Mrs. B, the personal cook in the household of X, filed a monetary claim against her employer, X, for denying her service incentive leave pay. X argued that Mrs. B did not avail of any service incentive leave at the end of her one (1) year of service and hence, not entitled to the said monetary claim.
(a) Is the contention of X tenable? Explain. (2.5%)
(b) Assuming that Mrs. B is instead a clerk in X’s company with at least 30 regular employees, will her monetary claim prosper? Explain (2.5%)
Suggested Answer:
(a) No. Answer
Under the Kasambahay Law, and its implementing rules and regulations, a kasambahay who has rendered at least one (1) year of service shall be entitled to an annual service incentive leave of at least five (5) days with pay. Rule
In the case at bar, Mrs. B has rendered at least one (1) year of service and thus entitling her to the 5-day service incentive leave. Apply
Thus, the contextion of X is not tenable. Conclusion
(b) Yes. Answer
Under the Labor Code, covered employees are entitled to a 5-day service incentive leave after rendering at least one (1) year of service. Rule
In the case at bar, if Mrs. B was a clerk in Company X, she would be a covered employee. Since she has rendered at least one (1) year of service, she would be entitled to the 5-day service incentive leave. Apply
Thus, the monetary claim of Mrs. B will prosper. Conclusion
