "ictures, *nc , !iled these petitions !or re&ie !
or certiorari
ISSUE
hether the $usicians in 7uestion (Duild $e$#ers% are Ie$ployees
Io! the petitioner !il$ co$panies
RULING
=.@ >he Court agreed ith the lo er court s decision, to itB -o er court
resorted to apply A 8 and )@ -a s and Hurisprudence !ro$ hich said Act as
patterned a!ter (@ince statutes are to #e construed in the light o! purposes
achie&ed and the e&ils sought to #e re$edied% *t ruled that the or6 o! the
$usical director and $usicians is a !unctional and integral part o! the
enterprise per!or$ed at the sa$e studio su#stantially under the direction
and control o! the co$pany *n other ords, to deter$ine hether a person ho
per!or$s or6 !or another is the latter s e$ployee or an independent
contractor, the 'ational -a#or elations relies on the right to control
test )nder this test an e$ployer e$ployee relationship exist here the
person !or ho$ the ser&ices are per!or$ed reser&es the right to control
not only the end to #e achie&ed, #ut also the $anner and $eans to #e
used in reaching the end ()nited *nsurance Co$pany, 108, '- / 'o 11 %
'ot ithstanding that the e$ployees are called independent contractors ,
the /oard ill hold the$ to #e e$ployees under the Act here the extent o!
the e$ployer s control o&er the$ indicates that the relationship is in
reality one o! e$ploy$ent ( ohn ;ancoc6 *nsurance Co , 23 , 1940, >eller,
-a#or ispute Collecti&e /argaining, Eol %
>he right o! control o! the !il$ co$pany o&er the $usicians is sho n
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 9/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
(1% #y calling the $usicians through call slips in the na$e o! the
co$pany?
(2% #y arranging schedules in its studio !or recording sessions?
(3% #y !urnishing transportation and $eals to $usicians? and
(4% #y super&ising and directing in detail, through the $otion
picture director, the per!or$ance o! the $usicians #e!ore the
ca$era, in order to suit the $usic they are playing to the picture
hich is #eing !lashed on the screen
>he I$usical directorsJ ha&e no such control o&er the $usicians
in&ol&ed in the present case @aid $usical directors control
neither the $usic to #e played, nor the $usicians playing it
>he "re$ier "roduction did not appeal the decision o! the Court en #anc
(that s hy it s not one o! the petitioners in the case% !il$ co$panies
su$$on the $usicians to or6, through the $usical directors >he !il$
co$panies, through the $usical directors, !ix the date, the ti$e and the
place o! or6 >he !il$ co$panies, not the $usical directors, pro&ide the
transportation to and !ro$ the studio >he !il$ co$panies !urnish $eal at
dinnerti$e *t is ell settled that <an e$ployer e$ployee relationship exists
here the person !or ho$ the ser&ices are per!or$ed reser&es
a right to control not only the end to #e achie&ed #ut also the
$eans to #e used in reaching such end <
>he decisi&e nature o! said control o&er the <$eans to #e used<, is
illustrated in the case o! Dilchrist >i$#er Co , et al , in hich, #y reason o!
said control, the e$ployer e$ployee relationship as held to exist #et een
the $anage$ent and the or6ers, not ithstanding the inter&ention o! an
alleged independent contractor, ho had, and exercise,
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 10/11
7/17/2019 Final Labor case digests.docx
the po er to hire and !ire said or6ers >he a!ore$entioned control
o&er the $eans to #e used< in reading the desired end is
possessed and exercised #y the !il$ co$panies o&er the $usicians
in the cases #e!ore us ;. .+O ., the order appealed !ro$ is here#y a!!
ir$ed, ith costs against petitioners herein *t is so ordered
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-labor-case-digestsdocx 11/11
