Thai Dara — for nagtitipid na addict sa Thai food

April 13, 2010

 One of our favorite restaurants, if not our favorite!  halos 3x a week kmi kumain dito minsan… dba kming dalawa ni erwin yung nandun sa pic?! hehehe.  haven’t taken a picture of us here though…  dami rin kse tao each time we eat there. staffs are nice.  prices are good. food is great.  we have to park at the other side of the road nga lng.  buti nlng it’s always late na when we eat kya closed na yng establishment sa harap.  if you like weird tasting drinks, you’ll like their lemon grass tea. I did!   others would also put the lemongrass garnishings to their glass of water para lasang lemon grass tea.  hehe.  condiments are ample and complete :  vinegar na kakaiba, liver sauce, brown sugar and *i forgot*.  Super love the food here.  Must try their Tom yum (ano nga ba spelling nun?!), ayaw kse ni erwin ng soup… d nya alam how kakaiba tong soup na to at sobrang saraap!

 

 

Motion for Reconsideration

Sana sa buhay, pwedeng mag motion for reconsideration… tapos pag denied pa din at may grave abuse of discretion, pwedeng i-certiorari.

Kadalasan nmn kse, mas wlang jurisdiction ang mga mahal natin sa buhay dahil sa grave abuse of discretion — wla nmng taong may karapatang manakit ng sobra, dba?

unless waived.  

 

how I studied for the bar exams

April 12, 2010

I wrote this for myself… to remember those days… 

I started studying when I was in first year. nahks! joke lng. 

I wasn’t a diligent student all throughout my lawschool days.  pero in fairness… masipag nmn yta ako? kahit konti…

But I make it a point that I study… That I fairly know the lesson for the day… prepared for the recitations…

I reread the whole coverage for the midterms and final exams.  That would be my 2nd reading of the book assigned for the subject.

During our Review Classes, I read only the transcribed lectures and relied on them for exams.  Except for Poli (Nachura), Commercial (Sundiang), Civil (Jurado/Albano Reviewer), and Tax (Lahat ng books ni mamalateo).

April na ko nagstart magseryoso sa review.  20 weeks to go before the bar.  I remember buying a couple of little notebooks for my schedule, list of books, lectures to attend, etc.  Nawala lng sila lahat after ko sulatan. Mahilig lng kse ko magsulat.

Wla akong proper sked. bsta dapat, pagkatapos ng isang linggo, marami akong nabasa. or may natapos ako.  kung wala ko natapos, hindi yun pde. hehe.

I made a list lng pla ng coverage… dapat lhat yun matapos ko tlga before mg exams… then pagnagyyabang ako, turo ka lng ng topic, iddiscuss ko sayo. ganun ako. haha 

Bsta here are all the materials i read:

SAN BEDA MEMORY AID> 2x - read once cover to cover the week before the exams kahit hanggang madaling araw or kahit sa lunch break. basta matapos lang. d kse ko confident pag di ko natapos. like sa criminal law. sobrang nangarag ako sa exam dahil lang d ko natapos basahin ang mem aid.

LAHAT NG MATERIALS NG BEDA: pre-week, digests, red notes (d mshado), etc.  

POLI - Nachura, codal, special laws, nachura lecture, i also attended yung lecture ni (Shet di ko na matandaan)

LABOR - lecture ni dean abad, digest ng Azucena book 1 and 2, everyone’s, codal, special laws. 

CIVIL - albano reviewer, conflicts by justice sempio diy, codal, special laws, digests

TAX - de leon, reyes, mamalateo reviewer at VAT, abella lecture

COMMERICIAL - Sundiang (2x) codal, special laws.

CRIM - digested Reyes 1 and 2, J Lo lecture, amurao lecture

REMEDIAL - jara notes, riano, a lil bit of regalado, yng notebook ng civpro nanabibili sa Rex

ETHICS - mem aid.

Habang nagrereview, madalas pa rin ako umiyak at makipag-away sa bf… punit punit ang mem aid ko sa ethics dahil sa galit ko.  basa ng luha ng iba.  may time pa na hindi ako nag-aaral for 2 days para lng magmatigas.

nag boracay pa pala ako ng august.

gumigising ako ng 8am, natutulog ng 10am, gumigising 12 para kumain hanggang 1. aral…. kwentuhan, byahe, mafia wars. hanggang 12midnight. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……….. 

I made it a point that I sleep at 1am ng sunday before exams. 4am gising na para maligo, magmakeup at magbihis.  sarap ng breakfast lagi yogurt. hehe.  I did not eat lunch all four sundays.  I went out for a movie/ nice dinner every after exam.

I prayed the rosary almost everyday while waitng for the results.  Prayed to our lady of manaoag before taking the exams and before te results went out.

Here’s how i prayed din pala… before the exams, i prayed na sana, i’ll have strength to study and the motivation to continue… nung september… sana matandaan ko lahat ng inaral ko at sana yng mga sagot sa tanong naaral ko, at sana masagot ko lahat ng tanong.  After ng exams, thank you i made it ng 4 sundays.  sana ok mood ng examiners while checking my paper.  I was desperately praying for a miracle.

Kahit na nabalita na na lalabas na results, i still believed na pde pa ang miracle…

Thank you Lord God!  Babalik akong Manaoag! 

Yahoo! I may not have topped the bar, atleast pumasa ako!

 

 

…I also wrote this for you.  For hope and faith in miracles.

What is the divisor used to compute the daily wage of monthly paid employees for the purpose of computing the undertime pay?

                       

            The divisor used in arriving at an employee’s daily rate for the purpose of computing salary-related benefits is 261.   From the 365 days in a year, we deduct 104 rest days which gives a total of 261 days. Now, if 261 days is the number of working days of the employees then, there is a disputable presumption that the employees are paid their holiday pay.[1]

 

            In Union of Filipro Employees v. Vivar, Jr.[2] the Court held that “[t]he divisor assumes an important role in determining whether or not holiday pay is already included in the monthly paid employee’s salary and in the computation of his daily rate.” This was also the Supreme Court’s ruling in Chartered Bank Employees Association v. Ople[3] as follows –

It is argued that even without the presumption found in the rules and in the policy instruction, the company practice indicates that the monthly salaries of the employees are so computed as to include the holiday pay provided by law. The petitioner contends otherwise.

One strong argument in favor of the petitioner’s stand is the fact that the Chartered Bank, in computing overtime compensation for its employees, employs a “divisor” of 251 days. The 251 working days divisor is the result of subtracting all Saturdays, Sundays and the ten (10) legal holidays form the total number of calendar days in a year. If the employees are already paid for all non-working days, the divisor should be 365 and not 251.

x              x              x

Any remaining doubts which may arise from the conflicting or different divisors used in the computation of overtime pay and employees’ absences are resolved by the manner in which work actually rendered on holidays is paid. Thus, whenever monthly paid employees work on a holiday, they are given an additional 100% base pay on top of a premium pay of 50%. If the employees’ monthly pay already includes their salaries for holidays, they should be paid only premium pay but not both base pay and premium pay.

 

            If the employer will use 261 as divisor in determining daily rate to compute overtime pay, the daily rate would be lower but an additional premium pay should still be paid to the employee for the eleven (11) holidays.  If 250 is used as divisor, the basic rate used for computing the overtime pay will be higher and the employer will have to pay both the base pay and premium pay for the eleven (11) holidays. 

May an employee who was arrested fro illegal possession of firearms be dismissed? On what ground?

 

            Article 282 of the Labor Code states that an employer may terminate an employee for these causes:

(a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work;

(b) Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties;

(c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized representative;

(d) Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the person of his employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly authorized representatives; and

(e) Other causes analogous to the foregoing.

 

           

            When an employee is arrested for the commission of a crime, the employee is prevented from reporting for work by reason of the detention. If his detention turns out to be without basis, as the criminal charge upon which said detention was ordered was later dismissed for lack of evidence, the absences incurred by the employee as a consequence thereof is not only involuntary but also excusable.  It is certainly not the employee’s intention to absent, nor is the detention on an erroneous charge be considered the employee’s fault.  In no way may the absences he incurred under such circumstances be likened to abandonment.  If dismissed on such ground, the dismissal would be illegal.  However, if the employee is convicted and the charge is proven to have basis, the employee may be dismissed for abandonment or neglect of duty.

 

 

            The Supreme Court, in Asian Terminals, Inc., et al.  vs. NLRC[1], held that absences incurred by an employee who is prevented from reporting for work due to his detention to answer some criminal charge is excusable if his detention is baseless, in that the criminal charge against him is not at all supported by sufficient evidence. In Magtoto vs. NLRC[2] as well as Pedroso vs. Castro[3], the High Court declared such absences as not constitutive of abandonment, and held the dismissal of the employee-detainee invalid.

 

           

            The commission of a crime or offense by the employee as a ground for termination of employment refers to an offense by the employee against the person of his employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly authorized representative.  The conviction of an employee in a criminal case is not necessary to warrant dismissal by the employer.  In this case, the employee CANNOT be dismissed on this ground. Neither can this be treated as an analogous cause given that the element of relation to his work or to his employer is absent. 

           

           

            Foregoing premises considered, the fact of being arrested for illegal possession of firearms CANNOT be a ground for dismissal of the employee. However, there may be circumstances peculiar to each case which could cause the situation to properly fall into one of the just causes for termination by the employer particularly in other causes analogous to the specified causes in Article 282 of the Labor Code.