Law Dictionary

Question XIV, Labor Law, 2017 Bar Exam

Notice: The following suggested answers simulate those that a bar examinee may provide as an answer to a bar exam question. Thus, specific citations (i.e., republic acts, articles/sections, jurisprudence, etc.) are not provided because it is not required in the bar exam. For purposes other than answering the bar exam, please be reminded that proper referencing or legal citation is required.

Question XIV, Labor Law, 2017 Bar Exam

Pursuant to his power under Sec. 278(g) (263(g)) of the Labor Code, the Secretary of Labor assumed jurisdiction over the 3-day old strike in Armor Steel Plates, Inc., one of the country’s bigger manufacturers of steel plates, and ordered all the striking employees to return to work. The striking employees ignored the order to return to work.

(a) What conditions may justify the Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction? (2.5%)

(b) What are the consequences of the assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary of Labor, and of the disobedience to the return to work? Explain your answer. (2.5%)

Suggested Answer:

(a) To justify the assumption of jurisdiction by the DOLE Secretary, the following conditions are required:

1) There exists a labor dispute; and

2) It is causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest.

(b) These are the two (2) immediate effects of assumption of jurisdiction:

1) The enjoining of an impending strike or lockout or its lifting; and

2) An order for the workers to return to work immediately and for the employer to readmit all workers under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout, or the return-to-work order.

Disobedience of the return to work make the strike illegal.  Any union officer who knowingly participates in an illegal strike may be declared to have lost his employment status. On the other hand, an ordinary striking worker or union member cannot, as a rule, be terminated for mere participation in an illegal strike; there must be proof that he committed illegal acts during the strike.

Disclaimer: All information is for educational and general information only. These should not be taken as professional legal advice or opinion. Please consult a competent lawyer to address your specific concerns. Any statements or opinions of the author are solely his own and do not reflect that of any organization he may be connected.

Suggested Answers

Question X, Labor Law, 2017 Bar Exam

A. The labor sector has been loudly agitating for the end of labor-only contracting, as distinguished from job contracting. Explain these two kinds of labor

Question I, Civil Law, 2017 Bar Exam

State whether the following marital unions are valid, void, or voidable, and give the corresponding justifications for your answer: (a) Ador and Becky’s marriage wherein

Question IV, Civil Law, 2017 Bar Exam

(a) Distinguish antichresis from usufruct? (3%) (b) Distinguish commodatum from mutuum. (3%) Suggested Answer: (a) By the contract of antichresis the creditor acquires the right

Top Read

Question XII, Political Law, 2017 Bar Exam

The Congress establishes by law Philippine Funds, Inc., a private corporation, to receive foreign donations coming from abroad during national and local calamities and disasters,

Video Lessons

Legal Maxims

non bis in idem

Latin maxim. • “not twice for the same” (Tacas v. Cariaso, G.R. No. L-37406, August 31, 1976)

Read more


You cannot copy content of this page