Dear Atty. Joji,

Our company recently received a demand from a former employee claiming unpaid overtime pay for the entire duration of his employment. He alleges that he regularly worked beyond eight hours a day and often remained in the office until late in the evening. However, the company records do not reflect any approved overtime work, and the employee has not presented any documentary evidence other than his bare assertions. Is the company automatically liable for overtime pay simply because the employee claims that he worked beyond regular office hours?

Carla

□□□□□

Dear Carla,

An employee’s mere allegation that he worked beyond eight hours a day does not automatically entitle him to overtime pay. Under Article 87 of the Labor Code, overtime compensation becomes due only when an employee actually renders work beyond eight hours in a workday. However, entitlement to overtime pay is not presumed. The employee bears the burden of proving by substantial evidence that overtime work was in fact performed.

The Supreme Court has held in multiple cases that entitlement to overtime pay must first be established by proof that overtime work was actually rendered. The Court emphasized that bare allegations are insufficient and that the claimant must present competent evidence showing the actual performance of overtime work.

Similarly, the Supreme Court likewise ruled that claims for overtime pay cannot rest on mere assertions. The employee must substantiate the claim through attendance records, time sheets, work schedules, payroll records, emails, system logs, reports, or other competent evidence demonstrating that work was performed beyond regular working hours.

Moreover, an employee’s presence in the workplace beyond office hours does not necessarily mean that compensable overtime work was rendered. To be compensable, the extended hours must involve actual work performed for the benefit of the employer. Time spent attending to personal matters, socializing, or voluntarily remaining in the workplace does not automatically qualify as overtime work.

Employers are likewise entitled to regulate overtime work through reasonable policies requiring prior approval or authorization. While the absence of prior approval may not always defeat an overtime claim where the employer knowingly allowed or benefited from the work performed, the employee must still establish that overtime work was actually rendered.

Accordingly, where the employee fails to present substantial evidence supporting his claim and relies solely on uncorroborated allegations, the claim for overtime pay may be denied. As consistently recognized by jurisprudence, overtime compensation is awarded not on the basis of assumption or speculation, but on competent proof of actual overtime work.

Hope this helps.

Atty. Joji Alonso