Can an employer’s service contract with another company be proof of an employee’s project employment status?
Unfit to Work as a Seaman
The third doctor in this case declared the claimant’s unfitness to work as a seafarer. Should the claimant be granted total permanent disability benefits?
The Liability Continues
Why was this manning agency not held liable for the seafarer’s claims despite having executed an Affidavit of Assumption of Responsibility?
Prima Facie Evidence of Employee’s Claim
Learn whether the employee was granted his claims of overtime pay, night shift differentials, and premium pay for working on holidays and rest days.
A Verbal Notice of the Seafarer’s Disability Rating Is Not Enough
The employer claims to have informed the seafarer of his disability rating. Learn why the Supreme Court still awarded the seafarer permanent total disability benefits.
A Blank Form with a Checklist
Illegal Dismissal was not among the causes of action listed in the employee’s complaint filed before the NLRC. Will such absence automatically preclude the labor tribunals from resolving the same?
The Seafarer Received His Medical Report When the Parties Filed Their Position Papers
The employer asserted that the seafarer failed to follow the third doctor referral procedure under the POEA SEC. Did the Supreme Court consider the assertion meritorious?
We Laid the Employee Off to Re-assess His Qualifications
The employer is charged with the burden of proving that its conduct and action are for valid and legitimate grounds and that the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient or prejudicial to the employee. If the employer cannot overcome this burden of proof, the employee’s transfer shall be tantamount to constructive dismissal.
Not a Mere Run-of-the-Mill Employee
The instructor in this case completed her probationary period. Learn why the Court did not consider her as a permanent employee.
But the Claims Exceeded Php5,000.00
Bus drivers and conductors filed a complaint against their employer for money claims before the Office of the Labor Arbiter and alleged that the latter failed to comply with Department Order No. 118, Series of 2012. Does the Office of the Labor Arbiter have jurisdiction over the case?
