“For there is but one essential justice which cements society, and one law which establishes this justice. This law is right reason, which is the true rule of all commandments and prohibitions. Whoever neglects this law, whether written or unwritten, is necessarily unjust and wicked.”
― Marcus Tullius Cicero, On the laws
SUBJECT : PENDING CLAIM
RETIREMENT PAY BENEFITS
SALUTATION
Dear Chief Justice Sereno, et al:
MESSAGE
In AC-10084 Atty. Quiroz disbarment case, to avoid showing that he had supported an [1]unlawful act, he claimed that though the separation[2] pay document showed my retirement pay accounts, it was not my retirement pay but my separation pay[3].
Upon reaching retirement age, I sent an e-mail[4] request for computation, then demand[5] release of my retirement pay to Shell Tabangao General Manager(GM) Geus.
Shell GM Geus through Mr. Ortega denied[6] my request for computation and payment of the same, where he responded this wise:
XXX"Our records show that you received your separation pay in 2003. Moreover, as you must be fully aware, your claim for additional amounts were dismissed with finality by the courts of competent jurisdiction. Accordingly, there are no amounts due you."XXX
From this response it is clearly shown that Mr. Ortega is hiding their/Shell responsibility and accountability and crime with respect to payment of retirement in the frail minute resolution GR-183273 decision[7] which contained wrongful, deceitful, unlawful and unconstitutional considerations which had consequently led to the to the existence of AC-10084 disbarment case against Atty. Raul Quiroz and the compilation of related hot continuing appeals[8] to this Court.
Meanwhile, I continued to reiterate my demand payment for my retirement benefit which up to this day they refused to issue payment nor respond to my e-mail inquiries regarding this matter.[9]
This is wrongful, despicable, deceitful, unlawful chicanery that had to be stopped and prosecuted as it is against public good and welfare. The ball now rests in the hands of the justices in your honorable Court to dispense justice fairly, honestly and without fear or favor and render review of GR-183273 with dispatch, correct, fair, honest and proper adjudication as an immediate prosecutorial move to deliver justice where it is due. Others, civil or criminal when applicable will eventually follow.
In addition, in order to display my conviction and undying resolve about my lawful claim over my retirement pay, among others, I have demanded and reiterated that the amount be paid to me with an option for an adjustment due to additional years of service on account of reinstatement with backwages as a result of fair, honest and proper adjudication of GR-183273.
Let copy of this e-mail be provided to the following recipients as I wished that they be informed of these action and causes of action in relation to my case against Shell, et al:
John Donovan <john@shellnews.net>,
rosebuens@gmail.com,
Mosses Buensuceso <mosses@alumni.nus.edu.sg>,
mimikyut <mimikyut@yahoo.com>,
Aaron Buensuceso <aaronbuensuceso@gmail.com>,
veronica buensuceso <vcbuensuceso@gmail.com>,Mia Buensuceso <miriambuens@gmail.com> |
pio@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_feedback@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_invitations@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_personnel@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_questions@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes P. A. Sereno
Justice Antonio T. Carpio
Justice Presbitero J. Velasco Jr.
Justice Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro
Justice Arturo D. Brion
Justice Diosdado M. Peralta
Justice Lucas P. Bersamin
Justice Mariano P. Del Castillo
Justice Martin S. Villarama (RETIRED)
Justice Jose P. Perez
Justice Jose C. Mendoza
Justice Bienvenido S. Reyes
Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe
Justice Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen
Justice Francis H. Jardeleza
Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa
Eduard.Geus@shell.com,
ecmanibogjr@accralaw.com,
jcleong@accralaw.com,
accra@accralaw.com
The People of the Philippines and the rest of world as this matter as far as I believe is imbued with public interest and help them shape the space where we live in a manner free from tyranny, oppression and injustice but love, peace, justice and compassion. |
Yours faithfully,
Antonio L. Buensuceso Jr.
FOOTNOTES
Click on the images to enlarge
[1]
Republic Act No. 7641 December 9, 1992
AN ACT AMENDING ARTICLE 287 OF PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 442, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES, BY PROVIDING FOR RETIREMENT PAY TO QUALIFIED PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYEES IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY RETIREMENT PLAN IN THE ESTABLISHMENT
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled::
Section 1. Article 287 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the Philippines, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Art. 287. Retirement. – Any employee may be retired upon reaching the retirement age established in the collective bargaining agreement or other applicable employment contract.
"In case of retirement, the employee shall be entitled to receive such retirement benefits as he may have earned under existing laws and any collective bargaining agreement and other agreements: Provided,however, That an employee's retirement benefits under any collective bargaining and other agreements shall not be less than those provided herein.
"In the absence of a retirement plan or agreement providing for retirement benefits of employees in the establishment, an employee upon reaching the age of sixty (60) years or more, but not beyond sixty-five (65) years which is hereby declared the compulsory retirement age, who has served at least five (5) years in the said establishment, may retire and shall be entitled to retirement pay equivalent to at least one-half (1/2) month salary for every year of service, a fraction of at least six (6) months being considered as one whole year.
"Unless the parties provide for broader inclusions, the term one-half (1/2) month salary shall mean fifteen (15) days plus one-twelfth (1/12) of the 13th month pay and the cash equivalent of not more than five (5) days of service incentive leaves.
"Retail, service and agricultural establishments or operations employing not more than (10) employees or workers are exempted from the coverage of this provision.
"Violation of this provision is hereby declared unlawful and subject to the penal provisions provided under Article 288 of this Code."
[2]
SEPARATION PAY SHOWING RETIREMENT PAY ACCOUNTS
[3]
|
|
FROM AC-10084 RAUL QUIROZ DISBARMENT COMPLAINT SWORN STATEMENT THROUGH HIS DEFENSE LAWYERS MANIBOG AND LEONG-PAMBID ASSERTED THAT THE [1]SEPARATION PAY DOCUMENT ALTHOUGH SHOWING RETIREMENT PAY ACCOUNTS IS NOT MY RETIREMENT PAY. ACCORDING TO THEM THE RETIREMENT PAY ACCOUNTS BEING SHOWN IN THE SEPARATION PAY DOCUMENT CAN NOT, AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS RETIREMENT PAY, FOR THE OBVIOUS REASON THAT THE COMPLAINANT DID NOT RETIRE AND/OR VOLUNTARY SEVER HIS EMPLOYMENT WITH THE COMPANY, BESIDES COMPLAINANT WAS NOT EVEN ELIGIBLE FOR RETIREMENT AT THE TIME HE WAS SEPARATED FROM EMPLOYMENT.
|
[4]
 |
REQUEST FOR COMPUTATION OF RETIREMENT PAY
[5]
DEMAND LETTER FOR THE RELEASE OF THE RETIREMENT PAY
|
[6]
SHELL GM GEUS RESPONSE THROUGH ORTEGA DENIAL OF MY RETIREMENT PAY
GR-183273
NOTE:
G.R. No. 199199 August 27, 2013
MARICRIS D. DOLOT, CHAIRMAN OF THE BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN-SORSOGON, PETITIONER
vs.
HON. RAMON PAJE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, REYNULFO A. JUAN, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, MINES AND GEOSCIENCES BUREAU, DENR, HON. RAUL R. LEE, GOVERNOR, PROVINCE OF SORSOGON, ANTONIO C. OCAMPO, JR., VICTORIA A. AJERO, ALFREDO M. AGUILAR, AND JUAN M. AGUILAR, ANTONES ENTERPRISES, GLOBAL SUMMIT MINES DEV'T CORP., AND TR ORE, RESPONDENTS.
xxx
Finally, failure to furnish a copy of the petition to the respondents is not a fatal defect such that the case should be dismissed. The RTC could have just required the petitioners to furnish a copy of the petition to the respondents. It should be remembered that "courts are not enslaved by technicalities, and they have the prerogative to relax compliance with procedural rules of even the most mandatory character, mindful of the duty to reconcile both the need to speedily put an end to litigation and the parties’ right to an opportunity to be heard."40
xx
40 Tomas v. Santos, G.R. No. 190448, July 26, 2010, 625 SCRA 645, 650-651.
[8]
IN RE A.C. NUMBER 10084
_
ATTY RAUL QUIROZ DISBARMENT CASE
“It is a fair characterization of the lawyer’s responsibility in our society that he stands “as a shield,” …, in defense of right and to ward off wrong. From a profession charged with such responsibilities there must be exacted those qualities of truth-speaking, of a high sense of honor, of granite discretion, of the strictest observance of fiduciary responsibility, that have, throughout the centuries, been compendiously described as “moral character”.”
Schware v. Board of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238, 239.
By swearing the lawyer's oath, an attorney becomes a guardian of truth and the rule of law, and an indispensable instrument in the fair and impartial administration of justice, a vital function of democracy, a failure of which is disastrous to society. While the duty to uphold the constitution and obey the laws is an obligation imposed upon every citizen, a lawyer assumes responsibilities over and beyond the basic requirements of good citizenship. As servant of the law, a lawyer ought to make himself an example for others to emulate. He should be possessed of and must continue to possess good moral character.
EXCERPTED FROM
The Lawyer's Oath
The Oath: The Lawyer's Ideal
-
Atty. Quiroz presented the document "Annex 5" shown above as a valid quitclaim document though that piece of document was not verified.
In his effort to achieve legitimacy of the illegitimate "Annex 5" quitclaim document, Atty Quiroz concocted a fraudulent alibi on his sworn statement that Annex 5 was not verified because according to him, when Ms. Eva Rojas, the remunerations supervisor, asked me my residence certificate, I told Ms. Rojas that I do not have it with me and I will return to give it to her for verification purposes. That was a lie, deceitful statement of fact because if it was true that Ms. Rojas asked me my residence certificate for Annex 5 verification purposes, why when we met again on October 23, 2003, when I got my PRB (performance related bonus, Annex J), she did not ask for my residence certificate for verification. Let it be known that both Annex 5 and Annex J are not verified. Hence, Atty. Quiroz is again proven to be lying, he should be disbarred.
As Atty. Quiroz wanted to prove his allegations of financial difficulties that led to the closure of the old plant he swore that in fact the closed plant was undergoing demolition. He even bragged about the contractor who will be doing the demolition. However, the demolition of the old plant demolished his credibility and sent him more toward disbarment. Why ? Because he is proven to be lying again, that Shell is undergoing financial difficulties due to the fact that the demolition costs Shell an incredible sum of PHP 129,950,000.00 as per his own presented documentary evidence. Is this the manner of a company undergoing financial difficulties, to spend PHP 129,950,000.00 for demolition work alone at the same time of having financial problems. Again, Atty. Quiroz is obviously lying, hence, he should be disbarred.
OIL Deregulation Law as yoke to the shoulders of oil companies doing business in the Philippines is a blatant lie. The fact is this law shielded oil companies from loses if ever there might be. As we can see, for every change in the cost petroleum products they can automatically adjust the price of their products to a point that is profitable for them.. Atty. Quiroz sworn statement that due to the Oil Deregulation Law it makes it harder for Shell to do business that made Shell decide to close an old plant is deceitful lie. Oil Deregulation Law is not a yoke but an oxen oil companies can ride on, contrary to Atty. Quiroz sworn statements.
8TH TIME_15MAR16_BITUMEN PLANT_ATTY. QUIROZ'S DECEITFUL INTENT TO CHEAT Atty. Raul Quiroz act of calling the BITUMEN PLANT as a "commercial business unit " and differentiating it from the "refinery business unit" carries with the deceitful intent to cheat. By exalting that difference he might be able to justify to terminate operators from Process 2 then hire new operators. But the truth is the "refinery business unit" is the same as the "commercial business unit". Both are plants ran and maintained by operators. Both have pipelines, motors, pumps to start and stop, valves to open or close. Both have raw materials and finished products and storage tanks and control room. The BITUMEN PLANT is just similar to the LPG Terminal (Shell Gas Eastern Inc.) that we ourselves are operating. In SGEI instead of bitumen, we receive liquified petroleum gas (lpg) in bulk quantities from abroad and the refinery and distribute it to different destinations in the Philippines and Asia. It is not that he called it "commercial business unit" it would be run by employees wearing tuxedos but with operators wearing safety suits. Clearly, Atty. Quiroz having sworn that" refinery business unit" is different from "commercial business unit" carries with that assertion his intention to cheat purposely to justify termiinating emplloyess from the old plant and hiring new employees for the BITUMEN plant.
It is a fact that Shell closed an old plant and terminated employees. Likewise, opened a new plant BITUMEN IMPORT FACILITY and hire new employees.
It is not true that there existed redundancy of positions when I was terminated from employment.
This phrase "in view of the requirements of the business" was intentionally omitted from the sentence from where it is supposed to be included. tthis phrase having been taken out from the sentence by Atty. Quiroz's defense lawyers avoided showing that there was actually " no redundancy" at the time when i was terminated from employment.
This document is PRB(performance related bonus) paid to me about 8 months after I was terminated from employment, a circumstantial evidence that the Ranking which showed that I was second from the poorest work performer was rigged and untrue as Atty. Quiroz deceitfully promoted.
The Ranking from where the result of which serve as the basis on who is to be terminated was rigged. It was rigged due to the fact that the list of employees to be terminated was already prepared and submitted to DOLE (Department of Labor and Employment before the Ranking exercise was conducted.. This is the most vicious lie that Atty. Raul Quiroz is guilty of. He must be disbarred. I was illegally terminated from employment on account of Atty. Quiroz promotion of Shell's wrongdoing. I should have been reinstated back to my work until my retirement.
- COMPLAINT REMINDER_15MAR16_REPUBLIC ACT 7641 CIRCUMVENTED BY SHELL ...PROMOTER GUARDIANS OF LAW SHOULD BE DISCIPLINED
RA 7641 THE RETIREMENT PAY LAW was circumvented by Shell as promoted by Atty. Raul Quiroz et al. This is unlawful. Therefore, promoters guardian of law disciplined administratively and/or criminally prosecuted.
This is the set of 14 persuasive appeals filed. Last update 11 April 2016
- 17TH TIME_15MAR16_TWELFTH PERSUASIVE APPEAL_SERENO LECTURES ARTICLE XI SECTION 1 OF THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION
This is the twelfth persuasive where the Honorable Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno lectures the Philippine Constitution Article XI Section 1.
Shown above is an e-mail response model from the Social Security System. This is the e-mail response which is most recommended to the Supreme Court of the Philippines Public Information Office. Atty. Theodore Te please be guided by this model.
This is one among the set of 12 persuasive appeals which Atty. Theodore Te et al refused to take cognizance of.
- ATTY THEODORE TE:_15MAR16_PERSUASIVE REMINDER_8TH COUNT PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT E-MAIL RESPONSE MODEL FROM THE USA
Public Information Office as signature to your e-mails denies the constitutional concept of accountability. Instead, please sign your name with great pride, honor and dignity.and not just PIO, the runaway, hiding and no face guy.
The righteousness of the blameless will direct his way aright, but the wicked will fall by his own wickedness....Proverbs Chapter11 v.5
When pride comes, then comes shame; but with humble is wisdom....Proverbs chapter 11 v. 2
-
-
[9]
GEUS_4DEC15_REITERATION OF DEMAND PAYMENT OF RETIREMENT PAY
| from: | antonio buensuceso <antoniobuensucesoshell@gmail.com> |
| to: | Eduard.Geus@shell.com,
accra@accralaw.com,
ecmanibogjr@accralaw.com,
jcleong@accralaw.com,
pio@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_feedback@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_invitations@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_personnel@sc.judiciary.gov.ph,
pio_questions@sc.judiciary.gov.ph |
| cc: | John Donovan <john@shellnews.net>,
rosebuens@gmail.com,
Mosses Buensuceso <mosses@alumni.nus.edu.sg>,
mimikyut <mimikyut@yahoo.com>,
Aaron Buensuceso <aaronbuensuceso@gmail.com>,
veronica buensuceso <vcbuensuceso@gmail.com>,
Mia Buensuceso <miriambuens@gmail.com> |
| date: | Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:29 AM |
| subject: | GEUS_4DEC15_REITERATION OF DEMAND PAYMENT OF RETIREMENT PAY |
| mailed-by: | gmail.com |
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT 4
EXCERPTED FROM
NUMBERS 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26
EXHIBIT 5
|
No comments:
Post a Comment