This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2010-02-26 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| 128 (b) of the Labor Code,[14] as amended by Republic Act (RA) No. 7730,[15] the DOLE Secretary and her representatives, the regional directors, have jurisdiction over labor standards violations based on findings made in the course of inspection of an employer's premises. The said jurisdiction is not affected by the amount of claim involved, as RA 7730 had effectively removed the jurisdictional limitations found in Articles 129 and 217 of the Labor Code insofar as inspection cases, pursuant to the visitorial and enforcement powers of the DOLE Secretary, are concerned.[16] The last sentence of Article 128(b) of the Labor Code recognizes an exception[17] to the jurisdiction of the DOLE Secretary and her representatives, but such exception is neither an issue nor applicable here. | |||||
|
2009-08-14 |
CARPIO MORALES, J. |
||||
| x x x if the labor standards case is covered by the exception clause in Article 128(b) of the Labor Code, then the Regional Director will have to endorse the case to the appropriate Arbitration Branch of the NLRC. In order to divest the Regional Director or his representatives of jurisdiction, the following elements must be present: (a) that the employer contests the findings of the labor regulations officer and raises issues therein; (b) that in order to resolve such issues, there is a need to examine evidentiary matters; and (c) that such matters are not verifiable in the normal course of inspection. The rules also provide that the employer shall raise such objections during the hearing of the case or at any time after receipt of the notice of inspection results.[14] | |||||
|
2009-06-16 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| This Court has held in a plethora of cases[19] that reliance on the Servando ruling is no longer tenable in view of the enactment of R.A. No. 7730, amending Article 128 (b) of the Labor Code. The Secretary of Labor or his duly authorized representatives is now empowered to hear and decide, in a summary proceeding, any matter involving the recovery of any amount of wages and other monetary claims arising out of employer-employee relations at the time of the inspection, even if the amount of the money claim exceeds P5,000.00. In Ex-Bataan Veterans Security Agency, Inc. v. Laguesma,[20] the Court elucidated:In Allied Investigation Bureau, Inc. v. Sec. of Labor, we ruled that: | |||||