Compromise Agreement In Labor Cases

The petitioners voluntarily entered into the compromise agreement, as shown by the following facts: (1) they signed the respondent`s manifesto (submitted to the Labour Arbitrator) that the arbitration award was completed;39 (2) they held a joint affidavit of 5 40 and (3) 6 of the 8 petitioners submitted a demonstration to the labour judge on October 20, 1997. , 1997, by requesting the closing of the cases relating to the receipt of the payment in full satisfaction of their claims41 These circumstances also show that the respondent has already fulfilled its commitment under the compromise agreement. Since estoppel has already benefited from the agreement, it prevents petitioners from challenging it. The Board found that the compromise agreements could be reached after a final judgment6. The petitioners therefore effectively released the respondent from any claim after voluntarily renouncing the law under the compromise agreement7.7 The rights may be waived by a compromise agreement, regardless of a final judgment that has already governed the rights of the parties. To be binding, it must be shown that the compromise was carried out voluntarily, freely and intelligently by the parties who were fully aware of the judgment. Moreover, it must not be contrary to law, morality, morals and public order. In its decision of August 17, 2004, the Court of Appeal found that the NRL had seriously abused its discretion in the selection of PJI. The compromise agreement dealt only with the NLRC`s attribution of the complainants in this case, that is, the employer`s obligation to the complainants. The CA indicated that the NRC resolution nevertheless stated that the respondent had not demonstrated the validity of its austerity program, which it believed also existed after the implementation of the compromise agreement; That is why the agreement was reached. In AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. The Court of Appeal (32) set out the distinctive features of a compromise agreement that is essentially aimed at resolving a case already pending in a dispute or an object normally referred to as a judicial compromise. The Court held that, after its approval, the agreement became more than just a binding contract for the parties, since it was registered as a Tribunal decision on the controversy and has the strength and effect of any other judgment.

He added: „A compromise agreement reached by the parties, which was not reached in the presence of the arbitrator of the work before which the case is pending, is approved by him if he is satisfied, after the confrontation with the parties, in particular the complainants, that they understand the terms of the transaction and that they were concluded freely and voluntarily by them and that the agreement is not contrary to the law. Morality and public order. 51 x x (1) whether or not a union without its consent may compromise the security rights of its minority members or waive the security of its minority members, and (2) whether the union`s compromise agreement with the petitioning company, which has not been approved or ratified by minority persons, has the force of law.“ 36 A careful examination of the wording of the compromise agreement will show that the parties agreed that the only issue to be resolved was the question of the monetary rights of several workers.