The NLRC and the Court of Appeals held that petitioners were liable to pay
tips to Orlando because of the contract of employment. Thus:
"The contract of employment entered into by and between the complainant
and Ace Navigation Co., Inc. (p. 82, Record) clearly provides xxx:
'That the employee shall be employed on board under the following terms and
conditions:
1.1 Duration of Contract: (12 months) 10 months remaining duration of
contract
1.2 Position: Bartender
1.3 Basic Monthly Salary: U.S.$450.00 Flat rate including overtime pay for
1.4 Hours of Work: 12 hrs. work daily.
1.5 Overtime: Plus tips of U.S.$2.00 per passenger per day.
1.6 Vacation Leave with Pay: 2.5 days/mo.' (record, p. 82)
"The record of this case shows that the respondent, in the Contract of
Employment xxx undertook to pay to complainant 'tips of U.S.$2.00 per
passenger per day.' Yet, there is no showing that the said undertaking was
complied with by the respondents.
"It was thus a serious error on the part of the Labor Arbiter to rule that the tips
were already paid, much less to rule that said tips were directly paid to the
crew of M/V "ORIENT PRINCESS." With Article 4 of the Labor Code
reminding us that doubts should be resolved in favor of labor, we all the more
find it compelling to rule that the complainant is still entitled to the
contractually covenanted sum of US$36,000.00. xxx."
We disagree. The contract of employment between petitioners and Orlando
is categorical that the monthly salary of Orlando is US$450.00 flat rate. This
already included his overtime pay which is integrated in his 12 hours of work.
The words "plus tips of US$2.00 per passenger per day" were written at the line
for overtime. Since payment for overtime was included in the monthly salary of
Orlando, the supposed tips mentioned in the contract should be deemed
included thereat.
The actuations of Orlando during his employment also show that he was
aware his monthly salary is only US$450.00, no more no less. He did not raise