Log inLog in  LBPEA PublicationsLBPEA Publications  PORTAL VIEWPORTAL VIEW  HomeHome  RegisterRegister  
2018-2022 LBPEA PRESIDENT IS NANETTE LATI
SFAL PF HF RELEASE
December 15
Latest topics
» LBPEA NEB ATTENDS APPRECIATIVE LEADERSHIP SEMINAR
LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:36 am by sonia

» HMO ENROLLMENT FOR 2018
LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:24 am by sonia

» A message from LBPEA Visayas Director SONIA D. BROTARLO
LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:30 am by sonia

A message from LBPEA Visayas Director SONIA D. BROTARLO
LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:30 am by sonia
LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Sonia10

It has been two (2) years and six (6) months that this website was closed.  Many were disappointed with the closure but we have to keep up with the fast changing technology - facebook and twitter, among others.  
 
With the remaining one month and a half of my stint as Director for Visayas, I have been ruminative as to the manner of my “consummatum est” in LBPEA.  Thus  here I am re-opening the website pro hac vice for my grand exit. 
 
This is the medium where you first knew me and this is where I want to personally reach out to you to express my deepest and heartfelt “THANK YOU” for all the years that you trusted me. 
 


[ Full reading ]
Comments: 0
NEWS LINKS

 

 LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs

Go down 
AuthorMessage
sonia
Admin


Number of posts : 1428
Registration date : 2008-12-16

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:45 pm

On its meeting last August 31, 2011, the LBPEA NEB came up with the following stand on the COLA issue:

1. To wait for the final decision of the Supreme Court on the Motion for Reconsideration of LANDBANK as there are two possibilities:

a. SC may MODIFY the decision of the Court of Appeals based on existing jurisprudence in the case of MWSS wherein it included "THOSE SIMILARLY SITUATED EMPLOYEES". Both petitioners and non-petitioners will benefit, as this is an implementation of the law on COLA wherein employees covered by such law have the right to receive.

b. SC may AFFIRM the decision of the Court of Appeals, thus in such case only the petitioners for Batch 1 will benefit. Those who signed the SPAs but are not included in the list of the petitioners under Batch 1 will not be benefited.

2. In case only the petitioners will be paid, LBPEA NEB intends to do the following plan of actions:

a. File a demand with LANDBANK for and in behalf of the rank and file employees who are non-petitioners. In this instance there is no need for an SPA and no need for legal fees but only a referendum authorizing LBPEA to make representation. Compromise settlement or agreement is also possible under this option but subject to the approval of the rank and file employees.

b. If the above option would not prosper, LBPEA would avail of the appropriate legal remedy. We need the expertise of lawyers and only in this instance that we will be requiring the employees to sign SPAs for the attorneys fees at a maximum rate of 10%. There are two legal remedies available either Intervention under Batch 2 or an original action may be filed in the RTC. The case will not take long since by that time there is already a Supreme Court ruling for LANDBANK on COLA.

3. On the SPAs currently in circulation, it was the majority decision of LBPEA NEB not to be involved. The attorneys fee was not acceptable to the Regional Governors during the Annual Convention. But this decision does not prevent the individual LBPEA officers who are also members of COLABEP to assist in the circulation of the SPA.

We hope that through this article the LBPEA members may be guided on their decision TO SIGN or NOT TO SIGN the SPAs.
Back to top Go down
https://lbpea.forumotion.net
boyblue



Number of posts : 24
Registration date : 2011-06-06

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Sun Sep 11, 2011 6:08 pm

Definitely, the 30 percent being demanded by cola-bep to batch 3, is akin to loan sharks.

1. waiting for the final decision of the supreme court is the work of a juan tamad. remember, the supreme court denied landbanks motion for certiorari, due to technicality. the justices did not anymore discuss the merit/demerit of lbp management's case.
if indeed, the supreme court's final decision will affirm the Court of Appeals decision, that only petitioners of the case will be granted COLA, etc., then non-petitioners will have to file another case at the Regional Trial Court, which will take a decade.
2. there is a big possibility that supreme court will not modify the CA decision, based from its earlier decision.
3. that is why in order to help the non-petitioners, Engr. Gene David is proposing a Motion to Intervene at the Supreme Court.
We strongly doubt the LBPEA-NEB would successfully move to represent the non-petitioners. Most LBPEA-NEB are affiliated with COLA-BEP Inc., which are demanding 30 percent per employee.
Madame Sonia, the above proposal you mentioned, is nice to hear. But your colleagues in the LBPEA-NEB have other intentions, to serve their selfish interests.
Back to top Go down
BLITZ



Number of posts : 181
Registration date : 2011-06-29

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:49 pm

semaj501 said:
Quote :
Sec. 2, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court provides the time to intervene. It states that the motion to intervene may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court. Take note that the motion to intervene is subject to the approval of the court which may be denied if considered that it will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties, or when intervenor's rights may be fully protected in a separate proceeding.

If foregoing is true, motion to intervene with the SC may not be the appropriate move at this point considering that, as stated, it may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court. Take note of the phrase "trial court", it means with the RTC in the case of our COLA claim.

Count me in Boyblue as one of the petitioners should the move will be finally filed with the RTC.
Back to top Go down
Pamela D. Medina



Number of posts : 1
Registration date : 2011-03-28

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:19 pm

mr. boyblue pasend nman po pamdeguzman_01@yahoo.com Thanks!
Back to top Go down
boyblue



Number of posts : 24
Registration date : 2011-06-06

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:56 am

To Blitz:



there many decisions that allows Motion to Intervene even at the Supreme Court. we are relying on the strong foundation of the jurisprudence. The rules of court, according to the Supreme Court, is only procedural. The rules should not deprive the indespensable right of petitioners to obtain justice. Likewise, the Constitution states:

Article III, Section I, “Bill of Rights”:



“No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law. Nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”
Back to top Go down
boyblue



Number of posts : 24
Registration date : 2011-06-06

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:30 pm

In 99.999 percent of Supreme Court cases, it DOES NOT REVERSE ITS DECISION. Meaning, it does not entertain a motion for reconsideration. Much more, MODIFY its decision.
Back to top Go down
palosapis

palosapis

Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2011-02-21

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Mon Sep 12, 2011 6:03 pm

"Boyblue says" "Madame Sonia, the above proposal you mentioned, is nice to hear. But
your colleagues in the LBPEA-NEB have other intentions, to serve their
selfish interests".

for me I believe on Mam Sonia's proposals.......Ang Importante lang dito Hindi tayo matalian ng isang SPA para meron tayong enough room to move in case na me desiasyon na ang SC.....
Back to top Go down
sonia
Admin


Number of posts : 1428
Registration date : 2008-12-16

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Tue Sep 13, 2011 5:38 am

INTERVENTION in the SUPREME COURT is not the proper legal remedy at this time. For those who intend to do so, kindly read the Rules of Court provided below and the jurisprudence on Intervention decided by the Supreme Court En Banc.

Intervention could only be done before rendition of judgment by the trial court under Sec. 2 of Rule 19 of the Rules of Court. This is to allow the other party to make an answer either to oppose or admit the intervention.

Let us not mislead our fellow employees who are already panicky on the issue on COLA. Our primary concern here is for all of us to be benefited should this COLA be decided by the Supreme Court. Let us do that which is best at the least cost for all of us.


RULES OF COURT
RULE 19

INTERVENTION

SECTION 1. Who may intervene.—Aperson who has a
legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either the court or of an officer thereof may, with leave of court, be allowed to
intervene in the action. The court shall consider whether or not the
intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of
the original parties, and whether or not the intervenor’s rights may be fully
protected in a separate proceeding. (2[a], a, R12)

SEC. 2. Time to intervene.–
The motion to intervene may be filed at any time before
rendition of judgment by the trial court.
A copy of the pleading-in-intervention shall be attached to the motion
and served on the original parties. (n)

SEC. 3. Pleadings-in-intervention.–The intervenor shall
file a complaint-in-intervention if he asserts a claim against either or all of
the original parties, or an answer-in-intervention if he unites with the
defending party in resisting a claim against the latter. (2[c]a, R12)

SEC. 4. Answer to complaint-in-intervention.–The answer to
the complaint-in-intervention shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from
notice of the order admitting the same, unless a different period is fixed by
the court. (2[d]a, R12)


SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC


[b]REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Petitioner,

G. R. No. 85284
February 28, 1990
-versus-
SANDIGANBAYAN,
THIRD DIVISION,


SIMPLICIO A. PALANCA in His Own
Behalf as a Stockholder of BACOLOD
REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
[BREDCO] and Other Stockholders
Similarly Situated,

Intervention is not an independent action, but is ancillary and supplemental to an existing litigation. Hence, the private respondents' action for intervention in Civil Case No. 0025, not being an independent action, is merely incidental to, or related to, the said civil case. Since the respondent Sandiganbayan has the exclusive and original jurisdiction over Civil Case No. 0025, it has likewise original and exclusive jurisdiction over the private respondents' action for
intervention therein.


In this jurisdiction, the law on "intervention" is found in the Rules of Court.. Thus, a person may, before or during a trial, be permitted by the court, in its discretion, to intervene in an action, if he has legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties or an interest against both, or when he is so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof.
Back to top Go down
https://lbpea.forumotion.net
boyblue



Number of posts : 24
Registration date : 2011-06-06

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:23 am

Madam Sonia, the above rules of court, according to the Supreme Court, is only rule of procedure. If you will do a little research, there are jurisprudence from the Supreme Court, which states that Motion to Intervene even at the stage of the case at the Supreme Court is allowed. Let me cite you the cases, such as the following:



“In Director of Lands v. Court of Appeals, we allowed intervention even when the petition for review of the assailed judgment was already submitted for decision in the Supreme Court. In this case we held in part:



“But Rule 12 of the Rules of Court like all other Rules therein promulgated, is simply a rule of procedure, the whole purpose and object of which is to make the powers of the Court fully and completely available for justice. The purpose of procedure is not to thwart justice. Its proper aim is to facilitate the application of justice to the rival claims of contending parties. It was created not to hinder and delay but to facilitate and promote the administration of justice.



“It does not constitute the thing itself which courts are always striving to secure to litigants. It is designed as the means best adopted to obtain that thing. In other words, it is a means to an end.”

“In Tahanan Development Corporation v. Court of Appeals, we allowed intervention almost at the end of the proceedings.



“The Rules on Intervention is to be interpreted liberally, as we held in Pinlac v. Court of Appeals:



“The rule on intervention, like all other rules of procedure is intended to make the powers of the Court fully and completely available for justice. It is aimed to facilitate a comprehensive adjudication of rival claims overriding technicalities on the timeliness of the filing thereof.



Now, WHO IS MISLEADING the Landbankers?

Whom shall we believe, the jurisprudence of the highest court, the Supreme Court, or the highly questionable LBPEA-NEB?
Back to top Go down
Rodolfo



Number of posts : 16
Registration date : 2010-10-31

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:42 pm


Hindi naman sa ganoon boy blue.dapat kasi huwag mong i-assert yong opinion mo dahil sa dami ng mga precedents ay talagang ma confuse na kaming hindi mga lawyers. bigyan na lang siguro ng sapat na info ang mga kasama natin at bahala na silang mag decide.
Back to top Go down
boyblue



Number of posts : 24
Registration date : 2011-06-06

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:54 pm

TO RODOLFO, Sir, im accused as misleading. im just answering clearly the issue. it's up to you to make your own decision.
Back to top Go down
doods



Number of posts : 85
Registration date : 2011-06-07

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Tue Sep 13, 2011 2:43 pm

mas maganda siguro kung c boy blue nag lawyer, legal opinion na nga tirada niya eh. tsktsktsk..........
Back to top Go down
semaj501



Number of posts : 280
Registration date : 2010-09-15

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Tue Sep 13, 2011 4:06 pm

Reliance on the ruling laid down in the case "Tahanan Development Corporation v. Court of Appeals, Nov. 1982" is misplaced at this point. The reason is that in this case and the other cited cases were decided by the SC when a different provision of Rules on Motion for Intervention was controlling at the time, thus:

Sec. 2. Intervention. — A person may, before or during a trial, be permitted by the court, in its discretion, to intervene in an action, if he has legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties or an interest against both, or when he is so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof.
(a) Motion for intervention. — A person desiring to intervene shall file a motion for leave of court with notice upon all the parties to the action.

Amendment to this provision was made which is now provided as Rule 19 of the 1997 Rules of Court as:

RULE 19. INTERVENTION

Section 1. Who may intervene.

A person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both, or is so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof may, with leave of court, be allowed to intervene in the action. The court shall consider whether or not the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties, and whether or not the intervenor's rights may be fully protected in a separate proceeding.

Sec. 2. Time to intervene. The motion to intervene may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court. A copy of the pleading-in-intervention shall be attached to the motion and served on the original parties.

In G.R. 182645, June 22, 2011, it was held that petitioner may not be allowed to intervene at this late a stage. Section 2, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court clearly provides that a motion to intervene may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court.

It cited “The Learning Child, Inc. v. Ayala Alabang Village Association” case where the SC ratiocinated on the significance of the abovementioned Section as instructive, to wit:

This section is derived from the former Section 2, Rule 12, which then provided that the motion to intervene may be filed "before or during a trial." Said former phraseology gave rise to ambiguous doctrines on the interpretation of the word "trial," with one decision holding that said Motion may be filed up to the day the case is submitted for decision, while another stating that it may be filed at any time before the rendition of the final judgment. This ambiguity was eliminated by the present Section 2, Rule 19 by clearly stating that the same may be filed "at any time before rendition of the judgment by the trial court," in line with the second doctrine above-stated. The clear import of the amended provision is that intervention cannot be allowed when the trial court has already rendered its Decision, and much less, as in the case at bar, when even the Court of Appeals had rendered its own Decision on appeal.

In his book on remedial law, former Supreme Court Associate Justice Florenz D. Regalado explained the rationale behind the amendments introduced in Section 2, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court as follows:
The justification advanced for this is that before judgment is rendered, the court for good cause shown, may still allow the introduction of additional evidence and that is still within a liberal interpretation of the period for trial. Also, since no judgment has yet been rendered, the matter subject of the intervention may still be readily resolved and integrated in the judgment disposing of all claims in the case, and would not require an overall reassessment of said claims as would be the case if the judgment had already been rendered.

Ms Sonia's contention, indeed, is with merit...
Back to top Go down
ismikey



Number of posts : 18
Registration date : 2010-09-08

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Tue Sep 13, 2011 4:44 pm

Antayin na lang natin ang final decision ng SC, meron point si madam sonia na maaring lahat ng landbanker na pwede bigyan ng COLA/BEP whether petitioner ka or hindi.
Back to top Go down
sonia
Admin


Number of posts : 1428
Registration date : 2008-12-16

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:30 pm

boyblue wrote:
TO RODOLFO, Sir, im accused as misleading. im just answering clearly the issue. it's up to you to make your own decision.

It seems that the word misleading struck you hard enough despite the fact that no name was mentioned and no person was ever accused in the article I posted. I have been fearless with the views I made in this website because I will really fight for what I believe is right.


For the other destroyers in this website:

I designed this website purposely as a source of information for the LBPEA members. This is a venue for healthy exchange of ideas, for queries and suggestions but not a venue to destroy the reputation of anyone.

We may fight or argue on the issue only but not to make personal attacks going beyond so as to destroy the name of anybody.

For those who are posting statements which are unethical, disastrous, and unprofessional, this is not a venue for you.
Back to top Go down
https://lbpea.forumotion.net
msangola



Number of posts : 120
Registration date : 2011-09-14

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:56 pm

nasan ba si engr David? bakit si boy blue ang naka front at ginagamit pa ang lbpea website....why not create another website for your advocacy..nakakapagtaka lang din asan kayo nong wala pang linaw ang cola bep nag a antay lang din na nakatunganga...ngayon gusto niyo magpasikat matagal pa election ng lbpea boy blue.....
Back to top Go down
batman_E289

batman_E289

Number of posts : 544
Age : 42
Registration date : 2010-10-28

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:57 pm

nais ko lang pong ipahayag ang aking nararamdaman sa mga pangyayaring bumabalot sa ating asosasyon ngayon.

tayong lahat bilang miembro ng asosasyon ay pawang may karapatan upang magbahagi ng ating mga kaalaman, kakayahan, talino, galing at tulong para sa ikabubuti ng kapwa nating miembro. subalit nakalulugkot isiping kinakailangan pa nating gamitin ang ibang tao at tapakan ang kanilang pangalang iningatan sa mahabang panahon.

ako po ay kasama sa batch 2 petitioners. hindi ko po alam kung may claim nga ako dahil naregular lang ako nung Feb 2005. subalit dahil nga ang case ng batch 1 ay upto present, naglakas loob po akong mag-file.

gusto ko lang din po iklaro para sa kaalaman ng lahat at alam ko pong mapapatunayan po ng mga kasama ko sa NEB at ng mga regional governors and vice governors na dumalo noong nakaraang LBPEA annual convention (Feb 2011) ang mga sumusunod:

1. sinikap po ng NEB at Reg. Governors & Vice Governors na maipababa ang

porsyentong hinihingi ng COLA case lawyers. subalit hindi tayo napagbigyan.

2. dahil sa nangyari, minabuti ng mga LBPEA officers na hindi makisawsaw tungkol

dito subalit nakahandang tumulong sa pagpapaliwanag sa mga empleyado.

3. nilinaw ni Atty. Bert Martinez na ang mga non-petitioners na hindi sang-ayon sa

nasabing porsyento ay malayang kumuha ng sariling abogado kung sakaling nais

nyang mag-file ng sariling claim.

bilang opisyal ng asosasyon bagamat ako'y bubot pa kung ikukumpara sa inyong lahat na mga matatagal na sa bangko (lalong-lalo na po sa mga hindi nakasama sa batch 1 and 2 petitioners), ako po'y muling nakikiusap na maging mahinahon tayong lahat tulad ng ating ginawa nung mga panahon ng ating pakikipaglaban para sa ating pay plan. marapat na pag-isipan at pag-aralan nating mabuti ang mga personal na desisyong ating gagawin.

sa ngayon po ay eto ang mga sinaryong ating kinakaharap:

1. tayo'y may COLA case (batch 1) na nasa SC at may COLA case (batch 2) sa RTC

2. may bagong SPAs na inilabas ang orihinal na grupo ng COLA BEP45, Inc. na

addendum sa batch 2 sa RTC

- 200 membership fee

- 1000 acceptance fee

- 30% contigence fee (all in)

3. may panibagong SPAs na inilabas ang grupo nila Engr. Generoso "GENE" David.

- 10% success fee for the intervention sa SC

- in case the SC intervention was denied or should an original court action be

resorted in the appropriate trial court, the following are to be charged:

a. 10% success fee

b. litigation expenses such as filing fee, docket fee, sheriff's fee, process

server's fee, commissioner's fee, cost of transcript of stenographic

notes, long distance calls, reproduction/printing charges,

representation, facilitation, certification fee, transportation,

administrative and logistics costs and other kindred and out of pocket

expenses

- in the event the aforesaid case is elevated for review and/or appeal with the

appellate court, the appeal fee (shall be fixed upon mutual agreement) shall

likewise depend on the filing/docket fee that will be charged by the concerned

appallate court or administrative body.

sa ganitong sitwasyon, ang huling pagpapasya ay nakasalalay po sa bawat indibidwal na miembro ng LBPEA, maging sa mga alumni, o sa kabuoang empleyado ng bangko. nabanggit na po ni madam sonia ang plano ng asosasyon hinggil sa usaping ito at nailahad din natin ang mga sinaryo. sana'y nakapagbigay kami ng linaw upang makatulong sa pagpapasya nyo.

salamat ng marami at patnubayan tayo ng Panginoon sa ating mga balakin.
Back to top Go down
palosapis

palosapis

Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2011-02-21

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:31 pm

Thank you Batman......Sana lahat nang SPA na dumaan sa harapan natin ay pag aralan natin nang maigi bago pirmahan, Kilalanin rin natin kung sino ang ang mga binigyan natin nang "authority" para sa sarili natin.......
Back to top Go down
black man

black man

Number of posts : 111
Registration date : 2011-08-09

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:17 am

thanks atty semaj501 for your unending support with lbpea.....
Back to top Go down
King Saviour

King Saviour

Number of posts : 105
Registration date : 2010-10-26

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:21 am

MABUHAY SI ATTY SEMAJ501
Back to top Go down
ganaby way

ganaby way

Number of posts : 82
Registration date : 2011-07-14

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:23 am

we are proud of you atty semaj501
Back to top Go down
palosapis

palosapis

Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2011-02-21

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:50 am

Salamat Atty semaj501.. Salamat rin ki Batman at Mam Sonia...nasa nyo ang suporta ko.....
Back to top Go down
donex7



Number of posts : 17
Registration date : 2011-04-15

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 2:20 pm

May I comment:



1. waiting for the final decision of the supreme court is the work of a juan tamad. - May we know why?


if indeed, the supreme court's final decision will affirm the Court of Appeals decision, that only petitioners of the case will be granted COLA, etc., then non-petitioners will have to file another case at the Regional Trial Court, which will take a decade. - Why would it takes for a decade when there is already a precedence? What is taking it that long?


2. there is a big possibility that supreme court will not modify the CA decision, based from its earlier decision.- Then LBPEA will do exactly what Ma'am Sonia had posted above.


3. that is why in order to help the non-petitioners, Engr. Gene David is proposing a Motion to Intervene at the Supreme Court. - I thought it is already too late to make an intervention since the proper time to do it is on the RTC level (i am not sure, correct me if i am wrong)


We strongly doubt the LBPEA-NEB would successfully move to represent the non-petitioners. Most LBPEA-NEB are affiliated with COLA-BEP Inc., which are demanding 30 percent per employee. - Then the non-petitioner will have other alternatives like filing for their own petition. The bottom line is this: that everybody will benefit on this regardless on when and how.
Back to top Go down
sonia
Admin


Number of posts : 1428
Registration date : 2008-12-16

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:20 pm

donex7 wrote:
We strongly doubt the LBPEA-NEB would successfully move to represent the non-petitioners. Most LBPEA-NEB are affiliated with COLA-BEP Inc., which are demanding 30 percent per employee. - Then the non-petitioner will have other alternatives like filing for their own petition. The bottom line is this: that everybody will benefit on this regardless on when and how.

Donex7 please remove your doubt that LBPEA-NEB would not represent the non-petitioners. For several instances, we have proven to all of you that we work for the interest, welfare and common good of the employees. I am once again asking you to trust us that WE WILL REPRESENT YOU. I am a non-petitioner and also the other Directors outside head office. Atty. Semaj is also a non-petitioner. Together we will pull our strengths to hurdle this quest for the elusive COLA.
Back to top Go down
https://lbpea.forumotion.net
donex7



Number of posts : 17
Registration date : 2011-04-15

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:35 pm

Ma'am Son I did not doubt the capabilities and sincerity of the LBPEA...ngayon pa ba after the success of our Interim increase?



You have just misunderstood my post..actually the italics are a quote from previous post of boyblue. The words after the hyphen are my comments...



What I'm trying to say is that if the SC would affirm the CA decision which is tantamount to favoring only the petitioner, then we (non-petitioners) have other alternatives to pursue like we file for our own petition, or like you said, negotiate with the LBP Mgt to just include everyone (petitioners and non-petitioners alike). Personally I do not care if batch 1 will have their share of blessing first as long as we will have ours in the near future or so.



Salamat po.
Back to top Go down
sonia
Admin


Number of posts : 1428
Registration date : 2008-12-16

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:16 pm

donex7, Mia culpa! You did not mention kasi na you are commenting on the post of boyblue sorry I stand corrected. Thanks for your comment and clarification.
Back to top Go down
https://lbpea.forumotion.net
palosapis

palosapis

Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2011-02-21

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:45 am


Mam Sonia wrote
"I am a non-petitioner and also the other
Directors outside head office. Atty. Semaj is also a non-petitioner.
Together we will pull our strengths to hurdle this quest for the elusive
COLA"

Mam Sonia isama nyo rin ang Regional Governors at Vice Governors
na hindi rin nagpirma ....

kasama pa rin ninyo kami....
Back to top Go down
batman_E289

batman_E289

Number of posts : 544
Age : 42
Registration date : 2010-10-28

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:20 am

palosapis:

damang-dama ko na kasama pa rin namin kayo...hehehe. makailang ilit mo nai-post eh. hehehe.

kidding aside, indeed, we really know that you together with our regional officers and every single member of our association are still with us in this quest for COLA. we also want to express our sincerity in what we are saying. we. the NEB, will never leave a man behind. we will all be benefited after this struggles. we will exert all our efforts to help our members. as what madam sonia had mentioned in her post, we already have our plans on how we could help all non-petitioners. please keep your trust in trust and we promise that in the end...there will be no man left behind.

thank you very much.
Back to top Go down
sonia
Admin


Number of posts : 1428
Registration date : 2008-12-16

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:21 am

palosapis wrote:

Mam Sonia wrote
"I am a non-petitioner and also the other
Directors outside head office. Atty. Semaj is also a non-petitioner.
Together we will pull our strengths to hurdle this quest for the elusive
COLA"

Mam Sonia isama nyo rin ang Regional Governors at Vice Governors
na hindi rin nagpirma ....

kasama pa rin ninyo kami....

Good morning Gov. Ruben(palosapis)! As what we successfully did in the past, we worked together towards our common goal. This time LBPEA in full force will once again work for this COLA from the NEB, to the Unit Representatives at the Head Office, the Regional Governors and Vice-Governors. As we all believe- IN UNITY THERE IS STRENGTH.

Sama sama pa rin po tayo Sir Ruben...

Back to top Go down
https://lbpea.forumotion.net
clsu78

clsu78

Number of posts : 5
Registration date : 2011-08-16

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:06 pm

[quote="batman"]

Good day. Tanong ko lang po kung may idea kayo kung may estimate kayo na date kung kailan payout sa 1st batch petitioner?
Back to top Go down
grieckoromano

grieckoromano

Number of posts : 23
Registration date : 2011-07-14

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Wed Sep 28, 2011 8:44 am

sa katapusan na clsu, lol
Back to top Go down
batman_E289

batman_E289

Number of posts : 544
Age : 42
Registration date : 2010-10-28

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:30 am

pay out of the first batch really depends on the final ruling of the SC. we are just hoping that SC would release its decision soon and hopefully within the year. just continue praying for its success and we the LBPEA NEB hope that ALL employees and even the retirees will be benefited. MAY GOD'S GRACE CONTINUE TO SHOWER UPON US.
Back to top Go down
batman_E289

batman_E289

Number of posts : 544
Age : 42
Registration date : 2010-10-28

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:44 am

for timmy:

may reply po ako sa message mo. sorry po medyo na-late po. salamat.
Back to top Go down
Rodolfo



Number of posts : 16
Registration date : 2010-10-31

LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:19 am

Ang paghihintay sa decision ng supreme court ay hidi katamaran kundi isang calculted move to minmimize cost on the part of employees.Sa tingin ko ang mga inputs ni atty. semaj ang pinaka informative at neutral.Salamat atty. semaj. sa mga excited ng maka recieve don't worry kong aabutiayong matatanggn ng isang dekada and decision total may legal interest man tayong matatanggap.Patience,patience my co-employees is agood virtue.He he he.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Empty
PostSubject: Re: LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs   LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs Icon_minitime1

Back to top Go down
 
LBPEA NEB'S STAND ON COLA AND SPAs
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
LBPEA Visayas :: NEWS ARCHIVE :: LBPEA NEWS :: UPDATE ON BENEFITS-
Jump to: