Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Supreme Court: Republic of The Philippines Manila en Banc
Supreme Court: Republic of The Philippines Manila en Banc
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
BRIONES, J.:
Acting on a petition from the labor body called the "National Labor Union,"
the Industrial Relations Court has issued a ruling in which, among other
things, the oil firm "The Shell Company of Philippine Islands, to their workers
who work at night (from sunset until they get up the next day) an additional
compensation of 50% on their regular wages if they worked during the day.
It seems that the comany needs the night service of a certain number of
workers, since the airplanes coming from abroad usually land and take off at
night, which is why it is necessary to do night work for the supply of gasoline
and lubricants, and for other things. The oil company has been excepted
against that decision of there the present resource of certiorari so that we
revoquemos it.
The appellant argues and argues that not only is there no legal provision that
empowers the Industrial Relations Court to order the payment of additional
compensation to workers who work at night but, on the contrary,
Commonwealth Law No. 444 exempts the employer from such an obligation
since in that law cases are provided in which the payment of overtime is
compulsory, and such cases do not include night work.
The Workers' Union, for its part, contends that the power at issue forms part
of the broad and effective powers conferred on the said tribunal by
Commonwealth Law No. 103 - the Organic Charter of the Industrial Relations
Tribunal - and that Commonwealth Law No. 444 invoked has no application
to the present case, since it is necessarily limited in scope, referring
specifically and exclusively to the maximum daily working time allowed in
industrial establishments - the day of 8 hours.
Our conclusion is that the workers' union appealed has the reason on its part.
For a clear and thorough elucidation of the points discussed, it is convenient,
even at the risk of lengthening this paper, to transcribe the relevant legal
provisions that are articles 1, 4 and 13 of Commonwealth Law No. 103. Helas
here:
SECTION 1. The Judge: his appointment, qualifications, compensation,
tenure. — There is hereby created a Court of Industrial Relations, which shall
have jurisdiction over the entire Philippines, to consider, investigate, decide,
and settle any question, matter, controversy or dispute arising between,
and/or affecting, employers and employees or laborers, and landlords and
tenants or farm-laborers, and regulate the relation between them, subject to,
and in accordance with, the provisions of this Act. The Court shall keep a
record of all its proceedings and shall be presided over by a Judge to be
appointed by the President of the Philippines with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments of the National Assembly. The Judge of the
Court shall hold office during good behavior until he reaches the age of
seventy years, or becomes incapacitated to discharge the duties of his office.
His qualifications shall be the same as those provided in the Constitution for
members of the Supreme Court and he shall receive an annual compensation
of ten thousand pesos and shall be entitled to traveling expenses and per
diems when performing official duties outside of the City of Manila. The
Department of Justice shall have executive supervision over the Court.
SEC. 4. Strikes and lockouts. — The Court shall take cognizance for purpose
of prevention, arbitration, decision and settlement, of any industrial or
agricultural dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout, arising form
differences as regards wages, shares or compensation, hours of labor or
conditions of tenancy or employment, between employers and employees or
laborers and between landlords and tenants or farm-laborers, provided that
the number of employees, laborers or tenants or farm-laborers involved
exceeds thirty, and such industrial or agricultural dispute is submitted to the
Court by the Secretary of Labor, or by any or both of the parties to the
controversy and certified by the Secretary of Labor as existing and proper to
be dealt with by the Court for the sake of public interest. In all such cases,
the Secretary of Labor or the party or parties submitting the disputes, shall
clearly and specifically state in writing the questions to be decided. Upon the
submission of such a controversy or question by the Secretary of Labor, his
intervention therein as authorized by law, shall cease.
The Court shall, before hearing the dispute and in the course of such hearing,
endeavor to reconcile the parties and induce them to settle the dispute by
amicable agreement. If any agreement as to the whole or any part of the
dispute is arrived at by the parties, a memorandum of its terms shall be
made in writing, signed and acknowledged by the parties thereto before the
Judge of the Court or any official acting in his behalf and authorized to
administer oaths or acknowledgments, or, before a notary public. The
memorandum shall be filed in the office of the Clerk of the Court, and, unless
otherwise ordered by the Court, shall, as between the parties to the
agreement, have the same effect as, and be deemed to be, a decision or
award.
It is evident that with these broad powers the State has proposed to equip
the Industrial Relations Tribunal to the maximum extent of its usefulness and
effectiveness, making it not a mere academic agency, but truly active,
dynamic and efficient - in a word, the official machinery par excellence in the
formidable and thorny task of resolving industrial and agrarian conflicts of a
certain kind, thus preventing and avoiding those strikes and strikes that so
much afflict and harm not only the enterprises and the workers, but in
general, the whole community. In his concurrent opinion delivered in the
authoritative case of Ang Tibay v. Court of Industrial Relations1 (R.G. No.
46496), Magistrate Laurel has very rightly expressed the fundamental idea
that underlies the creation of said court, with the following pronouncement:
The appellant argues, however, that although it is true that in case of dispute
the Industrial Relations Tribunal has, under its organic law, the power to fix
wages, such power is not absolute, but is subject to certain restrictions, and
cut-offs, provided by the law commonly known as the eight-hour law,
Commonwealth Law No. 444, the pertinent articles of which are dealt with in
full below:
SECTION 1. The legal working day for any person employed by another shall
be of not more than eight hours daily. When the work is not continuous, the
time during which the laborer is not working and can leave his working place
and can rest completely shall not be counted.
SEC. 3. Work may be performed beyond eight hours a day in case of actual
or impending emergencies caused by serious accidents, fire, flood, typhoon,
earthquake, epidemic, or other disaster or calamity in order to prevent loss
to life and property or imminent danger to public safety; or in case urgent
work to be performed on the machines, equipment, or installations in order
to avoid a serious loss which the employer would otherwise suffer, or some
other just cause of a similar nature; but in all such cases the laborers and
employees shall be entitled to receive compensation for the overtime work
performed at the same rate as their regular wages or salary, plus at least
twenty-five per centum additional.
However, the lawyers of the appellant argue - these articles specify the cases
in which the payment of extra or additional compensation is authorized and
are only, namely: (a) in case of overtime or work in excess of the regular
hours for imperative reasons of urgency in the event of a disaster or
accident, or to prevent loss or repair; (b) in case of work on Sundays and
holidays; (c) in case of emergency, and there is nothing to do with night
work; then the order in question is illegal, as it is not authorized by law. "In
the absence," recalls the lawyers of the appellant - legislation authorizing the
payment of extra compensation for work done at night, the Court of
Industrial Relations has no power or authority to order the petitioner
company to pay extra compensation for work done by its laborers At night,
at night, at night, at night, at night, at night, at night, at night, at night, at
night, at night. Commonwealth Act No. 444 can not be enlarged by
implication or otherwise. Expression facit cessare tacitum.
The argument is wrong. Law No. 444 is not applicable to the present case, it
being obvious that it has a specific purpose, namely: (a) fixing the maximum
working day in 8 hours; (b) to indicate certain exceptional cases in which the
work can be authorized outside that day; (c) provide a bonus, which must
not be less than 25% of the regular salary, for overtime or work in excess of
8 hours.
Nightwork has almost invariably been looked upon with disfavor by students
of the problem because of the excessive strain involved, especially for
women and young persons, the large amount of lost time consequent upon
exhaustion of the workers, the additional strain and responsibility upon the
executive staff, the tendency of excessively fatigued workers to "keep going"
on artificial stimulants, the general curtailment of time for rest, leisure, and
cultural improvement, and the fact that night workers, although precluded to
an extent from the activities of day life, do attempt to enter into these
activities, with resultant impairment of physical well-being. It is not
contended, of course, that nightwork could be abolished in the continuous-
process industries, but it is possible to put such industries upon a three- or
four-shifts basis, and to prohibit nightwork for women and children. (Labor's
Progress and Problems, Vol. I, p. 464, by Professors Millis and Montgomery.)
There is, moreover, a marked difference between the rates of output of night
and day shifts on the discontinuous plan. In each case investigated the
inferiority of night labor was definitely established. This inferiority is evidently
the result of the night worker's failure to secure proper amounts of sleep and
rest during the day. The system of continuous shifts, especially for women, is
regarded by all investigators as undesirable. Women on continuous
nightwork are likely to perform domestic duties, and this added strain
undoubtedly accounts for the poorer results of their industrial activities. The
tendency to devote to amusement and other things the time that should be
spent in rest and sleep is certainly as common among men as among women
workers and accounts largely for the loss of efficiency and time on the part of
both sexes in nightwork.
The case against nightwork, then, may be said to rest upon several grounds.
In the first place, there are the remotely injurious effects of permanent
nightwork manifested in the later years of the worker's life. Of more
immediate importance to the average worker is the disarrangement of his
social life, including the recreational activities of his leisure hours and the
ordinary associations of normal family relations. From an economic point of
view, nightwork is to be discouraged because of its adverse effect upon
efficiency and output. A moral argument against nightwork in the case of
women is that the night shift forces the workers to go to and from the factory
in darkness. Recent experiences of industrial nations have added much to the
evidence against the continuation of nightwork, except in extraordinary
circumstances and unavoidable emergencies. The immediate prohibition of
nightwork for all laborers is hardly practicable; its discontinuance in the case
of women employees is unquestionably desirable. 'The night was made for
rest and sleep and not for work' is a common saying among wage-earning
people, and many of them dream of an industrial order in which there will be
no night shift. (Labor Problems, 3rd Edition, pp. 325-328, by Watkins &
Dodd.).
In the merits of the above, the writ of certiorari interposed is denied and the
judgment of the Industrial Reconstruction Court, with costs in charge of the
appellant, is confirmed. That is how it is commanded.
Paras, Interim Pres., Fair, Pablo, Perfecto, Bengzon, Padilla and Tuason, MM.,
Are satisfied.