Practice question
A reasonable brief meal at the workplace satisfies hunger during duty. The employer rejects any employment nexus solely because eating is personal. Which is correct?
- Personal character alone does not defeat the incidental-employment rationale
- Every personal act is necessarily abandonment
- Only paid customer meals can qualify
- Hunger is expressly excluded from physical demands
- A worker must never eat during employment
Legal references
- Arguilles v Wilhelmsen GR254586 July10,2023 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/jul2023/gr_254586_2023.html Personal-comfort rationale and ordinary physical demands.
- Arriesgado v Multinational Maritime GR275424 April29,2026 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2026/apr2026/gr_275424_2026.html Employment nexus and substantial evidence.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.