1

Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
Intramuros, Metro Manila

JENIFFER P. ADOLFO, ROSE MINDA TIQUIL

GRANDESMA NAVIA, GLADYS LATONIO,
IRISH B. CAMPON,
Complainants-Appellees,

-versus- LSED Case No. RO700-2008-12-CI-125

OS No. _____________________
MDL MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT
LANGUAGE/MAJOR DEVEOPMENT
LANGUAGE CENTER AND OR SHiELA
TANEO, JANICE GABAYAN, SHEON YU &
PATRICK JIN,
Respondents-Appellants.
X - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - /

NOTICE OF APPEAL

COMES NOW, Respondents-Appellants, thru the undersigned

counsel, unto this Honorable Secretary of Labor, most respectfully
manifest their intention to appeal, as they hereby appeal from the
decision of the Regional Office No. VII Department of Labor and
Employment, Elias A. Cayanong, CESO IV Regional Director, dated
March 18, 2009, copy of which was officially received by respondents-
appelants only on June 03, 2009. This instant appeal is based on the
following grounds:

I- THAT THERE IS A PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF ABUSE OF

DISCRETION ON THE PART OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR,
ELIAS CAYANONG IN RENDERING THE QUESTIONED ORDER
AND RESOLUTION AGAINST RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS.

II- THAT REGIONAL DIRECTOR, ELIAS CAYANONG COMMITTED

SERIOUS ERRORS IN THE FINDINGS OF FACTS, WHICH IF
NOT CORRECTED WOULD CAUSE GRAVE AND
IRREPARABLE DAMAGE OR INJURY TO THE RESPONDENTS-
APPELLANTS.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
Cebu City, Philippines, June 15, 2009.

Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT
Intramuros, Metro Manila

1
 2

JENIFFER P. ADOLFO, ROSE MINDA TIQUIL

GRANDESMA NAVIA, GLADYS LATONIO,
IRISH B. CAMPON,
Complainants-Appellees,

-versus- LSED Case No. RO700-

2008-12-CI-125
OS No.
_________________
MDL MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT
LANGUAGE/MAJOR DEVEOPMENT
LANGUAGE CENTER AND OR SELA
TANEO, JANICE GABAYAN, SHEON YU &
PATRICK JIN,
Respondents-Appellants.
x - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - /

M E M O R A N D U M OF A P P E A L

COME NOW, RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS, thru the

undersigned counsel, most respectfully states;

PREFATORY STATEMENT

This is an appeal from the order/resolution of Regional Director,

Elias A. Cayanong, dated May 18, 2009, ordering
respondents/appellants to pay complainants/appellees an excessive
award in an aggregate amount of Five Hundred Sixty Seven
Thousand One Hundred Twenty Two Pesos and 56/100
(Php567,122.56) constituting underpayment of minimum wage, Non-
payment of overtime pay, non payment of legal Holiday Pay, on
payment of service incentive leave pay, non payment of 13 th month
pay and non remittance of SSS, Pag-ibig, and Philhealth
contributions and No ACR/ICR/AEP.

The dispositive portion of the assailed resolution is hereto

quoted as follows:
“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant
motion is hereby denied for lack of merit. The assailed Order

2
 3

dated January 20, 2009, is AFFIRMED but shall be corrected

to read as follows:
WHEREFORE, MDL Multilateral Development
Language and/or MAJOR DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE
CENTER INC and/or SHEILA TANEO, SHEON YU, PATRICK
JIN and JANICE GABAYAN are hereby ordered to pay the
amount of FIVE HUNDRED SIXTY SEVEN THOUSAND ONE
HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO and 56/100 (P567,122.56) PESOS
for the five(5) complainants, namely:
1. Jennifer Adolfo P123,157.39
2. Roseminda Tiquil P123,157.39
3. Grandesa Navia P119,820.24
4. Gladys Latonio P25,667.11
5. Iris B. Campon P175,320.43
Total P 567,122.56
SO RESOLVED
Cebu City, Philippines, March 18, 2009

Copy of the resolution was officially received by the

undersigned counsel on June 3, 2009 and machine copy of which is
hereto attached as annex “1”.

With all due respect to Elias A. Cayanong, CESO IV, said

Order/Resolution is UNWARRANTED, UNJUST, UNMERITORIOUS
and the monetary award is GROSSLY EXCESSIVE having no factual
and legal basis. Consequently, this order/resolution deserved a
second look by this Office of the Secretary of Labor and to consider
serious errors in the findings of facts and conclusion of law, which if
not corrected, would cause grave or irreparable damage or injury to
respondents-appellants and a prima facie evidence of grave abuse of
discretion on the part of the Regional Director.

Hence, this appeal.

THE PARTIES

Complainants-appellees, namely, Jennifer Adolfo, Roseminda

Tiquil, Gladys Latonio, Gradesa Navia and Iris Campon, (hereinafter

3
 4

referred to as “complainants-appellees” for brevity) were former

employees of respondents-appellants as cook and kitchen helper,
respectively.

Respondents-appellants, Major Development Language (MDL)

Center Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “respondents-appellants”
for brevity) is a corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the Republic of the Philippines with office address in R.
Duterte St. Banawa Cebu City. It is a business entity engaged in
private tutorial school business, catering mostly, Korean, Japanese
and Taiwanese students.

B R I E F S T A T E M E N T OF F A C T S

A complaint for violations of Labor Standard Laws before the

Regional Office was filed on December 3, 2008, by herein
complainants Jennifer P. Adolfo, Roseminda E. Tinguil, Grandesa C.
Navia, Gladys Latonio and Irish B. Lampon. They are employed as
cook and kitchen helper, respectively.
Copy of the complaint is hereto attached as annex “2” of this
memorandum of appeal.

Pursuant to the said complaint, this office conducted an

inspection in accordance with Article 128 of the Labor Code, as
amended by R.A. 7730. During the inspection, conducted by Leo B.
Jimenez, he noted the following alleged violations of the Labor
Standard Laws of the herein respondents, to wit: underpayment of
minimum wage, non-payment of overtime pay, non payment of legal
holiday pay, non payment of service incentive leave pay, non
payment of 13th month pay, non remittance of SSS, Pag-ibig, and
Philhealth contributions and No ACR/ICR/AEP presented for Sheon
Yu and Patrick Jun, Korean National. Said Labor Officer computed

4
 5

the alleged monetary violations for each five(5) complainants, as

follows:
1. Jennifer Adolfo P123,157.39
2. Roseminda Tiquil P123,157.39
3. Grandes Navia P119,820.24
4. Gladys Latonio P25,667.11
5. Iris B. Campon P175,320.43
Total P567,122.56

A motion for reconsideration was filed by respondents-

appellants, dated February 24, 2009. However, on May 18, 2009, a
resolution was issued by this Honorable Office denying said motion
for reconsideration.
Copy of the Resolution is hereto attached as annex “3’ of this
memorandum of appeal.

Hence, this appeal.

S T A T E M E N T AS TO THE TIMELINESS
OF THE APPEAL

Herein respondents-appellants authorized representative

received the formal copy of the Resolution on this Honorable
Regional Director dated May 18, 2009, denying the Motion for
Reconsideration, only on June 3, 2009. And in accordance with Rule
IV, Section 1,2,3, and 4 of Rules and Disposition of Labor Standard
Laws, as amended by R.A. 7730, the aggrieved party may appeal the
resolution/order to the Secretary of Labor and Employment within a
period of ten (10) calendar days from receipt of a copy of said order
or resolution. Thus, the last day to file the instant appeal is June 13,
2009 and considering that the last day of filing is Saturday, the last
day is June 15, 2009, which the next working day (Monday).

A S S I G N M E N T OF E R R O R S

5
 6

I- THE HONORABLE REGIONAL DIRECTOR ERRED IN

FINDING RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS LIABLE FOR
WAGE DEFFERENTIALS, OVERTIME PAY, LEGAL
HOLIDAY PAY, SERVICE INCENTIVE LEAVE PAY AND
13TH MONTH PAY;

II- THE HONORABLE LABOR ARBITER COMMITTED

SERIOUS ERROR IN AWARDING EXCESSIVE
MONETARY AWARD IN THE AGGREGATE SUM OF
P567,122.56 CONSTITUTING WAGE DEFFERENTIALS,
OVERTIME PAY, LEGAL HOLIDAY PAY, SERVICE
INCENTIVE LEAVE PAY AND 13TH MONTH PAY
WITHOUT PROPER COMPUTATIONS;

ARGUMENTS/DISCUSSION

I-THE HONORABLE REGIONAL

DIRECTOR ERRED IN FINDING
RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS
LIABLE FOR WAGE
DIFFERENTIALS, OVERTIME PAY,
LEGAL HOLIDAY PAY, SERVICE
INCENTIVE LEAVE PAY AND 13TH

With all due respect, the Honorable Regional Director erred in

finding respondents-appellants liable for wage differentials, overtime
pay, legal holiday pay, service incentive leave pay and 13 th month
pay.
During spot investigation conducted by this office and relying
only the data submitted by complainants-appellees, the Honorable
Regional Director made unsubstantiated findings against herein
respondents-appellants in violation of due process of law without
verifying the veracity and truthfulness of the allegations in the
complaint and without showing a complete data and figures as how
the monetary award was computed.

As proof thereto that respondents-appellants complied with the

minimum Labor Standard Laws, attached are the payslip duly signed

6
 7

by the complainants-appellees. Copies of the original payslip duly

signed by employees (complainants-appellees) are hereto attached
proving that indeed, they were given the minimum wage and other
benefits in accordance with the Labor Standard Laws.

As shown in the payslip duly signed by Roseminda Tiquil,

employed as cook, hereto attached as annexes 4-a to 4-i, she
received a salary in the sum of P270.00 per day, with free breakfast,
lunch and dinner because she enjoyed this meal benefit during her
duty hours and from the time she was employed as cook. Moreover,
aside from her meal benefit, she also enjoyed free use of water for
her shower, washing of her clothes with free soap. Approximately if
converted to monetary value, the cost of her food is P30 to P40 per
meal.

With respect to Adolfo Jennifer, employed as cook, and as

shown in his payslip duly signed by him, hereto attached as annexes
5-a to 5-g he received a salary of P270.00 per day, likewise, with free
breakfast, lunch and dinner because he enjoyed this meal benefit
during his duty hours and from the time he was employed as cook.
Moreover, aside from this meal benefit, he also enjoyed free use of
water for her shower, washing of her clothes with free soap.
Approximately if converted to monetary value, the cost of his food is
P30 to P40 per meal.

With respect to Iris Lampon, employed only as assistant cook,

as shown in her payslip duly signed by her, hereto attached as
annexes 6-a to 6-i, she received a salary in the sum of P170.00 per
day, with free breakfast, lunch and dinner because she enjoyed this
meal benefit during her duty hours and from the time she was
employed as assistant cook. Moreover, aside from this meal benefit,
she also enjoyed free use of water for her shower, washing of her

7
 8

clothes with free soap. Approximately if converted to monetary value,

the cost of his food is P30 to P40 per meal.

With respect to Navia Grandeasa, employed only as assistant

cook, as shown in her payslip duly signed by her, hereto attached as
annexes 7-a to 7-i, she received a salary of P160 per day, likewise
with free breakfast, lunch and dinner because she enjoyed this meal
benefit during her duty hours and from the time she was employed as
assistant cook. Moreover, aside from this meal benefit, she also
enjoyed free use of water for her shower, washing of her clothes with
free soap. Approximately if converted to monetary value, the cost of
his food is P30 to P40 per meal.

With respect to Gladys Latonio, employed only as assistant

cook, as shown in her payslip duly signed by her, hereto attached as
annexes 8-a to 8-f, she received a salary of P120.00 per day,
likewise with free breakfast, lunch and dinner because she enjoyed
this meal benefit during her duty hours and from the time she was
employed as assistant cook. Moreover, aside from this meal benefit,
she also enjoyed free use of water for her shower, washing of her
clothes with free soap. Approximately if converted to monetary value,
the cost of her food is P30 to P40 per meal.

Indeed, all the complainants worked with free meal and the
value of the meal was not included in their respective payslip/payroll.
They worked in the same category as domestic helper although they
did not stay in the house or building premises of the corporation and
works purely in the kitchen.

To disprove that complainants-appellees were given 13 th month

pay, hereto attached are the documentary evidence that
complainants-appellees received their 13th month pay.

8
 9

Copies of the documents duly signed by the complainants that

they indeed received their respective 13 th month pay are hereto
attached as annex 9.

Likewise, to prove that respondents-appellants remitted their

employees SSS to the Office of Social Seecurity System, hereto
attached as annexes 10a to 10z are the documentary evidences,
including receipt that SSS contribution payment returns were remitted
and summary of contributions.

Also Philhealth contributions were also remitted. Copies of the

receipt and Employer Quarterly remittance report are hereto attached
as annexes “11a” to “11v”

Relative to the issue on overtime work, the nature of the work of

complainants-appellees was purely on the kitchen works as cook.
They worked only during every meal time wherein they cooked the
food of the officers and students of the corporation. Other than
cooking the food during meal time, complainants-appellees were
relaxed because they have no other work except to cook the food
during meal time. Indeed, they started working at 6:00 o’clock in the
morning and after meal time from 8:30 o’clock to 10:00 o’clock they
are free and vacant and allowed to go out in the premises and go
back at 10:00 o’clock to 1:30 o’clock in the afternoon. During dinner,
appellees were again required to in at 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon to
7:00 o’clock in the afternoon. Hence, respondents-appellants are not
liable for overtime pay. In fact, attached are the logbook, as annexes
12-a to 12 showing their in and out of the company’s premises.

Hence, the award for wage differential, non-payment of

overtime pay, legal holiday, service incentive leave, 13 th month pay
and non remittance of SSS, Pag-ibig and Philhealth contributions

9
 10

without verifying the documentary evidences but based only on actual

interview during spot investigation without even presenting a proper
computation as to how they arrived the particular amount is clearly a
violation of due process on the part or respondents-appellants. In
fairness to the latter and as shown in the documentary attached,
complainants-appellees received said mandatory benefits.

II-THE HONORABLE REGIONAL

DIRECTOR ERRED IN AWARDING
EXCESSIVE MONETARY AWARD IN THE
AGGREGATE SUM OF P567,122.56
CONSTITUTING WAGE
DIFFERENTIALS, OVERTIME PAY,
LEGAL HOLIDAY PAY, SERVICE
INCENTIVE LEAVE PAY AND 13TH
MONTH PAY AGAINST RESPONDENTS-
APPELLANTS

That aggregate award of Five Hundred Sixty Seven Thousand

One Hundred Twenty Two Pesos (P567,122.56) by Regional Director
is grossly excessive, unreasonable and unfair on the part of
respondents-appellants. Indeed, it would be unreasonable
considering that the Regional Director presented no computation as
to how the award was computed in favor to the respective
complainants-appellees without verifying the truthfulness of the
allegations but based purely on the allegations of the appellees.

The Honorable Regional Director believed hook line and sinker,

the allegation of the appellees without affirming the veracity of the
complaint. There was even no concrete basis as to how the award
was computed.

The Regional Director awarded a hefty and excessive amount

of wage differential, overtime pay, legal holiday pay, service incentive
leave pay and 13th month pay with no proper computations.

10
 11

Indeed, it would be unduly harsh to respondents-appellants to

pay said iniquitous amount which is clearly, constituting grave abuse
of discretion on the part of the Regional Director and the same has no
legal and factual basis.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, it is most respectfully
prayed of this Honorable Office, that after due consideration of the
instant appeal and in the interest of substantial justice and equity, the
order/resolution of the Regional Director dated, March 18, 2009 be
REVERSED and SET ASIDE and to consider the documentary
evidences submitted by herein respondents-appellants.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
Cebu City, June 15, 2009.

MONDIGO LAW OFFICE

Rm 205, 2nd Flr. Medalle Bldg.
Fuente Osmeña, Cebu City

NELSON J. MONDIGO
Counsel for the Respondent-Appellants
IBP No. 771089 1/30/2009 Cebu City
PTR No. 5445033 1/30/2009 Cebu City
Roll of Attorney No. 42466

Copy furnished thru registered mail:

Ms. Jennifer P. Adolfo et at

B- Ceniza St. Asinan
Mandaue City

EXPLANATION

Copy of the foregoing memorandum of appeal is being served

to Jennifer P. Adolfo by registered mail.

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

11
 12

I, MARJORIE REBOGARDA, of legal age, married, Filipino

citizen and a resident of Basak Pardo, Cebu City after having been
duly sworn to in accordance with law hereby depose and state;

1. That I am the attorney-in-fact of respondents-appellants

corporation and authorized through board resolution to sign this
verification. Copy of the Board Resolution is hereto attached as
annex “13”

2. That in behalf of respondents-appellants corporation, I

have caused the preparation of the foregoing memorandum of
appeal;

3. That I have read the allegations contained therein and

have known them to be true and correct to my own personal
knowledge or based on authentic record;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my

signature this ___th day of June 2009 at Cebu City.

MARJORIE REBOGARDA
Affiant

SUBSCIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this ___th

day of June 2009 in the City of Cebu; Affiant exhibited to me her
Community Tax Certificate No. ___________ issued at Cebu City on
______________.

Doc. No. __________

Page No. __________
Book No. __________
Series of 2009

12