Labor Law Review
1st Sem, 2021-22
Atty. Paciano F. Fallar Jr.
SSCR-CoL
Bar Questions on
SSS/ECC/Disability
Q1. What is the extent of an employer’s intervention in the compensation process and
the payment of benefits to employees under the State Insurance Fund? Explain.
ANSWER: Under PD 626, the following are the employer’s intervention in the
compensation under the State Insurance Fund: (a) Under such regulations as the
System may prescribe, beginning as of the last day of the month when an employee's
compulsory coverage takes effect and every month thereafter during his employment,
his employer shall prepare to remit to the System a contribution equivalent to one
percent of his monthly salary credit. (b) The rate of contribution shall be reviewed
periodically and, subject to the limitations herein provided, may be revised as the
experience in risk, cost of administration, and actual or anticipated as well as
unexpected losses, may require. (c) Contributions under this Title shall be paid in their
entirety by the employer and any contract or device for the deduction of any portion
thereof from the wages or salaries of the employees shall be null and void. (d) When a
covered employee dies, becomes disabled or is separated from employment, his
employer's obligation to pay the monthly contribution arising from that employment shall
cease at the end of the month of contingency and during such months that he is not
receiving wages or salary.
Q2. Tito Paciencioso is an employee of a foundry shop in Malabon, Metro Manila. He is
barely able to make ends meet with his salary of P4,000.00 a month. One day, he
asked his employer to stop deducting from his salary his SSS monthly contribution,
reasoning out that he is waiving his social security coverage.
If you were Tito's employer, would you grant his request? Why?
ANSWER: NO. Under the SSS Law, once you become a covered SSS member, you
become a member for life. The contributions that you remit become savings for the
future that will serve as basis for the granting of social security benefits in times of
contingencies. Membership cannot be withdrawn and contributions paid cannot
refunded.
Q3.Can a member of a cooperative be deemed an employee for purposes of
compulsory coverage under the Social Security Act? Explain.
ANSWER: YES. Under the SSS Law, the Commission has the power to authorize
cooperatives registered with the cooperative development authority or associations
registered with the appropriate government agency to act as collecting agents of the
1
SSS with respect to their members: Provided, That the SSS shall accredit the
cooperative or association.
Q4. Mario, a member of cooperative RSC, filed a complaint for non-payment of
overtime pay with the DOLE Regional Office against RSC and its principal PizCorp. to
which he was deployed under the service agreement. RSC has a DOLE Certificate of
Registration as an independent contractor. After inspection, it was found that indeed
Mario was not getting his overtime pay. It was also found out that Mario was not
reported to the SSS. On this basis, the Regional Director issued a compliance order
holding PizCorp and RSC solidarily liable for the payment of overtime pay and ordering
PizCorp to report Mario for membership with SSS and remit overdue SSS premiums.
Who has the obligation to report the RSC members for membership with the SSS, with
the concomitant obligation to remit SSS premiums? Why?
ANSWER: RSC and PizCorp shall be solidarily liable with the obligation to remit
SSS premiums. However, RSC shall be the only one liable to report its members
for membership with the SSS.
Under the SSS Law, each employer shall immediately report to the SSS the names,
ages, civil status, occupations, salaries and dependents of all his employees who are
subject to compulsory coverage. Also, any person or entity engaging the services of an
independent contractor shall be subsidiarily liable with such contractor for any civil
liability incurred by the latter under this act: Provided, finally, That the same person or
entity engaging the services of an independent contractor shall require such contractor
to post a surety bond to guarantee the payment of the worker’s benefits.
Q5. A, single, has been an active member of the Social Security System for the past 20
months. She became pregnant out of wedlock and on her 7th month of pregnancy, she
was informed that she would have to deliver the baby through caesarean section
because of some complications. Can A claim maternity benefits? If yes, how many days
can she go on maternity leave? If not, why is she not entitled?
ANSWER: YES. She may be entitled to 78 days of leave for having to undergo
caesarean section.
Under the SSS Law, a female member who has paid at least three (3) monthly
contributions in the twelve-month period immediately preceding the semester of her
childbirth or miscarriage shall be paid a daily maternity benefit equivalent to one
hundred percent (100%) of her average daily salary credit for sixty (60) days or seventy-
eight (78) days in case of caesarean delivery.
Q6 AB, single and living-in with CD (a married man), is pregnant with her fifth child. She
applied for maternity leave but her employer refused the application because she is not
married. Who is right? Decide.
ANSWER: AB is right. Under the SSS Law, dependents comprise the following: the
legitimate, legitimated, or legally adopted, and illegitimate child who is unmarried, not
2
gainfully employed and has not reached twenty-one (21) years of age, or if over twenty-
one (21) years of age, he is congenitally or while still a minor has been permanently
incapacitated and incapable of self-support, physically or mentally. Furthermore,
Dependent Legitimate or Legitimated or Legally Adopted and Illegitimate Children are
considered as primary beneficiaries.
Q7.Pedro Tortilla and his employer were covered by the Social Security System. Tortilla
was legally married to Orpha de la Cruz, a plain housewife with whom he had two
minor, unmarried and unemployed children. But for two years, he had been living with
his common-law wife, Dore Tea, with whom he had two minor, unmarried and
unemployed children. His jobless father stayed with him. In his SSS record, he
designated as beneficiary his best friend, a 20-year-old student who was totally
dependent on him for support. In a car accident, Tortilla, Orpha de la Cruz and their two
children died.
Who are entitled to the death benefits?
ANSWER: The ones entitled to the death benefits are Tortilla’s 2 illegitimate
children and his designated beneficiary who is his bestfriend.
Under SSS Law, the beneficiaries are those who are the dependent spouse until he or
she remarries, the dependent legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted, and illegitimate
children, who shall be the primary beneficiaries of the member: Provided, That the
dependent illegitimate children shall be entitled to fifty percent (50%) of the share of the
legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted children: Provided, further, That in the absence
of the dependent legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted children of the member,
his/her dependent illegitimate children shall be entitled to one hundred percent (100%)
of the benefits. In their absence, the dependent parents who shall be the secondary
beneficiaries of the member. In the absence of all the foregoing, any other person
designated by the member as his/her secondary beneficiary.
Q8: Mans Weto had been an employee of Nopolt Assurance Company for the last ten
(10) years. His wife of six (6) years died last year. They had four (4) children. He then
fell in love with Jovy, his co-employee and they got married.
In October this year, Weto's new wife is expected to give birth to her first child. He has
accordingly filed his application for paternity leave, conformably with the provisions of
the Paternity Leave Law which took effect in 1996. The HRD manager of the assurance
firm denied his application, on the ground that Weto had already used up his entitlement
under that law. Weto argued that he has a new wife who will be giving birth for the first
time, therefore, his entitlement to paternity leave benefits would begin to run anew.
Whose contention is correct, Weto or the HRD manager?
ANSWER: Weto is correct. Under the Paternity Law as amended, a male employee
who is already enjoying the paternity leave benefits by reason of contract, company
policy or CBA to which the greater benefit prevails shall still be entitled to paternity
leave.
3
Q9: How many times may a male employee go on Paternity Leave? Can he avail
himself of this benefit, for example, 50 days after the first delivery by his wife?
ANSWER: A male employee may go on paternity leave for up to 4 times because
the law provides that every married male employee shall be entitled to paternity leave
for the first 4 deliveries of the legitimate spouse with whom he is cohabiting.
Q10.Luisa is an unwed mother with 3 children from different fathers. In 2004, she
became a member of the Social Security System (SSS). That same year, she suffered a
miscarriage of a baby out of wedlock from the father of her third child. She wants to
claim maternity benefits under the SSS Act. Is she entitled to claim?
ANSWER: YES. The law provides that a female member who has paid at least three (3)
monthly contributions in the twelve-month period immediately preceding the semester of
her childbirth or miscarriage shall be paid a daily maternity benefit equivalent to one
hundred percent (100%) of her average daily salary credit for sixty (60) days or seventy-
eight (78) days in case of caesarean delivery.
Q11.Luisito has been working with Lima Land for 20 years. Wanting to work in the
public sector, Luisito applied with and was offered a job at Livecor. Before accepting the
offer, he wanted to consult you whether the payments that he and Lima Land had made
to the Social Security System (SSS) can be transferred or credited to the Government
Service Insurance System (GSIS). What would you advice?
ANSWER: I would advice Luisito to proceed with his plan. Under the Portability Law,
retirees may combine their years of service in the private sector represented by
contributions to the Social Security System (SSS) with their government service and
contributions to the GSIS to satisfy the required years of service under PD 1146 and RA
8291.
Q12.Jennifer, a receptionist at Company X, is covered by the SSS. She was pregnant
with her fourth child when she slipped in the bathroom of her home and had a
miscarriage. Meanwhile, Company X neglected to remit the required contributions to the
SSS. Jennifer claims maternity leave benefits and sickness benefits. Which of these two
may she claim?
a. None of them;
b. Either one of them;
c. Only maternity leave benefits;
d. Only sickness benefits.
ANSWER: C
Q13.Baldo, a farm worker on pakyaw basis, had been working on Dencio's land by
harvesting abaca and coconut, processing copra, and clearing weeds from year to year
4
starting January 1993 up to his death in 2007. He worked continuously in the sense that
it was done for more than one harvesting season.
(a) Was Dencio required to report Baldo for compulsory social security coverage
under the SSS law? Explain.
ANSWER: YES. Jurisprudence provides that when a worker possesses some
attributes of an employee and others of an independent contractor, which
make him fall within an intermediate area, he may be classified under the
category of an employee when the economic facts of the relations make it
more nearly one of employment than one of independent business enterprise
with respect to the ends sought to be accomplished.
Thus, Baldo is considered a regular employee of Dencio’s land for having
worked continuously for more than one harvesting season. Hence, he should
be covered by the SSS Law.
(b) What are the liabilities of the employer who fails to report his employee for
social security coverage? Explain.
ANSWER: Under the SSS Law, if an employee subject to compulsory
coverage should die or become sick or disabled or reach the age of sixty (60)
without the SSS having previously received any report or written
communication about him from his employer, the said employer shall pay to
the SSS damages equivalent to the benefits to which said employee member
would have been entitled had his name been reported on time by the
employer to the SSS, except that in case of pension benefits, the employer
shall be liable to pay the SSS damages equivalent to the accumulated
pension due as of the date of settlement of the claim or to the five (5) years’
pension, whichever is higher, including dependents’ pension.
Q14.Because of the stress in caring for her four (4) growing children, Tammy suffered a
miscarriage late in her pregnancy and had to undergo an operation. In the course of the
operation, her obstetrician further discovered a suspicious-looking mass that required
the subsequent removal of her uterus (hysterectomy). After surgery, her physician
advised Tammy to be on full bed rest for six (6) weeks. Meanwhile, the biopsy of the
sample tissue taken from the mass in Tammy's uterus showed a beginning malignancy
that required an immediate series of chemotherapy once a week for four (4) weeks.
(a) What benefits can Tammy claim under existing social legislation? (4%)
ANSWER: Tammy can claim for Maternity benefits under the SSS Law.
(b) What can Roger-Tammy's 2nd husband and the father of her two (2) younger
children -claim as benefits under the circumstances? (4%)
ANSWER: Said person may be entitled under the Paternity Leave Law and
Portability Law for benefits and leave.
5
Q15.Carol de la Cruz is the secretary of the proprietor of an auto dealership in quezon
City. She resides in Caloocan City. Her office hours start at 8 a.m. and end at 5 p.m. On
July 30, 2008, at 7 a.m. while waiting for public transport at Rizal Avenue Extension as
has been her routine, she was sideswiped by a speeding taxicab resulting in her death.
The father of Carol filed a claim for employee's compensation with the Social Security
System.
Will the claim prosper? Why?
ANSWER: YES. The SSS Law provides that the basis of its claim includes non-work
connected disability, sickness, maternity, death and old age and other contingencies
resulting in loss of income or financial burden.
Here, even if Carol died as a result of commuting to her workplace, she is still covered
by the SSS law.
Q16.Under employee’s compensation, what is the relevance of the so-called "Theory of
Increased Risks" ?
ANSWER: Jurisprudence provides that for the sickness and the resulting disability or
death to be compensable, the sickness must be the result of an occupational disease
with the conditions set therein satisfied; otherwise, proof must be shown that the risk of
contracting the disease is increased by the working conditions.
Q17.Luis, a PNP officer, was off duty and resting at home when he heard a scuffle
outside his house. He saw two of his neighbors fighting and he rushed out to pacify
them. One of the neighbors shot Luis by mistake, which resulted in Luis's death. Marian,
Luis's widow, filed a claim with the GSIS seeking death benefits. The GSIS denied the
claim on the ground that the death of Luis was not service-related as he was off duty
when the incident happened. Is the GSIS correct?
ANSWER: NO. Luis is still covered by the GSIS benefits. Under jurisprudence,
members of the national police, unless they are on official leave, are, by the nature of
their functions, technically on duty 24 hours a day, because policemen are subject to
call at any time and may be asked by their superiors or by any distressed citizen to
assist in maintaining the peace and security of the community.
Hence, even if Luis is off-duty at the time he was killed, by virtue of his position as
member of the PNP, he is deemed to have perished in a service-related manner.
Q18.Gene is a married regular employee of Matibay Corporation. The employees and
Matibay Corporation had an existing CBA that provided for funeral or bereavement aid
of ₱15,000.00 in case of the death of a legal dependent of a regular employee. His
widowed mother, who had been living with him and his family for many years, died;
hence, he claimed the funeral aid. Matibay Corporation denied the claim on the basis
that she had not been his legal dependent as the term legal dependent was defined by
the Social Security Law.
(a) Who may be the legal dependents of Gene under the Social Security Law?
6
ANSWER: Under the SSS Law, the following may be Gene’s dependents: (1)
The legal spouse entitled by law to receive support from the member; (2) The
legitimate, legitimated, or legally adopted, and illegitimate child who is
unmarried, not gainfully employed and has not reached twenty-one (21) years
of age, or if over twenty-one (21) years of age, he is congenitally or while still
a minor has been permanently incapacitated and incapable of self-support,
physically or mentally; and (3) The parent who is receiving regular support
from the member.
(b) Is Gene entitled to the funeral aid for the death of his widowed mother?
Explain your answer.
ANSWER: YES. Under the SSS Law, a parent of the employee who is
receiving regular support from him may be considered a dependent. Thus,
Gene’s mother is qualified.
Q19.Rosa was granted vacation leave by her employer to spend three weeks in Africa
with her family. Prior to her departure, the General Manager of the company requested
her to visit the plant of a client of the company in Zimbabwe in order to derive best
manufacturing practices useful to the company. She accepted the request because the
errand would be important to the company and Zimbabwe was anyway in her itinerary.
It appears that she contracted a serious disease during the trip. Upon her return, she
filed a claim for compensation, insisting that she had contracted the disease while
serving the interest of her employer.
Under the Labor Code, the sickness or death of an employee, to be compensable, must
have resulted from an illness either definitely accepted as an occupational disease by
the Employees' Compensation Commission, or caused by employment subject to proof
that the risk of contracting the same is increased by working conditions.
Is the serious disease Rosa contracted during her trip to Africa compensable? Explain
your answer.
ANSWER: YES. Under the ECL, for the injury and the resulting disability or death to be
compensable, the injury must be the result of accident arising out of and in the course of
the employment. Under jurisprudence, when one in the course of his employment is
reasonably required to be at a particular place at a particular time and there meets an
accident, although one which any other person then and there present would have meet
irrespective of his employment, that accident is one arising out of employment.
Here, Rosa was required by her boss to be in Zimbabwe for work purposes. She did so.
Thus, she is considered to have been in employment when she contracted the disease
thereby causing her death.
Q20.Sgt. Nemesis was a detachment non-commissioned officer of the Armed Forces of
the Philippines in Nueva Ecija. He and some other members of his detachment sought
permission from their Company Commander for an overnight pass to Nueva Vizcaya to
settle some important matters. The Company Commander orally approved their request
and allowed them to carry their firearms as the place they were going to was classified
7
as a "critical place." They arrived at the place past midnight; and as they were alighting
from a tricycle, one of his companions accidentally dropped his rifle, which fired a single
shot, and in the process hit Sgt. Nemesis fatally. The shooting was purely accidental. At
the time of his death, he was still legally married to Nelda, but had been separated de
facto from her for 17 years. For the last 15 years of his life, he was living in with Narda,
with whom he has two minor children. Since Narda works as a kasambahay, the two
children lived with their grandparents, who provided their daily support. Sgt. Nemesis
and Narda only sent money to them every year to pay for their school tuition.
Nelda and Narda, both for themselves and the latter, also on behalf of her minor
children, separately filed claims for compensation as a result of the death of Sgt.
Nemesis. The Line of Duty Board of the AFP declared Sgt. Nemesis' death to have
been "in line of duty", and recommended that all benefits due to Sgt. Nemesis be given
to his dependents. However, the claims were denied by GSIS because Sgt. Nemesis
was not in his workplace nor performing his duty as a soldier of the Philippine Army
when he died.
(a) Are the dependents of Sgt. Nemesis entitled to compensation as a result of
his death?
ANSWER: YES. As provided under jurisprudence, members of the national
police, unless they are on official leave, are, by the nature of their functions,
technically on duty 24 hours a day, because policemen are subject to call at
any time and may be asked by their superiors or by any distressed citizen to
assist in maintaining the peace and security of the community.
Thus, Sgt. Nemesis is still covered by the benefits despite not being on duty
then.
(b) As between Nelda and Narda, who should be entitled to the benefits?
ANSWER: Nelda. Under the GSIS Law, the legitimate spouse entitled to
support shall be considered as a dependent.
Here, Sgt. Nemesis was still legally married to Nelda without the marriage
being dissolved despite them being separated de facto. Thus, It is Nelda not
Narda who is entitled.
(c) Are the minor children entitled to the benefits considering that they were not
fully dependent on Sgt. Nemesis for support?
ANSWER: YES. The GSIS Law only requires for children to be minors and
incapable of fully supporting themselves in order to be considered
dependents.
Q21. Nonato had been continuously employed and deployed as a seaman who
performed services that were necessary and desirable to the business of N-Train
Shipping, through its local agent, Narita Maritime Services (Agency), in accordance with
the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment
8
Contract (2010 POEA-SEC). Nonato’s last contract (for five months) expired on
November 15, 2016. Nonato was then repatriated due to a “finished contract.” He
immediately reported to the Agency and complained that he had been experiencing
dizziness, weakness, and difficulty in breathing. The Agency referred him to Dr. Neri,
who examined, treated, and prescribed him with medications. After a few months of
treatment and consultations, Nonato was declared fit to resume work as a seaman.
Nonato went back to the Agency to ask for re-deployment but the Agency rejected his
application. Nonato filed an illegal dismissal case against the Agency and its principal,
with a claim for total disability benefits based on the ailments that he developed on
board N-Train Shipping vessels. The claim was based on the certification of his own
physician, Dr. Nunez, that he was unfit for sea duties because of his hypertension and
diabetes.
Can Nonato successfully claim disability benefits against N-Train Shipping and its agent
Narita Maritime Services
ANSWER: NO. Under jurisprudence, since the employee was cleared for work by the
company-designated physicians who monitored his condition over a prolonged period
conducting extensive examinations, the employee is deemed not to have a
compensable disability. The opinion of the other specialist who saw the employee only
on one occasion and did not even order that medical tests be done to support his
declaration that the employee is unfit for work as a seaman, cannot overturn the
findings of the company designated physicians.
Thus, Nonato cannot claim for disability benefits.
Q22.X is a member of the Social Security System (SSS). In 2015, he died without any
spouse or children. Prior to the semester of his death, X had paid 36 monthly
contributions. His mother, M, who had previously been receiving regular support from X,
filed a claim for the latter’s death benefits.
(a) Is M entitled to claim death benefits from the SSS? Explain.
ANSWER: YES. Under the SSS Law, M is considered as a secondary
dependent who is entitled to receive support from X/
(b) Assuming that X got married to his girlfriend a few days before his death, is M
entitled to claim death benefits from the SSS? Explain
ANSWER: NO. In this case, it is the spouse of X who is entitled and not M
because the law provides that the legal spouse entitled to support shall be the
primary beneficiary.
Q23.W Ship Management, Inc. hired Seafarer G as bosun in its vessel under the terms
of the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration – Standard Employment
Contract (POEA-SEC).
On his sixth (6th) month on board, Seafarer G fell ill while working. In particular, he
complained of stomach pain, general weakness, and fresh blood in his stool. When his
illness persisted, he was medically repatriated on January 15, 2018. On the same day,
Seafarer G submitted himself to a post-employment medical examination, wherein he
9
was referred for further treatment. As of September 30, 2018, Seafarer G has yet to be
issued any fit-to-work certification by the company-designated physician, much less a
final and definitive assessment of his actual condition. Since Seafarer G still felt unwell,
he sought an opinion from a doctor of his choice who later issued an independent
assessment stating that he was totally and permanently disabled due to his illness
sustained during work.
Seafarer G then proceeded to file a claim for total and permanent disability
compensation. The company asserts that the claim should be dismissed due to
prematurity since Seafarer G failed to first settle the matter through the third-doctor
conflict resolution procedure as provided under the 2010 POEA-SEC.
(a) What is the third-doctor conflict resolution procedure under the 2010 POEA-
SEC? Explain.
ANSWER: The current third doctor rule is found in Section 20 A (3) of the POEA
Contract which states that if the doctor of the seafarer disagrees with the
assessment of the company-designated physician, a third doctor may be jointly
agreed upon between the parties whose decision shall be final and binding on
them.
b. Will Seafarer G’s claim for total and permanent disability benefits prosper
despite his failure to first settle the matter through the third-doctor conflict
resolution procedure? Explain.
ANSWER: NO. According to the Supreme Court, the third doctor rule is
mandatory and non-compliance with the same would result in the upholding
of the findings of the company-designated physician. The Supreme Court said
that the only instance when the assessment of the company-designated
physician may be challenged is when the seafarer likewise consulted with his
personal doctor who issued a different assessment. The conflicting
assessment shall be settled by referring the matter to a neutral third party
doctor whose assessment shall be final and binding
(c) Assuming that Seafarer G failed to submit himself to a post-employment
medical examination with three (3) working days from his return, what is
the consequence thereof to his disability claim? Explain.
ANSWER: Under jurisprudence, failure of an employee to have himself
examined by the company-designated physician shall result in the forfeiture of
the right to claim disability benefits. The POEA SEC mandates seafarers to
see a company-designated physician for a post-employment medical
examination, which must be done within 3 working days from their arrival.
PFFALLARJRNOV2021
10
11
