Labor Law Review Lecture Notes – October 25, 2022
Recruitment and Placement (Part II)
Relevant Principles
 A liaison officer working in a
recruitment company, bearing a job
order and canvassing in a remote
barangay is engaged in recruitment
and placement.
 The offer of employment need not be
categorical.
 The employment aspect initiated by a
person and not by an employee of a
travel agency does not amount to
engagement in recruitment and
placement.
 Referral letter by a Labor Arbiter
amounts to recruitment and
placement.
 Mere suggestion to complainants
where they could apply is equivalent or
tantamount to referral. (People vs.
Martinez)
 A person referred to an educational
institution by a recruitment agency for
the reason of training and by the
initiative of the client does not amount
to recruitment and placement. Such
employment contracted abroad is mere
consequence after training of the
client.
 The mere fact that the recruitment
agency does not charge any placement
fees will not detract the fact that it still
engaged in recruitment and placement.
 All acts under the definition of
recruitment and placement must be
committed towards employment, and
not for any other purpose.
Question: The definition of "recruitment and
placement" under Art. 13(b) of the Labor
Code includes promising or advertising for
employment, locally or abroad, whether for
profit or not, provided, that any person or
entity which, in any manner, offers or
promises for a fee, employment to two or
more persons shall be deemed engaged in
recruitment and placement. The second part
Prepared by: JOSE, Lovella Anne J.
of the definition contradicts the first part, how
to harmonize this conflict?
Answer: Regardless of the number of
persons dealt with, recruitment and
placement are still constituted. The proviso
merely lays down a rule of evidence that
where a fee is collected in consideration of a
promise or offer of employment to two (2) or
more prospective workers, the individual or
entity dealing with them shall be deemed to
be engaged in the act of recruitment and
placement. The words "shall be deemed"
create that presumption. (People vs. Panis)
Illegal Recruitment
 A person, entity, partnership or
corporation recruits without a license or
an authority to recruit.
License
- It is an authority also given to a person,
entity, corporation or partnership to
operate a recruitment agency.
- Broader in scope, since recruitment
violations can arise and disciplinary
actions.
Authority
- Issued to liaison officers normally.
- The value of the authority issued to a
person is that the person can go out of
the premises of the recruitment
agency, provided that it explicitly
provides where it can happen.
- More specific in scope, since only
disciplinary actions may arise.
GR: Only Filipino citizens can engage in
recruitment and placement. (for single
proprietorship)
XPN: Foreigners can come in the picture in
juridical entities such as partnership or
corporations, provided that the 75%
capitalization requirement is owned by
Filipinos.
Page 1 of 7
Labor Law Review Lecture Notes – October 25, 2022
NOTE: Foreigners cannot be the head or
manager of the recruitment and placement
company. Otherwise, it will be considered
illegal recruitment.
Question: An Arab national who has a share
in a recruitment agency went abroad to look
for a head or manager of such agency. Does
the action amounts to prohibited act under
the law?
Answer: Yes, the law provides that it is
prohibited to allow a non-Filipino citizen to
head or manage a licensed
recruitment/manning agency.
NOTE: Family drivers are not considered
domestic workers. Family drivers shall be
subject on the provisions of the New Civil
Code or any related laws, rules and
regulations. (Atienza vs. Saluta, GR 233413,
June 17, 2019) [company drivers are not
included]
RA 10361 intentionally excluded family
drivers.
NOTE: The penalties imposed under DO 216-
20 and DO 217-20 are administrative
penalties. It does not bar the institution of
illegal recruitment complaints and will not be
tantamount to double jeopardy.
Question: Who has jurisdiction over
recruitment violations in local recruitment and
placement?
Answer: The Regional Director of the
Department of Labor and Employment,
particularly the Regional Office which issued
the license of such recruitment and placement
agency.
Question: Who has jurisdiction over
recruitment violations in overseas
recruitment and placement?
Answer: POEA pursuant to Joint Circular No.
01, s. 2022. There is no administrator of
POEA, it is now undersecretary.
Prepared by: JOSE, Lovella Anne J.
Regulatory and Visitorial Functions in
Recruitment and Placement both Local
and Overseas
Local Recruitment – exercised by the
Secretary of Labor
Art. 36 of the Labor Code
Regulatory Power. – The Secretary of
Labor shall have the power to restrict and
regulate the recruitment and placement
activities of all agencies within the
coverage of this Title and is hereby
authorized to issue orders and promulgate
rules and regulations to carry out the
objectives and implement the provisions of
this Title.
Art. 37 of the Labor Code
Visitorial Power. – The Secretary of Labor
or his duly authorized representatives
may, at any time, inspect the premises,
books of accounts and records of any
person or entity covered by this Title,
require it to submit reports regularly on
prescribed forms, and act on violation of
any provisions of this Title.
Art. 128 of the Labor Code – Visitorial and
Enforcement Power
- Labor standards violations and
occupational health violations.
- The agency is still liable, but it is their
compliance with the labor standards or
occupational health and safety with
respect to its own employees.
Page 2 of 7
Labor Law Review Lecture Notes – October 25, 2022
Direct Hiring
- A foreign or local employer secures the
services of an employee without an
intervention of a local recruitment and
placement agency or POEA.
Art. 18 of the Labor Code
Ban on Direct-Hiring. – No employer may
hire a Filipino worker for overseas
employment except through the Boards
and entities authorized by the Secretary of
Labor. Direct-hiring by members of the
diplomatic corps, international
organizations and such other employers as
may be allowed by the Secretary of Labor
is exempted from this provision.
Question: Why is Direct Hiring prohibited?
Answer: It exposes the recruited
vulnerabilities such as exploitation.
In case of foreign employment, the recruited
becomes an undocumented OFW to which:
1. Not subject to protection, not covered by a
life or health insurance;
2. Not covered by the visitorial and
enforcement power.
Undocumented OFW if the following
requirements are absent:
1. Holding a Philippine passport issued
regularly;
2. Holding a working visa or some other
kind of visa;
3. Covered by POEA approved contract.
Direct Hire Name Hire
Illegal Legal
[Not absolutely
prohibited]
Prepared by: JOSE, Lovella Anne J.
Exceptions to the Ban on Direct Hiring:
1. Members of the diplomatic corps;
2. Members of the international
organizations immune from suit;
3. Such other that may be allowed by the
Secretary of Labor;
4. Heads of State and Government
Officials with the rank of at least deputy
minister; or
5. Other employers as may be allowed by
the Administration, such as:
6. Those employers allowed by Philippine
Overseas Labor Office (POLO);
7. Professionals and skilled workers with
duly executed verified/authenticated
contracts containing terms and
conditions over and above the
standards set by the POEA;
8. Workers hired by a relative/family
member who is a permanent resident
of the host country, except domestic
to workers. (POEA MC No. 8, s. 2018)
Jurisdiction of POEA
- Over recruitment violations during pre-
employment, employment and post-
employment.
- Recruitment agency and the foreign
principal may commit recruitment
violations or the employee.
- Disciplinary action cases.
- Money claims are not covered since it
is under the jurisdiction of Labor Arbiter
under Sec. 10 of RA 8042.
NOTE: Recruitment violations and
disciplinary actions prescribes after 3
years from the accrual of the recruitment
violation or for the cause of the disciplinary
action.
Two Concepts of Illegal Recruitment
1. Those committed by non-licensees or
non-holders of authorities;
2. Those committed by licensees or
holders of authorities.
Page 3 of 7
Labor Law Review Lecture Notes – October 25, 2022
NOTE: RA 8042 expounded the concept of
illegal recruitment by including licensees or
holders or authorities can be guilty of illegal
recruitment by engaging in the prohibited
acts.
Most common forms of illegal
recruitment:
1. Illegal recruitment committed by a
non-licensee or non-holder of
authority;
2. Failure to deploy without any fault on
the part of the applicant;
3. Failure to reimburse placement fee in
case of non-deployment.
Elements of the First Concept of Illegal
Recruitment:
1. No license or no authority to recruit;
2. Commission of any of the act of
recruitment and placement mentioned
in Art. 13 of the Labor Code.
Elements of the Second Concept
Illegal Recruitment:
1. With license or authority to recruit;
2. Commission of the prohibited acts
enumerated in the Labor Code or RA
8042.
Two Kinds of Illegal Recruitment
1. Simple Illegal Recruitment
2. Qualified Illegal Recruitment/Economic
Sabotage
a. By Syndicate [3 or more persons
conspiring to commit]
b. By Large-scale [3 or more
persons recruited]
Simple Illegal Recruitment
Elements:
1. No valid license or authority;
2. With license or with authority;
3. The offender undertakes any of the
recruitment activity under the law [RA
8042, as amended]
Prepared by: JOSE, Lovella Anne J.
Penalties for Local Illegal Recruitment:
Art. 39 of the Labor Code
Penalties. –
(a) The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine
of One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00) shall be imposed if illegal
recruitment constitutes economic sabotage as
defined herein;
(b) Any licensee or holder of authority found
violating or causing another to violate any
provision of this Title or its implementing rules
and regulations shall, upon conviction
thereof, suffer the penalty of imprisonment of
not less than two years nor more than five
years or a fine of not less than P10,000 nor
more than P50,000, or both such
imprisonment and fine, at the discretion of
the court;
(c) Any person who is neither a licensee nor a
holder of authority under this Title found
violating any provision thereof or its
of
implementing rules and regulations shall,
upon conviction thereof, suffer the penalty of
imprisonment of not less than four years nor
more than eight years or a fine of not less
than P20,000 nor more than P100,000 or both
such imprisonment and fine, at the discretion
of the court;
(d) If the offender is a corporation,
partnership, association or entity, the penalty
shall be imposed upon the officer or officers
of the corporation, partnership, association or
entity responsible for violation; and if such
officer is an alien, he shall, in addition to the
penalties herein prescribed, be deported
without further proceedings;
(e) In every case, conviction shall cause and
carry the automatic revocation of the license
or authority and all the permits and privileges
granted to such person or entity under this
Title, and the forfeiture of the cash and surety
bonds in favor of the Overseas Employment
Development Board or the National Seamen
Board, as the case may be, both of which are
Page 4 of 7
Labor Law Review Lecture Notes – October 25, 2022
authorized to use the same exclusively to
promote their objectives.
Penalties for Overseas Illegal
Recruitment: Section 7 of RA 8042, as
amended
"(a) Any person found guilty of illegal
recruitment shall suffer the penalty of
imprisonment of not less than twelve (12)
years and one (1) day but not more than
twenty (20) years and a fine of not less than
One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) nor more
than Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00).
"(b) The penalty of life imprisonment and a
fine of not less than Two million pesos
(P2,000,000.00) nor more than Five million
pesos (P5,000,000.00) shall be imposed if
illegal recruitment constitutes economic
sabotage as defined therein.
"Provided, however, That the maximum
penalty shall be imposed if the person illegally
recruited is less than eighteen (18) years of
age or committed by a non-licensee or non-
holder of authority.
"(c) Any person found guilty of any of the
prohibited acts shall suffer the penalty of
imprisonment of not less than six (6) years
and one (1) day but not more than twelve
(12) years and a fine of not less than Five
hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) nor
more than One million pesos
(P1,000,000.00).
"If the offender is an alien, he or she shall, in
addition to the penalties herein prescribed, be
deported without further proceedings.
"In every case, conviction shall cause and
carry the automatic revocation of the license
or registration of the recruitment/manning
agency, lending institutions, training school or
medical clinic."
NOTE: Be careful on the effectivity of the
laws.
- RA 8042 – June 7, 1995
- RA 10022 – March 10, 2010
Prepared by: JOSE, Lovella Anne J.
Prescriptive Period
Local Illegal Recruitment and Placement – 3
years (Art. 305 of the Labor Code)
Simple Illegal Recruitment – 5 years (RA
8042)
Qualified Illegal Recruitment – 20 years (RA
8042)
People vs. Manalang
 RA 8042 broadened the concept of
illegal recruitment for overseas
employment and increased the
penalties. Thus, while Article 38 of the
Labor Code limits illegal recruitment to
recruitment activities undertaken by
non-licensees or non-holders of
authority, Part II of RA 8042 defines
and penalizes illegal recruitment for
employment abroad, regardless of
whether it was undertaken by a non-
licensee or non-holder of authority or
by a licensee or holder of authority.
 Illegal recruitment in large scale can
co-exist with estafa.
 Bad faith and damage are not essential
in illegal recruitment.
Toston vs. People
 Toston engaged in recruitment and
placement when he interviewed the
complainant.
 Interview is a component of
recruitment.
 Referral to Runas, and the referral to
the medical clinic constitutes acts of
recruitment and placement.
 It is therefore clear that at the time of
Mary Ann's recruitment in June 2010,
Steadfast's recruitment license had not
yet been cancelled; and Toston's
employment thereat was duly reported
to the POEA.
 The fact that Toston's 2009-2011 stint
at Steadfast does not appear in
subsequent POEA record searches
cannot be held against him. In People
Page 5 of 7
Labor Law Review Lecture Notes – October 25, 2022
v. Chowdury, this Court acquitted the
accused who was found guilty of illegal
recruitment on the basis of a finding
that his employment in the subject
recruitment agency was not reported to
the POEA.
 Toston cannot be faulted for not
following up on his registration status.
Since the obligation to register his
Marajas vs. People
employment fell upon Steadfast,
Toston was justified in relying upon his
employer to faithfully comply with
industry regulations. Furthermore,
there is enough documentation on
record to prove that Toston was
employed at Steadfast at the time of
Mary Ann's recruitment, and that
Steadfast reported his employment to
the POEA.
 Toston was merely performing his
tasks as a documented employee of a
validly licensed recruitment agency,
under the supervision of the agency's
general manager, Gutierrez. Thus, he
cannot be held liable for illegal
recruitment per se.
People vs. Chowdury
 The obligation to register its personnel
with the POEA belongs to the officers of
the agency. A mere employee of the
agency cannot be expected to know the
legal requirements for its operation.
The evidence at hand shows that
accused-appellant carried out his
duties as interviewer of Craftrade
believing that the agency was duly
licensed by the POEA and he, in turn,
was duly authorized by his agency to
deal with the applicants in its behalf.
 This is not to say that private
complainants are left with no remedy
for the wrong committed against them.
The Department of Justice may still file
a complaint against the officers having
control, management or direction of
the business of Craftrade Overseas
Developers (Craftrade), so long as the
offense has not yet prescribed. Illegal
Prepared by: JOSE, Lovella Anne J.
recruitment is a crime of economic
sabotage which need to be curbed by
the strong arm of the law. It is
important, however, to stress that the
government's action must be directed
to the real offenders, those who
perpetrate the crime and benefit from
it.
 Petitioner's denial that she did not
engage in any recruitment activity
cannot prevail over the positive
identification of private complainant of
the former who made representations
on her capability of sending private
complainant to Beijing, China for
employment. The Court has oft
pronounced that denial is an inherently
weak defense which cannot prevail
over the positive and credible
testimony of the prosecution witness
that the accused committed the crime.
Thus, as between a categorical
testimony which has the ring of truth
on the one hand, and a mere denial and
alibi on the other, the former is
generally held to prevail.
 Section 3(a) of R.A. No. 9208 defines
"Trafficking in Persons" as the
"recruitment, transportation, transfer
or harboring, or receipt of persons with
or without the victim's consent or
knowledge, within or across national
borders by means of threat or use of
force, or other forms of coercion,
abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of
power or of position, taking advantage
of the vulnerability of the person, or,
the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a
person having control over another
person for the purpose of exploitation
which includes at a minimum, the
exploitation or the prostitution of
others or other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the removal or
sale of organs." Furthermore, the same
Page 6 of 7
Labor Law Review Lecture Notes – October 25, 2022 Prepared by: JOSE, Lovella Anne J.

provision provides that "[t]he of DOLE or POEA. (Absence of proper

recruitment, transportation, transfer, job order)
harboring or receipt of a child for the 5. Recruitment can only take place when
purpose of exploitation shall be there is a valid job order accredited by
considered as 'trafficking in persons' the POEA. A valid job order in favor of
even if it does not involve any of the one agency can later on be transferred
means set forth in the preceding to another agency with new process of
paragraph." The crime of "Trafficking in accreditation.
Persons" becomes qualified when, 6. The mere fact that the one who issued
among others, the trafficked person is the certificate is not present in the
a child. court to testify will not affect the
probative weight of the such evidence
Jurisprudence on Illegal Recruitment
pursuant to presumption of regularity
1. Sec. 6[m] of RA 8042 criminalizes the of performance of official function.
failure to reimburse documentation and (People vs. David)
processing expenses incurred by 7. Actual receipt of a fee is not an element
applicant in case of non-deployment. of illegal recruitment. (People vs.
(there must be demand and no fault on Ballesteros)
the applicant) 8. Good faith and merely following orders
2. In illegal recruitment, mere failure to are not viable defenses in a charge of
present written receipt is not fatal to illegal recruitment. (People vs.
the prosecution. Provided that Valenciano)
payment can be proved by clear and 9. Money is immaterial in a prosecution of
convincing testimonies of credible a complaint of illegal recruitment.
witnesses. The duty to issue the official
Trafficking in Illegal
receipts is on the recruitment agency,
Persons Recruitment
hence non-issuance should not be
May or may not Does not involve
taken against the claimants. (People involve coercion, coercion but uses
vs. Espiritu, et.al) fraud, deception, more of deception,
3. A person who is charged of illegal abuse of promises and fraud.
recruitment can also be charged of vulnerability, etc.
estafa. The offense of illegal Characterized by Facilitates the entry
recruitment is malum prohibitum, subsequent from one country or
estafa is malum in se. Acquittal in exploitation after the another through an
illegal recruitment case does not mean illegal entry of one authorized or
acquittal in estafa and vice versa. person from one unauthorized or
Conviction in illegal recruitment does country to another. even licensed or
not mean conviction in estafa. (People non-licensed
vs. Sison) agency.
4. Sec. 6(L) of RA 8042 or failure to Presence of Recruitment without
actually deploy the worker without a exploitation or that a license is
valid reason as determined by DOLE the recruitment is immediately
requires special evidence. It requires facilitated for the punishable, no need
purpose of to prove
an independent evidence from DOLE or
exploitation. exploitation.
POEA. It is a certification that
deployment is possible, and that there Human rights issue. International
migration concern.
is no reason why complainant cannot
be deployed. It is issued by an Officer

Page 7 of 7