8/20/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly defense is deemed waived and can no longer be considered on appeal.[36] Hence, the Court rules that the LA properly took cognizance of this case. However, the Court deems it essential to point out that in resolving whether the LA had jurisdiction over this case, the CA erroneously assumed that the designated person in the dispute settlement provision is a Voluntary Arbitrator under the auspices of the Labor Code, to wit: It is true that the Voluntary Arbitrator or a panel of Voluntary Arbitrators can hear and decide all other labor disputes including unfair labor practices and bargaining deadlocks upon agreement of the parties. But if the parties wish to submit termination disputes to voluntary arbitration, such an agreement must be stated "in unequivocal language." In the present case, the agreement of the parties was written in this manner: xxxx It is, however, not sufficient to merely say that the parties agree on the principle that "all disputes" should first be submitted to a Voluntary Arbitrator. There is a need for an express stipulation that illegal termination disputes should be resolved by a Voluntary Arbitrator or Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, since the same fall within a special class of disputes that are generally within the exclusive [and] original jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiters by express provision of law.[37] To clarify, the Voluntary Arbitrator[38] under the Labor Code is one agreed upon by the parties to resolve certain disputes[39] and is tasked to render an award or decision within twenty (20) calendar days pursuant to Article 276 of the Labor Code.[40] This decision shall be final and executory after ten (10) calendar days from receipt thereof. [41] In this case, the dispute settlement provision reads: 14. Settlement of disputes: All claims and complaints relative to the employment contract of the employee shall be settled in accordance with Company policies, rules[,] and regulations. In case the Employee contests the decision of the employer, the matter shall be settled amicably with [the] participation of the Labour Attaché or any authorised representative of the Philippines Embassy nearest the site of employment. x x x[42] (Emphasis and underscoring supplied) Clearly, the mechanism contemplated herein is an amicable settlement whereby the parties can negotiate with each other; it is not a voluntary arbitration under the Labor Code wherein a third party renders a decision to resolve the dispute. The text of the contractual provision shows that the designated person is tasked merely to participate in the amicable settlement and not to decide the dispute. This participation is in line with the mandate of Filipinos Resource Centers, in which labor attachés are members, to engage in the "conciliation of disputes arising from employer-employee relationship." [43] Hence, the "[Labor] Attaché or any [authorized] representative of the Philippine[] elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/64949 4/11