4/10/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly On July 11, 2005, the CA promulgated its assailed Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads as follows: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the petition is hereby GRANTED and the case is REFERRED to the National Conciliation and Mediation Board for the designation of the Voluntary Arbitrator or the constitution of a panel of Voluntary Arbitrators for the appropriate resolution of the issue on the matter of the applicable CBA provision. SO ORDERED.[4] The CA ruled that while the suit filed by Merridy Jane is a money claim, the same basically involves the interpretation and application of the provisions in the subject CBA. As such, jurisdiction belongs to the voluntary arbitrator and not the labor arbiter. Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration but the CA denied it in its Resolution of April 18, 2006. Hence, the instant petition raising the sole issue of whether or not the CA committed error in ruling that the Labor Arbiter has no jurisdiction over the case. Petitioner contends that Section 10 of Republic Act (R.A.) 8042, otherwise known as the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, vests jurisdiction on the appropriate branches of the NLRC to entertain disputes regarding the interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement involving migrant or overseas Filipino workers. Petitioner argues that the abovementioned Section amended Article 217 (c) of the Labor Code which, in turn, confers jurisdiction upon voluntary arbitrators over interpretation or implementation of collective bargaining agreements and interpretation or enforcement of company personnel policies. The pertinent provisions of Section 10 of R.A. 8042 provide as follows: SEC. 10. Money Claims. - Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the Labor Arbiters of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) shall have the original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide, within ninety (90) calendar days after filing of the complaint, the claims arising out of an employer-employee relationship or by virtue of any law or contract involving Filipino workers for overseas deployment including claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages. Article 217(c) of the Labor Code, on the other hand, states that: xxxx (c) Cases arising from the interpretation or implementation of collective elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/54854 3/8