3. Bisig Manggagawa vs Phil Refine

BISIG NG MANGGAGAWA NG PHILIPPINE REFINING CO., INC., plaintiff-appellant, vs. PHILIPPINE REFINING CO., INC. Facts: 1. April 15, 1966 Appellant labor union (Bisig ng Manggagawa) filed an action for declaratory relief in the Court of First Instance praying that the 1968 Collective Bargaining Agreement it had entered into with the company that: a. The union wanted to include the Christmas bonus and other fringe benefits in the computation of overtime pay.

2. The company contended that they never intended to include such benefits in the computation because they already increased the overtime computation from 25% to 50% in the condition that overtime pay will only include the regular base pay

and other fringe benefits in the computation but the appellee refused to accede to its demand.

CFI RULING: "regular base pay" does not include Christmas bonus and other fringe benefits. Issue: (1) whether or not the phrase "regular base pay as used in subject CBA includes Christmas bonus and other fringe benefits - NO

(2) whether or not the stipulation in the Collective Bargaining Agreement on overtime pay violates the NAWASA doctrine if the answer to question No. 1 is in the negative – NO Provision:

3. The ruling in NAWASA vs. NAWASA Consolidated Unions the company contended could not be applied because that was a government controlled corporation.

4. During the hearing, it was established that all the other collective bargaining agreements entered into between the parties before 1965 contained a provision similar to subject provision and that overtime pay then was computed on the basis solely of the employee's basic monthly pay, and that appellant had attempted to negotiate for the inclusion of the Christmas bonus

Commonwealth Act No. 444 "SEC. 3. Work may be performed beyond eight hours a day in case of actual or impending emergencies . . .; 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. NAWASA CASE – 25% of REGULAR AND BENEFITS = OVERTIME PAY CURRENT CASE – 50% of REGULAR = OVERTIME PAY RATIO

-

All employers covered by said law are under legal compulsion to grant their employees overtime compensation in amounts not less than their basic pay and the fringe benefits regularly and continuously received by them plus 25% thereof. o

-

BUT it does not mean computation should always include fringe benefits.

In the foregoing case, the company still complied with the basic requirement. Because based on the mathematical computation of the overtime pay in which the compensation was increased from 25% to 50% of the Regular Base Pay. IT YIELDED A HIGHER COMPENSATION THAN OF THE STATUTORY FORMULA.