Parras, Juan Paolo S.

Labor Standards Bar Questions

BOOK 4
ATTY. VOLTAIRE DUANO
1995 BAR QUESTION NO. XI (1) (2):
(1)What is the extent of an employers intervention in the compensation
process and the payment of benefits to employees under the State Insurance
Fund? Explain. (2) Is it necessary for an employee to litigate in order to
establish and enforce his right to compensation? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(1)The new law establishes a State Insurance Fund built up by the
contribution of employers based on the salaries of their employees. The
employer does not intervene in the compensation process and it has no
control over the payment of benefits. Unlike under the Workmens
Compensation Act, employers are no longer directly liable for the income and
medical and related benefits that are to be paid to covered employees if they
should suffer from work connected injury or sickness or death. The payment
of employees compensation is now from the state insurance fund which is
constituted from the contributions collected from the employees.
(2)No, all that an employee does to claim employees compensation is to file
a claim for the said benefits with the SSS or GSIS. In the event that the claim
is denied on the SSS/GSIS level, claimant may appeal to the Employees
Compensation Commission where he may prove the causal connection
between injury and nature of work.
2013 BAR QUESTION NO. X:
For ten (10) separate but consecutive yearly contracts, Cesar has been
deployed as an able-bodied seaman by Meritt Shipping, through its local
agent, Ace Maritime Services (agency), in accordance with the
2000Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment
Contract (2000 POEA-SEC). Cesar's employment was also covered by a CBA
between the union, AMOSl.JP, and Meritt Shipping. Both the 2000 POEA-SEC
and the CBA commonly provide the same mode and procedures for claiming
disability benefits. Cesar's last contract (for nine months) expired on July 15,
2013. Cesar disembarked from the vessel M/V Seven Seas on July 16, 2013as
a seaman on "finished contract". He immediately reported to the agency and

complained that he had been experiencing spells of dizziness, nausea,

general weakness, and difficulty in breathing. The agency referred him to Dr.
Sales, a cardio-pulmonary specialist, who examined and treated him; advised
him to take a complete rest for a while; gave him medications; and declared
him fit to resume work as a seaman. After a month, Cesar went back to the
agency to ask for re-deployment. The agency rejected his application. Cesar
responded by demanding total disability benefits based on the ailments that
he developed and suffered while on board Meritt Shipping vessels. The claim
was based on the certification of his physician (internist Dr. Reyes) that he
could no longer undertake sea duties because of the hypertension and
diabetes that afflicted him while serving on Meritt Shipping vessels in the last
10 years. Rejected once again, Cesar filed a complaint for illegal dismissal
and the payment of total permanent disability benefits against the agency
and its principal. Assume that you are the Labor Arbiter deciding the case.
Identify the facts and issues you would consider material in resolving the
illegal dismissal and disability complaint. Explain your choices and their
materiality, and resolve the case.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(1) Does the Labor Arbiter have jurisdiction to decide the case? (2) Did Cesar
submit to a post-employment examination within 3 days upon his return?
This is mandatory requirement; otherwise, Cesar will forfeit his right to claim
benefits. (3) Is Dr. Sales the company-designated physician? The companydesignated physician is the one who initially determines compensability. (4)
Was Cesar assisted by Dr. Sales (if he is the company physician) within 120
days? (5) If the 120 days was exceeded and no declaration was made as to
Cesars disability, was this extended to 240 days because Cesar required
further medical treatment? (6) Was the 240 days exceeded and still no final
decision was reached as to Cesars disability? If so, Cesar is deemed entitled
to permanent total disability benefits. (7) If the companys physician and
Cesars physician cannot agree, was a third physician designated to
determine the true nature and extent of the disability. The third physicians
finding under the law is final and conclusive. (8) In the matter of the
complaint for illegal dismissal: There is none because Cesar disembarked on
a finished contract. (9) Seafarers are contractual employees, for a fixed
terms, governed by the contract they sign; an exception to Article 280 (now
Article 286) of the Labor Code. Hence, the complaint for illegal dismissal will
not prosper.
2012 BAR QUESTION NO. 36

Which of the following is not considered an employer by the terms of the

Social Security Act?
(A) A self-employed person;
(B) The government and any of its political subdivisions, branches or
instrumentalities, including corporations owned or controlled by the
government;
(C) A natural person, domestic or foreign, who carries on in the Philippines,
any trade, business, industry, undertaking or activity of any kind and uses
the services of another person who is under his orders as regards the
employment;
(D) A foreign corporation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) The government and any of its political subdivisions, branches or
instrumentalities, including corporations owned or controlled by the
government.
By virtue of Sec. 8(c) of R.A. 8282. (c) Employer Any person, natural or
juridical, domestic or foreign, who carries on it the Philippines any trade,
business, industry, undertaking or activity of any kind and uses the services
of another person who is under his orders as regards the employment,
except the Government and any of its political subdivisions, branches or
instrumentalities, including corporations owned or controlled by the
Government: Provided, That a selfemployed person shall be both employee
and employer at the same time