Raffy Tulfo wants NLRC to promptly execute rulings favorable to employees

Senator Raffy Tulfo on Monday emphasized the need to address the alleged non-execution of the labor dispute decisions issued by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) that were favorable to the employees.

In a privilege speech, Tulfo said that there had been an increase in incidents of employees encountering difficulties in recovering their money claims or executing judgments that they fought so hard for.

He mentioned the case of a certain Tommy Flaviano and his group's case before the NLRC.

Although they won the case, Tulfo said the group had a hard time seeking their claims. The group was composed of 20 complainants but nine of them had already died because of the slow processing of claims.

"Indeed, the enforcement of rights through litigation is not the same for employers and employees. Iba ang pinagdadaanan ng abusadong employer at ng kawawang manggagawa," he said.

"Ang employer pag nanalo di mahirap para ipa-execute ang decision. Kadalasan inaaprubahan lang ang pagtanggal ng empleyado. Pero pag nanalo ang empleyado, pahirapan. Parang treasure hunt ang paghahanap ng mananagot sa award ng korte," he went on.

The senator said the problem starts at the very beginning when the parties go to Single Entry Approach (SENA) where the parties appear before a mediation officer to possibly reach an amicable settlement.

Although the procedure should only allow the attendance of the parties involved, Tulfo said the employees are easily intimidated as sometimes the employer-party sends their lawyer posing as their representative to attend the conference.

Tulfo proposed that only non-lawyers could represent parties before the SENA and the officers must be given guidelines by the NLRC on unreasonable settlements being proposed at the SENA level.

"The officers must be able to protect the employees against these kinds of agreements when their rights are really being violated," he said.

Should the parties fail to settle at the SENA level, Tulfo said they proceed to the filing of cases before the labor arbiters but there are delays in the resolution of cases.

He mentioned the NLRC's statement in one of the Senate committee hearings, admitting the delays that have been encountered during the filing and service of pleadings and processes

Tulfo pointed out that the NLRC and other courts have resorted to electronic filing during the pandemic.

He then suggested the NLRC institutionalize the use of this digital technology in its filing and service.

For Tulfo, the biggest problem is the execution of the NLRC rulings as employees were often left hopeless in seeking their claims.

"The rules of the NLRC provide for a cash bond and surety bond. But the problem is this cash bond and surety bond only arises when the case is appealed from the Labor Arbiter to the NLRC," he said.

"Most employers who want to evade the payment of money claims would stop fighting cases with their employees at the Labor Arbiter level. Because if they appeal to the Commission, they have to file a cash bond or surety bond equivalent to the award. Thus, it is easier to simply hide. Taguan na ng mga ari-arian," he continued.

Tulfo then raised the need to address this, explaining that the rights under the law "become useless when the employees could not enforce them in the end" and it just becomes a "paper victory."

The senator said he would file a proposal to provide a way to garnish the properties of employers at the Labor Arbiter level.

In a statement, the NLRC addressed the points Tulfo raised.

On the SENA, the NLRC said the presence of lawyers was not prohibited but merely discouraged.

"However, our con-meds take steps to inform parties of the guidelines during SEnA. They also verify if the lawyer present is authorized by the company to appear and/or authorized to enter into compromise/settlement agreements. Moreover, the requesting party may opt not to proceed with the hearing if he objects to the presence of the lawyer. He may inform the con-med immediately for a resetting," the NLRC said.

The NLRC will said it would raise the issue on the appearance/presence of lawyers during conciliation-mediation to the SENA Committee of the DOLE for a possible revision in the IRR.

On the issue of delays in the resolution of cases because of the delays in filing and service/ adoption of electronic filing, the NLRC said it served summons thru personal service by the bailiff.

"However due to lack of bailiffs, one (1) bailiff is assigned to the sala/office of four (4) Labor Arbiters (specially in NCR) to serve summons, orders and other processes issued by the LAs. The NLRC already engaged the services of a private courier, in addition to the postal service, to speed up the service of summons, orders, resolutions and decisions of the Commission," the NLRC said.

"It has also authorized 3 other private couriers whose services the stakeholders may use in the filing of their pleadings. The Committee on Rules has been reconstituted and is currently reviewing the Rules of Procedure for possible amendments, including the introduction of electronic filing," it added.

On the execution of its writs, the NLRC said, "The sheriff is duty bound to serve , even without the presence of the complainant/s, the writ of garnishment to all the banks within the vicinity of the establishment. If the respondent have no deposits in the said banks, the sheriff is duty bound to serve the notice of levy for real properties registered at the RD and motor vehicles registered in the LTO in the name of the respondent."

"If no properties registered in the RD or LTO, the sheriff will visit the premises of the establishment to levy the personal properties of the respondent found therein. It is only when there are no leviable properties that the sheriff will seek the assistance of the complainants to ask for additional information as to the possible whereabouts of other properties , since the sheriff does not know both the complainant and respondent as he comes only into the case during the execution stage," the NLRC said.

On piercing the veil of corporate fiction, the NLRC said a motion must be filed before the LA stating the grounds for the same.

"A hearing will thus be called for the propriety of the motion," the NLRC said.

On the matter of solidary liability, the NLRC said a decision being enforced must contain a finding that individual respondents were solidarily liable to be personally answerable to pay the judgment award.

"Existing jurisprudence states that individual respondents can be held solidarily liable with the corporation only if there is evident bad faith in the termination of the services of the employees," the NLRC said.

"With respect to the proposal on the Preliminary attachment of the properties of the respondents upon filing of the complaint, the NLRC will abide by   any   law  that will be  passed on the matter," it added.

"As to the specific case involving Mr. Tommy Flaviano, we are still getting the specific information from the concerned LA. May we inform you that as of 30 September 2022, the total judgment award released by NLRC is 1.613 Billion, benefitting 9,267 workers," the NLRC said.— DVM/NB, GMA Integrated News