Managerial employees don’t get holiday premium pay

Dear PAO,
Good day po!
I would like to inquire if an employee with a supervisory level position is entitled to a legal holiday premium pay. Because our company pays a legal holiday premium pay to our employees which is equivalent to daily rate for a legal holiday that falls on a Saturday/Sunday except for those employees with supervisory positions.

I’ll appreciate your kind assistance on this inquiry. God bless!
Best Regards,
Mags

Dear Mags,
The Labor Code of the Philippines provides enlightenment regarding your query. Title I of Book Three of said law covers the grant of holiday pays. Article 82 of said law which is contained in Title I of Book Three provides, to wit:

“ART. 82. Coverage. – The provisions of this Title shall apply to employees in all establishments and undertakings whether for profit or not, but not to government employees, managerial employees, field personnel, members of the family of the employer who are dependent on him for support, domestic helpers, persons in the personal service of another, and workers who are paid by results as determined by the Secretary of Labor in appropriate regulations.

As used herein, ”managerial employees” refer to those whose primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or subdivision thereof, and to other officers or members of the managerial staff.

xxx.” (Emphasis supplied)

Thus, it is quite clear from the aforecited provision that managerial employees, which include other officers or members of the managerial staff are not entitled to the payment of holiday pay. The only question we are faced now is whether or not supervisory employees are considered part of the phrase “other officers and members of the managerial staff” so as to take them away from the coverage of said provisions of law granting premium pay.

The Supreme Court in the case of National Sugar Refineries Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission and NBSR Supervisory Union, (PACIWU) TUCP provides the answer to that very query, when it held that:

“ . . . it is apparent that the members of respondent union discharge duties and responsibilities which ineluctably qualify them as officers or members of the managerial staff, as defined in Section 2, Rule I Book III of the aforestated Rules to Implement the Labor Code, viz.: (1) their primary duty consists of the performance of work directly related to management policies of their employer; (2) they customarily and regularly exercise discretion and independent judgment; (3) they regularly and directly assist the managerial employee whose primary duty consist of the management of a department of the establishment in which they are employed (4) they execute, under general supervision, work along specialized or technical lines requiring special training, experience, or knowledge; (5) they execute, under general supervision, special assignments and tasks; and (6) they do not devote more than 20% of their hours worked in a work-week to activities which are not directly and clearly related to the performance of their work hereinbefore described.

Under the facts obtaining in this case, we are constrained to agree with petitioner that the union members should be considered as officers and members of the managerial staff and are, therefore, exempt from the coverage of Article 82. Perforce, they are not entitled to overtime, rest day and holiday” (G.R. No. 101761, March 24, 1993)(Emphasis supplied).

Thus, if the employee performs the aforementioned duties, then they are considered as officers or members of the managerial staff and are thus not entitled to get holiday pay.

It is worth mentioning that the nomenclature of the position is not controlling in cases like these. Rather, what is important is the actual duties and responsibilities the employees are tasked to perform and likewise the power and authority they wield.

Again, we find it necessary to mention that this opinion is solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. The opinion may vary when the facts are changed or elaborated.

We hope that we were able to enlighten you on the matter. –PERSIDA ACOSTA, Manila Times

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net.