Anda di halaman 1dari 12

Bar Exams 2013

Possible Topic to be covered in the Essay Questions in Labor and Social Legislation
By Professor Victoria V. Loanzon

1. Labor Standards - as a social justice concern under the Constitution; minimum
guarantees accorded to employees (as part of labor contract/ CBA);

The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers, recognizing the
right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the right of enterprises to
reasonable returns on investments, and to expansion and growth. (Section 3 (Labor),
Article XIII [Social Justice and Human Rights] of the 1987 Constitution)

Basic rights of workers guaranteed by the Constitution

1. Security of tenure
2. Receive a living wage
3. Humane working conditions
4. Share in the fruits of production
5. Organize themselves
6. Conduct collective bargaining or negotiation with management
7. Engage in peaceful concerted activities including strike
8. Participate in policy and decision making processes

2. Employer- employee relationship, tests, managerial positions and other posts
considered as confidential

3. Wages inclusions, computation of OT, Holiday pay, premium pay; fringe benefits
and other allowances, how treated;

A: GR: It applies to all employees
1. Farm tenancy or leasehold;
2. Household or domestic helpers, including family drivers and persons working in the
personal service of another;
3. Home workers engaged in needlework or in any cottage industry duly registered in
accordance with law;
4. Workers in duly registered cooperatives when so recommended by the Bureau of
Cooperative Development and upon approval of the Secretary of Labor and
5. Workers of a barangay micro business enterprise (R.A. 9178)

What is overtime work?
1. Work rendered after normal eight (8) hours of work is called overtime work.
2. In computing overtime work, "regular wage" or "basic salary" means "cash"
wage only without deduction for facilities provided by the employer.
3. "Premium pay" means the additional compensation required by law for work
performed within 8 hours on non-working days, such as rest days and special
4. "Overtime pay" means the additional compensation for work performed
beyond 8 hours. Every employee entitled to premium pay is also entitled to the
benefit of overtime pay.
5. Illustrations on how overtime is computed:

a. For overtime work performed on an ordinary day, the overtime pay is plus
25% of the basic hourly rate.

b. For overtime work performed on a rest day or on a special day, the overtime
pay is plus 30% of the basic hourly rate which includes 30% additional compensation as
provided in Article 93 [a] of the Labor Code.

c. For overtime work performed on a rest day which falls on a special day, the
overtime pay is plus 30% of the basic hourly rate which includes 50% additional
compensation as provided in Article 93 [c] of the Labor Code. cralaw

d. For overtime work performed on a regular holiday, the overtime pay is plus
30% of the basic hourly rate which includes 100% additional compensation as provided
in Article 94 [b] of the Labor Code. Cralaw

e. For overtime work performed on a rest day which falls on a regular holiday,
the overtime pay is plus 30% of the basic hourly rate which includes 160% additional

4. Role of Regional Wage Boards, wage formulation, adjustments and wage distortion

5. Illegal recruitment - elements, as crime of syndicated estafa

Pursuant to Article 38(b) in relation to Article 34 of the Code, the offense of illegal
recruitment has two essential elements, to wit: (1) the accused must be engaged in the
recruitment and placement of workers, whether locally or overseas; and (2) the accused
has not complied with the guidelines issued by the Secretary of Labor and Employment,
particularly with respect to the securing of a license or an authority to recruit and
deploy workers, either locally or overseas. If it is committed against three or more
persons individually or as a group, the crime becomes illegal recruitment in large scale
which is considered an offense involving economic sabotage in Article 38(b) and is
penalized under Article 39 of the Labor Code.

Recruitment for overseas employment is not in itself necessarily immoral or unlawful. It
is the lack of the necessarily license or permit that renders such recruitment activities
unlawful or criminal, which is qualified into large scale recruitment when three or more
persons are victimized. (People of the Phils. vs. Lucille B. Sendon, G.R. No. 101579-82,
December 15, 1993)

A person who violates any of the provisions under Article 13(b) and Article 34 of the Labor
Code can be charged and convicted separately of illegal recruitment and estafa [Revised Penal
Code, Article 315, 2(a)] because illegal recruitment is a malum prohibitum where the criminal
intent of the accused is not necessary for a conviction while estafa is a malum in se where
criminal intent of the accused is necessary for a conviction. (People of the Phils. vs. Fernando G.
Manungas, Jr., G.R. No. 91552, March 10, 1994)

6. Review R.A. 8042 and 10022; power of POEA and role of POEA; safeguards under
contracts; Death benefits of OFWs particularly, the seafarers

7. Special attention on women workers maternity leave, VAWC leave, special benefits
for women, parental leave

In implementing this constitutional mandate the Law on Employment of Women has provisions
1. Night work prohibition on working women;
2. Facilities for working women;
3. Family planning services; and
4. Prohibition of discrimination against working women.

There are also provisions that make certain acts against working women unlawful.

The Labor Code also provides for classification of certain women workers.

There are also other statutory benefits that certain women may be entitled to, particularly those
who are victims of violence against women and children as defined under Republic Act 9262.

Private sector women employees who are victims as defined in RA 9262 shall be entitled to the
paid leave benefit under such terms and conditions provided herein. The leave benefit shall
cover the days that the woman employee has to attend to medical and legal concerns.

To be entitled to the leave benefit, the only requirement is for the victimemployee to present to
her employer a certification from the barangay chairman (Punong Barangay) or barangay
councilor (barangay kagawad) or prosecutor or the Clerk of Court, as the case may be, that an
action relative to the matter is pending.

In addition to other paid leaves under existing labor laws, company policies, and/or collective
bargaining agreements, the qualified victim-employee shall be entitled to a leave of up to ten
(10) days with full pay, consisting of basic salary and mandatory allowances fixed by the
Regional Wage Board, if any. The said leave shall be extended when the need arises, as specified
in the protection order issued by the barangay or the court.

The usage of the ten-day leave shall be at the option of the woman employee. In the event that
the leave benefit is not availed of, it shall not be convertible into cash and shall not be

How is the night work prohibition on working women implemented?

No woman, regardless of age, shall be employed or permitted or suffered to work, with or
without compensation:
(a) In any industrial undertaking or branch thereof between ten oclock at night and six oclock
in the morning of the following day; or
(b) In any commercial or non-industrial undertaking or branch thereof, other than agricultural,
between midnight and six oclock in the morning of the following day; or
(c) In any agricultural undertaking at nighttime unless she is given a period of rest not less than
nine (9) consecutive hours. (Art. 130, Labor Code)

The above prohibitions, however, shall not apply in any of the following cases:
(a) In cases of actual or impending emergencies caused by serious accident, fire, flood, typhoon,
earthquake, epidemic or other disasters or calamity, to prevent loss of life or property, or in
cases of force majeure or imminent danger to public safety;
(b) In cases of urgent work to be performed on machineries, equipment or installation, to avoid
serious loss which the employer would otherwise suffer;
(c) Where the work is necessary to prevent serious loss of perishable goods;
(d) Where the woman employee holds a responsible position of managerial or technical nature,
or where the woman employee has been engaged to provide health and welfare service;
(e) Where the nature of the work requires the manual skill and dexterity of women workers and
the same cannot be performed with equal efficiency by male workers;
(f) Where the woman employees are immediate members of the family operating the
establishment or undertaking; and
(g) Under other analogous cases exempted by the Secretary of Labor in appropriate regulations.
(Art. 131, Labor Code)

What standards and facilities shall be established for working women?

The Secretary of Labor shall establish standards that will insure the safety and health of women
employees. In appropriate cases, he shall, by regulations, require any employer to:
(a) Provide seats proper for women and permit them to use such seats when they are free from
working and during working hours, provided they can perform their duties in this position
without detriment to efficiency;
(b) To establish separate toilet rooms and lavatories for men and women and provide at least a
dressing room for women;
(c) To establish a nursery in a workplace for the benefit of the women employees therein; and
(d) to determine appropriate minimum age and other standards for retirement or termination in
special occupations such as those of flight attendants and the like. (Art. 132, Labor Code)

What are the Labor Code provisions on family planning?
(a) Establishments which are required by law to maintain a clinic or infirmary shall provide free
family planning services to their employees which shall include, but not limited to, the
application or use of contraceptive pills and intrauterine devices.
(b) In coordination with other agencies of the Government engaged in the promotion of family
planning, the Department of Labor shall develop and prescribe incentive bonus schemes to
encourage family planning among female workers in any establishment or enterprise. (Art. 134,
Labor Code)

How is the prohibition of discrimination against working women implemented?

It shall be unlawful for any employer to discriminate against any woman employee with respect
to terms and conditions of employment solely on account of her sex.

The following are acts of discrimination:
a. Payment of a lesser compensation, including wage, salary or other form of remuneration and
fringe benefits, to a female employees as against a male employee, for work of equal value; and
b. Favoring a male employee over a female employee with respect to promotion, training
opportunities, study and scholarship grants solely on account of their sexes.

Criminal liability for the willful commission of any unlawful act as provided in this Article or
any violation of the rules and regulations issued pursuant to Section 2 hereof shall be penalized
as provided in Articles 288 and 289 of this Code: Provided, That the institution of any criminal
action under this provision shall not bar the aggrieved employee from filing an entirely separate
and distinct action for money claims, which may include claims for damages and other
affirmative reliefs. The actions hereby authorized shall proceed independently of each other. (
Article 135, Labor Code as amended by Republic Act No. 6725, May 12, 1989)

It shall be unlawful for an employer to require as a condition of employment or continuation of
employment that a woman employee shall not get married, or to stipulate expressly or tacitly
that upon getting married, a woman employee shall be deemed resigned or separated, or to
actually dismiss, discharge, discriminate or otherwise prejudice a woman employee merely by
reason of her marriage. (Article 136, Labor Code)

To protect working women, the Labor Code prohibits an employer form doing certain acts.
What are these prohibited acts?

It shall be unlawful for any employer:
(1) To deny any woman employee the benefits provided for in the Chapter on Employment of
Women in the Labor Code or to discharge any woman employed by him for the purpose of
preventing her from enjoying any of the benefits provided under the Code;
(2) To discharge such woman on account of her pregnancy, or while on leave or in confinement
due to her pregnancy; or
(3) To discharge or refuse admission of such woman upon returning to her work for fear that
she may again be pregnant. (Art. 137, Labor Code)

How are certain women workers classified under the Labor Code?
Any woman who is permitted or suffered to work, with or without compensation, in any night
club, cocktail lounge, massage clinic, bar or similar establishment, under the effective control or
supervision of the employer for a substantial period of time as determined by the Secretary of
Labor, shall be considered as an employee of such establishment for purposes of labor and
social legislation. (Art. 138, Labor Code)

8. Job contracting requisites; when valid; remedies of parties; or
apprenticeship/learners elements; limitations

A: Specifically, there is job contracting where:

1. The contractor carries on an independent business and undertakes the contract work
on his own account under his own responsibility according to his own manner and
method, free from the control and direction of his employer or principal in all matters
connected with the performance of the work except as to the results thereof; and

2. The contractor has substantial capital or investment in the form of tools, equipment,
machineries, work premises, and other materials which are necessary in the conduct of
his business.


Article 57 of the Labor Code provides that the State aims to "establish national
apprenticeship program through the participation of employers, workers and
government and non-government agencies" and "to establish apprenticeship standards
for the protection of apprentices." To translate such objectives into existence, prior
approval of the DOLE to any apprenticeship program has to be secured as a condition
sine qua non before any such apprenticeship agreement can be fully enforced. The role
of the DOLE in apprenticeship programs and agreements cannot be debased. (Nitto
Enterprises vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 114337, September 29, 1995)

It is mandated that apprenticeship agreements entered into by the employer and
apprentice shall be entered only in accordance with the apprenticeship program duly
approved by the Minister of Labor and Employment.

Prior approval by the Department of Labor and Employment of the propose
apprenticeship program is, therefore, a condition sine qua non before an apprenticeship
agreement can be validly entered into.

The act of filing the proposed apprenticeship program with the Department of Labor
and Employment is a preliminary step towards its final approval and does not
instantaneously give rise to an employer-apprentice relationship. (Nitto Enterprises vs.
NLRC, G.R. No. 114337, September 29, 1995)

9. Agrarian reform - read hacienda luisita case on retention and basis of award to

SEC. 6. Retention Limits. - Except as otherwise provided in this Act, no person may own or
retain, directly, any public or private agricultural land, the size of which shall vary according to
factors governing a viable family-sized farm, such as commodity produced, terrain,
infrastructure, and soil fertility as determined by the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council
(PARC) created hereunder, but in no case shall the retention by the landowner exceed five (5)
hectares. Three (3) hectares may be awarded to each child of the landowner, subject to the
following qualifications: (1) that he is at least fifteen (15) years of age; and (2) that he is actually
tilling the land or directly managing the farm: Provided, That landowners whose lands have
been covered by Presidential Decree No. 27 shall be allowed to keep the area originally retained
by them thereunder; Provided, further, That original homestead grantees or direct compulsory
heirs who still own the original homestead at the time of the approval of this Act shall retain the
same areas as long as they continue to cultivate said homestead.

The right to choose the area to be retained, which shall be compact or contiguous, shall pertain
to the landowner: Provided, however, That in case the area selected for retention by the
landowner is tenanted, the tenant shall have the option to choose whether to remain therein or
be a beneficiary in the same or another agricultural land with similar or comparable features. In
case the tenant chooses to remain in the retained area, he shall be considered a leaseholder and
shall lose his right to be a beneficiary under this Act. In case the tenant chooses to be a
beneficiary in another agricultural land, he loses his right as a leaseholder to the land retained
by the landowner. The tenant must exercise this option within a period of one (1) year from the
time the landowner manifests his choice of the area for retention.

In all cases, the security of tenure of the farmers or farm workers on the land prior to the
approval of this Act shall be respected.

Upon the effectivity of this Act, any sale, disposition, lease, management contract or transfer of
possession of private lands executed by the original landowner in violation of this Act shall be
null and void: Provided, however, That those executed prior to this Act shall be valid only
when registered with the Register of Deeds within a period of three (3) months after the
effectivity of this Act. Thereafter, all Registers of Deeds shall inform the DAR within thirty (30)
days of any transaction involving agricultural lands in excess of five (5) hectares.

10. Labor relations - right to organize, right to join/affiliate, right to withdraw/
disaffiliate; formation of unions and accreditation/registration with DOLE

The protection of workers' right to self-organization in no way interfere with employer's
freedom to enforce such rules and orders as are necessary to proper conduct of his businesses,
so long as employer's supervision is not for the purpose of intimidating or coercing his
employees with respect to their self-organization and representation. It is the functions of the
court to see that the rights of selforganization and collective bargaining guaranteed by the Act
are amply secured to the employee, but in its effort to prevent the prescribed unfair labor
practice, the court must be mindful of the welfare of the honest employer. (Lakas Ng
Manggagawang Makabayan vs. Marcelo Enterprises, G.R. No. L-38258, November 19, 1982)

The State guarantees the right of all workers to self-organization, collective bargaining and
negotiations, as well as peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike, in accordance
with law. The right to strike, however, is not absolute.

It has heretofore been held that a "no strike, no lock-out" provision in the Collective Bargaining
Agreement ("CBA") is a valid stipulation although the clause may be invoked by an employer
only when the strike is economic in nature or one which is conducted to force wage or other
concessions from the employer that are not mandated to be granted by the law itself. It would
be inapplicable to prevent a strike which is grounded on unfair labor practice. In this situation,
it is not essential that the unfair labor practice act has, in fact, been committed; it suffices that
the striking workers are shown to have acted honestly on an impression that the company has
committed such unfair labor practice and the surrounding circumstances could warrant such a
belief in good faith. (Panay Electric Company, Inc. vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 102672, October 4, 1995)

11. Recognition of bargaining unit certification election and power to negotiate/bargain
on behalf of members, sky bargaining and surface bargaining

A bargaining unit is "a group of employees of a given employer, comprised of all or less
than all of the entire body of employees, consistent with equity to the employer indicate
to be the best suited to serve the reciprocal rights and duties of the parties under the
collective bargaining provisions of the law." The factors in determining the appropriate
collective bargaining unit are (1) the will of the employees (Globe Doctrine); (2) affinity
and unity of the employees' interest, such as substantial similarity of work and duties, or
similarity of compensation and working conditions (Substantial Mutual Interests Rule);
(3) prior collective bargaining history; and (4) similarity of employment status. The basic
test of an asserted bargaining unit's acceptability is whether or not it is fundamentally
the combination which will best assure to all employees the exercise of their collective
bargaining rights. (International School Alliance of Educators vs. Leonardo A. Quisumbing,
G.R. No. 128845, June 1, 2000)


The purpose of certification election is to give the employees true representation in their
collective bargaining with an employer because certification election is the most
democratic and expeditious method by which the laborers can freely determine the
union that shall act as their representative in their dealing with the establishment where
they are working. It is the most effective way of determining which labor organization
can truly represent the working force. (Balmar Farms, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations
Commission, G.R. No. 73504 October 15, 1991)

12. Unfair Labor Practice, right to strike and return to work order

Article 261 of the Labor Code provides that violations of a CBA, except those which are
gross in character, shall no longer be treated as unfair labor practice and shall be
resolved as grievances under the parties' CBA. Moreover, "gross violations of CBA"
under the same Article referred to flagrant and/or malicious refusal to comply with the
economic provisions of such agreement, which is not the issue in the instant case. (Flight
Attendants and Stewards Ass'n. of the Phil. vs. Phil. Airlines, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 178083, July
22, 2008) Under this provision [Article 261], voluntary arbitrators have original and
exclusive jurisdiction over matters which have not been resolved by the grievance
machinery. (Miguela Santuyo, et al. vs. Remerco Garments Manufacturing, Inc., et al., G.R.
No. 174420, March 22, 2010)


A strike otherwise valid, if violent in character, may be placed beyond the pale. Care is
to be taken, however, especially where an unfair labor practice is involved, to avoid
stamping it with illegality just because it is tainted by such acts. To avoid rendering
illusory the recognition of the right to strike, responsibility in such a case should be
individual and not collective. A different conclusion would be called for, of course, if the
existence of force while the strike lasts is pervasive and widespread, consistently and
deliberately resorted to as a matter of policy. It could be reasonably concluded then that
even if justified as to ends, it becomes illegal because of the means employed. (Juan S.
Barrera vs. Court of Industrial Relations, G.R. No. L-32853, September 25, 1981)

Government employees may, therefore, through their unions or associations, either
petition the Congress for the betterment of the terms and conditions of employment
which are within the ambit of legislation or negotiate with the appropriate government
agencies for the improvement of those which are not fixed by law. (Social Security System
Employees Association vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 85279, July 28, 1989)

The right to strike is one of the rights recognized and guaranteed by the Constitution as
an instrument of labor for its protection against exploitation by management. By virtue
of this right, the workers are able to press their demands for better terms of employment
with more energy ad persuasiveness, poising the threat to strike as their reaction to the
employer's intransigence. The strike is indeed a powerful weapon of the working class.
But precisely because of this, it must be handled carefully, like a sensitive explosive, lest
it blow up in the workers' own hands. Thus, it must be declared only after the most
thoughtful consultation among them, conducted in the only way allowed, that is,
peacefully, and in every case conformably to reasonable regulation. Any violation of the
legal requirements and strictures, such as a defiance of a return-to-work order in
industries affected

13. Termination of employment just causes and authorized causes; two-notice rule
reinstatement, payment of back wages and what other monetary award may be
included; maximum amount to be recovered


It must be borne in mind that the basic principle in termination cases is that the burden
of proof rests upon the employer to show that the dismissal is for just cause and failure
to do so would necessarily mean that the dismissal is not justified and, therefore the
employee is entitled to be reinstated in accordance with the mandate of Article 280 of the
New Labor Code on security of tenure. (Polymedic General Hospital vs. NLRC, G.R. No.
64190, January 31, 1985)

The law requires that an employee sought to be dismissed must be served two written
notices before termination of his employment. The first notice is to apprise the employee
of the particular acts or omissions by reason of which his dismissal has been decided
upon; and the second notice is to inform the employee of the employer's decision to
dismiss him. Failure to comply with the requirement of two notices makes the dismissal
illegal. The procedure is mandatory. Non-observance thereof renders the dismissal of an
employee illegal and void. (Viola Cruz vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 116384, February 7, 2000)
[w]here there is valid or authorized cause for the dismissal of the employee, but the
employer failed to comply with statutory due process in effecting the same, the
dismissal is not illegal. Logically, if there is no illegal dismissal in such a case, then we
can deduce that the dismissed employee cannot avail himself of the rights under Article
279 of the Labor Code, i.e., reinstatement and full backwages. What the employee can
demand from the employer, according to Agabon, is the payment of nominal damages
as indemnification for the violation of the former's statutory rights .(Victory Liner, Inc.
vs. Pablo Race, G.R. No. 164820, December 8, 2008; Jenny M. Agabon vs. National Labor
Relations Commission, G.R. No. 158693, November 17, 2004)


In San Miguel Corporation v. Javate, Jr., we affirmed the consistent findings and
conclusions of the Labor Arbiter, National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), and
Court of Appeals that the employee was illegally dismissed since he was still fit to
resume his work; but the employer's liability was mitigated by its evident good faith in
terminating the employee's services based on the terms of its Health, Welfare and
Retirement Plan. Hence, the employee was ordered reinstated to his former position
without loss of seniority and other privileges appertaining to him prior to his dismissal,
but the award of backwages was limited to only one year considering the mitigating
circumstance of good faith attributed to the employer. (Victory Liner, Inc. vs. Pablo Race,
G.R. No. 164820, December 8, 2008;San Miguel Corporation vs. Ernesto Javate, Jr., G.R. No.
54244, January 27, 1992)

The employee was terminated for her continuous absence without permission. Although
we found that the employee was indeed guilty of breach of trust and violation of
company rules, we still declared the employee's dismissal illegal as it was too severe a
penalty considering that she had served the employer company for 21 years, it was her
first offense, and her leave to study the French language would ultimately benefit the
employer who no longer had to spend for translation
services. Even so, other than ordering the employee's reinstatement, we awarded
the said employee backwages limited to a period of two years, given that the
employer acted without malice or bad faith in terminating the employee's services.
(Victory Liner, Inc. vs. Pablo Race, G.R. No. 164820, December 8, 2008;Milagros
I. Dolores vs. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 87673, January 24,
The employee in Itogon-Suyoc Mines, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission, was
found guilty of breach of trust for stealing high-grade stones from his employer.
However, taking into account the employee's 23 years of previously unblemished
service to his employer and absent any showing that his continued employment would
result in the employer's oppression or self-destruction, we considered the employee's
dismissal a drastic punishment. We deemed that the ends of social and compassionate
justice would be served by ordering the employee reinstated but without backwages in
view of the employer's obvious good faith. (Victory Liner, Inc. vs. Pablo Race, G.R. No.
164820, December 8, 2008;Itogon-Suyoc Mines, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission,
G.R. No. L-54280, September 30, 1982)

In San Miguel Corporation v. Secretary of Labor, the employee was dismissed after he
was caught buying from his co-workers medicines that were given gratis to them by the
employer company, and re-selling said medicines, in subversion of the employer's
efforts to give medical benefits to its workers. We likewise found in this case that the
employee's dismissal was too drastic a punishment in light of his voluntary confession
that he committed trafficking of company-supplied medicines out of necessity, as well as
his promise not to repeat the same mistake. We ordered the employee's reinstatement
but without backwages, again, in consideration of the employer's good faith in
dismissing him. (Victory Liner, Inc. vs. Pablo Race, G.R. No. 164820, December 8, 2008;San
Miguel Corporation vs. Secretary of Labor, G.R. No. L-39195, May 16, 1975)


The legal consequences of an illegal dismissal are reinstatement of the employee without
loss of seniority rights and other privileges, and payment of his full backwages,
inclusive of allowances, and other benefits or their monetary equivalent. Clearly, the law
intended reinstatement to be the general rule. It is only when reinstatement is no longer
feasible that payment of separation pay is awarded to an illegally dismissed employee.

Reinstatement is the restoration to a state or condition from which one had been
removed or separated. In providing foremost for the reinstatement of an illegally
dismissed employee, the Labor Code not only recognizes the security of tenure granted
by law to regular employees, but also gives substance and meaning to the protection
accorded by the Constitution to labor. Employment is significant to every working man.
It is the means by which he sustains himself and his family, hence, the law mandates the
reinstatement of an illegally dismissed employee to his former position. Payment of
separation pay as a substitute for reinstatement is allowed only under exceptional

14. Disability claims with ECC; retirement/pension benefits under SSS and GSIS laws;
survivorship benefits under SSS and GSIS laws
15. Labor disputes; modes of settlement and jurisdiction for eash mode - conciliation,
reconciliation, arbitration
16. NLRC - composition, jurisdiction of arbiter, jurisdiction of commission proper;
extent of matters to be covered by judgement
17. Due process (notice and right to be heard) and exhaustion of administrative remedies
before any judicial relief
18. Legal ethics Can counsel represent a dismidded employee of Company A after
serving as its retained counsel?
19. If an arbiter/Commissioner of the NLRC was connected with a law firm which has a
pending case before him, must he inhibit himself?