Back

Sara Lee Philippines, Inc. Vs. Emilinda D. Macatlang, et al.

SARA LEE PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, vs. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., 1 G.R. No. 180147 --------------------------------------- ARIS PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, vs. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Respondents. G.R. No. 180148 ------------------------------------- SARA LEE CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Respondents. G.R. No. 180149 ------------------------------------ CESAR C. CRUZ, Petitioner, vs. EMILINDA D. MACA TLANG, ET AL., Respondents. G.R. No. 180150 ----------------------------------- FASHION ACCESSORIES PHILS., INC., Petitioner, vs. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Respondents. G.R. No. 180319 ---------------------------------- EMILINDA D. MACA TLANG, ET AL., Petitioners, vs. NLRC, ARIS PHILIPPINES, INC., FASHION ACCESSORIES PHILS., INC., SARA LEE CORPORATION, SARA LEE PHILIPPINES, INC., COLLIN BEAL and ATTY. CESAR C. CRUZ, Respondents. G.R. No. 180685

G.R. No. 180147/G.R. No. 180148/G.R. No. 180149/G.R .No. 180150/G.R. No. 180319/G.R. No. 180685 | 2014-06-04

SECOND DIVISION
 
D E C I S I O N

PEREZ, J.:
 
The dilemma of the appeal bond in labor cases is epochal, present whenever the amount of monetary award becomes debatably impedimental  to the completion of remedies. Such instances exaggerate the ambivalence between rigidity and liberality in the application of the requirement that the bond must be equal to the arbiter’s award. The rule of reasonableness in the determination of the compliant amount of the bond has been formulated to allow the review of the arbiter’s award. However, that rule seemingly becomes inadequate when the award...