In sum, it can be properly said that the proceedings before the Labor Arbiter are non-litigious in nature and the technicalities of law and procedure, and the rules obtaining in the courts of law are not applicable. Thus, the rules allow the admission of affidavits by the Labor Arbiter as evidence despite the fact that the affiants were not presented for cross-examination by the counsel for the adverse party. To require otherwise would be to negate the rationale and purpose of the summary nature of the administrative proceedings and to make mandatory the application of the technical rules of evidence. What the other party should do is to present counter-affidavits instead of merely objecting on the ground that the affidavits are hearsay.   The Court, however, has recognized specific instances of the impracticality for the Labor Arbiter to follow the position paper method of disposing cases; thus, formal or clarificatory hearings must be had in cases of termination of employment: such as, when claims are not properly ventilated for lack of proper determination whether complainant employee was a rank-and-file or a managerial employee,60[60] that the Labor Arbiter cannot rely solely on the parties’ bare allegations when the affidavits submitted presented conflicting factual issues,61[61] and considering the dearth of evidence presented by complainants the Labor Arbiter should have set the case for hearing.62[62] 60[60] Batongbacal v. Associated Bank, No. L-72977, December 21, 1988, 168 SCRA 600. 61[61] Greenhills Airconditioning and Services, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 112850, June 27, 1995, 245 SCRA 384. 62[62] Progress Homes v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 106212, March 7, 1997, 269 SCRA 274.