Atty. Phil Juris

  SC: Employer-Employee Relationship Begins Once Job Offer is Signed The Supreme Court has ruled that an employer-employee relationship is established as soon as a job offer is signed—regardless of whether the employee has started working. In a Decision issued on April 2, 2025 and released to the public on May 16, 2025, the Court found Alltech Biotechnology Corporation guilty of illegally dismissing Paolo Landayan Aragones. Alltech had offered Aragones the position of Swine Technical Manager – Pacific in 2016, with a monthly salary of ₱140,000. Aragones accepted the offer and resigned from his previous job. However, before his start date, Alltech informed him that the position was abolished due to a global restructuring and instead offered him ₱140,000 as a goodwill payment. Aragones filed a case for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter initially ruled in his favor, but the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the ruling, saying there was no employer-employee relatio...

  Facts: Employees of Holy Face Cell Corporation , operating as Tres Pares Fast Food, were informed on January 14, 2011, that the restaurant would close on January 19, 2011. The employees attempted to discuss the closure with the company's president, Hayden Kho, Sr ., but were unsuccessful. The restaurant closed as scheduled, leading the employees to file a complaint for illegal dismissal, seeking separation pay and other benefits. Supreme Court Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled that the failure to provide notice of closure constitutes a violation of procedural due process but does not amount to an unlawful or criminal act. The Court stated: "The failure to give notice is not an unlawful act because the law does not define such failure as unlawful." Consequently, the Court found no basis to hold Kho personally liable for the corporate liabilities arising from the case. Reasoning: The Court emphasized that non-compliance with the notice requirement results in a procedura...

    An employer's blanket policy of no-spouse employment is discriminatory. To justify its enforcement, the employer must clearly establish a reasonable business necessity.  .. unless the employer can prove that the reasonable demands of the business require a distinction based on marital status and there is no better available or acceptable policy which would better accomplish the business purpose, an employer may not discriminate against' an employee based on the identity of the employee's spouse. This is known as the  bona fide occupational qualification exception. To justify a  bona fide  occupational qualification, the employer must prove two factors:  (1) that the employment qualification is reasonably related to the essential operation of the job involved; and,  (2) that there is a factual basis for believing that all or substantially all persons meeting the qualification would be unable to properly perform the duties of the job. Thus, a...

 Excessively low compromise agreements are invalid — SC The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that compromise agreements and settlements that offer employees excessively low amounts are invalid. In a decision promulgated in May, the SC Second Division invalidated the compromise agreement between two companies and several illegally dismissed employees. The SC said the petitioners were 12 out of 35 employees earlier declared as illegally dismissed by the two companies. The court ordered the companies to pay the employees backwages and separation pay. According to the SC, the employees later agreed to receive settlement amounts ranging from 5.20% to 23.42% of the backwages and separation pay they were entitled. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) ruled that the agreements were invalid because the amounts given to the petitioners were unreasonable. However, the Court of Appeals found that the agreements were valid as they were voluntarily signed by the petitioners. This prompte...

Resignation is the voluntary act of an employee who is in a situation where one believes that personal reasons cannot be sacrificed in favor of the exigency of the service, and one has no other choice or is otherwise compelled to dissociate oneself from employment. 36  It is a formal pronouncement or relinquishment of an office and must be made with the intention of relinquishing the office, accompanied by the act of relinquishment or abandonment. A resignation must be unconditional and with the intent to operate as such. 37  Thus, voluntariness is essential to the act of resignation. It must be the result of an employee's exercise of his or her own will. 38 SALVADOR DELA FUENTE, et al. vs. MARILYN E. GIMENEZ, G.R. No. 214419. November 17, 2021   Footnotes 36  See Pascua v. Bank Wise, Inc., G.R. Nos. 191460 & 191464, 31 January 2018 [Per J. Leonen] and Jacob v. Villaseran Maintenance Service Corp., G.R. No. 243951, 20 January 2021 [Per J. Lazaro-Javier]. 37...

  𝐄𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭. [G.R. No. 189255 June 17, 2015]  "Aside from the control test, the Supreme Court has also used the economic reality test in determining whether an employer-employee relationship exists between the parties."  "Under this test, the economic realities prevailing within the activity or between the parties are examined, taking into consideration the [totality of circumstances] surrounding the true nature of the relationship between the parties." In Sevilla v. Court of Appeals, we observed the need to consider the existing economic conditions prevailing between the parties, in addition to the standard of right-of-control [...] to give a clearer picture in determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship based on an analysis of the totality of economic circumstances of the worker.  Thus, the determination of the relationship between employer and employee depends upon the circumstances of the whole economic activi...

  Sub-paragraph (c) purportedly limits the coverage of the position papers of the parties to only those claims and causes of action stated in the complaint or amended complaint; [whereas] sub-paragraph (d) directs that the reply shall only allege and prove facts and causes of action contained in the original or amended complaint or in the position paper.  At this juncture, it is well to take judicial notice of the fact that initiatory complaints filed before the NLRC are just blank forms wherein the employee-complainant simply inputs his/her details, the respondent's details, and ticks off a checklist of causes of action which are applicable to him/her. It is only upon the filing of position papers that the complainant is able to expound on the employer's acts or omissions which constitute his/her causes of action against the latter..  Given the foregoing, it is only reasonable to infer that [notwithstanding] the aforementioned provision, the complaint cannot be the sole ...