Open navigation menu
Close suggestions
Search
Search
en
Change Language
Upload
Loading...
Loading...
User Settings
close menu
Welcome to Scribd!
Upload
Read for free
FAQ and support
Language (EN)
Sign in
OpSec Respondant Position Paper 1
Uploaded by
tonybhorn7856
100%
(7)
100% found this document useful (7 votes)
4K views
19 pages
Document Information
click to expand document information
1
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Share this document
Share or Embed Document
Sharing Options
Share on Facebook, opens a new window
Facebook
Share on Twitter, opens a new window
Twitter
Share on LinkedIn, opens a new window
LinkedIn
Share with Email, opens mail client
Email
Copy link
Copy link
Did you find this document useful?
100%
100% found this document useful, Mark this document as useful
0%
0% found this document not useful, Mark this document as not useful
Is this content inappropriate?
Report this Document
1
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download
as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Flag for inappropriate content
Download now
Download as pdf or txt
Save
Save OpSec Respondant Position Paper 1 For Later
100%
(7)
100% found this document useful (7 votes)
4K views
19 pages
OpSec Respondant Position Paper 1
Uploaded by
tonybhorn7856
1
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download
as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Flag for inappropriate content
Save
Save OpSec Respondant Position Paper 1 For Later
100%
100% found this document useful, Mark this document as useful
0%
0% found this document not useful, Mark this document as not useful
Embed
Share
Print
Download now
Download as pdf or txt
Jump to Page
You are on page 1
of 19
Search inside document
= — i ate REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES laps Department of Labor and Employment 3b Se NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION ne Regional Arbitration Branch No. III City of San Fernando, Pampanga TONY BRIAN HORN, Complainant, - versus - NLRC Case No, RAB-III-03-14640-09 OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC, NORMAN HAYNES, MATILDE HAYNES and HUNTER HAYNES, Respondents. x RESPONDENTS’ POSITION PAPER Respondents, through their undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Office, respectfully submit this Position Paper in support of their stand that captioned complaint - which is bereft of factual and legal bases - should be outrightly dismissed for lack of merit and of jurisdiction. ‘The Parties 1) Respondent OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC. (herein referred to as OPSEC) is a corporation duly organized, existing and operating under and in accordance with law, with principal address at Unit 1116 City Land Shaw Tower Saint Francis Street corner Shaw Blvd., Mandaluyong City, and duly represented by Mr. Hunter Dean Haynes, copy of the Secretary's Certificate hereto marked and attached as Annex “1”. 2) Respondent NORMAN HAYNES is of legal age, American, married to Matilde Haynes with address at No. 35-A Sarita St. Diamond Subd., Balibago, Angeles City. Norman Haynes is neither a stockholder, a member of the board of directors nor an officer or even an employee of OPSEC. 3) Respondent MATILDE HAYNES is of legal age, Filipino, married to Norman Haynes with address at No. 35-A Sarita St. Diamond Subd., Balibago, Angeles City. Matilde Haynes is neither a stockholder, a member of the board of directors nor an officer or even an employee of OPSEC. 4) Respondent HUNTER HAYNES is of legal age, American, single with address c/o OPSEC INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC, Unit 1116 City Land Shaw Tower Saint Francis Street corner Shaw Bivd., Mandaluyong City. Hunter Haynes is one of the incorporator and member of the board of directors of OPSEC.STATEMENT OF FACTS The facts and circumstances as they hanspired 1. OPSEC is a domestic corporation engaged in the business of providing management, financial, human resource development and technical advice for companies, industrial and other kinds of enterprise. As appearing in its Amended Articles of Incorporation, its primary purpose is to act as a managing agent of persons, firms, associations, corporations, partnerships and other entities. As the principal purpose of its incorporation dictates, OPSEC’s foremost function is to provide certain services to entities to further the objectives and purposes of their business by acting as managing agents of other organizations by virtue of a management arrangement or understanding, copy of page 1 of OPSEC’s Amended Articles of Incorporation hereto marked and attached as Annex "2". 2. Pursuant to a management and business services agreement with MANILA EXPLORATION CO. - ANNEX, LTD. (MECO, for brevity), OPSEC undertook to provide its management services to the former. MECO isa limited partnership primarily organized to purchase real estate, secure leasehold rights or to enter into joint venture arrangements for the purpose of conducting exploratory drilling, electronic prospecting and excavatory search for the ultimate recovery of precious metals, and other valuables located upon, within or below privately owned and/or public lands. 3. In the course of its management arrangement with OPSEC and as an incident thereto, MECO usually assigns some of its independent consultants to OPSEC in order to facilitate immediate investment decisions and other management concerns, in behalf of MECO pursuant to OPSEC’s recommendation of potential investments and management strategy. There is a clear understanding, however, that such individual business consultants assigned to OPSEC are directly engaged or contracted by MECO, Engagement, Remuneration and Termination of their services are directly dealt and handled by MECO. 4. As far as OPSEC was informed, Complainant Tony Brian Horn (HORN, for brevity) was engaged as an Independent Consultant of MECO. There was no instance that he became an employee nor a consultant of OPSEC. His engagement, work assignment including his compensation, contractual arrangement and thereafter separation, was directly dealt by MECO and never by OPSEC. Much, the board of directors of OPSEC never approved of any kind of contract or engagement with Complainant. 1, On the basis of Complainants assignment to OPSEC, the following points will strengthen our position that HORN was not an employee of OPSEC: a. The power to terminate the consultancy agreement was exclusively and mutually vested between HORN and MECO. Either may terminate 2|Pagethe business arrangement at will, with or without cause, Copy of the Affidavit executed by Norman D. Haynes dated May 15, 2009 hereto marked and attached as Annex ‘3’; b. The arrangement for compensation and investment share was exclusively agreed upon between HORN and MECO. Notably, OPSEC was not a privy to this agreement. ©. It appears also that by speaking of a technical business word such as ‘investment’ it should not be construed as limited only to a favorable gain or return of investment BUT also to a proportionate share in the loss of the business. Meaning, although Complainant (as he alleged) may have been guaranteed a minimum share of investment, his right would only be measured and made to depend base on the full success and conclusion of a project and after his full completion of his engagement. d. Noticeably apparent was the absence of control in Complainant's engagement. Complainant was not even obliged to stay in the MECO premises for a structured work hours like any other MECO employee. He was free to come any time he pleases and even had access to the unlimited use of MECO’s private gym. @. Moreso, Complainant worked with MECO at his own pleasure and was not subject to definite hours or conditions of work. He could even refuse or delegate his tasks to others, if he so desires or simultaneously engage in other means of livelihood while being connected with MECO f Under the conditions set forth, it is incontestable that Complainant was engaged as a consultant deemed as an independent contractor contracted to do consultancy service according to his own method and without being subject to the control of MECO. 2. Undeniably, the Labor Tribunal's jurisdiction being primarily predicated upon the existence of an employer-employee relationship between the parties, the absence of such element, as in the case at bar, removes the controversy from the scope of its limited jurisdiction. 1. At this early stage, respondents would like to emphasize that Complainant was not illegally dismissed from employment by the respondents. 2. In his Complaint, Complainant wants to collect from respondents a fantastic amount in the grand total of $250,437.89 or more or less TWELVE MILLION PESOS (Php12,000,000.00) for an alleged period of employment of at least 2 years, Copy of Complainants Contract Claims hereto marked and attached as Annex “4”, Definitely, this is a classic 31Pageexample of extortion with manipulation and harassment without regard to the close friendship, personal relationship and trust reposed in him by the individual respondents which dates back even prior to his business engagement. 3. Without a doubt, with his alleged entitlement to his ‘Contract Claims, Complainant seeks protection under the civil laws and claims no benefits under the Labor Code. The items demanded are not labor benefits demanded by workers generally taken cognizance of in labor disputes. It is of note that the items being claimed by HORN are the natural consequences flowing from the alleged breached of an obligation, intrinsically a civil dispute. 4. To have a cause of action, the claimant must show that that he has a legal right and the respondent a correlative duty in respect thereof, which the latter violated by some wrongful act or omission.‘ It is well settled in law and jurisprudence that where no employer-employee relationship exists between the parties and no issue is involved which may be resolved by reference to the Labor Code, other labor statutes, or any collective bargaining agreement, it is the Regional Trial Court that has jurisdiction *. 5. Unquestionably, the complaint could not be categorized under any of the cases within the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter under Article 217, considering that no employer-employee relationship existed between HORN and OPSEC or any of the individual respondents. OPSEC have never had any privity with HORN since it had its own employees to take care of. In the case at bar, it is clear that there is no employer-employee relationship between horn and OPSEC. Absent the jurisdictional requisite of an employer-employee relationship between petitioner and private respondents, the inevitable conclusion is that the Labor Arbiter is without jurisdiction to hear and decide the case with respect to the Complainant. OMI im -Emplo} lati HOi 1, To determine the existence of an employer-employee relationship, the ‘Supreme Court ina long line of decisions? has invariably applied the following four-fold test: the selection and engagement of the employee; the payment of wages; the power of dismissal; and the power to control the employee's conduct. Itis the so-called ‘control-test’ that is the most important element:. aoe 4 Marquez vs. Varela, 92 Phil, 373 (1952). day Agricultural Development Corporation vs. CA 324 SCRA 39, January 31, 2000, 3 Bautista, G.R. No, 21278, December 27,1966,18 SCRA 41, ‘Brotherhood’ Labor Unity Movement of the Philippines, et.al. vs. Zamora, G.R. No. 48645, January 7, 1987) 4|Page
You might also like
Position Paper - Money Claims Format
Document
12 pages
Position Paper - Money Claims Format
dyosa
80% (5)
Sample FDCPA Lawsuit
Document
7 pages
Sample FDCPA Lawsuit
Profit J
No ratings yet
Sample Reply To Respondents Position Paper
Document
23 pages
Sample Reply To Respondents Position Paper
Anonymous 40zhRk1
100% (1)
Magazines
Podcasts
Sheet music
Finmat Vs Tayao Reply
Document
8 pages
Finmat Vs Tayao Reply
Gerald Hernandez
100% (3)
Cole Hagan Lawsuit
Document
16 pages
Cole Hagan Lawsuit
National Content Desk
No ratings yet
Position Paper
Document
7 pages
Position Paper
Raniel Calata
No ratings yet
Certiorari Sample
Document
9 pages
Certiorari Sample
Wendell Leigh Oasan
No ratings yet
REPLY To MEMO (DAGOT VS DASIA)
Document
8 pages
REPLY To MEMO (DAGOT VS DASIA)
Anthony Madrazo
No ratings yet
Labor Case Position Paper
Document
16 pages
Labor Case Position Paper
nestor acido
67% (3)
Counter Affidavit. Nacion
Document
3 pages
Counter Affidavit. Nacion
chrisdonaal
No ratings yet
Complainant, - versus-NLRC CASE NO. RAB-lll-12-34567-89: Respondent'S Rejoinder
Document
9 pages
Complainant, - versus-NLRC CASE NO. RAB-lll-12-34567-89: Respondent'S Rejoinder
Chloe Sy Galita
No ratings yet
Inquest Resolution
Document
1 page
Inquest Resolution
tonybhorn7856
67% (3)
NR09 ICC Design Construct V4 3 (TP)
Document
85 pages
NR09 ICC Design Construct V4 3 (TP)
David Woodhouse
No ratings yet
LAS 32622 - Hatcher Pass Mountain Guides - 2019 Memorandum of Decision
Document
30 pages
LAS 32622 - Hatcher Pass Mountain Guides - 2019 Memorandum of Decision
William Finley
No ratings yet
Answer With Counterclaim - Final For Printing
Document
11 pages
Answer With Counterclaim - Final For Printing
Patrick Penachos
No ratings yet
Notice of Change of Address-Fenol
Document
2 pages
Notice of Change of Address-Fenol
Jong
100% (1)
Position Paper For Paramed
Document
6 pages
Position Paper For Paramed
Ruben Palomino
No ratings yet
Position Paper
Document
5 pages
Position Paper
Sheryl Arcales
100% (2)
Draft - Position Paper - Rowena Ramos
Document
28 pages
Draft - Position Paper - Rowena Ramos
Anonymous BcqFvsQ754
No ratings yet
Reply-Ronnel Sta - Ana Final Draft
Document
17 pages
Reply-Ronnel Sta - Ana Final Draft
Royalhighness18
No ratings yet
National Labor Relations Commission: Joint Position Paper of Complainants
Document
1 page
National Labor Relations Commission: Joint Position Paper of Complainants
Atty. Emmanuel Sandicho
100% (1)
Reply 2 Pos Paper
Document
14 pages
Reply 2 Pos Paper
Rhyz Taruc-Consorte
No ratings yet
Reply Position Paper Tayao Latest
Document
13 pages
Reply Position Paper Tayao Latest
Rowena Mae Mencias
100% (1)
TAG's Reply To GMA Network's Position Paper (December 2014)
Document
18 pages
TAG's Reply To GMA Network's Position Paper (December 2014)
Buhay Media
100% (3)
Position Paper
Document
11 pages
Position Paper
Janica Lobas
No ratings yet
Position Paper
Document
17 pages
Position Paper
Atty. Emmanuel Sandicho
100% (2)
Position Paper - Jeomon
Document
22 pages
Position Paper - Jeomon
Greg Refugio
No ratings yet
Position Paper Labor
Document
5 pages
Position Paper Labor
Kim Andaya-Yap
No ratings yet
Position Paper Labor
Document
8 pages
Position Paper Labor
Yan Daño
No ratings yet
Robbery by Band
Document
4 pages
Robbery by Band
Ruchess
No ratings yet
Mejorada Position Paper
Document
15 pages
Mejorada Position Paper
Kerth
100% (5)
Answer To Charge
Document
6 pages
Answer To Charge
Deurod Joe
100% (1)
Reply Position Paper - MAGANA
Document
12 pages
Reply Position Paper - MAGANA
NARAG LAW OFFICE
No ratings yet
REPLY To Respondents Position Paper - Jessamyn Caraang
Document
8 pages
REPLY To Respondents Position Paper - Jessamyn Caraang
Joems Gee
No ratings yet
Answer
Document
6 pages
Answer
NeNe Dela LLana
No ratings yet
NLRC Position Paper - Arpon
Document
8 pages
NLRC Position Paper - Arpon
chikatee
No ratings yet
Petition For Recognition of Divorce (JapAN)
Document
5 pages
Petition For Recognition of Divorce (JapAN)
Teodulo Jr Cruz
No ratings yet
Enter of Appearance With Motion For Extension of Time To File Counter Affidavit
Document
2 pages
Enter of Appearance With Motion For Extension of Time To File Counter Affidavit
Genesy Timonera
No ratings yet
Comment On Foe Cabuang
Document
4 pages
Comment On Foe Cabuang
Raffy Pangilinan
No ratings yet
Sample Reply To Respondents Position Paper
Document
23 pages
Sample Reply To Respondents Position Paper
Anonymous 40zhRk1
100% (1)
Mcbride Manifestation
Document
3 pages
Mcbride Manifestation
ROMY
No ratings yet
Motion For Reconsideration (D.M. Ferrer)
Document
9 pages
Motion For Reconsideration (D.M. Ferrer)
Maria Lourdes P. Garcia
No ratings yet
Complaint Affidavit Bp22 Case
Document
6 pages
Complaint Affidavit Bp22 Case
Haniyyah Ftm
No ratings yet
Position Paper
Document
7 pages
Position Paper
John Ree Esquivel Doctor
No ratings yet
Position Paper Wong Vs Alorica (NTC Edit) 13 February 2019
Document
15 pages
Position Paper Wong Vs Alorica (NTC Edit) 13 February 2019
neil
No ratings yet
National Labor Relations Commission: Manufacturing Corporation vs. Alcon and Papa, G.R. No. 194884, October 22, 2014)
Document
17 pages
National Labor Relations Commission: Manufacturing Corporation vs. Alcon and Papa, G.R. No. 194884, October 22, 2014)
Chloe Sy Galita
No ratings yet
Oppositon To Petition For Review
Document
19 pages
Oppositon To Petition For Review
Debie Sallidao Tay-og
No ratings yet
NLRC Position Paper For The Respondent - Google Search
Document
2 pages
NLRC Position Paper For The Respondent - Google Search
Sarah Jane-Shae O. Semblante
25% (4)
Rejoinder: National Labor Relations Commission
Document
7 pages
Rejoinder: National Labor Relations Commission
Tonton Reyes
No ratings yet
Format Reply Comment Dhsud
Document
1 page
Format Reply Comment Dhsud
Mark Dungo
50% (2)
Reply - Kerwin Serrano-24June2020
Document
5 pages
Reply - Kerwin Serrano-24June2020
harold ramos
No ratings yet
Motion For Reconsideration Petition For Cancellation of The Certificate of Live Birth Lucila Esquivel Austria Natividad
Document
5 pages
Motion For Reconsideration Petition For Cancellation of The Certificate of Live Birth Lucila Esquivel Austria Natividad
Ej Tagatugue
No ratings yet
Mem of Appeal Sec of Labor-2
Document
12 pages
Mem of Appeal Sec of Labor-2
Torni Jo
No ratings yet
Twentieth (20) Division: Republic of The Philippines
Document
7 pages
Twentieth (20) Division: Republic of The Philippines
Mark Lojero
No ratings yet
Vianex Salon Position Paper
Document
14 pages
Vianex Salon Position Paper
Marlon Gonzaga
100% (1)
Counter Affidavit (CALLAO)
Document
5 pages
Counter Affidavit (CALLAO)
Gerard Martin Camiña
No ratings yet
Profiles of The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Practices of Philippine Mining Firms
Document
26 pages
Profiles of The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Practices of Philippine Mining Firms
Jbc
No ratings yet
Renew
Document
1 page
Renew
Eduardo Anerdez
No ratings yet
Counter Affidavit
Document
6 pages
Counter Affidavit
kong pagulayan
No ratings yet
Partial Appeal
Document
11 pages
Partial Appeal
Sal Joseph Gonzales Yutiampo
100% (1)
Comment: (To The Complainant-Appellant'S Motion For Reconsideration)
Document
2 pages
Comment: (To The Complainant-Appellant'S Motion For Reconsideration)
Sanchez Roman Victor
No ratings yet
COMPROMISE AGREEMENT-jully
Document
2 pages
COMPROMISE AGREEMENT-jully
Don Sala
No ratings yet
Answer To Respondent's Reply .Edited
Document
19 pages
Answer To Respondent's Reply .Edited
Warren Canoy
No ratings yet
Chavez vs. Bonto-Perez, G.R. No. 109808, March 1, 1995 DIGEST
Document
3 pages
Chavez vs. Bonto-Perez, G.R. No. 109808, March 1, 1995 DIGEST
SS
No ratings yet
THE LABOUR LAW IN UGANDA: [A TeeParkots Inc Publishers Product]
From Everand
THE LABOUR LAW IN UGANDA: [A TeeParkots Inc Publishers Product]
Dr. Smith Kiiza
No ratings yet
OpSec Respndants Reply Paper 2
Document
6 pages
OpSec Respndants Reply Paper 2
tonybhorn7856
No ratings yet
Horn Reply To Opsec Position Paper Small File
Document
67 pages
Horn Reply To Opsec Position Paper Small File
tonybhorn7856
No ratings yet
Horn Complainant Position Paper 1
Document
5 pages
Horn Complainant Position Paper 1
tonybhorn7856
88% (17)
Respond Ants Rejoiner Submission
Document
18 pages
Respond Ants Rejoiner Submission
tonybhorn7856
No ratings yet
Search Warrant No. 012-09
Document
3 pages
Search Warrant No. 012-09
tonybhorn7856
No ratings yet
Civil Procedure Notes Compiled University of San Carlos College of Law
Document
2 pages
Civil Procedure Notes Compiled University of San Carlos College of Law
April Jugadora
No ratings yet
Abatement of Nuisance Complaint
Document
5 pages
Abatement of Nuisance Complaint
Antonio de Vera
No ratings yet
Legal Aspects of Business 1827667
Document
7 pages
Legal Aspects of Business 1827667
Scroll with deepriya
No ratings yet
Complaint and Demand For Jury Trial
Document
27 pages
Complaint and Demand For Jury Trial
Maine Trust For Local News
No ratings yet
62 CV 19 3910
Document
33 pages
62 CV 19 3910
Michael Brun
No ratings yet
Our War With Spain For Cuba's Freedom by White, Trumbull, 1868-1941
Document
381 pages
Our War With Spain For Cuba's Freedom by White, Trumbull, 1868-1941
Gutenberg.org
No ratings yet
Orozco v. Navarro - Viento y Sol Complaint PDF
Document
15 pages
Orozco v. Navarro - Viento y Sol Complaint PDF
Mark Jaffe
No ratings yet
Position Paper Eva
Document
8 pages
Position Paper Eva
Cesar Parado
No ratings yet
Simple Loan or Mutuum
Document
13 pages
Simple Loan or Mutuum
Maria Cristina Itao
No ratings yet
Suzanne Germany v. Carol Vance, Suzanne Germany v. Carol Vance, 868 F.2d 9, 1st Cir. (1989)
Document
21 pages
Suzanne Germany v. Carol Vance, Suzanne Germany v. Carol Vance, 868 F.2d 9, 1st Cir. (1989)
Scribd Government Docs
No ratings yet
Air France V CA - GR L-57339 - Dec 29 1983
Document
5 pages
Air France V CA - GR L-57339 - Dec 29 1983
Jeremiah Reynaldo
No ratings yet
Baritua vs. Mercader
Document
15 pages
Baritua vs. Mercader
Ars Moriendi
No ratings yet
Position Paper
Document
13 pages
Position Paper
Anonymous 4grAabQcn
No ratings yet
Excessive Force Lawsuit Against Clermont County Sheriff's Office
Document
12 pages
Excessive Force Lawsuit Against Clermont County Sheriff's Office
CincinnatiEnquirer
100% (2)
Bank of The Philippine Islands v. Guevarra, G.R. No. 167052, March 11, 2015
Document
12 pages
Bank of The Philippine Islands v. Guevarra, G.R. No. 167052, March 11, 2015
Glenn caraig
No ratings yet
Plaintiff'S Class Action Complaint Case Summary
Document
24 pages
Plaintiff'S Class Action Complaint Case Summary
CBS 11 News
100% (1)
Radin - A Restatement of Hohfeld
Document
25 pages
Radin - A Restatement of Hohfeld
Aki Lacanlalay
100% (1)
Rash v. JV Intermediate, LTD., 498 F.3d 1201, 10th Cir. (2007)
Document
27 pages
Rash v. JV Intermediate, LTD., 498 F.3d 1201, 10th Cir. (2007)
Scribd Government Docs
No ratings yet
Criminal Law Cases Set 2
Document
143 pages
Criminal Law Cases Set 2
aia marie comedido
No ratings yet
Obligations and Contracts: San Beda College of Law
Document
32 pages
Obligations and Contracts: San Beda College of Law
saint
No ratings yet
Wood V Hamden
Document
3 pages
Wood V Hamden
mtuccitto
No ratings yet
15&43-Mendoza v. Paule G.R. No. 175885 February 13, 2009
Document
8 pages
15&43-Mendoza v. Paule G.R. No. 175885 February 13, 2009
Jopan SJ
100% (1)
Adrian Reyes Complaint
Document
12 pages
Adrian Reyes Complaint
James Justice
No ratings yet
Antonio Tan vs. Court of Appeals and Cultural Center of The Philippines
Document
4 pages
Antonio Tan vs. Court of Appeals and Cultural Center of The Philippines
Ella Cardenas
No ratings yet
Ba3 Module 1 Law On Obligations
Document
40 pages
Ba3 Module 1 Law On Obligations
Jean Marie Delgado
No ratings yet
Villafuerte V CA
Document
16 pages
Villafuerte V CA
Gui Pe
No ratings yet