Showing posts with label Social Legislation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Legislation. Show all posts

Friday, December 25, 2020

Social Legislation Reviewer for Finals

 

Social Legislation Reviewer for Finals

 

 

 

Employees Compensation and State Insurance Fund

1.      Who are subject to coverage under the employees’ compensation program?

The following are subject to coverage under the employees’ compensation program:

§  Private sector workers who are compulsory members of the Social Security System (SSS) and sea-based Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs).

§  Government sector employees who are members of the Government service Insurance System (GSIS), including members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, elective government officials who are receiving regular salary and all casual, emergency, temporary and substitute or contractual employees.

 

 

2.      When shall EC claims be filed? And, on what grounds may a claim be made for benefits under the employees’ compensation program?

EC claims must be filed within a period of three years from:

§  In case of sickness, from the time the employee was unable to report for work;

§  In case of injury, from the time of the incident;

§  In case of death, from the date of death.

 

The filing of disability or death benefits either under the SSS law or the GSIS law within three years from the time the cause of action accrued would stop the running of the prescriptive period.

 

 

3.      May an illness not listed by the Employees Compensation Commission as an occupational disease be compensable? If so, cite an example.

 

Yes. An illness not listed by the Employees Compensation Commission as an occupational disease be compensable.

 

The Supreme Court in the case of Santos vs ECC & GSIS, [GR. No. 89222, 1993] states that “Where the claimant's illness is not listed in the Table of Occupational Diseases embodied in Annex A of the Rules on Employees' Compensation, said claimant must positively prove that the risk of contracting the disease is increased by the working conditions. Cirrhosis of the liver is not listed as an occupational disease.”

 

The law defines compensable sickness as any illness definitely accepted as occupational disease listed by the Commission, or any illness caused by employment subject to proof that the risk of contracting the same is increased by the working conditions. For sickness and the resulting death of an employee to be compensable, the claimant must show either: (1) that it is a result of an occupational disease listed under Annex A of the Amended Rules on Employees' Compensation with the conditions set therein satisfied: or (2) if not so listed, that the risk of contracting the disease is increased by the working conditions.

 

In the case of Santos vs ECC & GSIS, [GR. No. 89222, 1993] SC held that even “Cirrhosis of the liver is not listed as an occupational disease. Nevertheless, in the very recent case of Librea v. Employees' Compensation Commission. SC took a liberal stand and based on the evidence presented, pronounced the said sickness compensable. In the cited case, a Division Physical Education Supervisor, who likewise spent the last 32 years of his life in public service was adjudged entitled to the benefits of the ECC, upon his death due to liver cirrhosis.”

 

But in the case of Lorenzo vs GSIS; the Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia is a result of a defective genetic expression in expanding hematopoietic stem cells hence not work related as a teacher; therefore is not entitled of the benefits as provided by law.

 

 

GSIS Act

4.      What government employees are subject to coverage under the Government Service Insurance System?

As provided in Section 3 of RA 8291 that the "Compulsory Membership. — Membership in the GSIS shall be compulsory for all employees receiving compensation who have not reached the compulsory retirement age, irrespective of employment status, except members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police, subject to the condition that they must settle first their financial obligation with the GSIS, and contractuals who have no employer and employee relationship with the agencies they serve.

 

“Except for the members of the judiciary and constitutional commissions who shall have life insurance only, all members of the GSIS shall have life insurance, retirement, and all other social security protection such as disability, survivorship, separation, and unemployment benefits."

 

 

5.      Who are excluded from the coverage of the GSIS Act?

The government employee excluded from the coverage of GSIS as stated in Section 3 of RA 8291 are:

§  Members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines

§  Philippine National Police

§  Contractuals (of the government) who have no employer-employee relationship with the government agencies they serve.

 

The members of the judiciary and constitutional commissions have only life insurance benefit with the GSIS.

 

 

6.      When is retirement compulsory?

The retirement is compulsory at the age of 65 [R.A. 8291, Sec. 13, Par. B]

 

 

7.      Is the pension of a public servant a gratuity? Explain.

 

Yes. The pension of a public servant a gratuity.

 

Section 7-1(9) of Commonwealth Act No. 246, as amended, which provides the following:

Compensation of persons receiving pension — A person receiving life pension, annuity, or gratuity from the government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines, or any province, city, municipality, or other subdivision thereof, or from any government owned or controlled entity or enterprise, who is reappointed to any position, the appropriation for the salary of which is provided from funds of the said Commonwealth Government of any province, city, municipality, or other subdivision thereof, or from any government-owned or controlled entity, or enterprise, shall have the option to receive either the compensation for the position, or the pension, gratuity or annuity; but in no case shall he receive both.

 

The provision of second paragraph of Section 8 of Article IX-B of the Constitution which states "Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double, or indirect compensation," may not be invoked. This provision simply means that a retiree receiving pension or gratuity can continue to receive such pension or gratuity even if he accepts another government position to which compensation is attached [Ocampo vs COA, G.R. No. 188716].”

 

Retirement laws are liberally construed in favor of the employee because the level of retirement compensation is below the cost of living requirements of a retiree. A grateful nation owes the retiree at the very least a liberal interpretation. Hence; it is submitted that the pension of a public servant is of a nature a gratuitous compensation of his/her work done in the government.  Although the employee contributed in such pension; but nevertheless the benefits derived therein; the aids and welfare and the compensation program of the government by virtue of the current enabling laws with respect to pension and retirement are for the good of the beneficiaries therein.

 

 

 

SSS Act

8.      What is the policy of the State under the Social Security Law?

As embodied in Section 2 of R.A 8282 gives the policy of the state in the SSS beneficiaries which states that "Declaration of Policy. - It is the policy of the Republic of the Philippines to establish, develop, promote and perfect a sound and viable tax-exempt social security service suitable to the needs of the people throughout the Philippines which shall promote social justice and provide meaningful protection to members and their beneficiaries against the hazards of disability, sickness, maternity, old age, death, and other contingencies resulting in loss of income or financial burden. Towards this end, the State shall endeavor to extend social security protection to workers and their beneficiaries."

 

 

9.      Cite instances of a voluntary coverage under the SSS law.

The following are instances of voluntary coverage under the SSS Law:

 

§  Voluntary contributions of employers and/or employees, self-employed and voluntary members and their earnings [Sec. 4, R.A. 8282]

§  Spouses who devote full time to managing the household and family affairs, unless they are also engaged in other vocation or employment which is subject to mandatory coverage, may be covered by the SSS on a voluntary basis. [R.A. 8282, Sec. 9, Par. B]

§  Filipinos recruited by foreign-based employers for employment abroad may be covered by the SSS on a voluntary basis. [R.A. 8282, Sec. 9, Par. C]

 

 

10.  What is a “self-employed” individual?

A self-employed person shall be both employee and employer at the same time. [R.A. 8282, Sec. 8, Par. D]

 

 

11.  After working for five (5) years in a private insurance company, Jose was fired without cause.  His dismissal affected him so much that two months after his dismissal he suffered a stroke resulting in the paralysis of left arm and legs. Considering that Jose was no longer working at the time he incurred disability, is he nevertheless entitled to disability benefits under the SSS Law? Why?

 

Yes;  Jose’s disability is permanent partial because he suffered a stroke resulting in the paralysis of left arm and legs.

 

As provided in R.A. 8282, Sec. 13-A, Par. E provides that “If the disability is permanent partial, and such disability occurs before thirty-six (36) monthly contributions have been paid prior to the semester of disability, the benefit shall be such percentage of the lump sum benefit described in the preceding paragraph with due regard to the degree of disability as the Commission may determine.”

 

Since Jose is working with a private insurance company for 5 years; it is submitted that since he is employed it is presumed that his employer made the contribution to the SSS; and that Jose was working for 5 years already.  Therefore Jose is covered to the Disability Benefits by the SSS.

 

 

Anti-Sexual Harassment Act

12.  Who can be victims of sexual harassment?

Although women are the most frequent targets of sexual harassment; but nevertheless both males and females can either be the victim of sexual harassment.

 

As provided in R.A. 11313, Sec. 4 which states that "Section 4. Gender-Based Streets and Public Spaces Sexual Harassment. -The crimes of gender-based streets and public spaces sexual harassment are committed through any unwanted and uninvited sexual actions or remarks against any person regardless of the motive for committing such action or remarks."  This law provides Gender-Based protection for the victim which is not based on sex but on the gender of the victim.

 

 

13.  What constitutes sexual harassment?

As provided in Sec. 3 of R.A. 7877; the following constitute sexual harassment:

 

(a) In a work-related or employment environment, sexual harassment is committed when:

(1) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment, re-employment or continued employment of said individual, or in granting said individual favorable compensation, terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in limiting, segregating or classifying the employee which in any way would discriminate, deprive ordiminish employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect said employee;

(2) The above acts would impair the employee's rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or

(3) The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the employee.

 

(b) In an education or training environment, sexual harassment is committed:

(1) Against one who is under the care, custody or supervision of the offender;

(2) Against one whose education, training, apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the offender;

(3) When the sexual favor is made a condition to the giving of a passing grade, or the granting of honors and scholarships, or the payment of a stipend, allowance or other benefits, privileges, or consideration; or

(4) When the sexual advances result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for the student, trainee or apprentice.

 

As provided in Sec. 4 of R.A. 11313; the following constitute sexual harassment:

“Gender-based streets and public spaces sexual harassment includes catcalling, wolf-whistling, unwanted invitations, misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic and sexist slurs, persistent uninvited comments or gestures on a person’s appearance, relentless requests for personal details, statement of sexual comments and suggestions, public masturbation or flashing of private parts, groping, or any advances, whether verbal or physical, that is unwanted and has threatened one’s sense of personal space and physical safety, and committed in public spaces such as alleys, roads, sidewalks and parks. Acts constitutive of gender-based streets and public spaces sexual harassment are those performed in buildings, schools, churches, restaurants, malls, public washrooms, bars, internet shops, public markets, transportation terminals or public utility vehicles.”

 

 

 

14.  Discuss the penalty for violation of the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act.

The penalty for violation of the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act is that “Any person who violates the provisions of this Act shall, upon conviction, be penalized by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month nor more than six (6) months, or a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000) nor more than Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000), or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court.” [Sec. 7, R.A. 7877].

 

Section 6 of the said law provides for an “Independent Action for Damages. - Nothing in this Act shall preclude the victim of work, education or training-related sexual harassment from instituting a separate and independent action for damages and other affirmative relief.”

 

 

Solo Parent Welfare Act and Paternity Leave Act

15.  Discuss the qualification of a Solo Parent.

To be entitled for the benefits, trainings and other programs granted by the government by virtue of R.A 8972 the following qualifications of a Solo Parent are necessary:

§  That he/she is a Solo Parent pursuant to the provision in Sec. 3, Par. A of R.A. 8972

§  Having an income in the place of domicile falls below the poverty threshold as set by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and subject to the assessment of the DSWD worker in the area shall be eligible for assistance: Provided, however, That any solo parent whose income is above the poverty threshold shall enjoy the benefits mentioned in Sections 6, 7 and 8 of this Act.

 

 

16.  What are the benefits of solo parents under the Solo Parent Welfare Act?

The benefits of Solo Parents are:

§  Comprehensive Package of Social Development and Welfare Services. [Sec. 5, R.A. 8972]

§  Flexible Work Schedule [Sec. 6, R.A. 8972]

§  Against Work Discrimination [Sec. 7, R.A. 8972]

§  Parental Leave [Sec. 8, R.A. 8972]

§  Educational Benefits [Sec. 9, R.A. 8972]

§  Housing Benefits [Sec. 10, R.A. 8972]

§  Medical Assistance [Sec. 11, R.A. 8972]

 

 

17.  What is paternity leave?

 

Paternity Leave refers to the benefits granted to a married male employee allowing him not to report for work for seven (7) days but continues to earn the compensation therefor, on the condition that his spouse has delivered a child or suffered a miscarriage for purposes of enabling him to effectively lend support to his wife in her period of recovery and/or in the nursing of the newly-born child. [Sec. 3, R.A. 8187]

           

 

 

Monday, November 16, 2020

Ambassador Hotel vs. SSS [G.R. No. 194137] Case Digest

 

Ambassador Hotel vs. SSS

G.R. No. 194137

G-one T. Paisones

 

 

Facts:

SSS filed a complaint with the City Prosecutor's Office of Quezon City against Ambassador Hotel and its officers for non-remittance of SSS contributions and penalty liabilities for the period from June 1999 to March 2001.  Yoland Chan (President of the Hotel) and other officers were charged for the violation of Section 22(a), in relation to Section 22(d) and Section 28(e) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 1161, as amended by R.A. No. 8282. Only Yolanda was arrested. Upon arraignment, she pleaded not guilty.

RTC held that Yolanda could not be held criminally liable for the non-payment of SSS contributions because she was not performing the duties of the hotel's president from June 1999 to March 2001. The RTC, however, ruled that the acquittal of Yolanda did not absolve Ambassador Hotel from its civil liabilities.

 

Issue:

Whether or not Ambassador Hotel should pay its civil liabilities (including non-remittance of SSS contributions) even their president (Yolanda) acquitted from the said criminal case.

 

Held:

Yes.

 

Ratio:

The Social Security System is a government agency imbued with a salutary purpose to carry out the policy of the State to establish, develop, promote and perfect a sound and viable tax-exempt social security system suitable to the needs of the people throughout the Philippines which shall promote social justice and provide meaningful protection to members and their beneficiaries against the hazards of disability, sickness, maternity, old- age, death and other contingencies resulting in loss of income or financial burden.

Under Section 8(c) of R.A. No. 8282, an employer is defined as "any person, natural or juridical, 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, except the Government and any of its political subdivisions, branches or instrumentalities, including corporations owned or controlled by the Government." Ambassador Hotel, as a juridical entity, is still bound by the provisions of R.A. No. 8282. Section 22 (a) thereof states:

Remittance of Contributions. (a) The contributions imposed in the preceding section shall be remitted to the SSS within the first ten (10) days of each calendar month following the month for which they are applicable or within such time as the Commission may prescribe. Every employer required to deduct and to remit such contributions shall be liable for their payment and if any contribution is not paid to the SSS as herein prescribed, he shall pay besides the contribution a penalty thereon of three percent (3%) per month from the date the contribution falls due until paid. If deemed expedient and advisable by the Commission, the collection and remittance of contributions shall be made quarterly or semiannually in advance, the contributions payable by the employees to be advanced by their respective employers: Provided, That upon separation of an employee, any contribution so paid in advance but not due shall be credited or refunded to his employer.

Social Security Commission vs Hon. Bayona [G.R. No. L-13555] Case Digest

 

Social Security Commission vs Hon. Bayona

G.R. No. L-13555

G-one T. Paisones


Facts:

The Faculty Club of the University of Santo Tomas, Inc. and San Beda College Lay Faculty Club, Inc. filed a petition for declaratory relief with preliminary injunction before CFI of Manila alleging that they have existing agreements with their respective employers for the establishment of gratuity and retirement funds; that the Social Security Commission tried to compel them to integrate their private system into the Social Security System.  Faculty club alleged that their private systems grant more benefits to the members than the Social Security System; and the integration of their private systems would deprive their members of property without due process of law, as well as would impair the obligation of their contract to the detriment of the members.

Herein respondent Judge Bayona granted the petition by Faculty Club and issued preliminary injunction against SSC. SSC moved to dissolve the preliminary injunction on the following grounds a statute is presumed constitutional; and among others. The motion to dissolve was denied.

 

Issue:

Whether or not the SSS integration to Faculty Club’s existing private system for the establishment of gratuity and retirement funds to their members could destruct their current system.

 

Held:

No.

 

Ratio:

Neither can respondent corporations contend that their integration would mean the destruction of their existing private systems. The most that can happen would be a diminution of benefits in proportion to the reduction of the contributions to their private systems. But while they may suffer such reduction in benefits they also stand to benefit under the government system. Bear in mind that the integration does not mean the discontinuance of the private system for under the law three alternatives are open to respondents in effecting the integration. In other words, respondents may continue with whatever private social system they may have at present as a complement to the benefits afforded to them under the government system without prejudice to their integration into the government security system.