Photo from Unsplash | LinkedIn Sales Solutions
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
The burden of proving entitlement to overtime work rests on the employee, as this monetary claim is not incurred in the normal course of business.
It is thus incumbent upon the employee to first prove that he actually rendered service in excess of the regular eight working hours a day, and that he in fact worked on holidays and rest days.
(Reggie Zonio v. 1st Quantum Leap Security Agency, Inc. and Romulo Par, G.R. No. 224944, May 05, 2021)
Under Article 87 of the Labor Code of the Philippines, employees are entitled to overtime pay, which is typically an additional twenty-five percent (25%) of their hourly rate performed beyond the regular working hours, or thirty percent (30%) of their hourly rate performed on a holiday or rest day.
The law says:
ART. 87. Overtime Work. – Work may be performed beyond eight (8) hours a day provided that the employee is paid for the overtime work, an additional compensation equivalent to his regular wage plus at least twenty-five percent (25%) thereof. Work performed beyond eight hours on a holiday or rest day shall be paid an additional compensation equivalent to the rate of the first eight hours on a holiday or rest day plus at least thirty percent (30%) thereof.
Overtime pay refers to the additional compensation for work performed beyond eight (8) hours a day. (Overtime Pay, 2023 DOLE Handbook on Workers’ Statutory Monetary Benefits)
Burden of proving entitlement to monetary benefits
In the case of Reggie Zonio v. 1st Quantum Leap Security Agency, Inc. and Romulo Par (G.R. No. 224944, May 05, 2021), the Supreme Court outlined who between the employer and employee has the burden of proving entitlement to monetary benefits. Jurisprudence says:
“In determining the employee’s entitlement to monetary claims, the burden of proof is shifted from the employer or the employee, depending on the monetary claim sought. In claims for payment of salary differential, service incentive leave, holiday pay, and 13th month pay, the burden rests on the employer to prove payment.
This standard follows the basic rule that in all illegal dismissal cases the burden rests on the defendant-employer to prove payment rather than on the plaintiff-employee to prove non-payment. This likewise stems from the fact that all pertinent personnel files, payrolls, records, remittances and other similar documents – which show that the differentials, service incentive leave and other claims of workers have been paid – are not in the possession of the worker but are in the custody and control of the employer.
On the other hand, for overtime pay, premium pays for holidays and rest days, the burden is shifted on the employee, as these monetary claims are not incurred in the normal course of business. It is thus incumbent upon the employee to first prove that he actually rendered service in excess of the regular eight working hours a day, and that he in fact worked on holidays and rest days.”
Conditions for entitlement to overtime pay
In the case of Paul Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc. (G.R. No. 1623419, July 10, 2007), the Supreme Court held that there are two conditions that need to be satisfied before an employee could be entitled to overtime pay. These are:
- rendition of overtime work; and
- submission of sufficient proof that overtime work was actually performed.
Jurisprudence says:
“Simply stated, the rendition of overtime work and the submission of sufficient proof that said work was actually performed are conditions to be satisfied before a seaman could be entitled to overtime pay which should be computed on the basis of 30% of the basic monthly salary. In short, the contract provision guarantees the right to overtime pay but the entitlement to such benefit must first be established.”
Related Article:
Refusal to Render Overtime Work – When Considered Willful Disobedience?
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding taxation and taxpayer’s remedies, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.
All rights reserved.