ALBURO ALBURO AND ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES ALBURO ALBURO AND ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES

contact

MON-SAT 8:30AM-5:30PM

SUPREME COURT SAYS: EMPLOYER’S NON-REMITTANCE OF UNION DUES CONSTITUTES UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE LABOR ARBITER

In a recent development in labor jurisprudence, the question of jurisdiction over complaints regarding non-remittance of union dues by employers has been decisively settled. A recent ruling emphasized that such complaints, arising from the failure of employers to remit collected union member dues as stipulated in a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), do not fall under the purview of “intra-union disputes.” Instead, they constitute unfair labor practices, specifically interference with employees’ rights to self-organization.

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW: Concealment vs. Material Misrepresentation in Insurance Contracts

In insurance contracts:
Neglect to communicate that which a party knows and ought to communicate, is called a concealment. (Section 26, Insurance Code of the Philippines)
A representation is to be deemed false when the facts fail to correspond with its assertions or stipulations. (Section 43, Insurance Code of the Philippines)

Importance of Stock Market Transactions

Stock market transactions affect the general public and the national economy. The rise and fall of stock market indices reflect to a considerable degree the state of the economy. Trends in stock prices tend to herald changes in business conditions.

(Philippine Stock Exchange, Inc., et al. v. Secretary of Finance, et al., G.R. No. 213860, July 05, 2022)

THE SUPREME COURT SAYS: Farmworkers generally fall under the definition of regular seasonal employees.

Farm workers generally fall under the definition of seasonal employees. We have consistently held that seasonal employees may be considered as regular employees. Regular seasonal employees are those called to work from time to time. The nature of their relationship with the employer is such that during the off season, they are temporarily laid off; but reemployed during the summer season or when their services may be needed. They are in regular employment because of the nature of their job,and not because of the length of time they have worked.

Regular seasonal employees are those called to work from time to time.

(Jaime Gapayao vs. Rosario Fulo, G.R. No. 193493, June 13, 2013)

Rescission of Insurance Contracts and Refund of Premiums

A concealment, whether intentional or unintentional, entitled the injured party to rescind a contract of insurance. (Section 27, Insurance Code)

An intentional and fraudulent omission on the part of one insured, to communicate information of matters proving or tending to prove the falsity of a warranty, entitled the insurer to rescind. (Section 29, Insurance Code)

If a representation is false in a material point, whether affirmative or promissory, the injured party is entitled to rescind the contract from the time when the representation becomes false. (Section 45, Insurance Code)

THE SUPREME COURT SAYS: A cashier’s inability to safeguard and account for missing cash is a sufficient cause for dismissal

A cashier who, through carelessness, lost a document evidencing a cash receipt, and then wilfully chose not to record the excess cash as miscellaneous income and instead took it home and spent it on herself, and later repeatedly denied or concealed the cash overage when confronted, deserves to be dismissed.
It would be most unfair to require an employer to continue employing as its cashier a person whom it reasonably believes is no longer capable of giving full and wholehearted trustworthiness in the stewardship of company funds.

(P.J. Lhuillier, Inc. vs. Flordeliz Velayo, G.R. No. 198620, November 12, 2014)

Four Absences Without Leave CANNOT be considered as Gross Neglect of Duty, hence, NOT a ground for Termination of Employment.

Neglect of duty, to be a ground for dismissal under the Labor Code, must be both gross and habitual. Gross negligence implies want of care in the performance of one’s duties. Habitual neglect imparts repeated failure to perform one’s duties for a period of time, depending on the circumstances.
(Cavite Apparel, Inc. v. Michelle Marquez, G.R. No. 172044, February 06, 2013)