Del Monte Land Transport Bus, Co. vs. Armenta

Claims for labor standards violations by public utility bus drivers and conductors, including underpayment of wages and non-payment of wage-related benefits, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the DOLE Regional Office under Article 128 of the Labor Code and Department Order No. 118-12, provided an employer-employee relationship exists and no reinstatement is sought, notwithstanding the aggregate amount of the claims or the fact that the action was initiated by complaint rather than routine inspection.

To protect drivers and conductors in the public utility bus industry, the Department of Labor and Employment issued Department Order No. 118-12 on January 13, 2012, mandating a fixed and performance compensation scheme. The Order aimed to improve working conditions and eliminate risk-taking behavior by ensuring compliance with minimum wage and wage-related benefits. On February 12, 2014, the DOLE Regional Director issued Labor Standards Compliance Certificates (LSCC) to Del Monte Motor Works, Inc. (DMMWI)—the operator of petitioner Del Monte Land Transport Bus, Co. (DLTB)—certifying compliance with the Order. On July 28, 2014, respondents, who were drivers and conductors hired by DLTB on various dates from 2010 to 2013, filed a complaint alleging underpayment of wages (receiving P337.00 instead of the P466.00 NCR minimum wage) and non-payment of holiday pay, rest day premium, service incentive leave, and 13th month pay.

• Nature of Employment: Respondents were drivers and conductors hired by DLTB, a domestic corporation engaged in public transportation with principal office at 650 EDSA, Malibay, Pasay City, Metro Manila. They were assigned to various operations centers in South Luzon and Visayas regions.
• Department Order No. 118-12: The DOLE issued DO 118-12 on January 13, 2012, establishing a fixed and performance compensation scheme for public utility bus drivers and conductors to ensure compliance with minimum wage and wage-related benefits.
• Issuance of Compliance Certificates: On February 12, 2014, the DOLE Regional Director issued LSCCs to DMMWI (operator of DLTB) certifying compliance with DO 118-12 and other labor standards, valid for one year.
• The Complaint: On July 28, 2014, respondents filed a complaint alleging underpayment of wages (P337.00 daily rate vs. P466.00 NCR minimum wage) and non-payment of holiday pay, holiday premium, rest day premium, service incentive leave, 13th month pay, and ECOLA.
• Jurisdictional Defense: DLTB contended that the LA lacked jurisdiction, asserting that Article 128 of the Labor Code and DO 118-12 vested jurisdiction over labor standards compliance with the DOLE Regional Office. It argued that respondents were assigned outside the NCR and that the LSCCs issued to DMMWI evidenced DOLE's prior jurisdiction.
• Respondents' Position: Respondents maintained that the LA had jurisdiction under Article 224 because the aggregate claims exceeded P5,000.00. They argued that the LSCCs were issued to DMMWI, a distinct corporation, and not to DLTB, and that their complaint challenged the validity of those certificates.

• Exclusive Jurisdiction of DOLE: DLTB argued that Section 1, Rule VIII of DO 118-12 explicitly vests jurisdiction over compliance with minimum wages and wage-related benefits for bus drivers and conductors with the appropriate DOLE Regional Office having jurisdiction over the principal office of the bus owner/operator.
• Effect of RA 7730: Petitioner maintained that Republic Act No. 7730 amended Article 128 of the Labor Code to remove the P5,000 threshold limitation, thereby expanding the DOLE Secretary's visitorial and enforcement powers to include money claims regardless of amount, provided an employer-employee relationship exists.
• Challenge to LSCCs: The filing of the complaint five months after the issuance of LSCCs by the DOLE Regional Director constituted a challenge to those certificates, which properly falls under the DOLE's jurisdiction under Article 128, not the LA's jurisdiction under Article 224.

• Jurisdiction by Amount: Respondents argued that Article 224 (formerly 217) of the Labor Code grants the LA jurisdiction over money claims exceeding P5,000.00, and since their claims totaled over P16 million, the LA properly assumed jurisdiction.
• Nature of Claims: They contended that the complaint sought recovery of wage differentials and monetary benefits, not merely enforcement of labor standards, placing it within the LA's adjudicatory powers.
• No Prior DOLE Action: Respondents asserted that no complaint was filed with the DOLE, nor was any inspection conducted at DLTB specifically; the LSCCs were issued to DMMWI, a separate legal entity, and their complaint effectively disputed the validity of those certificates, which did not bar the LA's jurisdiction.

• Jurisdiction of DOLE vs. Labor Arbiter: Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the Labor Arbiter had jurisdiction over respondents' money claims, notwithstanding Section 1, Rule VIII of DO 118-12 which vests jurisdiction over labor standards compliance with the DOLE Regional Office.
• Underpayment of Wages: Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding underpayment of wages without properly applying DO 118-12.

• Jurisdiction of DOLE vs. Labor Arbiter: The Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Labor Arbiter's assumption of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction over labor standards claims involving public utility bus drivers and conductors is vested by law in the DOLE Regional Office under Section 1, Rule VIII of DO 118-12 and Article 128 of the Labor Code, as amended by RA 7730. The amendment removed the P5,000.00 threshold previously limiting DOLE's authority under Articles 129 and 224. Applying People's Broadcasting Service v. Secretary of DOLE, where an employer-employee relationship exists and the claim involves labor standards benefits without a prayer for reinstatement, the DOLE exercises jurisdiction to the exclusion of the NLRC, regardless of the amount claimed or whether the action was initiated by complaint.
• Underpayment of Wages: The resolution of the jurisdictional issue in favor of the DOLE rendered this issue moot; the complaint was properly dismissed without prejudice to respondents' recourse before the proper forum.

• Jurisdiction Conferred by Law: Jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by law and the allegations in the complaint, not by the parties' consent or a tribunal's erroneous belief of its existence. Any act performed without jurisdiction is void and without legal effect.
• People's Broadcasting Service Doctrine: The rules governing jurisdiction over labor standards claims are: (1) If the claim involves labor standards benefits mandated by the Labor Code regardless of the amount prayed for, and there is an existing employer-employee relationship, jurisdiction is with the DOLE regardless of whether the action was brought about by complaint or inspection; (2) If there is no existing employer-employee relationship or the claim is coupled with a prayer for reinstatement, jurisdiction is with the Labor Arbiter/NLRC.
• Effect of RA 7730 on Article 128: Republic Act No. 7730 effectively removed the P5,000.00 jurisdictional limitation found in Articles 129 and 224 of the Labor Code regarding the DOLE Secretary's visitorial and enforcement powers. The DOLE may now exercise jurisdiction regardless of the amount of the award claimed, provided an employer-employee relationship exists.

• "Jurisdiction over the subject matter or authority to try a certain case is conferred by law and not by the whims, consent or acquiescence of the interested parties nor by the erroneous belief of the court or tribunal that it exists."
• "Section 1 [of DO 118-12] categorically provides that issues concerning compliance with the minimum wages and wage-related benefits of public utility bus drivers and conductors is conferred with DOLE-Regional Officer having jurisdiction over the principal office of the bus owner/operator."
• "The issuance of RA 7730 on June 2, 1994, however, effectively removed the jurisdictional limitations brought about by the threshold amount found in Articles 129 and 224 of the Labor Code insofar as the exercise of the visitorial and enforcement powers of the DOLE Secretary are concerned."
• "If the claim involves labor standards benefits mandated by the Labor Code or other labor legislation regardless of the amount prayed for and provided that there is an existing employer-employee relationship, jurisdiction is with the DOLE regardless of whether the action was brought about by the filing of a complaint or not."

• People's Broadcasting Service v. Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment, 683 Phil. 509 (2012) — Controlling precedent establishing that the DOLE has jurisdiction over labor standards claims regardless of amount or mode of initiation, provided an employer-employee relationship exists and no reinstatement is sought.
• Bilag v. Ay-ay, 809 Phil. 236 (2017) — Cited for the principle that jurisdiction is conferred by law and not by consent or erroneous belief.
• Tiger Construction and Development Corporation v. Abay, 627 Phil. 530 (2010) — Cited for the principle that jurisdiction is determined by law.

• Article 5, Labor Code — Basis for DOLE's rule-making power in issuing DO 118-12.
• Article 128 (Visitorial and Enforcement Power), Labor Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7730 — Grants the Secretary of Labor and Regional Directors the power to issue compliance orders for labor standards violations, now without the P5,000.00 limitation.
• Article 129, Labor Code — Limits the Regional Director's adjudicatory power to money claims not exceeding P5,000.00 (superseded by RA 7730 in the context of Article 128).
• Article 224 (formerly Article 217), Labor Code — Grants Labor Arbiters jurisdiction over money claims exceeding P5,000.00 and cases accompanied by claims for reinstatement.
• Section 1, Rule VIII, Department Order No. 118-12 — Specifically vests jurisdiction over compliance with labor standards for bus drivers and conductors with the DOLE Regional Office.

Leonen, J. (Chairperson), Inting, J., Delos Santos, J., and J. Lopez, J.