Republic of the Philippines

Department of Labor and Employment

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
National Capital Region
Quezon City

SOCORRO SALDUA FLORES,

Complainant,

-versus- CASE NO. NCR-01-01074-18

Labor Arbiter:
Hon. Maria Mylene P. Carag-Cruz

RCG STATELINK INC. /FERNANDO R. GONONG

& MA. CECILIA MATTA

Respondents.
x--------------------------------------------------x

POSITION PAPER
(For the Complainants)

Complainants, assisted by the Public Attorney’s Office, unto this

Honorable Arbitration Branch, most respectfully state that:

THE PARTIES

Complainant SOCORRO SALDUA FLORES, is of legal age and

Filipino citizen and may be served with summons and other legal processes
at#126 Barangay Loob San Antonio Quezon Province 4324.

Respondent Company RCG STATELINK INC., is a corporation duly

organized and existing under Philippine laws and may be served with
summons and other legal processes at Franco Drive, 4/F R&R BLDG.
 2

BUENCAMINO ST. ALABANG ZAPOTE MUNTINLUPA CITY, NCR 1770.

Respondent FERNANDO R. GONNONG and CECILIA MATTA may be
served with summons and other legal processes at the same address.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The Complainant had worked for the respondent company since 2002
and only resigned from the company just last year, 2017. As a consequence of
her resignation, the complainant sought the following:

1. Backpay, which included her 13th month pay for the year 2017 and
monetary equivalent if her unused sick and vacation leaves.
2. Half of her 13th month pay (2016)
3. Tax Refund
3. Monetary equivalent of her unused sick leaves and vacation leaves
since 2002 when she first started working for the company.

ISSUES

Complainants respectfully submit the following as the issues to be

resolved by the Honorable Arbiter in this case:

I. Is the complainant entitled to receive the monetary benefits she is claiming

for?

According to the Labor Code, all money claims should be filed

within three years from the time the cause of action accrued.
Art. 291. MONEY CLAIMS. All money claims arising from employer-employee
relations accruing during the effectivity of this Code shall be filed within three (3) years
from the time the cause of action accrued; otherwise they shall be forever barred.

In this regard, clearly the complainant was able to file a case on time.
 3

Although the Labor Code does not exactly state when back wages should be
paid, it has been the government’s policy to ensure that the back wages are paid by
employers “within the reasonable time”.

However, due to the actions of the Respondent Company, by giving false

assurances and not setting a specific date as to when her Backpay would be given to her,
she was constrained to file a case against her employer several months after she had
separated from the company.

The complainant fears that because the respondent company is notoriously

known for not giving its employees their salaries on time, coupled with the fact that they
have even FAILED to give the other half of her 13th month pay (2016), she believes that
the company would again fail to provide her the mandated monetary benefits she is
entitled to. It has been several months already since she resigned and she already made
several attempts to follow up on the status on the release of her back pay, but until now
the Respondent Company has failed to settle the same.

According to law:

13th Month Pay of Resigned or Separated Employee.

An employee who has resigned or whose services were terminated at any time
before the time for payment of the 13th month pay is entitled to this monetary
benefit in proportion to the length of time he worked during the year,
reckoned from the time he started working during the calendar year up to the
time of his resignation or termination from the service. Thus, if he worked
only from January up to September his proportionate 13th month pay should
be equivalent of 1/12 his total basic salary he earned during that period.

The payment of the 13th month pay may be demanded by the employee upon
the cessation of employer-employee relationship. This is consistent with the
principle of equity that as the employer can require the employee to clear
himself of all liabilities and property accountability, so can the employee
demand the payment of all benefits due him upon the termination of the
relationship.

Attached hereto as pieces of evidence to establish the claim of the

complainants are the following:

1. Annex “A” – Certificate of Employment

2. Annex “B” – Certification that the Complainant received only ½ of
her 13 month pay for the year 2016
3. Annex “C” – Payslips 2017
4. Annex “D” – Payslips 2016
5. Annex “E” – Company ID
 4

II. Award for Attorney’s Fees is in order

Accordingly an award for Attorney’s Fees is proper. Based on the

Revised Implementing Rules of R.A. 9406 also known as the PAO Law, clients
represented by the PAO shall be entitled to 10% of the judgment award. Such
award shall be deposited to the National Treasury.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Office that

the judgment be rendered in favor of the complainants and against herein
respondents:

a) Order the Respondents to immediately satisfy the Back Pay and

other monetary claims of the Complainant ;

b) Directing the respondent company to pay Complainant back wages

computed from the time their compensation was withheld from them up to
the time of the finality of the judgment of this Honorable Office;1

c) Attorney’s fees, the amounts of which are left to the sound

discretion of this Honorable Office.

Other reliefs just and equitable under the laws and jurisprudence are
likewise prayed for.

Quezon City, February 24, 2018.

SOCORRO SALDUA FLORES

Complainant

By:

ATTY. FRANCIS IMMANUEL DC PANGANIBAN

 5

Counsel of the Complainants

Public Attorney II
Roll No. 66367
IBP Lifetime No./Receipt: AR000285, 12/28/2017
MCLE Comp. Admitted to the Bar 2015

Republic of the Philippines)

Quezon City ) S.S.

CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION

I, the undersigned affiant, after being duly sworn in accordance with

law, depose and state that:

1. I am the complainant in the above-entitled case;

2. I have caused the preparation of the above Position Paper, the

contents of which are true and correct of my own personal knowledge;

3. I certify that I have not commenced any other action or proceeding

involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or
different divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency;

4. To the best of my knowledge, no such action is pending in the

Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency;

5. If I should thereafter learn that similar actions or proceedings have

been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals or
different divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency, I shall undertake
to report that fact to the Honorable labor Arbiter within five (5) days there
from.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hands this 26th day of

February, 2018 at Quezon City, Metro Manila.

SOCORRO SALDUA FLORES

Complainant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME, this ___ day of

February, 2018 at Quezon City, Metro Manila.
6