Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Summary:
Collective
Bargaining:
General
Concept
Procedure
and
Issues
A.
General
Concept
1.
The
State’s
policy
as
to
collective
bargaining
is:
• Art.
211-‐A(a):
“To
promote
and
emphasize
the
primacy
of
free
collective
bargaining
and
negotiations,
including
voluntary
arbitration,
mediation
and
conciliation,
as
modes
of
settling
labor
or
industrial
disputes.”
• Art.
211-‐B:
“To
encourage
a
truly
democratic
method
of
regulating
the
relations
between
the
employers
and
employees
by
means
of
agreements
freely
entered
into
through
collective
bargaining…”
2.
Nature
and
Purpose
Kiok
Loy
v
NLRC:
• Negotiations
towards
a
collective
agreement
• One
of
the
democratic
frameworks
under
the
LC
• Designed
to
stabilize
the
relation
between
labor
and
management
and
to
create
a
climate
of
sound
and
stable
industrial
peace
• A
mutual
responsibility
of
the
employer
and
the
union
and
(a
legal
obligation,
duty)
B.
Bargainable
Issues
Under
Art.
252,
the
purpose
of
collective
bargaining
is
to
negotiate
an
agreement
with
respect
to:
• Wages,
hours
of
work,
and
ALL
other
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
• [“All”
includes]
grievance
and
arbitration
machineries
• Anything
consensual
in
nature
is
negotiable
(Union
of
Filipro
Employees-‐Drug
v
Nestle).
Mandatory
v
Permissive
Issues
• The
above
under
Art.
252
(that
is,
employment-‐related),
are
mandatory
bargaining
issues.
However,
anything
else
may
be
negotiated
upon
agreement
(i.e.,
with
“permission”)
of
the
parties-‐
these
are
permissive
issues.
• Consequences
for
refusal
to
bargain:
o In
mandatory
issues,
this
constitutes
ULP
(thus,
strike
or
lockout
may
ensue).
o In
permissive
issues,
no
ULP
(thus,
“economic
weapons”
such
as
strike
or
lockout
may
not
be
used).
Limitation:
As
in
other
contracts,
stipulations
contrary
to
law,
morals,
good
customs,
public
order,
and
public
policy
are
void
(Manila
Fashions
v
NLRC).
C.
Bargaining
Procedure
1.
Private
Procedure
When
there
is
no
CBA
in
place
(i.e.,
an
agreement
or
arrangement
providing
a
manner
of
collective
bargaining),
the
employer
and
the
representatives
of
the
employees
have
the
duty
to
bargain
collectively
in
accordance
with
the
LC
(Art.
251).
2.
Labor
Code
Procedure
Art.
250
lays
down
the
procedure
in
collective
bargaining:
a. Party
desires
to
negotiate
an
agreement:
It
shall
serve
a
written
notice
upon
the
other
party
with
proposals.
o Other
party
must
reply
within
10
calendar
days
from
receipt
of
notice
b. If
differences
arise
on
the
basis
of
(a):
Either
may
request
for
a
conference
o Must
begin
maximum
10
calendar
days
from
request
c. If
dispute
not
settled:
The
Board
shall
intervene
(at
request
of
parties
or
own
initiative);
conciliation
meetings.
d. During
conciliation
in
the
Board:
Parties
are
prohibited
from
any
act
which
may
disrupt
or
impede
settlement
(may
constitute
ULP).
2
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
e. Board
shall
exert
all
efforts
to
settle
disputes
amicably
and
encourage
the
parties
to
submit
their
case
to
a
voluntary
arbitrator.
Single
enterprise
bargaining
(Secs.
3-‐4,
Rule
XVI,
Book
V)
• When
available:
Any
voluntarily
recognized
or
certified
labor
union
may
demand
negotiations
with
its
employer
for
terms
and
conditions
of
work
covering
employees
in
the
bargaining
unit
concerned.
• Procedure:
1. Union
submits
intentions
to
negotiate
together
with
its
proposals,
in
writing,
to
the
employer.
2. The
union
and
its
employer
may
adopt
such
procedures
they
may
deem
appropriate
for
the
early
termination
of
negotiations.
3. Both
parties
name
their
respective
representatives
to
the
negotiation
and
schedule
the
meetings.
4. Agreement
on
wages,
benefits,
and
other
terms
and
conditions
of
work
for
all
employees
covered
in
the
bargaining
unit.
Multi-‐employer
enterprise
(Secs.
5-‐6,
Rule
XVI,
Book
V)
• When
available:
a
legitimate
labor
union(s)
and
employers
may
agree
(in
writing)
to
come
together
for
collective
bargaining.
• Limitations:
a. Only
legitimate
labor
unions
who
are
incumbent
bargaining
agents
(SEBAs)
may
participate;
b. Only
employers
with
counterpart
legitimate
labor
unions
who
are
incumbent
bargaining
agents
may
participate;
AND
c. Only
legitimate
labor
unions
who
pertain
to
employer
units
who
consent
to
multi-‐employer
bargaining
may
participate.
• Procedure:
1. Either
labor
unions
or
employers
initiate.
2. Labor
unions
who
desire
to
negotiate
must
execute
a
written
agreement
among
themselves
(legitimate
labor
unions
who
are
members
of
the
same
federation,
national,
or
industry
union
are
exempt
from
this).
3. Legitimate
labor
unions
who
desire
to
bargain
with
multi-‐employers
shall
send
a
written
notice
to
each
employer
concerned.
Employers
who
agree
to
group
themselves
or
use
their
existing
associations
to
engage
in
multi-‐employer
bargaining
shall
send
a
written
notice
to
each
of
their
counterpart
labor
unions.
4. Negotiations
may
commence
only
with
regard
to
respective
employers
and
unions
who
consent
to
participate
in
multi-‐employer
bargaining.
5. During
the
course
of
negotiations,
parties
shall
discuss
and
agree
on
(1)
the
manner
by
which
negotiations
shall
proceed;
(2)
the
scope
and
coverage;
(3)
where
appropriate,
the
effect
of
the
negotiations
on
current
agreements
or
conditions
of
employment.
3.
Conciliation/preventive
mediation
(For
when
this
takes
place,
see
the
procedure
in
collective
bargaining
above.)
Note:
Conciliation
cases
which
are
not
subjects
of
notices
of
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
docketed
as
preventive
mediation
cases.
Information
and
statements
made
during
conciliation
proceedings
shall
be
treated
as
privileged
information
and
shall
not
be
used
as
evidence
in
the
Commission;
conciliators
and
similar
officials
may
not
testify
before
any
court
or
body
(Art.
233;
Sec.
2,
Rule
XXII,
Book
V).
4.
Duty
to
Bargain
The
“duty
to
bargain
collectively”
means
“the
performance
of
a
mutual
obligation
to
meet
and
convene
promptly
and
expeditiously
in
good
faith
for
the
purposes
of
negotiating
an
agreement”
with
respect
to
those
issues
listed
above
(Art.
252).
This
duty
remains
even
in
the
absence
of
a
CBA.
3
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
When
a
CBA
exists,
this
duty
“shall
also
mean
that
neither
party
shall
terminate
nor
modify
such
agreement
during
its
lifetime.”
(Art.
253)
o Exception:
Freedom
period.
Either
party
can
serve
a
written
notice
to
terminate
or
modify
the
agreement
at
least
60
days
prior
to
its
expiration.
(They
may,
however,
choose
to
renew
it.)
(Art.
253)
But
provisions
contrary
to
law
(such
as
those
below
minimum
standards),
morals,
good
customs,
public
order,
and
public
policy
are
void.
Violation
of
this
duty,
or
refusal
to
bargain
collectively,
constitutes
ULP
(Art.
248(g)
for
employers;
Art.
249(c)
for
labor
organizations).
D.
The
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement
1.
Definition/Contents
“Collective
Bargaining
Agreement”
or
“CBA”
–
The
contract
between
a
legitimate
labor
union
and
the
employer
concerning
wages,
hours
of
work,
and
all
other
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
in
a
bargaining
unit
(Sec.
1(j),
Rule
I,
Book
V).
When
the
CBA
is
clear
and
unambiguous,
it
becomes
the
law
between
the
parties
(Lepanto
Ceramics
v
Lepanto
Ceramics
Employees
Assoc.;
PAL
v
PALEA).
Effect
of
Sub-‐Standard
Contract:
Before
RA
9481,
Art.
239(f)
provided
that
entering
into
a
CBA
which
provides
for
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
below
minimum
standard
established
by
law
was
a
ground
for
cancellation
of
union
registration.
• However,
Art.
239,
as
amended
no
longer
includes
sub-‐section
(f).
• Obviously,
such
terms
and
conditions
would
still
be
void
(those
contrary
to
law,
morals,
good
customs,
public
order,
and
policy)
as
seen
in
a
long
line
of
jurisprudence
(Manila
Fashions
v
NLRC).
2.
Registration
The
Bureau
maintains
a
file
of
all
CBAs
and
other
related
agreements
and
records
of
settlement
of
labor
disputes
and
copies
of
orders
and
decisions
of
voluntary
arbitrators
(Art.
231).
Process
for
application
of
registration:
(Art.
231;
Secs.
1-‐3,
Rule
XVII,
Book
V)
1) Within
30
days
from
a
CBA’s
execution,
the
parties
shall
submit
to
the
Bureau
or
the
Regional
Office
of
DOLE
for
registration:
a) Copies
of
the
CBA
b) Verified
proof
of
its
posting
in
2
conspicuous
places
in
the
place
of
work
c) Verified
proof
of
its
ratification
by
the
majority
of
all
the
workers
in
the
bargaining
unit
o No
other
document
shall
be
required.
2) The
Bureau
or
Regional
Office
shall
act
upon
the
application
within
5
calendar
days
from
receipt
thereof.
o (If
application
in
Regional
Office)
Regional
Office
shall
furnish
the
Bureau
with
a
copy
of
the
CBA
within
5
days
from
its
submission.
3) Bureau/Regional
Office
assess
employer
a
registration
fee
of
at
least
P1,000.
o Amount
as
set
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
for
the
effective
and
efficient
administration
of
the
Voluntary
Arbitration
Program.
o Amounts
collected
here
go
to
the
Special
Voluntary
Arbitration
Fund.
3.
Beneficiaries
The
beneficiaries
of
a
CBA
are
all
the
workers
in
the
respective
bargaining
unit.
The
CBA’s
benefits
extend
to
the
laborers
and
employees
not
part
of
the
chosen
bargaining
labor
organization.
4
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
o Otherwise,
the
purpose
of
the
CBA,
to
enable
labor
to
secure
better
terms
of
employment,
would
be
frustrated
when
non-‐members
are
deprived
of
advantages
they
could
gain
(Mactan
Workers
Union
v
Aboitiz).
4.
Minutes
of
Negotiations
Proposals
found
in
the
minutes
of
the
negotiations
do
not
form
part
of
the
CBA.
They
are
not
binding.
If
they
were
agreed
upon,
then
they
should
have
been
included
in
the
CBA
(Samahan
ng
Manggagawa
sa
Top
Form
v
NLRC).
5.
Interpretation,
Administration,
and
Enforcement
CBA’s
are
contracts
subject
to
appropriate
special
laws.
• Reason:
“The
relations
between
capital
and
labor
are
not
merely
contractual.
They
are
so
impressed
with
public
interest
that
labor
contracts
must
yield
to
the
common
good.”
(Art.
1700,
CC)
• E.g.
wage
orders
supersede
CBA
provisions
on
wages
(Norkis
Free
and
Independent
Workers
Union
v
Norkis
Trading).
Nature:
“Contracts
are
perfected
by
mere
consent,
and
from
that
moment
the
parties
are
bound
not
only
to
the
fulfillment
of
what
has
been
expressly
stipulated
but
also
to
all
the
consequences
which,
according
to
their
nature,
may
be
in
keeping
with
good
faith,
usage
and
law
(Art.
1315,
CC).”
• That
is,
as
in
Pantranco
North
Express
v
NLRC
and
Dole
Phils.
v
Pawis
ng
Makabayang
Obrero,
CBA
provisions
should
be
interpreted
and
enforced
literally
when
such
is
possible.
Liberal
Construction:
A
CBA,
imbued
with
public
interest,
must
be
construed
liberally
and
yield
to
the
common
good
(Cirtek
Employees
Labor
Union
v
Cirtek).
Grievance
Procedure:
(Arts.
260)
The
parties
to
a
CBA
shall
include
provisions
that
will
ensure
mutual
observance
of
its
terms
and
conditions,
i.e.
establish
a
grievance
machinery.
• For
the
adjustment
and
resolution
of
grievances
arising
from
(1)
the
interpretation
or
implementation
of
the
CBA
and
(2)
arising
from
the
interpretation
or
enforcement
of
company
personnel
policies.
• Grievances
submitted
to
such
machinery
which
are
not
settled
within
7
days
shall
be
automatically
referred
to
voluntary
arbitration
(as
prescribed
in
the
CBA).
o The
CBA
should
name
and
designate
in
advance
a
Voluntary
Arbitrator
or
panel
of
V.A.s,
or
include
a
procedure
for
selection
of
the
same.
o In
case
of
the
parties’
failure
to
select
a
V.A.
or
panel
of
V.A.’s,
the
Board
shall
designate.
Voluntary
Arbitration:
• V.A.
or
panel
of
V.A.s
shall
have
the
original
and
exclusive
jurisdiction
to
hear
and
decide
all
unresolved
grievances
arising
from:
a) The
interpretation
or
implementation
of
the
CBA
b) The
interpretation
or
enforcement
of
company
personnel
policies
o This
jurisdiction
does
NOT
include
termination
cases
when
it
does
not
arise
from
2
grounds
above
(Atlas
Farm
v
NLRC).
a) Upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
the
V.A.
or
panel
of
V.A.’s
shall
also
hear
and
decide
all
other
labor
disputes
involving
ULP
and
bargaining
deadlocks
(Art.
262).
b) With
relation
to
strikes,
picketing,
and
lockouts-‐
before
or
at
any
stage
of
the
compulsory
arbitration
process,
the
parties
may
opt
to
submit
their
dispute
to
voluntary
arbitration
(Art.
263(h)).
A
strike
(and
by
extension
all
other
similar
acts,
such
as
a
lockout)
conducted
without
first
following
the
grievance
mechanism
and
voluntary
arbitration
clauses
agreed
upon
and
founded
on
the
provisions
of
the
Labor
Code
will
render
the
strike
illegal.
Jurisprudence
grants
Voluntary
Arbitrators
to
adjudicate
corollary
issues.
However,
if
the
V.A.
does
not
rule
on
an
issue,
the
employer
does
not
lose
authority
to
act
upon
it
(e.g.
exercise
its
right
to
discipline
erring
employees).
(Manila
Pavilion
Hotel
v
Henry
Delada)
5
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Contract
Infirmities:
The
contract
bar
rule
in
certification
elections
(see
Art.
232;
petition
for
certification
election
should
not
be
entertained
when
it
may
disturb
the
administration
of
duly
registered
CBAs)
does
not
apply
when
the
CBA
is
full
of
infirmities
(e.g.
missing
essential
requirements
such
as
notice
in
2
conspicuous
places,
consent
of
majority
of
union
members
undetermined,
etc.)
(Associated
Labor
Unions
v
Calleja).
Contract
Ambiguity
• General
rule:
Unless
ambiguous,
CBA
provisions
should
be
interpreted
according
to
their
literal
meaning.
• HOWEVER,
in
cases
of
ambiguity,
the
same
should
be
resolved
in
favor
of
the
union
members
(Art.
1702,
CC;
Holy
Cross
of
Davao
College
v
Holy
Cross
Faculty
Union).
Contract
Duration
and
Renewal
Insofar
as
the
representation
aspect
is
concerned,
a
CBA
a
shall
be
for
a
term
of
5
years
(Art.
253-‐A).
• During
these
5
years,
the
Contract
Bar
Rule
applies
(Sec.
7,
Rule
XVII,
Book
V),
that
is:
(1)
no
petition
questioning
the
majority
status
of
the
incumbent
bargaining
agent
shall
be
entertained
and
(2)
no
certification
election
shall
be
conducted,
except:
o During
the
60-‐day
“freedom
period”
immediately
before
the
date
of
expiry
of
the
CBA’s
5-‐year
term
• All
other
provisions
of
the
CBA
shall
be
renegotiated
not
later
than
3
years
after
its
execution.
• Any
agreement
on
such
other
provisions
of
the
CBA
entered
into
within
6
months
from
the
date
of
expiry
of
the
term
of
such
other
provisions
as
fixed
in
such
CBA,
shall
retroact
to
the
day
immediately
following
such
date.
o If
such
agreement
is
entered
into
beyond
6
months,
the
parties
shall
agree
on
the
duration
of
the
retroactivity.
When
the
freedom
period
expires
and
no
petition
for
certification
election
is
filed,
the
employer
shall
continue
to
recognize
the
majority
status
of
the
incumbent
bargaining
agent
(Art.
256
par.
2).
• When
the
parties
agree
to
extend
the
CBA’s
original
5-‐year
term,
the
union’s
exclusive
collective
bargaining
status
is
not
also
extended.
As
such,
another
rival
union
may
still
file
for
certification
election
during
the
freedom
period
(FVC
Labor
Union
–
Phil.
Transport
&
Gen.
Workers
Org.
v
Sama-‐samang
Nagkakaisang
Manggagawa
sa
FBC).
Note:
Renegotiated
CBAs
are
subject
to
the
same
requirements
and
procedure
in
registration
as
discussed
earlier.
Automatic
Renewal:
Status
quo
prevails
until
a
new
agreement
is
reached
(status
quo
also
prevails
during
the
freedom
period).
• It
is
the
duty
of
both
parties
to
keep
this
status
quo
and
to
continue
in
full
force
and
effect
the
existing
CBA.
• However,
in
case
of
bargaining
deadlock,
they
may
exercise
their
rights
under
the
LC
(grievance
machinery,
strike,
deadlock,
etc.)
(Art.
253-‐A).
• Automatic
renewal
pertains
to
economic
provisions
only
and
does
not
include
the
representational
aspect
of
the
CBA.
An
existing
CBA
cannot
constitute
a
bar
to
a
filing
of
a
petition
for
certification
election
(Art.
253
as
explained
in
PICOP
v
Tañeca).
CBA
and
3rd
Party
Liability:
None.
• Labor
contracts
are
not
enforceable
against
a
transferee
of
an
enterprise.
Labor
contracts
being
are
in
personam
(i.e.,
affecting
a
specific
person
only),
are
only
binding
only
between
the
parties.
(ALU
v
NLRC)
CBA
and
Disaffiliation:
A
union
that
disaffiliates
from
its
“mother
union”
is
still
the
same
party
as
stipulated
in
the
CBA.
Joining
such
national
union
does
not
form
a
new
union
(Elisco
Elirol
Labor
Union
v
Noriel).
Jurisdiction
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators:
• Under
Arts.
261
and
217(c),
as
clarified
in
Policy
Instruction
56
(1993)
of
the
Labor
Secretary,
the
voluntary
arbitrator
has
original
and
exclusive
jurisdiction
over
termination
cases
arising
in
or
resulting
from:
a) The
interpretation
and
implementation
of
CBAs
b) The
interpretation
of
enforcement
personnel
policies
which
were
initially
processed
at
the
various
steps
of
the
plant-‐level
Grievance
Procedures
under
the
parties’
CBAs.
Jurisdiction
of
Labor
Arbiters
(Art.
217(a)(c))
• L.A.s
have
the
original
and
exclusive
jurisdiction:
6
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
1. ULP
cases;
2. In
all
other
termination
disputes
not
in
the
two
situations
contemplated
above;
3. If
accompanied
with
a
claim
for
reinstatement,
those
cases
that
workers
may
file
involving
wages,
rates
of
pay,
hours
of
work
and
other
terms
and
conditions
of
employment;
4. Claims
for
actual,
moral,
exemplary
and
other
forms
of
damages
arising
from
the
employer-‐employee
relations;
5. Cases
arising
from
any
violation
of
Art.
264
(including
questions
on
the
legality
of
strikes
and
lockouts.
6. All
other
claims
arising
from
employer-‐employee
relations,
including
those
of
persons
in
domestic
or
household
service,
involving
an
amount
exceeding
P5,000
(e.g.
Social
Security,
Medicare
and
maternity
benefits;
with
or
without
claim
for
reinstatement).
o Except
claims
for
Employees
Compensation
The
Commission
has
exclusive
appellate
jurisdiction
over
all
cases
decided
by
Labor
Arbiters
(Art.
217(b)).
Cases
under
the
jurisdiction
of
Voluntary
Arbiters
shall
be
disposed
of
by
the
Labor
Arbiter
by
referring
the
same
to
the
grievance
machinery
and
voluntary
arbitration
as
may
be
provided
in
said
agreements.
• If
none
provided,
refer
to
the
NCMB
Regional
Branch
for
appropriate
action
(Policy
Instruction
56).
RTC
Jurisdiction
(Halaguena
v
PAL)
• General
Rule:
RTC
has
no
jurisdiction
in
disputes
involving
an
employer-‐employee
relationship.
• Exception
1:
RTC
may
have
jurisdiction
when
the
principle
relief
cannot
be
resolved
with
only
the
application
of
labor
law
(in
Halaguena,
the
Constitution
and
international
law)
as
it
is
outside
the
competence
and
expertise
of
the
L.A.s
and
the
NLRC.
• Exception
2:
When
the
dispute
is
not
between
the
Union
and
the
Company,
but
between
specific
employees
and
the
Company
(in
Halaguena,
some
female
employees
against
the
Company).
VII. Collective
Bargaining:
General
Concept
Procedure
and
Issues
A. General Concept Sec. 1, Rule XVI, Book V, Omnibus Rules
1.
Policy
Declaration
Penalties.
–
Any
person
violating
any
of
the
provisions
Article
211-‐A(a)
&
B.
Declaration
of
Policy.
–
A.
It
is
of
Article
264
of
the
Code
shall
be
punished
by
a
fine
of
the
policy
of
the
State:
not
less
than
one
thousand
(P1,000.00)
pesos
nor
more
than
ten
thousand
(P10,000.00)
pesos
and/or
(a)
To
promote
and
emphasize
the
primacy
of
free
imprisonment
for
not
less
than
three
months
nor
more
collective
bargaining
and
negotiations,
including
than
three
years,
or
both
such
fine
and
imprisonment,
voluntary
arbitration,
mediation
and
conciliation,
as
at
the
discretion
of
the
court.
Prosecution
under
this
modes
of
settling
labor
or
industrial
disputes.
provision
shall
preclude
prosecution
for
the
same
act
under
the
Revised
Penal
Code
and
vice
versa.
B.
To
encourage
a
truly
democratic
method
of
regulating
the
relations
between
the
employers
and
employees
by
means
of
agreements
freely
entered
into
through
collective
bargaining,
no
court
or
Sec.
3,
Art.
XIII,
1987
Constitution
administrative
agency
or
official
shall
have
the
power
to
set
or
fix
wages,
rates
of
pay,
hours
of
work
or
other
The
State
shall
afford
full
protection
to
labor,
local
and
terms
and
conditions
of
employment,
except
as
overseas,
organized
and
unorganized,
and
promote
otherwise
provided
under
this
Code.
(As
amended
by
full
employment
and
equality
of
employment
Sec.
3,
RA
6715,
March
21,
1989)
opportunities
for
all.
Facts:
The
Union
submitted
its
proposals
to
the
Union
initiated
negotiations.
Nestle
responded,
but
Company
and
requested
for
its
counter-‐proposals,
but
insisted
that
the
Retirement
Plan
was
a
unilateral
the
Company
ignored
these
requests.
The
case
was
grant
by
the
company
as
was
not
subject
to
submitted
to
the
NLRC
for
compulsory
arbitration.
negotiation.
After
asking
for
postponement
several
times,
the
NLRC
Held:
The
Retirement
Plan
was
a
proper
subject
of
the
declared
the
company
guilty
of
unjustified
refusal
to
CBA
negotiations.
The
benefit
was
actually
in
the
bargain.
existing
CBA,
which
showed
that
it
was
consensual
in
Held:
The
Union
has
a
valid
cause
to
complain
against
nature,
and
therefore
negotiable.
the
company’s
attitude
indicative
of
the
failure
to
follow
what
is
mandated
by
the
Labor
Code-‐
to
bargain
in
good
faith.
Collective
bargaining,
which
is
defined
as
negotiations
towards
a
collective
agreement,
is
one
of
Samahan
ng
Manggagawa
sa
Top
Form
v
NLRC
the
democratic
frameworks
under
the
New
Labor
Facts:
In
the
negotiations
for
a
new
CBA,
the
Union
Code,
designed
to
stabilize
the
relation
between
labor
was
persuaded
to
withdraw
its
proposal
that
wage
and
management
and
to
create
a
climate
of
sound
and
increases
mandated
by
the
government
be
stable
industrial
peace.
It
is
a
mutual
responsibility
of
automatically
implemented
across-‐the-‐board.
the
employer
and
the
union
and
is
characterized
as
a
According
to
the
Union,
it
withdrew
the
proposal
legal
obligation.
because
management
promised
it
would
implement
increases
across-‐the-‐board,
as
it
had
done
in
the
past.
B.
Bargainable
Issues
However,
when
new
wage
orders
were
issued,
Management
did
not
implement
it.
The
Union
alleged
Art.
252.
Meaning
of
Duty
to
Bargain
Collectively.
–
that
Management
was
guilty
of
bargaining
in
bad
faith.
The
duty
to
bargain
collectively
means
the
Held:
Where
a
proposal
raised
by
a
contracting
party
performance
of
a
mutual
obligation
to
meet
and
does
not
find
print
in
the
CBA,
it
is
not
a
part
thereof
convene
promptly
and
expeditiously
in
good
faith
for
and
the
proponent
has
no
claim
whatsoever
to
its
the
purpose
of
negotiating
an
agreement
with
respect
implementation.
The
Union
may
not
validly
claim
that
the
proposal
recorded
in
the
Minutes
of
the
to
wages,
hours
of
work
and
all
other
terms
and
negotiation
forms
part
of
the
CBA.
It
is
a
part
of
the
conditions
of
employment
including
proposals
for
proceedings
to
make
demands
and
offer
proposals
and
adjusting
any
grievances
or
questions
arising
under
counter-‐proposals
but
nothing
is
considered
final
until
such
agreement
and
executing
a
contract
the
parties
have
reached
an
agreement.
With
the
incorporating
such
agreements
if
requested
by
either
execution
of
the
CBA,
bad
faith
bargaining
can
no
party
but
such
duty
does
not
compel
any
party
to
longer
be
imputed
upon
any
of
the
parties
thereto.
agree
to
a
proposal
or
to
make
any
concession.
Manila
Fashions
v
NLRC
C.
Bargaining
Procedure
Facts:
The
Union
filed
a
complaint
charging
the
company
of
non-‐compliance
with
wage
increase
order.
1. Private
Procedure
Eventually,
the
Union
and
the
Company
agreed
to
Art.
251.
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
in
the
absence
of
condone
the
wage
increase,
and
such
was
reflected
in
collective
bargaining
agreements.
–
In
the
absence
of
their
CBA.
The
Union
admitted
the
existence
of
such
an
agreement
or
other
voluntary
arrangement
provision
but
argued
that
it
was
invalid
as
it
was
not
providing
for
a
more
expeditious
manner
of
collective
reached
after
due
consultation
with
its
members.
bargaining,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
employer
and
the
Held:
Parties
to
a
CBA
can
establish
such
stipulations,
representatives
of
the
employees
to
bargain
clauses,
terms
and
conditions
as
they
may
deem
collectively
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
this
convenient
provided
they
are
not
contrary
to
law,
Code.
morals,
good
customs,
public
order,
and
public
policy.
CBA
provision
violated
the
wage
order,
hence
it
is
void.
Union
of
Filipro
Employees-‐Drug
v
Nestle
Facts:
As
the
existing
CBA
was
about
to
expire,
the
8
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
parties
is
valid,
and
can
be
seen
as
allowing
the
parties
Sec
6.
Procedure
in
Multi-‐Employer
Bargaining.
–
latitude
to
decide
for
themselves.
Multi-‐employer
bargaining
may
be
initiated
by
the
labor
unions
or
by
the
employers.
a. Single
Enterprise
Bargaining
(a)
Legitimate
labor
unions
who
desire
to
negotiate
Secs.
3-‐4,
Rule
XVI,
Book
V,
Omnibus
Rules
with
their
employers
collectively
shall
execute
a
Sec
3.
When
Single
Enterprise
Bargaining
Available.
–
written
agreement
among
themselves,
which
shall
Any
voluntarily
recognized
or
certified
labor
union
contain
the
following:
may
demand
negotiations
with
its
employer
for
terms
1)
the
names
of
the
labor
unions
who
desire
to
avail
of
and
conditions
of
work
covering
employees
in
the
multi-‐employer
bargaining;
bargaining
unit
concerned.
2)
each
labor
union
in
the
employer
unit;
Sec
4.
Procedure
in
Single
Enterprise
Bargaining.
–
A
recognized
or
certified
labor
union
that
desires
to
3)
the
fact
that
each
of
the
labor
unions
are
the
negotiate
with
its
employer
shall
submit
such
incumbent
exclusive
bargaining
agents
for
their
intentions
in
writing
to
the
employer,
together
with
its
respective
employer
units;
proposals
for
collective
bargaining.
4)
the
duration
of
the
collective
bargaining
The
recognized
or
certified
labor
union
and
its
agreements,
if
any,
entered
into
by
each
labor
union
employer
may
adopt
such
procedures
and
processes
with
their
respective
employers.
they
may
deem
appropriate
and
necessary
for
the
early
termination
of
their
negotiations.
They
shall
Legitimate
labor
unions
who
are
members
of
the
same
name
their
respective
representatives
to
the
registered
federation,
national,
or
industry
union
are
negotiation,
schedule
the
number
and
frequency,
of
exempt
from
execution
of
this
written
agreement.
meetings,
and
agree
on
wages,
benefits
and
other
terms
and
conditions
of
work
for
all
employees
(b)
The
legitimate
labor
unions
who
desire
to
bargain
covered
in
the
bargaining
unit.
with
multi-‐employers
shall
send
a
written
notice
to
this
effect
to
each
employer
concerned.
The
written
b. Multi-‐employer
bargaining
agreement
stated
in
the
preceding
paragraph,
or
the
Secs.
5-‐6,
Rule
XVI,
Book
V,
Omnibus
Rules
certificates
of
registration
of
the
federation,
national,
industry
union,
shall
accompany
said
notice.
Sec
5.
When
Multi-‐Employer
Bargaining
Available.
–
Employers
who
agree
to
group
themselves
or
use
their
A
legitimate
labor
union(s)
and
employers
may
agree
existing
associations
to
engage
in
multi-‐employer
in
writing
to
come
together
for
the
purpose
of
bargaining
shall
send
a
written
notice
to
each
of
their
collective
bargaining,
provided:
counterpart
legitimate
labor
unions
indicating
their
desire
to
engage
in
multi-‐employer
bargaining.
Said
(a)
only
legitimate
labor
unions
who
are
incumbent
notice
shall
indicate
the
following:
exclusive
bargaining
agents
may
participate
and
negotiate
in
multi-‐employer
bargaining;
1)
the
names
of
the
employers
who
desire
to
avail
of
multi-‐employer
bargaining;
(b)
only
employers
with
counterpart
legitimate
labor
unions
who
are
incumbent
bargaining
agents
may
2)
their
corresponding
legitimate
labor
organizations;
participate
and
negotiate
in
multi-‐employer
bargaining;
and
3)
the
fact
that
each
corresponding
legitimate
union
is
any
incumbent
exclusive
bargaining
agent;
(c)
only
those
legitimate
labor
unions
who
pertain
to
employer
units
who
consent
to
multi-‐employer
4)
the
duration
of
the
current
collective
bargaining
bargaining
may
participate
in
multi-‐employer
agreement,
if
any,
entered
into
by
each
employer
with
bargaining.
the
counterpart
legitimate
labor
union
express
its
willingness
or
refusal
to
participate
in
settle
the
dispute
amicably.
The
regional
branch
of
the
multi-‐employer
bargaining
in
writing,
addressed
to
its
Board
may,
upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
treat
a
corresponding
exclusive
bargaining
agent
or
notice
as
a
preventive
mediation
case.
It
shall
also
employer.
Negotiations
may
commence
only
with
encourage
the
parties
to
submit
the
dispute
to
regard
to
respective
employers
and
labor
unions
who
voluntary
arbitration.
consent
to
participate
in
multi-‐employer
bargaining.
During
the
proceedings,
the
parties
shall
not
do
any
(d)
During
the
course
of
negotiations,
consenting
act
which
may
disrupt
or
impede
the
early
settlement
employers
and
the
corresponding
legitimate
labor
of
the
dispute.
They
are
obliged,
as
part
of
their
duty
to
unions
shall
discuss
and
agree
on
the
following:
bargain
collectively
in
good
faith
and
to
participate
fully
and
promptly
in
the
conciliation
meetings
called
1)
the
manner
by
which
negotiations
shall
proceed;
by
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board.
2)
the
scope
and
coverage
of
negotiations
and
the
A
notice,
upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
may
be
agreements;
and
referred
to
alternative
modes
of
dispute
resolution,
including
voluntary
arbitration.
3)
where
appropriate,
the
effect
of
the
negotiations
on
current
agreements
or
conditions
of
employment
4.
Duty
to
Bargain
among
the
parties.
Arts.
250,
supra
p.
9
3.
Conciliation/preventive
mediation
Art.
233,
supra
p.
9
Secs.
1,
2,
9,
Rule
XXII,
Book
V,
Omnibus
Rules
CONCILIATION,
STRIKES
AND
LOCKOUTS
Art.
253.
Duty
to
Bargain
Collectively
When
There
Exists
a
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement.
–
When
there
Sec.
1.
Conciliation
of
Labor-‐Management
disputes.
–
is
a
collective
bargaining
agreement,
the
duty
to
The
board
may,
upon
request
of
either
of
both
parties
bargain
collectively
shall
also
mean
that
neither
party
or
upon
its
own
initiative,
provide
conciliation-‐ shall
terminate
nor
modify
such
agreement
during
its
mediation
services
to
labor
disputes
other
than
lifetime.
However,
either
party
can
serve
a
written
notices
of
strikes
or
lockouts.
Conciliation
cases
which
notice
to
terminate
or
modify
the
agreement
at
least
are
not
subjects
of
notices
of
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
sixty
(60)
days
prior
to
its
expiration
date.
It
shall
be
docketed
as
preventive
mediation
cases.
the
duty
of
both
parties
to
keep
the
status
quo
and
to
continue
in
full
force
and
effect
the
terms
and
Sec.
2.
Privileged
Communication.
–
Information
and
conditions
of
the
existing
agreement
during
the
60-‐day
statements
given
in
confidence
at
conciliation
period
and/or
until
a
new
agreement
is
reached
by
the
proceedings
shall
be
treated
as
privileged
parties.
communications.
Conciliators
and
similar
officials
shall
not
testify
in
any
court
or
body
regarding
any
matter
taken
up
at
conciliation
proceedings
conducted
by
them.
Art.
242(c).
Rights
of
legitimate
labor
organizations.
–
A
legitimate
labor
organization
shall
have
the
right:
Sec.
9.
Action
on
Notice.
–
Upon
receipt
of
the
notice,
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall
exert
all
efforts
c.
To
be
furnished
by
the
employer,
upon
written
at
mediation
and
conciliation
to
enable
the
parties
to
request,
with
its
annual
audited
financial
statements,
11
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
including
the
balance
sheet
and
the
profit
and
loss
increases.
It
also
included
a
provision
or
quitclaim
statement,
within
thirty
(30)
calendar
days
from
the
wherein
the
Union
absolved
and
released
the
date
of
receipt
of
the
request,
after
the
union
has
been
Company
for
any
monetary
claim
that
might
have
existed
prior
to
the
signing
of
the
agreement.
Here,
the
duly
recognized
by
the
employer
or
certified
as
the
Company
contended
that
the
Union
had
already
sole
and
exclusive
bargaining
representative
of
the
waived
the
wage
distortion
brought
by
RA
6640.
employees
in
the
bargaining
unit,
or
within
sixty
(60)
calendar
days
before
the
expiration
of
the
existing
Held:
The
wage
distortion
was
already
cured
by
the
new
CBA
wherein
salary
increases
re-‐established
and
collective
bargaining
agreement,
or
during
the
broadened
the
gaps.
Such
CBA
is
more
than
a
collective
bargaining
negotiation;
substantial
compliance
with
R.A.
No.
6640.
A
CBA
is
the
law
between
the
parties
when
freely
and
voluntarily
entered
into.
The
duty
to
bargain
requires
that
the
parties
deal
with
each
other
with
open
and
Art.
239(f)
fair
minds.
A
sincere
endeavor
to
overcome
obstacles
and
difficulties
that
may
arise,
so
that
employer-‐
[Before
amendment
by
RA
9481;
there
seems
to
be
no
employee
relations
may
be
stabilized
and
industrial
strife
eliminated,
must
be
apparent.
The
goal
of
counterpart
to
this
provision
in
the
amended
version
collective
bargaining
is
the
making
of
agreements
that
of
the
grounds
for
cancellation
of
union
registration.]
will
stabilize
business
conditions
and
fix
fair
standards
of
working
conditions.
Grounds
for
cancellation
of
union
registration.
–
The
following
shall
constitute
grounds
for
cancellation
of
union
registration:
Faculty
Association
of
MAPUA
v
CA
f.
Entering
into
collective
bargaining
agreements
Facts:
Mapua
implemented
a
new
faculty
ranking
which
provide
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
instrument
as
agreed
upon
in
the
new
CBA.
A
month
below
minimum
standards
established
by
law;
after
implementation,
Mapua
requested
for
amendments
as
regards
the
faculty
ranking
and
rates.
The
Union
opposed,
claiming
that
the
request
was
in
violation
of
their
CBA.
Art.
248(g).
Unfair
labor
practices
of
employers.
–
It
Held:
The
proposed
amendments
were
unauthorized
shall
be
unlawful
for
an
employer
to
commit
any
of
the
modifications
of
the
CBA.
Art
253
of
the
LC
states,
as
a
following
unfair
labor
practice:
general
rule,
that
neither
party
to
a
CBA
shall
terminate
or
modify
the
agreement
during
its
lifetime.
g.
To
violate
the
duty
to
bargain
collectively
as
prescribed
by
this
Code;
D.
The
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement
1.
Definition/Contents
Sec.
1(j),
Rule
I,
Book
5,
Omnibus
Rules
Art.
249(c).
Unfair
labor
practices
of
labor
"Collective
Bargaining
Agreement”
or
“CBA”
refers
to
organizations.
–
It
shall
be
unfair
labor
practice
for
a
the
contract
between
a
legitimate
labor
union
and
the
labor
organization,
its
officers,
agents
or
employer
concerning
wages,
hours
of
work,
and
all
representatives:
other
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
in
a
c.
To
violate
the
duty,
or
refuse
to
bargain
collectively
bargaining
unit.
with
the
employer,
provided
it
is
the
representative
of
the
employees;
Art.
260,
supra
p.
9
of
settlement
of
labor
disputes
and
copies
of
orders
and
decisions
of
voluntary
arbitrators.
The
file
shall
be
Effect
of
Sub-‐Standard
Contract
open
and
accessible
to
interested
parties
under
Art.
239(f).
Grounds
for
cancellation
of
union
conditions
prescribed
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
registration.
–
Employment,
provided
that
no
specific
information
submitted
in
confidence
shall
be
disclosed
unless
f.
Entering
into
collective
bargaining
agreements
authorized
by
the
Secretary,
or
when
it
is
at
issue
in
which
provide
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
any
judicial
litigation,
or
when
public
interest
or
below
minimum
standards
established
by
law;
(This
national
security
so
requires.
no
longer
exists
after
Art.
239
was
amended
by
RA
9481.)
Within
thirty
(30)
days
from
the
execution
of
a
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement,
the
parties
shall
Lepanto
Ceramics
v
Lepanto
Ceramics
Employee
submit
copies
of
the
same
directly
to
the
Bureau
or
the
Association
Regional
Offices
of
the
Department
of
Labor
and
Employment
for
registration,
accompanied
with
Facts:
Lepanto
and
the
Employees
Association
entered
verified
proofs
of
its
posting
in
two
conspicuous
places
into
a
CBA
which
provided
for
the
grant
of
a
P3,000
Christmas
bonus.
The
said
bonus
had
been
given
since
in
the
place
of
work
and
ratification
by
the
majority
of
1998.
In
2002,
the
bonus
came
in
the
form
of
P600
and
all
the
workers
in
the
bargaining
unit.
The
Bureau
or
a
cash
advance
equivalent
to
one
month’s
salary.
The
Regional
Offices
shall
act
upon
the
application
for
association
argued
that
this
was
a
violation
of
the
CBA.
registration
of
such
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement
Held:
As
a
general
rule,
bonus
is
not
a
demandable
and
within
five
(5)
calendar
days
from
receipt
thereof.
The
enforceable
obligation.
However,
in
this
case,
the
Regional
Offices
shall
furnish
the
Bureau
with
a
copy
bonus
is
integrated
into
the
CBA
and
thus
partakes
the
of
the
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement
within
five
(5)
nature
of
a
demandable
obligation.
It
is
a
The
CBA
is
days
from
its
submission.
the
law
between
the
parties
and
they
are
obliged
to
comply
with
its
provisions.
The
Bureau
or
Regional
Office
shall
assess
the
employer
for
every
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement
a
registration
fee
of
not
less
than
one
thousand
pesos
PAL
v
PALEA
(March
12,
2008)
(P1,000.00)
or
in
any
other
amount
as
may
be
deemed
appropriate
and
necessary
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
Facts:
CBA
required
PAL
to
pay
13th
month
pay
and
Christmas
bonus
to
its
rank
and
file
employees.
But
and
Employment
for
the
effective
and
efficient
PAL
informed
respondent
PALEA
that
rank
and
file
administration
of
the
Voluntary
Arbitration
Program.
employees
who
were
regularized
after
30
April
1988
Any
amount
collected
under
this
provision
shall
were
not
entitled
to
the
13th
month
pay
as
they
were
accrue
to
the
Special
Voluntary
Arbitration
Fund.
already
given
their
Christmas
bonuses
on
9
December
1988.
PALEA
filed
a
complaint
for
unfair
labor
The
Bureau
shall
also
maintain
a
file
and
shall
practice.
undertake
or
assist
in
the
publication
of
all
final
Held:
13th
month
pay
or
mid-‐year
bonus
is
distinct
decisions,
orders
and
awards
of
the
Secretary
of
Labor
from
the
Christmas
Bonus.
Since
the
payment
of
13th
and
Employment,
Regional
Directors
and
the
month
pay
was
agreed
upon
in
the
CBA,
PAL
is
obliged
Commission.
(As
amended
by
Section
15,
Republic
Act
to
pay
it.
Where
the
CBA
is
clear
and
unambiguous,
it
No.
6715,
March
21,
1989)
becomes
the
law
between
the
parties,
and
compliance
therewith
is
mandated
by
the
express
policy
of
the
law.
2.
Registration
Art.
231.
Registry
of
unions
and
file
of
collective
bargaining
agreements.
–
The
Bureau
shall
keep
a
registry
of
legitimate
labor
organizations.
The
Bureau
shall
also
maintain
a
file
of
all
collective
bargaining
agreements
and
other
related
agreements
and
records
13
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Secs.
1-‐3,
Rule
XVII,
Book
V,
Omnibus
Rules
bargaining
unit
shall
be
the
exclusive
representative
of
the
employees
in
such
unit
for
the
purpose
of
REGISTRATION
OF
COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING
collective
bargaining.
However,
an
individual
AGREEMENTS
employee
or
group
of
employees
shall
have
the
right
at
any
time
to
present
grievances
to
their
employer.
Sec.
1.
Where
to
File.
–
Within
thirty
(30)
days
from
execution
of
a
collective
bargaining
agreement,
the
Any
provision
of
law
to
the
contrary
notwithstanding,
parties
thereto
shall
submit
two
(2)
duly
signed
copies
workers
shall
have
the
right,
subject
to
such
rules
and
of
the
agreement
to
the
Regional
Office
which
issued
regulations
as
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
the
certificate
of
registration/certificate
of
chartered
may
promulgate,
to
participate
in
policy
and
decision-‐
local
of
the
labor
union-‐party
to
the
agreement.
Where
making
processes
of
the
establishment
where
they
are
the
certificate
of
creation
of
the
concerned
chartered
employed
insofar
as
said
processes
will
directly
affect
local
was
issued
by
the
Bureau,
the
agreement
shall
be
their
rights,
benefits
and
welfare.
For
this
purpose,
filed
with
the
Regional
Office
which
has
jurisdiction
workers
and
employers
may
form
labor-‐management
over
the
place
where
it
principally
operates.
councils:
Provided,
That
the
representatives
of
the
workers
in
such
labor-‐management
councils
shall
be
Multi-‐employer
collective
bargaining
agreement
shall
elected
by
at
least
the
majority
of
all
employees
in
said
be
filed
with
the
Bureau.
establishment.
(As
amended
by
Section
22,
Republic
Act
No.
6715,
March
21,
1989)
Sec.
2.
Requirements
for
Registration.
–
The
application
for
CBA
registration
shall
be
accompanied
by
the
Mactan
Workers
Union
v
Aboitiz
original
and
two
(2)
duplicate
copies
of
the
following
documents
which
must
be
certified
under
oath
by
the
Facts:
The
Company
employed
members
of
both
representatives(s)
of
the
employer(s)
and
labor
unions
ALU
and
MWU.
The
Company
entered
into
a
union(s)
concerned:
CBA
with
ALU
on
profit-‐sharing
bonuses.
MWU
did
not
receive
its
share
and
did
not
claim
it,
so
the
money
(a)
the
collective
bargaining
agreement;
was
returned
to
Cebu
Shipyard.
Held:
A
CBA
constitutes
the
law
between
the
(b)
a
statement
that
the
collective
bargaining
bargaining
parties,
so
those
who
are
entitled
to
the
agreement
was
posted
in
at
least
two
(2)
conspicuous
benefits
under
it
can
invoke
its
provisions.
However,
places
in
the
establishment
or
establishments
the
benefits
of
a
CBA
also
extend
to
the
laborers
and
concerned
for
at
least
five
(5)
days
before
its
employees
not
part
of
the
chosen
bargaining
labor
organization.
Otherwise,
the
purpose
of
the
CBA,
ratification;
and
which
enables
labor
to
secure
better
terms
in
employment
condition
and
better
rates
of
pay,
would
(c)
a
statement
that
the
collective
bargaining
be
frustrated
when
non-‐members
are
deprived
of
agreement
was
ratified
by
the
majority
of
the
advantages
they
could
gain.
employees
in
the
bargaining
unit
of
the
employer
or
employers
concerned.
4.
Minutes
of
Negotiations
No
other
document
shall
be
required
in
the
Samahan
ng
Manggagawa
sa
Top
Form
v
NLRC,
registration
of
collective
bargaining
agreements.
supra
Held:
The
Union
cannot
claim
that
the
proposal,
as
Sec.
3.
Payment
of
Registration
Fee.
–
The
certificate
of
found
in
the
minutes
of
the
negotiations,
forms
part
of
registration
of
collective
bargaining
agreement
shall
the
CBA.
The
minutes
reflect
the
proceedings
and
be
issued
by
the
Regional
Office
upon
payment
of
the
discussions
undertaken
in
the
process
of
bargaining
prescribed
registration
fee.
for
worker
benefits.
At
the
negotiations,
it
is
natural
for
both
management
and
labor
to
adopt
positions
or
make
demands
and
offer
proposals
and
counter-‐
3.
Beneficiaries
proposalss.
However,
nothing
is
considered
final
until
Art.
255.
Exclusive
Bargaining
Representation
and
the
parties
have
reached
an
agreement.
Workers’
Participation
in
Policy
and
Decision-‐Making.
–
The
labor
organization
designated
or
selected
by
the
majority
of
the
employees
in
an
appropriate
collective
14
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
5.
Interpretation,
Administration
and
Enforcement
fulfillment
of
what
has
been
expressly
stipulated
but
Art.
1700,
Civil
Code
also
to
all
the
consequences
which
according
to
their
nature,
may
be
in
keeping
with
good
faith,
usage
and
The
relations
between
capital
and
labor
are
not
merely
law
(Art.
1315,
CC).
contractual.
They
are
so
impressed
with
public
interest
that
labor
contracts
must
yield
to
the
common
good.
Therefore,
such
contracts
are
subject
to
the
Dole
Phils.
v
Pawis
ng
Makabayang
Obrero
special
laws
on
labor
unions,
collective
bargaining,
Facts:
Dole
and
the
Union
were
in
a
dispute
over
the
strikes
and
lockouts,
closed
shop,
wages,
working
free
meals
provision
in
their
CBA.
Pursuant
to
this
conditions,
hours
of
labor
and
similar
subjects.
provision,
some
of
Dole’s
departments
reverted
to
the
previous
practice
of
granting
free
meals
after
exactly
Norkis
Free
and
Independent
Workers
Union
v
three
hours
of
actual
overtime
work.
The
others,
Norkis
Trading
Co.
however,
continued
the
practice
of
granting
free
meals
only
after
more
than
three
hours
of
overtime
work.
Facts:
The
Regional
Tripartite
Wages
and
Productivity
Board
issued
a
wage
order
fixing
a
new
minimum
Held:
After
having
interpreted
similar
provisions
in
wage
rate
for
private
sector
employees.
Based
on
this,
the
1985-‐88,
1990-‐95
and
the
1993-‐1995
Norkis
Free
and
Independent
Workers
Union
wanted
amendments
to
the
1990-‐1995
CBAs,
the
court
ruled
an
across-‐the-‐board
increase
in
wages
in
accordance
that
employees
are
entitled
to
free
meals
once
they
with
the
CBA.
have
rendered
at
least
three
hours
of
overtime
work,
and
not
after
they
have
worked
more
than
three
Held:
Denied.
Norkis
was
already
paying
its
employees
hours.
The
CBA
is
the
norm
of
conduct
between
Dole
above
the
existing
minimum
wage,
and
the
wage
order
and
PAMAO-‐NFL
and
compliance
therewith
is
was
a
“floor
wage”
increase.
The
CBA
was
no
ordinary
mandated
by
the
express
policy
of
the
law.
contract,
but
one
impressed
with
public
interest.
Therefore,
it
was
subject
to
special
orders
on
wages
b. Liberal
construction
such
as
those
issued
by
the
RTWPB.
Art.
1700,
Civil
Code,
supra
a. Nature
Art.
1315,
Civil
Code
Cirtek
Employees
Labor
Union-‐FFW
v
Cirtek
Electronics
Contracts
are
perfected
by
mere
consent,
and
from
Facts:
Secretary
of
Labor
ordered
wage
increases
that
moment
the
parties
are
bound
not
only
to
the
higher
than
what
was
in
the
MOA
between
the
parties.
fulfillment
of
what
has
been
expressly
stipulated
but
Held:
The
Secretary
of
Labor,
in
the
exercise
of
his
also
to
all
the
consequences
which,
according
to
their
power
to
assume
jurisdiction,
may
resolve
all
issues
nature,
may
be
in
keeping
with
good
faith,
usage
and
involved
in
the
controversy
including
the
award
of
law.
wage
increases
and
benefits.
The
arbitral
award
can
be
considered
an
approximation
of
a
CBA
which
would
otherwise
have
been
entered
into
by
the
parties.
Pantranco
North
Express
v
NLRC
Hence,
it
has
the
force
and
effect
of
a
valid
contractual
Facts:
3
employees
were
retired
25
years’
service
obligation.
While
a
contract
constitutes
the
law
before
age
60,
pursuant
to
the
compulsory
retirement
between
the
parties,
this
is
so
in
the
present
case
with
provision
in
the
CBA.
They
filed
complaints
for
illegal
respect
to
the
CBA,
not
to
the
MOA.
A
MOA,
unlike
a
dismissal.
CBA,
does
not
constitute
the
law
between
the
parties.
But
even
assuming
arguendo
that
the
MOA
is
treated
Held:
The
CBA
provision,
allowing
compulsory
as
a
new
CBA,
since
it
is
imbued
with
public
interest,
it
retirement
before
age
60,
but
after
25
years
of
service,
must
be
construed
liberally
and
yield
to
the
common
is
legal
and
enforceable.
The
law
(Art.
287;
Sec.
13,
good.
Rule
I,
Book
VI)
leaves
to
the
employer
and
employees
the
fixing
of
the
age
of
retirement.
Early
retirement
c. Grievance
Procedure
does
not
constitute
diminution
of
benefits.
Rather,
it
constitutes
a
reward
of
employment.
Retirements
Art.
255,
supra
p.
14
agreed
upon
by
the
employer
and
the
employees
in
their
CBA
are
not
dismissals.
The
terms
and
conditions
of
a
CBA
constitute
the
law
between
the
parties,
and
bind
not
only
the
union,
but
also
its
members.
The
parties
to
a
contract
are
bound
not
only
to
the
15
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Art.
260,
supra
p.
9
shall
mean
flagrant
and/or
malicious
refusal
to
comply
with
the
economic
provisions
of
such
agreement.
USAEU-‐FFW
v
CA
The
Commission,
its
Regional
Offices
and
the
Regional
Facts:
There
was
a
dispute
between
the
Union
and
the
Directors
of
the
Department
of
Labor
and
Employment
Company
about
the
computation
of
salary
increases.
shall
not
entertain
disputes,
grievances
or
matters
Before
preventive
mediation
proceedings
with
the
under
the
exclusive
and
original
jurisdiction
of
the
NCMB
were
completed,
the
Union
filed
notice
and
went
on
strike
despite
the
Company’s
insistence
that
Voluntary
Arbitrator
or
panel
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators
the
CBA’s
grievance
mechanism
and
voluntary
and
shall
immediately
dispose
and
refer
the
same
to
arbitration
clauses
should
be
followed.
the
Grievance
Machinery
or
Voluntary
Arbitration
provided
in
the
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement.
Held:
The
CBA’s
grievance
mechanism
and
voluntary
arbitration
clauses
were
founded
on
Arts.
261
and
262
of
the
LC
and
should
have
been
honored
by
the
Union.
The
parties
were
directed
to
voluntary
arbitration.
The
strike
was
illegal.
Art.
262.
Jurisdiction
over
other
labor
disputes.
–
The
Voluntary
Arbitrator
or
panel
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators,
upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
shall
also
hear
and
Atlas
Farm
v
NLRC
decide
all
other
labor
disputes
including
unfair
labor
practices
and
bargaining
deadlocks.
Facts:
Peña
and
Abion
were
fired
by
Atlas.
They
filed
complaints
for
illegal
dismissal,
but
the
complaints
were
dismissed
because
the
grievance
machinery
in
the
CBA
had
not
yet
been
exhausted.
Peña
and
Abion
availed
of
the
grievance
process
but
were
Art.
263(h).
Strikes,
picketing
and
lockouts.
–
unsuccessful,
so
they
re-‐filed
with
the
NLRC.
Atlas
contended
that
NLRC
did
not
have
jurisdiction,
(h)
Before
or
at
any
stage
of
the
compulsory
because
the
CBA
provided
that
jurisdiction
belongs
to
arbitration
process,
the
parties
may
opt
to
submit
the
grievance
machinery
and
then
the
voluntary
their
dispute
to
voluntary
arbitration.
arbitrator.
Held:
The
NLRC
had
jurisdiction.
A
voluntary
e. Contract
Infirmity
arbitrator
shall
only
have
jurisdiction
over
termination
cases
if
they
arise
from
interpretation
or
Associated
Labor
Unions
v
Calleja
implementation
of
the
CBA,
and
interpretation
and
Facts:
The
Company
recognized
ALU
as
the
sole
and
enforcement
of
company
personnel
policies,
which
exclusive
bargaining
agent
for
its
employees,
and
a
was
not
the
case
with
Peña
and
Abion.
CBA
was
executed.
SPFL
and
NAMGAW
went
on
strike
because
of
this
recognition.
BLR
Director
Calleja
d. Voluntary
Arbitration
ordered
certification
elections.
Art.
261.
Jurisdiction
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators
or
panel
Held:
Calleja’s
decision
correct.
The
contract-‐bar
rule
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators.
–
The
Voluntary
Arbitrator
or
(Art.
232)
does
not
apply
in
this
case
because
the
CBA
panel
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators
shall
have
original
and
was
full
of
infirmities.
(Infirmities:
haste
on
the
part
of
exclusive
jurisdiction
to
hear
and
decide
all
the
Company
in
recognizing
union
despite
being
unresolved
grievances
arising
from
the
interpretation
aware
that
there
were
other
unions
existing
in
the
or
implementation
of
the
Collective
Bargaining
unit,
failure
to
post
the
same
in
at
least
2
conspicuous
places
in
the
establishment
at
least
5
days
before
its
Agreement
and
those
arising
from
the
interpretation
ratification;
181
out
of
281
workers
who
ratified
the
or
enforcement
of
company
personnel
policies
same
now
strongly
and
vehemently
deny
and/or
referred
to
in
the
immediately
preceding
article.
repudiate
the
alleged
negotiations
and
ratification
of
Accordingly,
violations
of
a
Collective
Bargaining
the
CBA.)
Agreement,
except
those
which
are
gross
in
character,
shall
no
longer
be
treated
as
unfair
labor
practice
and
shall
be
resolved
as
grievances
under
the
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement.
For
purposes
of
this
article,
gross
violations
of
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement
16
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
18
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Facts:
Union
members,
upon
demand
by
the
Union
terminated
due
to
MOPI’s
closure
sued
for
illegal
president,
were
terminated
for
allegedly
having
dismissal
and
ULP.
campaigned
for,
supported,
and
signing
the
petition
Held:
When
Caltex
acquired
MOPI
it
did
not
for
certification
election
which
was
filed
by
another
automatically
become
an
assignee
of
the
CBA
agreed
union
(FFW)
on
the
ground
that
it
was
as
an
act
of
upon
by
MOPI
and
its
employees.
Labor
contracts
are
disloyalty
and
a
valid
basis
for
termination
for
a
cause
not
enforceable
against
a
transferee
of
an
enterprise;
in
accordance
with
its
constitution
and
by-‐laws
and
labor
contracts
being
in
personam,
thus
binding
only
the
Union
Security
Clause
of
the
existing
CBA.
In
between
the
parties.
terminating
the
employees,
the
Company
cited
Art.
253,
which
provides
that
"it
shall
be
the
duty
of
both
i. CBA
and
Disaffiliation
parties
to
keep
the
status
quo
and
to
continue
in
full
force
and
effect
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
Elisco-‐Elirol
Labor
Union
v
Noriel
existing
agreement
during
the
60-‐day
period
and/or
Facts:
EELU-‐NAFLU
executed
a
CBA
with
the
until
a
new
agreement
is
reached
by
the
parties”
to
Company.
Later,
they
decided
to
disaffiliate
from
argue
that
they
were
bound
by
the
Union
Security
NAFLU.
After
such
disaffiliation,
the
Company
refused
Clause
even
after
the
CBA’s
expiration.
to
recognize
EELU
as
a
party
to
the
CBA,
it
not
being
Held:
It
is
incumbent
upon
the
employer
to
continue
to
the
“same
union”
stated
in
the
CBA
(EELU-‐NAFLU).
recognize
the
majority
status
of
the
incumbent
Held:
Unions
have
the
right
to
disaffiliate
themselves
bargaining
agent
even
after
the
expiration
of
the
from
their
“mother
union”
in
the
common
interest
of
freedom
only
if
no
petition
for
certification
election
their
members
and
still
be
the
same
party
as
was
filed.
In
this
case,
4
petitions
were
already
filed.
stipulated
in
the
CBA.
The
employees
and
members
of
Thus,
the
Company
obligation
to
recognize
the
the
local
union
did
not
form
a
new
union,
but
merely
incumbent
union
does
not
hold
true
when
petitions
for
registered
the
local
union
pursuant
to
their
right.
certification
election
were
filed.
Also,
the
last
sentence
Upon
joining
a
national
union,
the
locals
remained
the
of
Art.
253
provides
for
automatic
renewal
of
basic
units
of
the
association.
Hence,
it
is
free
to
economic
provisions
only
and
does
not
include
the
renounce
affiliation
for
mutual
welfare
upon
the
terms
representational
aspect
of
the
CBA.
An
existing
CBA
in
the
agreement
which
brought
it
into
existence.
cannot
constitute
a
bar
to
a
filing
of
a
petition
for
certification
election.
When
there
is
a
representational
issue,
the
status
quo
provision
in
so
far
as
the
need
to
await
the
creation
of
a
new
agreement
does
not
apply.
j. Jurisdiction
Policy
Instruction
No.
56,
April
6,
1993
CLARIFYING
THE
JURISDICTION
BETWEEN
GMC-‐ILU
v
GMC
VOLUNTARY
ARBITRATORS
AND
LABOR
ARBITERS
Before
the
expiration
of
the
CBA,
the
Union
sent
a
draft
OVER
TERMINATION
CASES
AND
PROVIDING
CBA
proposal
and
requested
counterproposals
from
GUIDELINES
FOR
THE
REFERRAL
OF
SAID
CASES
GMC.
GMC
failed
to
heed
the
request.
NLRC
ordered
the
imposition
of
the
draft
proposal
for
the
remaining
ORIGINALLY
FILED
WITH
THE
NLRC
TO
THE
NCMB
2
years
duration
of
the
original
CBA.
In
line
with
the
policy
of
the
Labor
Code
of
the
Held:
Considering
that
no
new
CBA
had
been,
in
the
Philippines
to
promote
and
emphasize
the
primacy
of
meantime,
agreed
upon
by
GMC
and
the
Union,
free
collective
bargaining
and
negotiations,
including
pursuant
to
Article
253
of
the
Labor
Code,
the
provisions
of
the
imposed
CBA
continues
to
have
full
voluntary
arbitration,
mediation
and
conciliation,
as
force
and
effect
until
a
new
CBA
has
been
entered
into
modes
of
settling
labor
of
industrial
disputes,
the
by
the
parties.
The
law
does
not
distinguish
between
a
following
guidelines
are
hereby
promulgated:
CBA
duly
agreed
upon
by
the
parties
and
an
imposed
CBA.
The
draft
proposal
of
the
CBA
that
was
imposed
1.
Termination
cases
arising
in
or
resulting
from
the
by
the
NLRC
should
be
in
effect
for
the
remaining
interpretation
and
implementation
of
collective
years.
bargaining
agreements
and
interpretation
and
rd enforcement
of
company
personnel
policies
which
h. CBA
and
3
Party
Liability
were
initially
processed
at
the
various
steps
of
the
Associated
Labor
Unions
v
NLRC
plant-‐level
Grievance
Procedures
under
the
parties’
Facts:
MOPI
was
reorganized
as
MPI
and
was
acquired
collective
bargaining
agreements
fall
within
the
by
Caltex.
MOPI’s
former
employees
who
were
original
and
exclusive
jurisdiction
of
the
voluntary
19
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
arbitrator
pursuant
to
Article
217
(c)
and
Article
261
possible,
be
avoided,
and
all
serious
efforts,
not
only
of
the
Labor
Code.
by
labor
and
management
but
government
as
well,
be
exhausted
to
substantially
minimize,
if
not
prevent,
2.
Said
cases,
if
filed
before
a
Labor
Arbiter,
shall
be
their
adverse
effects
on
such
life
and
health,
through
dismissed
by
the
Labor
Arbiter
for
lack
of
jurisdiction
the
exercise,
however
legitimate,
by
labor
of
its
right
and
referred
to
the
concerned
NCMB
Regional
Branch
to
strike
and
by
management
to
lockout.
In
labor
for
appropriate
action
towards
an
expeditious
disputes
adversely
affecting
the
continued
operation
selection
by
the
parties
of
voluntary
arbitrator
or
of
such
hospitals,
clinics
or
medical
institutions,
it
shall
panel
of
arbitrators
based
on
the
procedures
agreed
be
the
duty
of
the
striking
union
or
locking-‐out
upon
in
the
CBA.
employer
to
provide
and
maintain
an
effective
skeletal
workforce
of
medical
and
other
health
personnel,
This
issuance
shall
take
effect
immediately.
whose
movement
and
services
shall
be
unhampered
(SGD.)
MA.
NIEVES
R.
CONFESOR,
Secretary
and
unrestricted,
as
are
necessary
to
insure
the
proper
and
adequate
protection
of
the
life
and
health
of
its
1)
Jurisdiction
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators
vis-‐à-‐vis
patients,
most
especially
emergency
cases,
for
the
Labor
Arbiters
duration
of
the
strike
or
lockout.
In
such
cases,
Art.
261,
supra
p.
16
therefore,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
may
immediately
assume,
within
twenty
four
(24)
hours
from
knowledge
of
the
occurrence
of
such
a
strike
or
lockout,
jurisdiction
over
the
same
or
certify
Art.
262,
supra
p.
16
it
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
arbitration.
For
this
purpose,
the
contending
parties
are
strictly
enjoined
to
comply
with
such
orders,
prohibitions
and/or
injunctions
as
are
issued
by
the
Secretary
of
Art.
263(g).
Strikes,
picketing
and
lockouts.
–
Labor
and
Employment
or
the
Commission,
under
pain
of
immediate
disciplinary
action,
including
dismissal
When,
in
his
opinion,
there
exists
a
labor
dispute
or
loss
of
employment
status
or
payment
by
the
causing
or
likely
to
cause
a
strike
or
lockout
in
an
locking-‐out
employer
of
backwages,
damages
and
industry
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
the
other
affirmative
relief,
even
criminal
prosecution
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
may
assume
against
either
or
both
of
them.
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute
and
decide
it
or
certify
the
same
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
The
foregoing
notwithstanding,
the
President
of
the
arbitration.
Such
assumption
or
certification
shall
have
Philippines
shall
not
be
precluded
from
determining
the
effect
of
automatically
enjoining
the
intended
or
the
industries
that,
in
his
opinion,
are
indispensable
to
impending
strike
or
lockout
as
specified
in
the
the
national
interest,
and
from
intervening
at
any
time
assumption
or
certification
order.
If
one
has
already
and
assuming
jurisdiction
over
any
such
labor
dispute
taken
place
at
the
time
of
assumption
or
certification,
in
order
to
settle
or
terminate
the
same.
all
striking
or
locked
out
employees
shall
immediately
return-‐to-‐work
and
the
employer
shall
immediately
resume
operations
and
readmit
all
workers
under
the
same
terms
and
conditions
prevailing
before
the
strike
Art.
217(a)(c).
Jurisdiction
of
the
Labor
Arbiters
and
or
lockout.
The
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
or
the
Commission.
–
the
Commission
may
seek
the
assistance
of
law
enforcement
agencies
to
ensure
compliance
with
this
a.
Except
as
otherwise
provided
under
this
Code,
the
provision
as
well
as
with
such
orders
as
he
may
issue
Labor
Arbiters
shall
have
original
and
exclusive
to
enforce
the
same.
jurisdiction
to
hear
and
decide,
within
thirty
(30)
calendar
days
after
the
submission
of
the
case
by
the
In
line
with
the
national
concern
for
and
the
highest
parties
for
decision
without
extension,
even
in
the
respect
accorded
to
the
right
of
patients
to
life
and
absence
of
stenographic
notes,
the
following
cases
health,
strikes
and
lockouts
in
hospitals,
clinics
and
involving
all
workers,
whether
agricultural
or
non-‐
similar
medical
institutions
shall,
to
every
extent
agricultural:
20
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Security,
Medicare
and
maternity
benefits,
all
other
termination
disputes.
On
the
other
hand,
under
Article
claims
arising
from
employer-‐employee
relations,
261,
a
voluntary
arbitrator
has
original
and
exclusive
including
those
of
persons
in
domestic
or
household
jurisdiction
over
grievances
arising
from
the
interpretation
or
enforcement
of
company
policies.
As
service,
involving
an
amount
exceeding
five
thousand
a
general
rule
then,
termination
disputes
should
be
pesos
(P5,000.00)
regardless
of
whether
accompanied
brought
before
a
labor
arbiter,
except
when
the
with
a
claim
for
reinstatement.
parties,
under
Art.
262,
unmistakably
express
that
they
agree
to
submit
the
same
to
voluntary
arbitration.
b.
The
Commission
shall
have
exclusive
appellate
jurisdiction
over
all
cases
decided
by
Labor
Arbiters.
3)
RTC
Jurisdiction
Summary:
Unfair
Labor
Practice
A. In
general
1. Definition
and
general
concept
Super
general
definition
(Labor
Code,
Art.
212
(k))
• Any
unfair
labor
practice
as
expressly
defined
by
the
Labor
Code
General
definition
(Labor
Code,
Art.
246)
• Any
abridgement
of
employees’
and
workers’
right
to
self-‐organization
o Restrain,
coerce,
discriminate
against,
or
unduly
interfere
in
the
exercise
of
the
right
• ULP
is
related
to
the
workers’
right
to
self-‐organization
and
to
the
observance
of
the
CBA.
Without
that
element,
the
act,
no
matter
how
unfair,
is
not
ULP
as
legally
defined.
(Azucena)
o EXCEPTION:
Labor
Code,
Art.
248
(f)
(to
dismiss,
discharge,
or
otherwise
prejudice
or
discriminate
against
an
employee
for
having
given
or
being
about
to
give
testimony
under
the
Labor
Code)
Why
are
ULPs
punished?
(Labor
Code,
Art.
247)
• Violation
of
constitutional
right
to
self-‐organization
• Inimical
to
the
legitimate
interests
of
both
labor
and
management
• Disrupt
industrial
peace
• Hinder
promotion
of
healthy
and
stable
labor-‐management
–relations
22
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• Both
violations
of
labor
and
management’s
civil
rights
AND
criminal
offenses
against
the
State
ULP
vis-‐à-‐vis
management
prerogative;
exception
(Labor
Code,
Art.
263
(g))
• An
act
may
not
be
considered
a
ULP
if
it’s
a
valid
exercise
of
management
prerogative.
• Management
may
regulate,
according
to
its
discretion
or
judgment,
all
aspects
of
employment,
as
long
as
it’s
exercised
in
good
faith
for
the
advancement
of
the
employer’s
interest,
and
not
exercised
in
a
malicious,
harsh,
oppressive,
vindictive,
or
wanton
manner.
(Azucena)
• The
law
on
ULP
is
not
intended
to
deprive
employers
of
their
fundamental
right
to
prescribe
rules
they
honestly
believe
to
be
necessary
to
the
proper
operation
of
their
business
(Philcom
Employees
v.
Philcom)
2. Requisites
2
requisites
of
ULP:
1) Employer-‐employee
relationship
o Why?
ULP
is
a
violation
of
the
right
to
self-‐organize,
a
right
exercisable
by
employees
in
relation
to
their
employer
(Azucena)
o Art.
246
(non-‐abridgement
of
right
to
self-‐organization)
says
“any
person,”
so
ULPs
may
also
be
committed
by
the
employer’s
representative
or
agent.
2) Act
must
be
specifically
defined
in
the
law
o Labor
Code,
Art.
212
(k)
in
relation
to
Art.
248
(ULPs
committed
by
employers)
and
Art.
249
(ULPs
committed
by
labor
organizations)
ULPs
committed
by
employers
(Labor
Code,
Art.
248)
Summary
of
ULPs
committed
by
employers
Category
(NOT
official,
only
for
mnemonic
purposes)
ULPs
Right
to
self-‐organization
Interference
with
Formation/administration
of
labor
organization
Terms
and
conditions
of
employment
Discrimination
in
regard
to
Employee
who
testifies
(retaliation)
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
Violation
of
CBA
Membership/withdrawal
as
condition
of
employment
Attitude
towards
labor
organization
Contracting
out
services/functions
of
members
Payment
of
negotiation/attorney’s
fees
as
part
of
settlement
ULPs
committed
by
labor
organizations
(Labor
Code,
Art.
249)
Summary
of
ULPs
committed
by
labor
organizations
Category
(NOT
official,
only
for
mnemonic
ULPs
purposes)
Restraint/coercion
of
employees
In
the
exercise
of
their
right
to
self-‐organization
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
Violation
of
CBA
Discriminate
against
employee
Pay/deliver
money
or
other
things
of
value
for
services
not
performed
Causing
or
requesting
employer
to
(featherbedding)
Pay
negotiation
or
attorney’s
fees
as
part
of
settlement
3. Burden
of
proof
Basically,
the
burden
of
proof
is
on
the
party
which
alleges
ULP.
• The
union
has
the
burden
of
proof
to
present
substantial
evidence
to
support
its
ULP
allegations
against
management.
(Schering
Employees
v.
Schering
Plough)
4. Interpretation
Labor
contracts
are
subject
to
special
laws
(e.g.
laws
on
working
conditions
and
wages).
23
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• Why?
Because
the
relations
between
labor
and
capital
aren’t
merely
contractual;
they
are
impressed
with
public
interest
(Civil
Code,
Art.
1700).
In
case
of
doubt,
how
should
labor
laws
be
interpreted?
• In
favor
of
labor
(Labor
Code,
Art.
4)
• In
favor
of
the
safety
and
decent
living
for
the
laborer
(Civil
Code,
Art.
1702)
5. Inter-‐relations
of
ULP
acts
• Justice
Fernando's
concurring
opinion
in
Republic
Saving
Bank
v.
CIR
explains
the
inter-‐relations
of
ULP
acts.
(Note:
while
the
decision
refers
to
the
first
subsection
Industrial
Peace
Act,
such
section
is
actually
similar
to
Art.
248
(a)
and
Art.
249
(b)
of
the
Labor
Code,
hence
the
applicability
of
the
explanation):
o The
first
subsection
of
the
Industrial
Peace
Act
on
“interference,
restraint,
or
coercion,”
covering
as
it
does
such
a
broad
range
of
ULPs
on
the
part
of
employers,
is
a
catch-‐all
provision
for
borderline
cases
inimical
to
the
right
of
self-‐organization
or
to
collective
bargaining
justifying
a
finding
of
ULP.
The
succeeding
ULPs
enumerated
in
the
Act
are
designed
not
to
impose
limitations
or
restrictions
upon
the
general
guarantees
of
the
first,
but
rather
to
spell
out
with
particularity
some
of
the
practices
that
have
been
most
prevalent
and
most
troublesome.
It’s
impossible
to
specify
in
precise
and
unmistakable
language
each
incident
which
constitutes
a
ULP,
so
it’s
up
to
the
court
to
apply
the
Act’s
general
prohibitory
language
in
the
light
of
infinite
combinations
of
events
which
may
be
charged
as
violative
of
its
terms.
(Republic
Savings
Bank
v.
CIR,
concurring
opinion
of
Justice
Fernando)
B. Acts
violative
of
right
to
self-‐organization
1. Interference,
restraint,
and
coercion
(Labor
Code,
Art.
248
(a)
and
Art.
249
(a))
Art.
248
(a)
and
Art.
249
(a)
provide
GENERAL
grants
of
protection,
from
which
all
the
other
cases
of
ULP
in
those
provisions
are
derived
(Bar
Ops
2007
reviewer):
• Art.
248
(a)
–
employers
who
interfere,
restrain,
or
coerce
employees
in
the
exercise
of
their
right
to
self-‐
organization
• Art.
249
(a)
–
labor
organizations
who
restrain
or
coerce
employees
in
the
exercise
of
their
right
to
self
organization
Aside
from
the
fact
that
Art.
248
refers
to
ULPs
committed
by
employers
while
Art.
249
refers
to
ULPs
committed
by
labor
organizations,
one
notable
difference
between
the
2
provisions
is
the
word
“interfere.”
• “Interfere”
is
not
included
in
Art.
249
because
any
act
of
a
labor
organization
amounts
to
interference
with
the
right
to
self-‐organization.
(Bar
Ops
2007
reviewer)
a. Interrogation
• “Blue
Flash
Doctrine”
(from
Bar
Ops
2007
reviewer,
citing
Blue
Flash
Express)
o An
employer
is
not
denied
the
privilege
of
interrogating
its
employees
as
to
their
union
affiliation,
provided
the
same
is
for
a
legitimate
purpose
and
assurance
is
given
by
the
employer
that
no
reprisals
would
be
taken
against
unionists
• Questioning
of
employees
concerning
union
membership
and
activities,
made
in
such
a
way
as
to
hamper
the
exercise
of
free
choice
on
the
part
of
the
employees,
constitutes
ULP
(Scoty’s
v.
Miller;
Philippine
Steam
Navigation
Co.
v.
Philippine
Marine
Officers
Guild)
b. Speech,
espionage,
economic
coercion
• Speech
o A
company
commits
ULP
when
it
writes
letters
to
employees
containing
“bribes”
and
threats
of
dismissal
to
induce
strikers
to
return
to
work.
Such
letters,
when
taken
together
with
the
other
24
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
circumstances,
aren’t
protected
by
the
free
speech
provisions
of
the
Constitution
(Insular
Life
Assurance
Co.,
Ltd.
Employees
Association
v.
Insular
Life
Assurance
Co.,
Ltd.).
• Espionage
o A
company
commits
ULP
when
there
is
good
ground
to
believe
that
a
former
union
member
was
made
to
spy
on
union
activities
and
testify
against
union
members
on
behalf
of
the
company.
(Insular
Life
Assurance
Co.,
Ltd.,
Employees
Association
v.
Insular
Life
Assurance
Co.,
Ltd.)
• Economic
coercion
o A
company
commits
ULP
when
it
offers
“bribes,”
e.g.
bonuses
to
“loyal”
employees
and
wage
increases
to
strikers
in
exchange
for
returning
to
work.
c. Concerted
activities
• A
company
commits
ULP
when
it
doesn’t
permit
all
of
its
employees
to
join
a
mass
demonstration
against
alleged
police
abuses
(Philippine
Blooming
Mills
v.
Philippine
Blooming
Mills
Employees
Organization)
2. Non-‐union
membership
or
withdrawal
of
membership
as
a
condition
of
employment
(yellow-‐dog
contract)
(Labor
Code,
Art.
248
(b))
“Yellow-‐dog
contract”
• Promise
exacted
from
workers
or
prospective
employees
that
they
will
not
belong
to
nor
form
a
union
during
their
employment
(Azucena)
A
company
commits
ULP
when
it
refuses
to
admit
seasonal
workers
(whose
services
it
had
engaged
in
previous
seasons)
belonging
to
a
particular
union,
and
tells
such
workers
that
they
must
leave
that
union
if
they
want
to
continue
working
for
the
company
(Visayan
Stevedore
Trans.
Co.
v.
CIR)
3. Contracting
out
to
discourage
unionism
(Art.
248
(c))
Subcontracting
is
NOT
always
tantamount
to
ULP.
• When
is
it
ULP?
When
it’s
motivated
by
a
desire
to
prevent
employees
from
organizing
(Azucena)
• When
is
it
NOT
ULP?
If
it’s
done
for
business
reasons
(e.g.
decline
in
business,
inadequacy
of
equipment,
need
to
reduce
cost)
(Azucena)
4. Company
domination
of
union
(Art.
248
(d))
What’s
a
“company
union”?
(Art.
212)
• Any
labor
organization
whose
formation,
function
or
administration
has
been
assisted
by
any
act
defined
as
ULP
by
the
Labor
Code
Common
manifestations
(Azucena,
citing
Philippine
American
Cigar):
• Initiation
by
the
employer
of
the
company
union
idea
o Outright
formation
of
the
union
by
the
employer
o Employee
formation
of
the
union
upon
employer’s
demand/influence
o Employee
formation
motivated
by
management
• Financial
support
to
union
o Union
expenses
o Attorney’s
fees
• Employer
encouragement
and
assistance
o Immediately
recognizing
a
union
as
SEBA
without
first
determining
if
it
represents
the
majority
• Supervisory
assistance
o Soliciting
membership
o Permitting
union
activities
during
working
hours
5. Discrimination
to
discourage/encourage
unionism
(Art.
248
(e),
Art.
249
(b))
Discrimination
in
regard
to
what?
• Terms
and
conditions
of
employment
(e.g.
wages,
hours
of
work)
25
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Why
discriminate?
• To
discourage/encourage
membership
in
a
labor
organization
Who
commits
ULP?
• The
employer
who
discriminates
• The
labor
organization
which
causes
or
attempts
to
cause
the
employer
to
discriminate
Discrimination
vs.
differentiation/classification
• There
are
valid
differentiations
based
on
differences
in
job
requirements.
It’s
not
ULP
when
management
classifies
jobs
with
varying
pay/benefits.
(Azucena)
a. Discriminatory
discharge
• If
the
main
reason
for
discharging
the
employee
is
his
union
activities,
then
it
doesn’t
matter
if
a
lawful
cause
of
discharge
is
also
available
(not
a
defense).
(Azucena)
b. Valid
discrimination:
union
security
clause
Union
security
clause
• In
terminating
the
employment
of
an
employee
by
enforcing
the
union
security
clause,
the
employer
needs
only
to
determine
and
prove
that:
o The
union
security
clause
is
applicable.
o The
union
is
requesting
for
the
enforcement
of
the
union
security
provision
in
the
CBA
o There
is
sufficient
evidence
to
support
the
decision
of
the
union
to
expel
the
employee
from
the
union
(General
Milling
Corp.
v.
Casio)
Summary
of
union
security
clauses
(Taken
from
Bar
Ops
2007
reviewer)
Hiring
Continued
employment
Ground
for
termination
Closed
shop
Must
become
union
Must
be
union
member
all
If
not
a
union
member
member
at
time
of
throughout
at
anytime
hiring
Union
shop
May
be
hired
even
if
Must
become
union
Does
not
become
union
not
union
member
member
after
reasonable
member
after
time
reasonable
time
Maintenance
of
Already
union
member
Must
maintain
membership
Disaffiliates
from
union
membership
at
time
of
hiring
Closed
shop
• No
person
may
be
employed
in
any
or
certain
agreed
departments
of
the
enterprise
unless
he
or
she
is,
becomes,
and,
for
the
duration
of
the
agreement,
remains
a
member
in
good
standing
of
a
union
entirely
comprised
of
or
of
which
the
employees
in
interest
are
a
part
(General
Milling
Corp.
v.
Casio)
Union
shop
• All
new
regular
employees
are
required
to
join
the
union
within
a
certain
period
as
a
condition
for
their
continued
employment
(Alabang
Country
Club,
Inc.
v.
NLRC)
Maintenance
of
membership
shop
• Employees
who
are
union
members
as
of
the
effective
date
of
the
agreement,
or
who
thereafter
become
members,
must
maintain
union
membership
as
a
condition
for
continued
employment
until
they
are
promoted
or
transferred
out
of
the
bargaining
unit
or
the
agreement
is
terminated
(Alabang
Country
Club,
Inc.
v.
NLRC)
c. Collection
of
agency
fees
(Labor
Code,
Art.
248
(e))
26
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Employees
in
the
bargaining
unit
who
are
not
members
of
the
recognized
collective
bargaining
agent
may
be
assessed
a
reasonable
fee
equivalent
to
the
dues
and
other
fees
paid
by
members
of
the
recognized
collective
bargaining
agent,
if
such
non-‐union
members
accept
the
benefits
under
the
collective
bargaining
agreement.
Legal
basis
of
union’s
right
to
agency
fees?
• Quasi-‐contractual,
to
prevent
non-‐union
members’
unjust
enrichment.
(Del
Pilar
Academy,
et
al.
v.
Del
Pilar
Academy
Employees’
Union)
6. Retaliatory
discharge
or
retaliation
for
testimony
against
employer/indirect
discrimination
(Labor
Code,
Art.
248
(f))
What
constitutes
retaliation?
• To
dismiss,
discharge
or
otherwise
prejudice
or
discriminate
against
an
employee
for
having
given
or
being
about
to
give
testimony
under
the
Labor
Code
• Employer’s
motive
is
immaterial
–
may
or
may
not
have
been
motivated
by
anti-‐union
attitude
(Azucena)
• Nature
of
employee’s
testimony
is
immaterial
–
may
or
may
not
pertain
to
union
matter
(Azucena)
A
company
commits
ULP
when
it
drops
an
employee’s
grievance
case
after
the
employee
testifies
against
the
company
in
a
certification
election
hearing.
(Itogon-‐Suyoc
Mines,
Inc.
v.
Baldo)
7. Illegal
exaction
–
featherbedding
(Art.
249
(d))
What’s
illegal
exaction/featherbedding?
• To
cause
or
attempt
to
cause
an
employer
to
pay
or
deliver
or
agree
to
pay
or
deliver
any
money
or
other
things
of
value,
in
the
nature
of
an
exaction,
for
services
which
are
not
performed
or
not
to
be
performed,
including
the
demand
for
fee
for
union
negotiations
• Creating
or
spreading
employment
by
unnecessarily
maintaining
or
increasing
the
number
of
employees
or
amount
of
time
used
for
a
job
(Azucena)
Why
is
it
ULP?
• Economically
wasteful
and
without
any
legitimate
employee
justification
(Azucena,
citing
Cox,
Bok,
German,
Cases
and
Materials
on
Labor
Law)
• In
the
case
of
union
negotiation
fees,
the
resulting
CBA
would
probably
be
a
“sweetheart
contract”
i.e.
one
that
doesn’t
substantially
improve
employees’
wages
and
benefits
(Azucena)
C. Acts
violative
of
right
to
collective
bargaining
1. Violation
of
duty
to
bargain
(Art.
248
(g))
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
(Art.
252)
• Performance
of
a
mutual
obligation
to
meet
and
convene
promptly
and
expeditiously
in
good
faith
for
the
purpose
of
negotiating
an
agreement
with
respect
to
terms
and
conditions
of
employment,
including
proposals
for
adjusting
any
grievances
or
questions
arising
under
such
agreement,
and
executing
a
contract
incorporating
such
agreements,
if
requested
by
either
party
• Does
NOT
compel
any
party
to
agree
to
a
proposal
or
to
make
any
concession
• If
there’s
a
CBA…
o Neither
party
shall
modify
or
terminate
the
agreement
during
its
lifetime,
but
can
serve
a
written
notice
to
do
so
at
least
60
days
prior
to
its
expiration
date
o Both
parties
must
keep
status
quo
during
60-‐day
period
prior
to
its
expiration
date
and/or
until
a
new
agreement
is
reached
• If
there’s
no
CBA…
o Employer
and
representative
of
employees
still
have
duty
to
bargain
collectively
Who
commits
ULP?
• Employer
who
violates
duty
to
bargain
collectively
• Labor
organization
which
violates
duty
to
bargain
collectively
or
refuses
to
bargain
with
employer,
provided
it’s
the
representative
of
the
employees
27
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Summary
of
procedure
in
collective
bargaining
(Art.
250)
1) Party
#1
serves
written
notice
(with
proposals;
Party
#2
must
reply
within
10
days
from
receipt
2) In
case
of
differences,
either
party
may
request
for
conference
to
be
held
within
10
days
from
request
3) If
dispute
not
settled,
NCMB
may
intervene
and
call
for
conciliation
meetings
4) During
conciliation,
parties
are
prohibited
from
doing
any
act
which
may
disrupt/impede
early
settlement
5) NCMB
shall
exert
all
efforts
to
settle
all
disputes
amicably
and
encourage
parties
to
submit
case
to
voluntary
arbitrator
A
company
cannot
dissolve
something
provided
for
in
the
existing
CBA.
The
duty
to
bargain
is
a
continuous
process
which
imposes
on
the
parties
the
obligation
to
live
up
to
the
terms
of
the
agreement.
(Shell
Oil
Workers
Union
v.
Shell
Co.
of
the
Philippines,
Ltd.)
During
negotiations,
management
has
a
right
to
insist
on
its
position
to
the
point
of
stalemate.
Reaching
an
impasse
does
not
evidence
bad
faith.
(Union
of
Filpro
Employees
–
DFAI
Unions
KMU
v.
Nestle
Phils.,
Inc.)
Duty
to
resume
negotiations
• While
the
law
makes
it
an
obligation
for
the
employer
and
the
employees
to
bargain
collectively
with
each
other,
such
compulsion
does
not
include
the
commitment
to
precipitately
accept
or
agree
to
the
proposals
of
the
other.
All
it
contemplates
is
that
both
parties
should
approach
the
negotiation
with
an
open
mind
and
make
reasonable
effort
to
reach
a
common
ground
of
agreement
(CABEU-‐NFL
v.
Central
Azucarera
de
Bais)
2. Gross
violation
of
collective
bargaining
agreement
(Labor
Code,
Art.
248
(i),
Art.
249
(f),
and
Art.
261)
Only
GROSS
violation
of
the
CBA
constitutes
ULP.
• Under
Art.
248
(i)
and
Art.
249
(f),
violation
of
the
CBA
by
either
the
employer
or
labor
organization
would
constitute
ULP.
But
Art.
261
provides
that
“violations
of
a
CBA,
except
those
which
are
gross
in
character,
shall
no
longer
be
treated
as
ULP.”
• To
be
heard
and
decided
by
a
Labor
Arbiter
What
is
a
gross
violation
of
the
CBA?
(Art.
261)
• Flagrant
and/or
malicious
refusal
to
comply
with
the
economic
provisions
of
the
CBA
What
happens
if
it’s
just
a
violation
of
the
CBA?
(Art.
261)
• Resolved
as
grievance
under
the
CBA
• If
can’t
be
resolved
through
the
grievance
machinery,
then
to
be
heard
and
decided
by
a
Voluntary
Arbitrator
If
employer
acts
in
good
faith,
merely
acting
on
the
request
of
some
workers,
then
it’s
not
a
gross
violation
of
the
CBA.
(Arellano
University
Employees
and
Workers
Union
v.
CA)
Violation
of
seniority
rule
in
promotions
is
a
ULP
over
which
the
Labor
Arbiter
has
jurisdiction.
But
violation
of
grievance
procedure
in
CBA
is
not
ULP
because
it’s
not
an
economic
provision.
(San
Miguel
Foods,
Inc.
v.
SMC
Employees
Union)
D. Motive,
conduct,
proof
1. Employer
motive
and
proof
• In
determining
whether
a
discharge
is
discriminatory,
the
true
reason
for
the
discharge
must
be
established.
While
union
activity
is
no
bar
to
a
discharge,
the
existence
of
a
lawful
cause
for
discharge
is
no
defense
if
the
employee
was
actually
discharged
for
union
activity.
(Phil.
Metal
Foundries,
Inc.
v.
CIR)
2. Totality
of
evidence
• An
employer
may
treat
freely
with
an
employee
and
is
not
obliged
to
support
his
actions
with
a
reason
or
purpose.
However,
where
the
attendant
circumstances
taken
as
a
whole
raise
a
suspicion
as
to
the
motivation
for
the
employer’s
action,
the
failure
of
the
employer
to
ascribe
a
valid
reason
therefor
may
justify
an
inference
that
his
conduct
towards
the
employee
was
inspired
by
the
latter’s
union
membership
or
activities
(Royal
Undergarments
Corp.
of
the
Phil.
v.
CIR)
28
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• A.k.a.
“Totality
of
conduct”
doctrine
–
the
culpability
of
an
employer’s
remarks
is
to
be
evaluated
not
only
on
the
basis
of
their
implications,
but
against
the
background
of
collateral
circumstances
(Azucena)
E. Enforcement,
remedies,
and
sanctions
1. Parties
against
whom
ULP
committed
Employer
(Art.
212
(e))
• Includes
any
person
acting
in
the
interest
of
an
employer,
directly
or
indirectly
• Does
not
include
any
labor
organization
or
any
of
its
officers
or
agents
except
when
acting
as
employer.
Employee
(Art.
212
(f))
• Includes
any
person
in
the
employ
of
an
employer
• Not
limited
to
the
employees
of
a
particular
employer,
unless
the
Labor
Code
so
explicitly
states
• Includes
any
individual
whose
work
has
ceased
as
a
result
of
or
in
connection
with
any
current
labor
dispute
or
because
of
any
unfair
labor
practice,
if
he
has
not
obtained
any
other
substantially
equivalent
and
regular
employment
Labor
organization
(Art.
212
(g))
• Any
union
or
association
of
employees
which
exists
in
whole
or
in
part
for
the
purpose
of
collective
bargaining
or
of
dealing
with
employers
concerning
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
2. Parties
liable
Summary
of
parties
liable
Who
committed
the
ULP?
Who
is
criminally
liable?
Officers
Employer
Agents
Officers
Members
of
governing
boards
Labor
organization
Representatives
Agents
Members
Not
natural
person
(corporation,
trust,
firm,
Officers
partnership,
association
or
any
other
entity)
Punishment
for
violators
of
Labor
Code
provisions
(Art.
288)*
Filipino
Alien
Fine
(Php1,000-‐Php10,000),
Fine
(Php1,000-‐Php10,000),
Imprisonment
(3
mos-‐3
yrs),
or
Imprisonment
(3
mos-‐3
yrs),
or
Both
fine
+
imprisonment
Both
fine
and
imprisonment
PLUS:
Summary
deportation
after
completion
of
sentence
*EXCEPTIONS:
-‐
If
otherwise
provided
in
the
Labor
Code
-‐
Acts
complained
of
hinge
on
interpretation/implementation
of
ambiguous
provisions
of
existing
CBA
3. Prosecution
and
prescriptive
period
Prescriptive
periods
(Art.
290)
• Offenses
punished
under
the
Labor
Code
and
implementing
rules
and
regulations
prescribe
within
3
years
o But
if
ULP,
must
be
filed
with
appropriate
agency
within
1
year,
or
else
forever
barred
a) Civil
aspect
(Art.
247)
• May
include
claims
for
damages
(actual,
moral,
exemplary,
etc.),
attorney’s
fees,
and
other
affirmative
relief
• Recovery
in
the
administrative
proceedings
shall
bar
recovery
under
the
Civil
Code
29
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• Under
jurisdiction
of
Labor
Arbiter,
who
shall
resolve
the
case
within
30
days
from
submission
• During
pendency
of
proceedings,
the
running
of
prescriptive
period
of
criminal
offense
is
interrupted
• Final
judgment
is
not
binding
in
criminal
case
nor
evidence
of
guilt
b) Criminal
aspect
(Art.
247)
• May
not
be
instituted
without
a
final
judgment
finding
that
ULP
was
committed
having
first
been
obtained
in
the
administrative
proceedings
• Under
the
concurrent
jurisdiction
of
the
ff.
(Art.
288):
o Municipal
Courts
o City
Courts
o Courts
of
First
Instance
• Running
of
prescriptive
period
is
interrupted
during
pendency
of
administrative
proceedings
• Final
judgment
in
administrative
proceedings
not
binding
4. Compromise
• ULP
cases
are
not,
in
view
of
the
public
interest
involved,
subject
to
compromises.
(CCLC
E.G.
Gochanco
Workers
Union
v.
NLRC)
5. Remedies
and
sanctions
Appeal
(Art.
223)
• Who
may
appeal?
o Either
or
both
parties
• When
to
appeal?
o Decisions,
awards,
or
orders
of
the
Labor
Arbiter
must
be
appealed
to
the
NLRC
within
10
days
from
receipt
Otherwise,
become
final
and
executory
• What
must
be
done?
o Appellant
must
furnish
memorandum
of
appeal
to
other
party,
who
must
answer
within
10
days
from
receipt
• How
long
does
it
take?
o NLRC
shall
decide
within
20
days,
decision
becomes
final
and
executory
10
days
after
receipt
by
parties
• Grounds:
o Prima
facie
evidence
of
abuse
of
discretion
on
part
of
LA
o Decision,
award,
or
order
secured
through
fraud
or
coercion
o Purely
questions
of
law
o Serious
errors
in
finding
of
facts
which
would
cause
grave
or
irreparable
injury
to
appellant
• Conditions:
o If
monetary
award,
perfected
only
by
posting
cash
or
surety
bond
of
equivalent
amount
o If
order
reinstating
dismissed/separated
employee,
reinstatement
aspect
is
immediately
executory,
even
pending
appeal
and
even
upon
posting
by
employer
of
bond
o If
frivolous
or
dilatory
appeal,
LA/NLRC
shall
impose
reasonable
penalty
Damages
• It
is
proper
to
award
moral
and
exemplary
damages
to
illegally
dismissed
employees
if
dismissal
was
tainted
with
ULP.
Moral
damages
may
be
awarded
when
the
dismissal
is
tainted
with
bad
faith
or
fraud,
or
is
an
act
oppressive
to
labor,
or
done
in
a
manner
contrary
to
good
morals,
good
customs
or
public
policy.
Exemplary
damages
may
be
awarded
if
the
dismissal
was
done
in
a
wanton,
oppressive
or
malevolent
manner.
(Quadra
v.
CA)
30
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
VIII.
Unfair
Labor
Practice
A.
In
general
exemplary
and
other
forms
of
damages,
attorney’s
fees
and
other
affirmative
relief,
shall
be
under
the
1.
Definition
and
general
concept
jurisdiction
of
the
Labor
Arbiters.
The
Labor
Arbiters
Art.
212
(k).
Definitions.
shall
give
utmost
priority
to
the
hearing
and
resolution
of
all
cases
involving
unfair
labor
practices.
They
shall
(k)
“Unfair
labor
practice”
means
any
unfair
labor
resolve
such
cases
within
thirty
(30)
calendar
days
practice
as
expressly
defined
by
the
Code.
form
the
time
they
are
submitted
for
decision.
or
lockout.
The
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
or
stipulation
that
there
was
no
employer-‐employee
the
Commission
may
seek
the
assistance
of
law
relationship
between
SMC
and
the
workers.
SMC
enforcement
agencies
to
ensure
compliance
with
this
Employees
Union
advised
SMC
through
a
letter
that
some
of
the
Lipercon
and
D’Rite
workers
had
signed
provision
as
well
as
with
such
orders
as
he
may
issue
up
for
membership
and
sought
regularization.
Union
to
enforce
the
same.
filed
two
notices
for
strike
and
eventually,
several
pickets
were
staged
by
Lipercon
and
D’Rite
workers
in
In
line
with
the
national
concern
for
and
the
highest
various
SMC
plants.
SMC
filed
a
Complaint
for
respect
accorded
to
the
right
of
patients
to
life
and
Injunction
and
Damages
with
the
RTC.
Union
health,
strikes
and
lockouts
in
hospitals,
clinics
and
questioned
the
jurisdiction
of
the
RTC
over
the
similar
medical
institutions
shall,
to
every
extent
case/nature
of
the
action.
possible,
be
avoided,
and
all
serious
efforts,
not
only
Held:
Court
held
that
Art.
212(1)
of
the
Labor
Code
by
labor
and
management
but
government
as
well,
be
applies.
Though
SMC
insists
that
no
employer-‐
exhausted
to
substantially
minimize,
if
not
prevent,
employee
relationship
exists
between
itself
and
the
their
adverse
effects
on
such
life
and
health,
through
contractual
workers,
a
labor
dispute
can
nevertheless
the
exercise,
however
legitimate,
by
labor
of
its
right
exist
regardless
of
whether
the
disputants
stand
in
the
proximate
relationship
of
employer
and
employee,
to
strike
and
by
management
to
lockout.
In
labor
provided
that
the
controversy
concerns
the
terms
and
disputes
adversely
affecting
the
continued
operation
conditions
of
employment
or
a
change
thereof.
Also,
of
such
hospitals,
clinics
or
medical
institutions,
it
shall
Art.
217(1)
expressly
gave
jurisdiction
to
the
Labor
be
the
duty
of
the
striking
union
or
locking-‐out
Arbiter
over
cases
of
unfair
labor
practice
cases,
cases
employer
to
provide
and
maintain
an
effective
skeletal
involving
wages,
hours
of
work,
terms
and
conditions
workforce
of
medical
and
other
health
personnel,
of
employment,
and
those
cases
involving
the
legality
whose
movement
and
services
shall
be
unhampered
of
strikes
and
lockouts.
and
unrestricted,
as
are
necessary
to
insure
the
proper
and
adequate
protection
of
the
life
and
health
of
its
patients,
most
especially
emergency
cases,
for
the
Philcom
Employees
v
Philcom
duration
of
the
strike
or
lockout.
In
such
cases,
Facts:
PEU
filed
2
notices
of
strike
against
Philcom,
on
therefore,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
the
basis
of
ULP
and
bargaining
deadlock
(due
to
acts
may
immediately
assume,
within
twenty
four
(24)
of
the
employer
such
as
the
contractualization
of
hours
from
knowledge
of
the
occurrence
of
such
a
positions
in
the
company
and
offers
or
promotions
to
strike
or
lockout,
jurisdiction
over
the
same
or
certify
union
members)
.
During
a
conciliation
meeting,
they
it
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
arbitration.
For
agreed
to
consolidate
the
2
notices,
and
to
maintain
the
status
quo
pending
the
proceedings.
However,
PEU
this
purpose,
the
contending
parties
are
strictly
still
staged
a
strike.
Upon
petition
by
Philcom,
the
enjoined
to
comply
with
such
orders,
prohibitions
Secretary
of
Labor
assumed
jurisdiction.
The
Secretary
and/or
injunctions
as
are
issued
by
the
Secretary
of
ruled
that
there
was
no
ULP
because
the
acts
Labor
and
Employment
or
the
Commission,
under
pain
complained
of
are
a
valid
exercise
of
management
of
immediate
disciplinary
action,
including
dismissal
prerogative.
or
loss
of
employment
status
or
payment
by
the
Helds:
The
acts
complained
of
are
not
considered
as
locking-‐out
employer
of
backwages,
damages
and
ULP
under
Art
248.
They
are
a
valid
exercise
of
other
affirmative
relief,
even
criminal
prosecution
management
prerogative.
Such
exercise
of
against
either
or
both
of
them.
management
prerogative
has
always
been
respected
by
the
Court
because
the
law
on
ULP
is
not
intended
to
The
foregoing
notwithstanding,
the
President
of
the
deprive
employers
of
their
fundamental
right
to
Philippines
shall
not
be
precluded
from
determining
prescribe
rules
as
they
honestly
believe
to
be
necessary
to
the
proper
operation
of
their
business.
the
industries
that,
in
his
opinion,
are
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
and
from
intervening
at
any
time
and
assuming
jurisdiction
over
any
such
labor
dispute
in
order
to
settle
or
terminate
the
same.
Culili
v
Eastern
Telecom
Facts:
Nelson
was
a
Senior
Technician
for
Eastern
San
Miguel
v.
Bersamira
Telecom.
When
the
company
entered
into
dire
financial
straits,
it
implemented
a
two-‐phase
Right-‐
Facts:
SMC
entered
into
contracts
for
merchandising
Sizing
Plan,
for
which
reason
they
negotiated
and
services
with
Lipercon
and
D’Rite,
with
the
express
32
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
consulted
with
ETEU,
the
recognized
bargaining
can
only
be
committed
within
the
context
of
an
representative.
The
first
phase
involved
a
special
employer-‐employee
relationship.
retirement
program,
which
Nelson
refused.
Later,
when
the
second
phase
involving
restructuring
was
b.
Act
must
be
specifically
defined
in
the
law
implemented,
Nelson’s
position
was
deemed
Art.
248.
Unfair
labor
practices
of
employers.
It
shall
be
redundant
and
he
was
terminated
accordingly.
LA
and
unlawful
for
an
employer
to
commit
any
of
the
NLRC
found
that
the
dismissal
was
illegal,
and
that
following
unfair
labor
practice:
there
was
ULP.
Held:
The
SC
defined
ULP
as
“acts
that
violate
the
(a)
To
interfere
with,
restrain
or
coerce
employees
in
workers'
right
to
organize.”
The
prohibited
acts
are
the
exercise
of
their
right
to
self-‐organization;
related
to
the
workers'
right
to
self-‐organization
and
to
the
observance
of
a
CBA.
All
the
prohibited
acts
(b)
To
require
as
a
condition
of
employment
that
a
constituting
unfair
labor
practice
in
essence
relate
to
person
or
an
employee
shall
not
join
a
labor
the
workers'
right
to
self-‐organization.
Thus,
an
organization
or
shall
withdraw
from
one
to
which
he
employer
may
only
be
held
liable
for
unfair
labor
practice
if
it
can
be
shown
that
his
acts
affect
in
belongs;
whatever
manner
the
right
of
his
employees
to
self-‐
organize.
Court
ruled
that
there
was
a
valid
(c)
To
contract
out
services
or
functions
being
redundancy,
in
that
ETPI
fulfilled
the
requirements
of
performed
by
union
members
when
such
will
interfere
good
faith
and
reasonable
standards.
Because
ETPI
with,
restrain
or
coerce
employees
in
the
exercise
of
negotiated
with
ETEU,
it
could
not
be
said
that
there
their
rights
to
self-‐organization;
was
ULP,
especially
considering
that
there
was
a
valid
termination.
(d)
To
initiate,
dominate,
assist
or
otherwise
interfere
with
the
formation
or
administration
of
any
labor
2.
Requisites
organization,
including
the
giving
of
financial
or
other
a.
Employer-‐employee
relationship
support
to
it
or
its
organizers
or
supporters;
(e)
To
discriminate
in
regard
to
wages,
hours
of
work
Sterling
Products
v
Sol
and
other
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
in
order
to
encourage
or
discourage
membership
in
any
Facts:
Sol
filed
a
complaint
against
the
firm
for
labor
organization.
Nothing
in
this
Code
or
in
any
underpayment,
money
equivalent
of
her
vacation
leave,
and
Christmas
bonus.
Because
of
her
complaint,
other
law
shall
stop
the
parties
from
requiring
she
was
dismissed
without
just
cause.
Sol
charged
membership
in
a
recognized
collective
bargaining
Sterling
Products
Int’l
and
its
Radio
Director
with
ULP.
agent
as
a
condition
for
employment,
except
those
employees
who
are
already
members
of
another
union
Held:
Sol
was
merely
an
employee
and
was
not
connected
with
any
labor
organization,
nor
has
she
at
the
time
of
the
signing
of
the
collective
bargaining
ever
attempted
to
join
a
labor
organization,
or
to
agreement.
Employees
of
an
appropriate
bargaining
assist,
or
contribute
to
a
labor
organization.
The
unit
who
are
not
members
of
the
recognized
collective
company
cannot,
therefore,
be
considered
as
having
bargaining
agent
may
be
assessed
a
reasonable
fee
committed
an
unfair
labor
practice.
equivalent
to
the
dues
and
other
fees
paid
by
members
of
the
recognized
collective
bargaining
agent,
if
such
non-‐union
members
accept
the
benefits
under
the
American
President
Lines
v
Clave
collective
bargaining
agreement:
Provided,
that
the
individual
authorization
required
under
Article
242,
Facts:
Individual
members
of
the
Marine
Security
Union
filed
a
case
for
unfair
labor
practice
against
paragraph
(o)
of
this
Code
shall
not
apply
to
the
non-‐
American
President
Lines,
alleging
that
the
company
members
of
the
recognized
collective
bargaining
did
not
heed
their
repeated
requests
to
negotiate
in
agent;
behalf
of
the
union,
and
that
they
were
dismissed
solely
because
of
their
union
activities.
(f)
To
dismiss,
discharge
or
otherwise
prejudice
or
Held:
The
Court
found
that
there
was
no
employer-‐ discriminate
against
an
employee
for
having
given
or
employee
relationship
between
APL
and
the
individual
being
about
to
give
testimony
under
this
Code;
complainants.
In
the
absence
of
such
relationship,
APL
cannot
be
guilty
of
unfair
labor
practice
because
such
(g)
To
violate
the
duty
to
bargain
collectively
as
prescribed
by
this
Code;
33
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
(h)
To
pay
negotiation
or
attorney’s
fees
to
the
union
The
provisions
of
the
preceding
paragraph
or
its
officers
or
agents
as
part
of
the
settlement
of
any
notwithstanding,
only
the
officers,
members
of
issue
in
collective
bargaining
or
any
other
dispute;
or
governing
boards,
representatives
or
agents
or
members
of
labor
associations
or
organizations
who
(i)
To
violate
a
collective
bargaining
agreement.
have
actually
participated
in,
authorized
or
ratified
unfair
labor
practices
shall
be
held
criminally
liable.
The
provisions
of
the
preceding
paragraph
(As
amended
by
Batas
Pambansa
Bilang
130,
August
notwithstanding,
only
the
officers
and
agents
of
21,
1981)
corporations,
associations
or
partnerships
who
have
actually
participated
in,
authorized
or
ratified
unfair
3.
Burden
of
proof
labor
practices
shall
be
held
criminally
liable.
(As
amended
by
Batas
Pambansa
Bilang
130,
August
21,
Schering
Employees
v
Schering
Plough
1981)
Facts:
SELU
(union)
and
its
President
Sereneo
filed
a
complaint
for
unfair
labor
practice
and
illegal
dismissal
against
Schering
Plough
Corporation,
alleging
that
the
company
terminated
Sereneo’s
services
on
account
of
her
being
the
Union
President.
Art.
249.
Unfair
labor
practices
of
labor
organizations.
It
shall
be
unfair
labor
practice
for
a
labor
Held:
The
Court
upheld
the
validity
of
the
dismissal
organization,
its
officers,
agents
or
representatives:
after
finding
that
Sereneo’s
infractions
breached
the
trust
reposed
in
her
by
the
company.
The
accusation
of
(a)
To
restrain
or
coerce
employees
in
the
exercise
of
union
busting
is
bereft
of
any
proof.
The
union
has
the
burden
of
proof
to
present
substantial
evidence
to
their
right
to
self-‐organization.
However,
a
labor
support
its
allegations,
and
it
is
not
enough
that
the
organization
shall
have
the
right
to
prescribe
its
own
union
believed
that
the
employer
committed
acts
of
rules
with
respect
to
the
acquisition
or
retention
of
unfair
labor
practice
when
the
circumstances
clearly
membership;
negate
even
a
prima
facie
showing
to
warrant
such
a
belief.
(b)
To
cause
or
attempt
to
cause
an
employer
to
discriminate
against
an
employee,
including
Interpretation
discrimination
against
an
employee
with
respect
to
Art.
4.
Construction
in
favor
of
labor.
All
doubts
in
the
whom
membership
in
such
organization
has
been
implementation
and
interpretation
of
the
provisions
of
denied
or
to
terminate
an
employee
on
any
ground
this
Code,
including
its
implementing
rules
and
other
than
the
usual
terms
and
conditions
under
regulations,
shall
be
resolved
in
favor
of
labor.
which
membership
or
continuation
of
membership
is
made
available
to
other
members;
(c)
To
violate
the
duty,
or
refuse
to
bargain
collectively
Art.
1700,
Civil
Code
with
the
employer,
provided
it
is
the
representative
of
the
employees;
The
relations
between
capital
and
labor
are
not
merely
contractual.
They
are
so
impressed
with
public
(d)
To
cause
or
attempt
to
cause
an
employer
to
pay
or
interest
that
labor
contracts
must
yield
to
the
common
deliver
or
agree
to
pay
or
deliver
any
money
or
other
good.
Therefore,
such
contracts
are
subject
to
the
things
of
value,
in
the
nature
of
an
exaction,
for
special
laws
on
labor
unions,
collective
bargaining,
services
which
are
not
performed
or
not
to
be
strikes
and
lockouts,
closed
shop,
wages,
working
performed,
including
the
demand
for
fee
for
union
conditions,
hours
of
labor
and
similar
subjects.
negotiations;
(e)
To
ask
for
or
accept
negotiation
or
attorney’s
fees
from
employers
as
part
of
the
settlement
of
any
issue
in
collective
bargaining
or
any
other
dispute;
or
34
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Art.
1702,
Civil
Code
this
bank,
but
also
of
the
bank
itself.”
Held:
Their
dismissal
constituted
an
unfair
labor
In
case
of
doubt,
all
labor
legislation
and
all
labor
practice.
Even
assuming
that
they
acted
in
their
contracts
shall
be
construed
in
favor
of
the
safety
and
individual
capacities,
they
were
nonetheless
protected
decent
living
for
the
laborer.
for
they
were
engaged
in
concerted
activity
in
the
exercise
of
their
right
of
self-‐organization
that
includes
concerted
activity
for
mutual
aid
and
protection.
(Concurring
Opinion:
The
dismissal
amounted
to
Caltex
Filipino
Managers
v
CIR
“Interference,
restraint
or
coercion”
as
prohibited
in
the
Industrial
Peace
Act.
The
four
succeeding
unfair
Facts:
Caltex
refused
to
recognize
the
Supervisors
and
labor
practices
are
designed
not
to
impose
limitations
Managers'
Association
because
it
was
arguing
that
or
restrictions
upon
the
general
guarantees
of
the
first,
managerial
employees
are
not
qualified
for
but
rather
to
spell
out
with
particularity
some
of
the
membership
in
a
labor
organization.
Company
wanted
practices
that
have
been
most
prevalent
and
most
to
institute
a
certification
proceeding,
but
the
troublesome.
The
first
subsection
on
"interference,
Association
felt
disinclined
to
do
this.
Despite
this,
the
restraint
or
coercion"
covering
as
it
does
such
a
broad
company
initiated
a
certification
proceeding.
range
of
undesirable
practices
on
the
part
of
Eventually,
the
Association
filed
a
Notice
to
Strike
on
employers
could
easily
be
seized
upon
(i.e.
a
catch-‐all
the
ground
of
unfair
labor
practice.
provision),
where
a
borderline
case,
inimical
to
the
right
of
self-‐organization
or
to
collective
bargaining,
The
Company
filed
a
case,
praying
among
others,
to
presents
itself
as
justifying
a
finding
of
an
unfair
labor
declare
the
strike
of
Caltex
Filipino
Managers
and
Supervisors
Association
“illegal”.
The
CIR
decided
that
practice)
the
strike
was
illegal
and
absolved
the
Company
from
unfair
labor
practices.
B.
Acts
violative
of
right
to
self-‐organization
Held:
There
is
substantial,
credible
and
convincing
1.
Interference,
restraint,
and
coercion
evidence
that
appear
on
record
which
established
beyond
doubt
the
ULP
of
the
company.
Pursuant
to
the
Art.
248
(a),
supra
p.
33
mandate
of
Art.
24
CC
that
courts
must
be
vigilant
for
the
protection
of
one
at
a
disadvantage—the
Association
in
this
case
being
the
party
at
a
Art.
255.
Exclusive
bargaining
representation
and
disadvantage—adequate
affirmative
relief
must
be
workers’
participation
in
policy
and
decision-‐making.
awarded.
It
is
imperative
that
in
order
to
attain
the
laudable
objectives
of
RA
875
(Act
to
Promote
The
labor
organization
designated
or
selected
by
the
Industrial
Peace),
the
provisions
should
be
liberally
majority
of
the
employees
in
an
appropriate
collective
construed
in
favor
of
employees
and
strictly
against
bargaining
unit
shall
be
the
exclusive
representative
of
the
employer,
unless
otherwise
intended
by
the
the
employees
in
such
unit
for
the
purpose
of
statute
itself.
collective
bargaining.
However,
an
individual
employee
or
group
of
employees
shall
have
the
right
at
Inter-‐relations
of
UPL
acts
any
time
to
present
grievances
to
their
employer.
Art.
248,
supra
p.
33
Any
provision
of
law
to
the
contrary
notwithstanding,
workers
shall
have
the
right,
subject
to
such
rules
and
regulations
as
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
Art.
249,
supra
p.
34
may
promulgate,
to
participate
in
policy
and
decision-‐
making
processes
of
the
establishment
where
they
are
Republic
Savings
Bank
v
CIR
employed
insofar
as
said
processes
will
directly
affect
their
rights,
benefits
and
welfare.
For
this
purpose,
Facts:
Employees
wrote
a
letter-‐charge
to
the
bank
president
demanding
his
resignation
on
the
grounds
of
workers
and
employers
may
form
labor-‐management
immorality,
nepotism
in
the
appointment
and
councils:
favoritism
as
well
as
discrimination
in
the
promotion
of
bank
employees.
They
were
discharged
on
the
Provided,
That
the
representatives
of
the
workers
in
ground
that
they
wrote
and
published
a
“patently
such
labor-‐management
councils
shall
be
elected
by
at
libelous
letter…
tending
to
cause
dishonor,
discredit,
least
the
majority
of
all
employees
in
said
or
contempt
not
only
of
the
officers
and
employees
of
establishment.
(As
amended
by
Section
22,
Republic
35
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Act
No.
6715,
March
21,
1989)
respondents,
alleging
that
respondents
transferred
them
to
its
sub-‐company,
Lubas
Transport,
to
prevent
them
from
forming
a
union.
The
LA
and
NLRC
held
that
petitioners
were
not
guilty
of
unfair
labor
practice.
Art.
277
(g),
(h).
Miscellaneous
provisions.
Held:
Court
held
that
petitioners
were
indeed
guilty
of
(g)
The
Ministry
shall
help
promote
and
gradually
unfair
labor
practice
by
transferring
respondents
and
develop,
with
the
agreement
of
labor
organizations
then
refusing
to
properly
operate
Lubas
Transport.
and
employers,
labor-‐management
cooperation
Respondents’
transfer
of
work
assignments
to
Lubas
was
a
subterfuge
to
frustrate
their
right
to
organize
programs
at
appropriate
levels
of
the
enterprise
based
themselves
into
a
union.
Evidence
of
petitioners'
on
the
shared
responsibility
and
mutual
respect
in
unfair
labor
practice
is
shown
by
the
established
fact
order
to
ensure
industrial
peace
and
improvement
in
that,
after
respondents'
transfer
to
Lubas,
petitioners
productivity,
working
conditions
and
the
quality
of
left
them
high
and
dry
insofar
as
the
operations
of
working
life.
(Incorporated
by
Batas
Pambansa
Bilang
Lubas
was
concerned.
130,
August
21,
1981)
k. Interrogation
(h)
In
establishments
where
no
legitimate
labor
Scoty’s
Department
Store
v
Micaller
organization
exists,
labor-‐management
committees
Facts:
Nena
Micaller
was
working
as
a
salesgirl
in
may
be
formed
voluntarily
by
workers
and
employers
Scoty’s
Dept.
Store.
She
formed
a
union.
After
forming
for
the
purpose
of
promoting
industrial
peace.
The
the
union
and
affiliating
with
the
National
Labor
Department
of
Labor
and
Employment
shall
endeavor
Union,
she
was
repeatedly
questioned
about
her
union
to
enlighten
and
educate
the
workers
and
employers
membership
and
activities,
before
eventually
being
on
their
rights
and
responsibilities
through
labor
terminated.
education
with
emphasis
on
the
policy
thrusts
of
this
Held:
Questioning
of
employees
concerning
union
Code.
(As
amended
by
Section
33,
Republic
Act
No.
membership
and
activities
and
disparaging
remarks
6715,
March
21,
1989)
by
supervisory
employees
made
in
such
a
way
as
to
hamper
the
exercise
of
free
choice
on
the
part
of
the
employees,
have
been
uniformly
condemned
as
a
violation
of
the
Act
Facts:
Unions
jointly
submitted
proposals
to
modify
demonstration
from
6
A.M.
to
2
P.M.
CIR
ruled
that
the
renewal
of
their
respective
CBAs.
Negotiations
PBMEO
guilty
of
bargaining
in
bad
faith
and
its
officers
were
conducted
but
there
was
a
deadlock.
The
Unions
were
ordered
to
be
dismissed.
eventually
went
on
strike.
To
try
and
get
the
Held:
The
Company
is
guilty
of
unfair
labor
practice
as
employees
back
to
work,
the
Companies
sent
two
defined
in
the
Industrial
Peace
Act
(RA
875).
Section
3
letters.
In
the
first,
they
“bribed”
the
workers
with
guarantees
to
the
employees
the
right
"to
engage
in
promises
of
free
meals,
comfortable
cots,
overtime
concert
activities
for
...
mutual
aid
or
protection".
pay,
free
coffee
and
occasional
movies,
as
well
as
more
Section
4(a-‐1)
regards
as
an
unfair
labor
practice
for
benefits
for
their
families
while
in
the
second,
they
an
employer
interfere
with,
restrain
or
coerce
subtly
threatened
the
strikers
by
saying
that
they
employees
in
the
exercise
their
rights
guaranteed
in
could
no
longer
hold
the
strikers’
positions
open
and
Section
Three.
It
is
not
necessary
that
union
activity
be
by
giving
an
ultimatum.
The
Companies
also
involved
or
that
collective
bargaining
be
contemplated
attempted
to
break
the
picket
lines,
filed
criminal
as
long
as
the
concerted
activity
is
for
the
furtherance
charges
against
some
strikers,
and
used
two
of
their
of
their
interests.
The
mass
demonstration
was
for
employees
who
were
the
former
legal
counsels
of
the
their
mutual
aid
and
protection
against
alleged
police
Unions.
abuses.
Hence,
the
company’s
action
constituted
as
Held:
Companies
were
guilty
of
violating
the
interference
to
their
right
to
engage
in
concerted
employees’
right
to
organize,
form
and
join
labor
activity.
organizations.
They
committed
unwarranted
acts
of
interference
in
trying
to
“bribe”
the
strikers
to
go
back
3.
Non-‐union
membership
or
withdrawal
from
to
work,
threatening
them
with
eventual
dismissal,
membership
as
a
condition
of
employment
(yellow-‐
and
in
utilizing
the
former
legal
counsels
of
the
Unions
dog
contract)
in
negotiations.
The
letters
containing
such
bribes
and
threats,
when
taken
together
with
other
circumstances,
are
not
covered
by
the
free
speech
Art.
248
(b),
supra
p.
33
provisions
of
the
Constitution.
Court
also
said
that
the
ff.
were
likewise
violative
of
the
right
to
self-‐
organization:
the
offer
of
a
Christmas
bonus
to
all
Visayan
Stevedore
Trans
Co
v
CIR
"loyal"
employees
of
a
company
shortly
after
the
Facts:
VISTRANCO’s
workers
were
supplied
by
UFWA,
making
of
a
request
by
the
union
to
bargain;
wage
a
labor
organization.
The
laborers
have
regularly
increases
given
for
the
purpose
of
mollifying
worked
for
the
company
during
every
milling
seasons.
employees
after
the
employer
has
refused
to
bargain
One
day
the
company
refused
to
engage
the
services
of
with
the
union,
or
for
the
purpose
of
inducing
striking
respondents.
According
to
the
respondents,
it
was
employees
to
return
to
work;
the
employer's
promises
because
of
their
union
activities,
but
the
Company
was
of
benefits
in
return
for
the
strikers'
abandonment
of
arguing
that
they
were
not
its
employees
but
workers
their
strike
in
support
of
their
union;
and
the
whose
services
were
merely
supplied
to
them
by
employer's
statement,
made
about
6
weeks
after
the
UFWA.
strike
started,
to
a
group
of
strikers
in
a
restaurant
to
the
effect
that
if
the
strikers
returned
to
work,
they
Held:
Regarding
the
charge
of
the
ULP
against
the
would
receive
new
benefits
in
the
form
of
company,
such
charge
is
substantially
borne
out
by
the
hospitalization,
accident
insurance,
profit-‐sharing,
and
evidence
of
record,
it
appearing
that
the
workers
a
new
building
to
work
in.
There
was
also
good
ground
which
were
not
admitted
to
work
were
precisely
those
to
believe
that
a
former
union
member
was
made
to
belonging
to
the
UFWA
and
the
Branch
Manager
had
spy
on
union
activities
and
testify
against
union
told
them
point-‐blank
that
severance
of
their
members
on
behalf
of
the
company.
connection
with
the
UFWA
was
the
remedy
if
they
wanted
to
continue
working
with
the
company.
This
m. Concerted
activities
act
done
by
the
company
is
considered
ULP.
Philippine
Blooming
Mills
Employees
Organization
Contracting
out
to
discourage
unionism
v
Philippine
Blooming
Mills
Art.
248
(c),
supra
p.
33
Facts:
PBMEO
carried
out
a
mass
demonstration
at
Malacañang
in
protest
against
alleged
abuses
of
the
Pasig
police
department.
PBMEO
gave
the
company
two
days'
prior
notice.
Company
insisted
that
the
first
shift
workers
should
not
be
required
to
participate
in
the
demonstration
and
that
the
workers
in
the
second
and
third
shifts
should
be
utilized
for
the
37
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
4.
Company
domination
of
union
Held:
The
dismissals
were
valid.
The
dismissal
of
the
Art.
248
(d),
p.
33
employees
on
the
basis
of
a
union
security
clause
embodied
in
the
CBA
is
recognized
and
accepted
in
this
jurisdiction.
The
terminated
employees
were
also
accorded
due
process.
There
is
union
shop
when
all
new
regular
employees
Art.
212
(i).
Definitions.
are
required
to
join
the
union
within
a
certain
period
as
a
condition
for
their
continued
employment.
“Company
union”
means
any
labor
organization
whose
formation,
function
or
administration
has
been
There
is
maintenance
of
membership
shop
when
assisted
by
any
act
defined
as
unfair
labor
practice
by
employees
who
are
union
members
as
of
the
effective
this
Code
date
of
the
agreement,
or
who
thereafter
become
members,
must
maintain
union
membership
as
a
condition
for
continued
employment
until
they
are
Progressive
Development
Corp
v
CIR
promoted
or
transferred
out
of
the
bargaining
unit
or
Facts:
48
ACEA
employees
were
dismissed.
ACEA
filed
the
agreement
is
terminated.
a
complaint
in
behalf
of
the
employees,
asserting
that
they
were
dismissed
because
of
their
failure
to
resign
from
ACEA
and
refusal
to
associate
with
PEU.
They
General
Milling
Corp.
v
Casio
also
claim
that
PEU
was
created
by
the
company
merely
to
stave
off
ACEA’s
recognition.
Facts:
Casio
et
al.
were
dismissed
by
GMC
pursuant
to
their
union’s
resolution
that
they
no
longer
enjoyed
Held:
SC
ruled
that
based
on
the
evidence
presented
good
standing
within
the
collective.
and
the
actions
of
PDC,
it
can
be
concluded
that
the
employees
were
indeed
dismissed
because
of
their
Held:
The
SC
upheld
the
validity
of
the
expulsion
from
refusal
to
resign
from
ACEA
and
to
affiliate
with
PEU.
the
union
and
subsequently,
from
work,
pursuant
to
It
was
shown
that
the
company
had
a
hand
in
the
union
security
provisions
in
the
CBA.
However,
GMC
formation
of
PEU.
It
can
also
be
seen
that
PEU
was
did
not
accord
Casio
et
al.
with
due
process
when
it
organized
to
camouflage
the
company’s
dislike
for
effected
the
termination.
ACEA
and
to
stave
off
their
recognition.
A
closed
shop
may
be
defined
as
an
enterprise
in
which,
by
agreement
between
the
employer
and
his
5.
Discrimination
to
discourage/encourage
employees
or
their
representatives,
no
person
may
be
unionism
employed
in
any
or
certain
agreed
departments
of
the
Art.
248
(e),
supra
p.
33
enterprise
unless
he
or
she
is,
becomes,
and,
for
the
duration
of
the
agreement,
remains
a
member
in
good
standing
of
a
union
entirely
comprised
of
or
of
which
the
employees
in
interest
are
a
part.
Art.
249
(b),
supra
p.
34
In
terminating
the
employment
of
an
employee
by
enforcing
the
union
security
clause,
the
employer
a. Discriminatory
discharge
needs
only
to
determine
and
prove
that:
(1)
the
union
security
clause
is
applicable;
b. Valid
discrimination:
union
security
clause
–
requisites
(2)
the
union
is
requesting
for
the
enforcement
of
the
union
security
provision
in
the
CBA;
and
Closed
shop
(3)
there
is
sufficient
evidence
to
support
the
decision
Union
Shop
of
the
union
to
expel
the
employee
from
the
union.
Held:
They
were
illegally
dismissed.
The
requisites
for
7.
Illegal
exaction
–
featherbedding
terminating
the
employment
of
an
employee
were
not
Art.
249
(d),
supra
p.
34
met.
There
was
not
enough
evidence
to
justify
the
expulsion
of
the
employees
from
the
union.
They
merely
signed
authorizations
and
not
actual
petitions.
C.
Acts
violative
of
right
to
collective
bargaining
Also,
an
existing
CBA
does
not
constitute
a
bar
to
a
petition
for
certification
election.
1.
Violation
of
duty
to
bargain
Art.
248
(g),
supra
p.
33
c. Collection
of
agency
fees
Art.
248
(e),
supra
p.
33
Del
Pilar
Academy,
et.
al,
v
Del
Pilar
Academy
Art.
249
(c),
supra
p.
34
Employees
Union
Facts:
The
union
successfully
negotiated
for
additional
benefits
under
the
CBA.
The
union
asked
Del
Pilar
that
agency
fees
be
deducted
from
the
salaries
of
Art.
250.
Procedure
in
collective
bargaining.
The
employees
(who
were
not
members
of
the
union
but
following
procedures
shall
be
observed
in
collective
benefited
under
the
new
CBA).
Del
Pilar
refused.
bargaining:
According
to
it,
it
was
not
authorized
by
the
employees
to
deduct
agency
fees
from
their
salaries
a)
When
a
party
desires
to
negotiate
an
agreement,
it
and
that
said
benefits
were
not
due
to
the
CBA
alone
shall
serve
a
written
notice
upon
the
other
party
with
but
were
mandated
by
law.
a
statement
of
its
proposals.
The
other
party
shall
Held:
The
agency
fees
should
be
deducted
from
the
make
a
reply
thereto
not
later
than
ten
(10)
calendar
salaries
of
non-‐members
of
the
union
who
benefited
days
from
receipt
of
such
notice;
under
the
CBA.
No
requirement
of
written
authorization
from
the
non-‐union
employees
is
b)
Should
differences
arise
on
the
basis
of
such
notice
necessary
if
the
non-‐union
employees
accepted
the
benefits
resulting
from
the
CBA.
The
employee's
and
reply,
either
party
may
request
for
a
conference
acceptance
of
benefits
resulting
justifies
the
deduction
which
shall
begin
not
later
than
ten
(10)
calendar
days
of
agency
fees
from
his
pay
and
the
union's
from
the
date
of
request.
entitlement
thereto.
The
legal
basis
of
the
union's
right
to
agency
fees
is
neither
contractual
nor
statutory,
but
c)
If
the
dispute
is
not
settled,
the
Board
shall
quasi-‐contractual,
deriving
from
the
established
intervene
upon
request
of
either
or
both
parties
or
at
principle
that
non-‐union
employees
may
not
unjustly
its
own
initiative
and
immediately
call
the
parties
to
enrich
themselves
by
benefiting
from
employment
conciliation
meetings.
The
Board
shall
have
the
power
conditions
negotiated
by
the
bargaining
union.
to
issue
subpoenas
requiring
the
attendance
of
the
6.
Retaliatory
discharge
or
retaliation
for
testimony
parties
to
such
meetings.
It
shall
be
the
duty
of
the
against
employer/indirect
discrimination
parties
to
participate
fully
and
promptly
in
the
Art.
248
(f),
supra
p.
33
conciliation
meetings
the
Board
may
call;
Held:
ISM
is
guilty
of
unfair
labor
practice.
He
didn’t
do
anything
grave
to
warrant
dismissal.
39
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Art.
251.
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
in
the
absence
of
guard
section
because,
even
though
the
same
is
normally
within
its
management
prerogative,
such
collective
bargaining
agreements.
In
the
absence
of
an
section
is
covered
and
provided
for
in
the
existing
agreement
or
other
voluntary
arrangement
providing
collective
bargaining
contract.
The
company
thus
for
a
more
expeditious
manner
of
collective
violated
the
collective
bargaining
contract
when
it
bargaining,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
employer
and
the
dissolved
the
security
guard
section.
The
duty
to
representatives
of
the
employees
to
bargain
bargain
is
a
continuous
process
which
imposes
on
the
collectively
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
this
parties
the
obligation
to
live
up
to
the
terms
of
the
Code.
agreement.
As
such,
it
is
undeniable
that
non-‐
compliance
to
the
agreement
constitutes
an
unfair
labor
practice.
Consequently,
the
strike
held
by
the
Union
was
not
illegal
because
it
was
only
made
as
a
response
to
the
company’s
commission
of
an
unfair
Art.
252.
Meaning
of
duty
to
bargain
collectively.
The
labor
practice.
duty
to
bargain
collectively
means
the
performance
of
a
mutual
obligation
to
meet
and
convene
promptly
and
expeditiously
in
good
faith
for
the
purpose
of
negotiating
an
agreement
with
respect
to
wages,
hours
Union
of
Filipro
Employees
–
DFAI
Unions
KMU
v
Nestle
Phil.
Inc.
of
work
and
all
other
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
including
proposals
for
adjusting
any
Facts:
The
union
initiated
the
CBA
negotiations
with
grievances
or
questions
arising
under
such
agreement
Nestle
since
their
existing
CBA
was
about
to
expire.
and
executing
a
contract
incorporating
such
Nestle
was
of
the
firm
stance
that
unilateral
grants
including,
but
not
limited
to
retirement
plans,
are
not
agreements
if
requested
by
either
party
but
such
duty
proper
subjects
of
the
negotiations.
The
union
filed
does
not
compel
any
party
to
agree
to
a
proposal
or
to
two
notices
of
strike
-‐
the
first
one
predicated
on
an
make
any
concession.
alleged
bargaining
deadlock
while
the
second
one
on
alleged
unfair
labor
practices
on
the
part
of
Nestle.
In
an
earlier
decision,
the
SC
held
that
Nestle
was
not
guilty
of
committing
any
unfair
labor
practice.
Art.
253.
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
when
there
exists
Held:
Nestle
is
not
guilty
of
committing
any
unfair
a
collective
bargaining
agreement.
When
there
is
a
labor
practice.
For
a
charge
of
unfair
labor
practice
to
collective
bargaining
agreement,
the
duty
to
bargain
prosper,
it
must
be
shown
that
Nestle
was
motivated
collectively
shall
also
mean
that
neither
party
shall
by
“ill
will
…
or
was
oppressive
to
labor
…”
in
disclaiming
unilateral
grants
(e.g.
retirement
plan)
as
terminate
nor
modify
such
agreement
during
its
proper
subjects
in
the
negotiations.
The
management
lifetime.
However,
either
party
can
serve
a
written
had
a
right
to
insist
on
its
position
to
exclude
the
notice
to
terminate
or
modify
the
agreement
at
least
retirement
plan
issue
to
the
point
of
stalemate.
sixty
(60)
days
prior
to
its
expiration
date.
It
shall
be
Reaching
an
impasse
does
not
evidence
bad
faith.
the
duty
of
both
parties
to
keep
the
status
quo
and
to
continue
in
full
force
and
effect
the
terms
and
a.
Duty
to
resume
negotiations
conditions
of
the
existing
agreement
during
the
60-‐day
CABEU-‐NFL
v
Central
Azucarera
de
Bais,
Inc.
period
and/or
until
a
new
agreement
is
reached
by
the
Facts:
After
CBA
negotiations
between
the
union
parties.
(CABEU-‐NFL)
and
company
CAB
resulted
in
a
deadlock,
the
union
filed
a
Notice
of
Strike
with
NCMB,
Shell
Oil
Workers
Union
v
Shell
Co.
of
the
Phils.
Ltd.
which
assumed
jurisdiction
and
summoned
the
parties
to
conciliation
conferences.
After
receiving
the
union’s
Facts:
Shell
wanted
to
dissolve
its
security
guard
request
for
further
conciliation
conferences,
CAB
section
and
replace
it
with
an
outside
agency,
despite
replied
that
such
would
serve
no
lawful
or
practical
its
being
embraced
in
and
assured
by
an
existing
purpose
because
the
majority
of
the
R&F
employees
in
collective
bargaining
contract.
As
a
response,
the
the
bargaining
unit
had
withdrawn
their
support
for
Union
held
a
strike.
The
Company
argued
that
the
the
union
and
organized
themselves
into
a
new
union,
move
to
dissolve
the
security
guard
section
is
within
known
as
CABELA,
which
had
already
concluded
its
its
management
prerogative.
CIR
decided
in
favor
of
own
CBA
with
CAB.
the
Company,
holding
that
the
strike
was
illegal.
Held:
CAB
is
NOT
guilty
of
ULP
by
refusing
to
bargain
Held:
Shell
is
precluded
from
dissolving
the
security
collectively.
There
was
no
showing
of
ill
will/bad
40
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
faith/fraud,
oppression
to
labor,
or
acting
in
a
manner
Voluntary
Arbitrator
or
panel
of
Voluntary
Arbitrators
contrary
to
morals/good
customs/public
policy
on
and
shall
immediately
dispose
and
refer
the
same
to
CAB’s
part,
nor
of
social
humiliation/wounded
the
Grievance
Machinery
or
Voluntary
Arbitration
feelings/grave
anxiety
on
the
union’s
part.
CAB’s
provided
in
the
Collective
Bargaining
Agreement.
actions
were
NOT
tantamount
to
anti-‐unionism,
the
evil
sought
to
be
punished
in
ULP
cases.
While
the
law
makes
it
an
obligation
for
the
employer
and
the
Arellano
University
Employees
and
Workers
Union
employees
to
bargain
collectively
with
each
other,
v
CA
such
compulsion
does
not
include
the
commitment
to
Facts:
Union
accused
the
University
of
ULP.
Among
precipitately
accept
or
agree
to
the
proposals
of
the
other
accusations,
the
University
allegedly
committed
other.
All
it
contemplates
is
that
both
parties
should
“Union
Busting”
by
withholding
union
dues
(those
approach
the
negotiation
with
an
open
mind
and
make
penalties
that
are
supposed
to
be
remitted
to
the
reasonable
effort
to
reach
a
common
ground
of
Union
from
members’
salaries
because
of
unexcused
agreement
absences
from
meetings).
However,
due
to
an
intra-‐
union
conflict
arising
from
suspicion
in
relation
to
2.
Negotiation
of
attorney’s
fees
auditing,
some
members
requested
the
University
to
Art.
248
(h),
supra
p.
33
withhold
the
dues
from
the
Union.
Held:
For
ULP
to
exist,
there
must
be
a
gross
violation
of
the
CBA.
There
is
no
such
gross
violation
here.
Art.
249
(e),
supra
p.
34
University
acted
in
good
faith,
merely
acting
on
the
request
of
some
workers.
Gross
violation
of
the
CBA
3.
Gross
violation
of
collective
bargaining
means
flagrant
and/or
malicious
refusal
to
comply
agreement
with
the
economic
provisions
thereof.
Art.
248
(i),
supra
p.
33
41
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
President
due
to
repeated
absences.
ascribe
a
valid
reason
therefor
may
justify
an
inference
that
his
unexplained
conduct
with
respect
to
Held:
In
determining
whether
a
discharge
is
the
particular
employee
was
inspired
by
the
latter’s
discriminatory,
the
true
reason
for
the
discharge
must
union
membership
or
activities.
be
established.
While
union
activity
is
no
bar
to
a
discharge,
the
existence
of
a
lawful
cause
for
discharge
is
no
defense
if
the
employee
was
actually
discharged
E.
Enforcement,
remedies,
and
sanctions
for
union
activity.
The
union
President
did
incur
numerous
absences.
If
the
company
wanted
to
1.
Parties
against
whom
ULP
committed
terminate
his
services
on
the
ground
of
absences,
it
Art.
248,
supra
p.
33
could
have
done
so
as
early
as
March
1963.
He
was
only
terminated
after
he
asked
the
company
for
a
grievance
conference
regarding
union
problems.
The
question
of
whether
an
employee
was
discharged
Art.
249,
supra
p.
34
because
of
his
union
activities
is
essentially
a
question
of
fact
as
to
which
the
findings
of
the
Court
of
Industrial
Relations
are
conclusive
and
binding
if
supported
by
substantial
evidence
considering
the
record
as
a
whole.
This
is
so
because
the
Industrial
Art.
212
(e),
(f),
(g).
Court
is
governed
by
the
rule
of
substantial
evidence,
rather
than
by
the
rule
of
preponderance
of
evidence
Definitions.
as
in
any
ordinary
civil
cases.
Substantial
evidence
has
been
defined
as
such
relevant
evidence
as
a
e)
“Employer”
includes
any
person
acting
in
the
reasonable
mind
might
accept
as
adequate
to
support
interest
of
an
employer,
directly
or
indirectly.
The
a
conclusion.
It
means
such
evidence
which
affords
a
term
shall
not
include
any
labor
organization
or
any
of
substantial
basis
from
which
the
fact
in
issue
can
be
its
officers
or
agents
except
when
acting
as
employer.
reasonably
inferred.
f)
“Employee”
includes
any
person
in
the
employ
of
an
2.
Totality
of
evidence
employer.
The
term
shall
not
be
limited
to
the
Royal
Undergarment
Corporation
of
the
Phils.
v
employees
of
a
particular
employer,
unless
the
Code
CIR
so
explicitly
states.
It
shall
include
any
individual
whose
work
has
ceased
as
a
result
of
or
in
connection
Facts:
Cruz
was
the
president
of
the
Union.
He
sent
CBA
proposals
to
the
company,
after
which
he
and
his
with
any
current
labor
dispute
or
because
of
any
wife
were
fired.
After
the
Union
called
a
strike,
they
unfair
labor
practice
if
he
has
not
obtained
any
other
were
only
reinstated
on
the
condition
that
the
Union
substantially
equivalent
and
regular
employment.
win
the
consent
election
for
collective
bargaining
agent,
which
the
union
did.
Less
than
a
year
later,
Cruz
g)
“Labor
organization”
means
any
union
or
was
fired
a
second
time
after
he
was
accused
of
being
association
of
employees
which
exists
in
whole
or
in
drunk
and
threatening
the
lives
of
his
co-‐workers.
part
for
the
purpose
of
collective
bargaining
or
of
Cruz
claimed
he
was
only
trying
to
convince
them
to
dealing
with
employers
concerning
terms
and
join
a
nationwide
strike
that
their
federation
was
calling
for.
conditions
of
employment.
Held:
Royal
was
guilty
of
unfair
labor
practice
because
2.
Parties
liable
for
acts
Cruz’s
two
terminations
from
employment
had
nothing
to
do
with
his
performance
as
an
employee
a.
Employer
but
his
aggressive
promotion
and
participation
in
Art.
248,
last
paragraph
union
activities.
An
employer
may
treat
freely
with
an
employee
and
is
not
obliged
to
support
his
actions
Unfair
labor
practices
of
employers.
with
a
reason
or
purpose.
However,
where
the
attendant
circumstances,
e.g.
the
history
of
the
The
provisions
of
the
preceding
paragraph
employer’s
past
conduct
and
like
considerations,
coupled
with
an
intimate
connection
between
the
notwithstanding,
only
the
officers
and
agents
of
employer’s
action
and
the
union
affiliations
or
corporations,
associations
or
partnerships
who
have
activities
of
the
particular
employee
taken
as
a
whole
actually
participated
in,
authorized
or
ratified
unfair
raise
a
suspicion
as
to
the
motivation
for
the
labor
practices
shall
be
held
criminally
liable.
(As
employer’s
action,
the
failure
of
the
employer
to
42
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
amended
by
Batas
Pambansa
Bilang
130,
August
21,
The
provisions
of
the
preceding
paragraph
1981)
notwithstanding,
only
the
officers,
members
of
governing
boards,
representatives
or
agents
or
members
of
labor
associations
or
organizations
who
have
actually
participated
in,
authorized
or
ratified
Art.
288.
Penalties.
Except
as
otherwise
provided
in
unfair
labor
practices
shall
be
held
criminally
liable.
this
Code,
or
unless
the
acts
complained
of
hinge
on
a
(As
amended
by
Batas
Pambansa
Bilang
130,
August
question
of
interpretation
or
implementation
of
21,
1981)
ambiguous
provisions
of
an
existing
collective
bargaining
agreement,
any
violation
of
the
provisions
of
this
Code
declared
to
be
unlawful
or
penal
in
nature
shall
be
punished
with
a
fine
of
not
less
than
One
Art.
288,
supra
Thousand
Pesos
(P1,000.00)
nor
more
than
Ten
Thousand
Pesos
(P10,000.00)
or
imprisonment
of
not
less
than
three
months
nor
more
than
three
years,
or
both
such
fine
and
imprisonment
at
the
discretion
of
Art.
289,
supra
the
court.
Any
provision
of
law
to
the
contrary
notwithstanding,
National
Labor
Union
v
CIR
any
criminal
offense
punished
in
this
Code,
shall
be
Facts:
Estanislao
sold
Everlasting
to
Ang,
while
CBA
under
the
concurrent
jurisdiction
of
the
Municipal
or
negotiations
were
ongoing.
The
CBA
was
entered
into
City
Courts
and
the
Courts
of
First
Instance.
(As
between
Estanislao
and
the
union.
Ang
later
dismissed
amended
by
Section
3,
Batas
Pambansa
Bilang
70)
some
workers
of
Everlasting.
The
union
filed
a
complaint
for
ULP
against
Everlasting
and
Ang.
The
CIR
found
them
guilty.
Upon
motion
for
reconsideration,
Estanislao
was
made
a
party
to
the
case,
and
the
CIR
found
that
Estanislao
is
guilty
of
ULP,
Art.
289.
Who
are
liable
when
committed
by
other
than
and
dismissed
the
complaint
against
Ang.
natural
person.
If
the
offense
is
committed
by
a
Held:
Ang
is
also
guilty
of
ULP.
The
circumstances
of
corporation,
trust,
firm,
partnership,
association
or
the
case
show
that
Ang
is
aware
of
the
labor
issues
in
any
other
entity,
the
penalty
shall
be
imposed
upon
Everlasting
even
before
he
bought
the
company.
The
the
guilty
officer
or
officers
of
such
corporation,
trust,
circumstances
indicate
that
Ang
and
Estanislao
firm,
partnership,
association
or
entity.
participated
in
unfair
labor
practices.
Art.
290.
Offenses.
Offenses
penalized
under
this
Code
a.
Civil
aspect
and
the
rules
and
regulations
issued
pursuant
thereto
Art.
247,
paragraphs
2-‐4
shall
prescribe
in
three
(3)
years.
Concept
of
unfair
labor
practice
and
procedure
for
All
unfair
labor
practice
arising
from
Book
V
shall
be
prosecution
thereof.
filed
with
the
appropriate
agency
within
one
(1)
year
from
accrual
of
such
unfair
labor
practice;
otherwise,
Consequently,
unfair
labor
practices
are
not
only
they
shall
be
forever
barred.
violations
of
the
civil
rights
of
both
labor
and
management
but
are
also
criminal
offenses
against
the
b. Labor
organization
State
which
shall
be
subject
to
prosecution
and
Art.
249,
last
paragraph
punishment
as
herein
provided.
Unfair labor practices of labor organizations. Subject to the exercise by the President or by the
43
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
of
the
powers
employees
waived
their
economic
demands
in
the
vested
in
them
by
Articles
263
and
264
of
this
Code,
light
of
an
order
issued
by
LA
in
other
cases
involving
the
civil
aspects
of
all
cases
involving
unfair
labor
the
same
parties.
practices,
which
may
include
claims
for
actual,
moral,
Held:
The
company
is
guilty
of
unfair
labor
practice
exemplary
and
other
forms
of
damages,
attorney’s
fees
and
the
employees
were
illegally
dismissed.
The
and
other
affirmative
relief,
shall
be
under
the
suspension
of
the
employees
was
an
interference
of
jurisdiction
of
the
Labor
Arbiters.
The
Labor
Arbiters
the
company
with
the
employee’s
right
to
self-‐
organization.
Unfair
labor
practice
cases
are
not,
in
shall
give
utmost
priority
to
the
hearing
and
resolution
view
of
the
public
interest
involved,
subject
to
of
all
cases
involving
unfair
labor
practices.
They
shall
compromises.
resolve
such
cases
within
thirty
(30)
calendar
days
from
the
time
they
are
submitted
for
decision.
Remedies
and
sanctions
CCLC
E.G.
Gochanco
Workers
Union
v
NLRC
a)
If
there
is
prima
facie
evidence
of
abuse
of
discretion
on
the
part
of
the
Labor
Arbiter;
Facts:
The
company
suspended
those
employees
who
attended
the
hearing
for
certification
election.
The
b)
If
the
decision,
order
or
award
was
secured
through
company
then
terminated
some
employees
on
the
ground
that
its
contract
with
the
US
Airforce
had
fraud
or
coercion,
including
graft
and
corruption;
expired.
On
appeal,
the
company
argued
that
the
44
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
45
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Summary:
Union
Concerted
Activities
A.
Basis
of
Right
to
Engage
in
Concerted
Activities
1.
Constitution
• The
State
shall…guarantee
the
rights
of
all
workers
to
self-‐organization,
collective
bargaining
negotiations,
and
peaceful
concerted
activities,
including
the
right
to
strike
in
accordance
with
law
(Art.
XIII,
Sec.
3)
• The
right
[to
strike]
should
be
read
with
a
libertarian
latitude
in
favor
of
labor.
“The
constitutional
recognition
of
the
right
to
strike
does
serve
as
a
reminder
that
injunctions
(against
strike)
should
be
reduced
to
the
barest
minimum
(Bisig
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC)
2.
Statutory
• It
is
the
policy
of
the
State
o to
promote
and
emphasize
the
primacy
of
free
collective
bargaining
negotiations
(voluntary
arbitration,
mediation,
conciliation)
o to
promote
free
trade
unioniusm
o to
foster
the
free
and
voluntary
organization
of
a
strong
and
united
labor
movement
(Art.
211-‐A
(a)-‐(c))
• Strikes,
picketing,
and
lockouts
o Workers
have
a
right
to
engage
in
concerted
activities
for:
• Purposes
of
collective
bargaining
• Mutual
benefit
and
protection
(263(b))
o Legitimate
labor
organizations
have
a
right
to
strike
and
picket
and
employers
have
the
right
to
lockout,
consistent
with
the
national
interest
• Exception:
labor
unions
and
employers
may
not
exercise
these
rights
on
grounds
involving
inter-‐
union
and
intra-‐union
disputes.
(263(b))
o Engaging
in
concerted
activities
(see
Scope
of
the
Term
Strike
below)
is
a
guaranteed
right
of
the
workers
in
order
for
them
to
attain
their
objectives.
Likewise,
management
is
also
allowed
to
engage
in
lockout:
• Lockout-‐
temporary
refusal
to
furnish
work
an
account
of
a
labor
dispute
(Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC)
o Legality
of
these
activities
for
both
employers
and
employees
usually
depends
on
the
legality
of
the
purpose
and
can
be
restricted
by
law
or
contract.
(Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC)
* Note: Constitution “In accordance with law”. Labor Code “Consistent with national interest”
3. Limitations
• The
strike
is
indeed
a
powerful
weapon
of
the
working
class.
But
precisely
because
of
this,
it
must
be
handled
carefully,
like
a
sensitive
explosive,
lest
it
blow
up
in
the
workers'
own
hands.
Thus,
it
must
be
declared
only
46
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
after
the
most
thoughtful
consultation
among
them,
conducted
in
the
only
way
allowed,
that
is,
peacefully,
and
in
every
case
conformably
to
reasonable
regulation.
Any
violation
of
the
legal
requirements
and
strictures,
such
as
a
defiance
of
a
return-‐to-‐work
order
in
industries
affected
with
public
interest,
will
render
the
strike
illegal,
to
the
detriment
of
the
very
workers
it
is
supposed
to
protect.
(BLT
Bus
Co
v
NLRC)
B.
Strike
1. Definition
• Any
temporary
stoppage
of
work
by
the
concerted
action
of
employees
as
a
result
of
an
industrial
or
labor
dispute
(212(o),
Book
V,
Rule
I,
Sec.
1
(uu))
o “Labor
dispute”
includes
any
controversy
or
matter
concerning:
• terms
or
conditions
of
employment,
or;
• the
association
or
representation
of
persons
in
negotiating,
fixing,
maintaining,
changing
or
arranging
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment,
regardless
of
whether
the
disputants
stand
in
the
proximate
relation
of
employer
and
employee
(Art.
212
(l))
• A
valid
strike
presupposes
the
existence
of
a
valid
labor
dispute
(G&S
Transport
Corp
v
Tito
Infante)
• Art.
263
LC
provides
the
procedural
requirements
for
a
valid
strike:
1. A
notice
of
strike,
with
the
required
contents,
filed
with
the
DOLE,
Regional
Branch
of
the
NCMB,
copy
furnished
the
employer
2. Cooling-‐off
period
between
filing
of
notice
and
actual
execution
of
strike:
• 30
days
–
bargaining
deadlock
• 15
days-‐
unfair
labor
practice
• No
need
to
observe
period
in
case
of
union
busting,
where
the
union’s
existence
is
threatened
3. Before
strike
actually
commenced,
a
strike
vote
should
be
taken
by
secret
balloting
with
a
24-‐hour
prior
notice
to
NMCB.
Decision
to
declare
strike
requires
a
secret-‐ballot
approval
of
the
majority
of
the
total
union
membership
in
the
bargaining
unit
concerned
4. Result
of
the
strike
vote
should
be
reported
to
the
NCMB
at
least
7
days
before
the
intended
strike
or
lockout,
subject
to
the
cooling-‐off
period.
(Pilipino
Telephone
Corp
v
PILTEA,
Bukluran
v
CA)
• The
requirements
in
Art.
263
are
mandatory
in
nature
and
failure
to
comply
therewith
renders
the
strike
illegal
(Pilipino
Telephone
Corp
v
PILTEA,
Bukluran
v
CA)]
2. Nature
and
Purpose
• The
right
to
strike
is
one
of
the
rights
recognized
and
guaranteed
by
the
Constitution
as
an
instrument
of
labor
for
its
protection
against
exploitation
by
management.
By
virtue
of
this
right,
the
workers
are
able
to
press
their
demands
for
better
terms
of
employment
with
more
energy
and
persuasiveness,
poising
the
threat
to
strike
as
their
reaction
to
the
employer's
intransigence
(BLT
Bus
Co
v
NLRC)
3. Rationale
for
Regulation
by
Law
• It
is
a
weapon
that
can
either
breathe
life
to
or
destroy
the
union
and
its
members
in
their
struggle
with
management
for
a
more
equitable
due
of
their
labors,
therefore,
the
decision
to
strike
must
rest
on
a
rational
47
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
basis.
Our
laws
require
the
decision
to
strike
to
be
the
consensus
of
majority
because
even
if
the
majority
is
not
infallible,
it
is
still
the
best
hedge
against
haste
and
error.
Besides,
a
majority
vote
assures
the
union
that
it
will
go
to
war
against
management
with
the
support
of
the
majority.
(Lapanday
Workers
Union
v
NLRC)
4. Scope
of
the
term
“strike”
• Strike
can
mean
work
stoppages,
slowdowns,
mass
leaves,
attempts
to
damage
equipment,
and
other
similar
activities
(some
examples
taken
from
Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC)
(Sta
Rosa
v
CCBP)
• Picketing
-‐marching
to
and
fro
at
the
employer’s
premises,
usually
accompanied
by
the
display
of
placards
and
other
signs;
*
DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN
A
STRIKE
AND
A
PICKET:
To
strike
is
to
withhold
or
to
stop
work
by
the
concerted
action
of
employees
as
a
result
of
an
industrial
or
labor
dispute.
Picketing
focuses
on
publicizing
the
labor
dispute
and
its
incidents
to
inform
the
public
of
what
is
happening
in
the
company
struck
against.
A
strike
may
be
accompanied
by
a
picket.
(Phimco
v
Phimco)
• Slowdown
-‐
"strike
on
the
installment
plan";
a
willful
reduction
in
the
rate
of
work
by
concerted
action
of
workers
for
the
purpose
of
restricting
the
output
of
the
employer,
in
relation
to
a
labor
dispute;
as
an
activity
by
which
workers,
without
a
complete
stoppage
of
work,
retard
production
or
their
performance
of
duties
and
functions
to
compel
management
to
grant
their
demands.
(Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC)
• Sit-‐down/Sympathetic
strike
-‐
the
striking
employees
have
no
demands
or
grievances
of
their
own,
but
they
strike
for
the
purpose
of
directly
or
indirectly
aiding
others,
without
direct
relation
to
the
advancement
of
the
interest
of
the
strikers
(G&S
Transport
v
Infante).
It
is
one
where
workers
stop
working
but
do
not
leave
their
place
of
work.
• Boycotts
-‐
concerted
refusal
to
patronize
employer’s
goods
or
services
and
persuade
others
to
a
like
refusal
• Wild-‐cat
Strike
–
One
declared
and
staged
without
filing
the
required
notice
of
strike
and
without
the
majority
approval
of
the
recognized
bargaining
agent
5. Effect
on
Work
Relationship
• Responsibility
for
the
illegal
acts
committed
during
a
strike
must
be
on
an
individual
and
not
a
collective
basis
(Chuayuco
Steel
v
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa)
• Art.
264,
in
providing
the
consequences
of
an
illegal
strike,
makes
a
distinction
between
union
officers
and
members
who
participated
therein:
1. Union
Officers-‐
knowingly
participating
in
an
illegal
strike
is
a
valid
ground
for
termination
of
employment
2. Union
Members-‐
mere
participation
in
an
illegal
strike
isn’t
sufficient
ground
for
termination.
There
must
also
be
illegal
acts
committed
by
the
union
member
(i.e.
there
must
be
substantial
evidence
of
the
illegal
acts
during
the
strike
+
striker
who
participated
in
the
illegal
acts
must
be
identified)
(G&S
Transport
Corp
v
Tito
Infante,
Chuayuco
Steel
v
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa)
• The
principle
of
a
fair
day’s
wage
for
a
fair
day’s
labor
remains
as
the
basic
factor
in
determining
the
award
of
backwages.
If
there
is
no
work
performed
by
the
employee
there
can
be
no
wage
or
pay
unless,
of
course,
the
laborer
was
able,
willing
and
ready
to
work
but
was
illegally
locked
out,
suspended
or
dismissed
or
otherwise
illegally
prevented
from
working.
But
for
this
to
apply,
it
is
required
that
the
strike
be
declared
legal.
(G&S
Transport
Corp
v
Tito
Infante)
48
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• In
holding
a
strike
on
the
ground
of
unfair
labor
practice,
it
is
not
even
required
that
there
be
an
actual
unfair
labor
practice
by
the
employer.
It
suffices
if
such
a
belief
in
good
faith
is
entertained
by
labor
as
the
inducing
factor
for
staging
a
strike.
(Shell
Oil
v
Shell
Co)
• “[Generally]
a
strike,
otherwise
valid,
if
violent
in
character
may
be
placed
beyond
the
pale.
Care
is
to
be
taken,
however,
especially
where
an
unfair
labor
practice
is
involved,
to
avoid
stamping
the
strike
with
illegality
just
because
it
is
tainted
by
such
[violent]
acts…
Responsibility
in
such
a
case
should
be
individual
and
not
collective”
(Shell
Oil
v
Shell
Co)
b. Bargaining
Deadlock
o Cooling-‐off
Period:
30
days
before
the
intended
date
(263(c))
o Cooling-‐off
Period:
15-‐day
cooling
off
period
doesn’t
apply,
but
the
mandatory
requisites
(strike
vote,
report
to
DOLE
of
strike
vote,
and
the
7-‐day
strike
ban)
still
apply
(263(c),
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
7)
reinstate
complainants
because
of
their
union
activities.
From
an
economic
strike,
it
was
converted
to
a
ULP
strike.
o Ma’am
Daway
says:
There
are
no
situations
in
which
a
ULP
strike
will
be
converted
into
an
economic
strike.
e. Non-‐conversion—Strike
to
Lockout
o “The
strike…
openly
and
publicly
declared
by
the…
union…cannot
be
converted
into
a
pure
and
simple
lockout
by
the
mere
[expedient]
of
filing
before
the
trial
court
a
notice
of
offer
to
return
to
work,
during
the
pendency
of
the
labor
dispute.”
(Rizal
Cement
v
CIR,
G.R.
No.
L-‐18442,
November
30,
1962
*not
in
the
syllabus
but
the
Sukhothai
case
doesn’t
say
anything
about
non-‐conversion
of
strike
to
lockout
anyway
so
we
had
to
look
for
alternative
sources)
o In
other
words,
even
if
the
union
filed
a
notice
of
offer
to
return
to
work
during
a
strike
and
the
company
refused
the
same,
the
strike
isn’t
immediately
converted
into
a
lockout
just
because
of
the
employer’s
refusal.
7.
Grounds
a. Allowable
strikes
o As
provided
in
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
5
1. Bargaining
deadlocks
2. Unfair
labor
practices
• Violations
of
CBA
not
considered
as
ULP
and
shall
not
be
strikeable,
UNLESS
it
is
a
flagrant
and/or
malicious
refusal
to
comply
with
its
economic
provisions
o Non-‐strikeable
grounds
–
can
be
found
in
numbers
1-‐3
under
“b.
Prohibited
Strikes”
below
(according
to
Ma’am’s
lecture)
b. Prohibited
Strikes
1. Those
involving
inter-‐union
or
intra-‐union
disputes
(263(b))
2. Violations
of
the
CBA
(Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
5)
3. Wage
distortion
caused
by
RA
6727
(Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC)
4. Stoppage
of
work
due
to
welga
ng
bayan
(even
if
it
were
considered
merely
as
an
exercise
of
free
expression)
(Biflex
Phils
v
Filflex)
5. After
assumption
order
of
Sec
of
Labor
in
263(g)
(264(a))
6. After
Certification
order
for
compulsory
arbitration
by
NLRC
(264(a))
7. After
Submission
Agreement
(signed
by
both
Union
and
Employer)
to
Voluntary
Arbitrator
(264(a))
8. Pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
grounds
for
strike
(264(a))
9. When
any
of
the
mandatory
requirements
for
strike
aren’t
present
(Notice
of
Strike
+
Strike
Vote
+
Report
to
DOLE)
(264(a))
i. Assumption
of
Jurisdiction
(basically
a
bulleted
version
of
263(g))
• When
made:
When,
in
the
Sec
of
Labor’s
opinion,
there
exists
a
labor
dispute
involving
an
industry
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
(e.g.
transportation)
50
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
o President
of
the
Phils
may
determine
industries
that,
in
his
opinion,
are
indispensable
to
the
national
interest.
• Effect:
o Automatically
enjoins
the
intended
or
impending
strike
or
lockout,
as
specified
in
the
assumption/certification
order
o If
strike
has
already
taken
place,
all
striking/locked
out
employees
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
employer
shall
immediately
resume
operations
and
readmit
all
workers
under
the
same
terms
and
conditions
prevailing
before
the
strike
or
lockout
• Sec
of
Labor
or
NLRC
may
seek
assistance
of
law
enforcement
agencies
to
ensure
compliance
with
this
provision
or
with
such
orders
he
may
issue
• In
cases
of
hospitals,
clinics,
and
similar
medical
institutions,
strikes
and
lockouts
shall,
to
every
extent
possible
be
avoided
o Goal:
to
substantially
minimize,
if
not
prevent
the
adverse
effects
on
the
life
and
health
of
the
people
o In
labor
disputes
affecting
their
continued
operations,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
the
union
or
employer
o to
provide
and
maintain
an
effective
skeletal
workforce
of
medical
and
other
health
personnel
for
the
duration
of
the
strike/lockout
o
the
movement
and
services
of
such
personnel
shall
be
unhampered
and
unrestricted,
as
are
necessary
to
insure
the
proper
and
adequate
protection
of
the
life
and
health
of
its
patients,
most
especially
emergency
cases
o In
such
cases,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
may
immediately
assume,
within
twenty
four
(24)
hours
from
knowledge
of
the
occurrence
of
such
a
strike
or
lockout,
jurisdiction
over
the
same
or
certify
it
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
arbitration.
o Union
and
employer
are
strictly
enjoined
to
comply
with
orders,
prohibitions
and/or
injunctions
issued
by
the
Sec
of
Labor
or
the
NLRC,
under
pain
of
immediate
disciplinary
action
o Disciplinary
actions
include:
1)
dismissal
or
loss
of
employment
status
or
payment
by
the
locking-‐out
employer
of
backwages,
damages
and
other
affirmative
reliefs,
or
even
2)
criminal
prosecution
against
either
or
both
of
them.
• Assumption
and
certification
orders
are
executory
in
character
and
are
to
be
strictly
complied
with
by
the
parties
even
during
the
pendency
of
any
petition
questioning
their
validity.
Such
orders
automatically
result
in
a
return-‐to-‐work
of
all
striking
workers,
whether
or
not
a
corresponding
order
has
been
issued
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor.
(Union
of
Filipro
v
Nestle)
ii. Compulsory
Arbitration,
Def.
51
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• When
the
consent
of
one
of
the
parties
is
enforced
by
statutory
provisions,
the
proceeding
is
referred
to
as
compulsory
arbitration.
In
labor
cases,
compulsory
arbitration
is
the
process
of
settlement
of
labor
disputes
by
a
government
agency
which
has
the
authority
to
investigate
and
to
make
an
award
which
is
binding
on
all
the
parties.
(Union
of
Filipro
v
Nestle)
• When
sitting
in
a
compulsory
arbitration
certified
to
it
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor,
the
NLRC
is
not
sitting
as
a
judicial
court
but
as
an
administrative
body
charged
with
the
duty
to
implement
the
order
of
the
Secretary.
(Union
of
Filipro
v
Nestle)
• Inter-‐union
dispute-‐
any
conflict
between
and
among
legitimate
labor
unions
involving
representation
questions
for
purposes
of
collective
bargaining
or
to
any
other
conflict
or
dispute
between
legitimate
labor
unions.
(Book
V,
Rule
1,
Sec.
1
(x))
• Intra-‐union
dispute-‐
any
conflict
between
and
among
union
members,
including
grievances
arising
from
any
violation
of
the
rights
and
conditions
of
membership,
violation
of
or
disagreement
over
any
provision
of
the
union’s
constitution
and
by-‐laws,
or
disputes
arising
from
chartering
or
affiliation
of
union
(Book
V,
Rule
1,
Sec.
1
(bb),
Employees
of
Union
Bayer
v
Bayer)
• The
BLR
divisions
of
the
regional
offices
of
the
DOLE
have
jurisdiction
over
inter-‐union
and
intra-‐union
disputes.
Unlike
the
NLRC,
however,
the
BLR
is
not
vested
with
the
jurisdiction
over
claims
for
damages.
(Marino
v
Gamilla)
• Rule
XI,
Secs.
1
and
2
of
DO
40-‐03
(these
are
listed
verbatim)
enumerates
the
ff
as
inter/intra-‐union
disputes:
(a) conduct
OR
NULLIFICATION
of
election
of
union
and
workers'
association
officers/nullification
of
election
of
union
and
workers'
association
officers;
(b) audit/accounts
examination
of
union
or
workers'
association
funds;
(c) deregistration
of
collective
bargaining
agreements;
(d) validity/invalidity
of
union
affiliation
or
disaffiliation;
(e) validity/invalidity
of
acceptance/non-‐acceptance
for
union
membership;
(f) validity/invalidity
of
voluntary
recognition;
(g) opposition
to
application
for
union
OR
CBA
registration;
(h) violations
of
or
disagreements
over
any
provision
of
the
constitution
and
by-‐laws
of
a
union
or
workers'
association
(i) disagreements
over
chartering
or
registration
of
labor
organizations
or
the
registration
of
collective
bargaining
agreements;
(j) violations
of
the
rights
and
conditions
of
membership
in
a
union
or
workers'
association
membership;
(k) violations
of
the
rights
of
legitimate
labor
organizations,
except
interpretation
of
collective
bargaining
agreements;
(l) validity/invalidity
of
impeachment/expulsion/suspension
or
any
disciplinary
action
meted
against
any
officer
and
member,
including
those
arising
from
non-‐compliance
with
the
reportorial
requirements
under
rule
V;
(m) such
other
disputes
or
conflicts
involving
the
rights
to
self-‐organization,
union
membership
and
collective
bargaining
-‐
(1) between
and
among
legitimate
labor
organizations;
AND
(2) between
and
among
members
of
a
union
or
workers'
association.
Other
labor
relations
disputes,
not
otherwise
covered
by
article
217
of
the
Labor
Code,
shall
include:
52
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
8. Striking Party
• For bargaining deadlocks: Any certified or duly recognized bargaining representative may declare a strike
• For
unfair
labor
practices:
Any
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative
o In
the
absence
of
a
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative,
any
legitimate
labor
organization
in
the
establishment
may
declare
a
strike(Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
6)
Failure
to
file
a
notice
of
intention
to
strike
is
a
prohibited
activity
(264(a))
•
c. Observance
of
Cooling-‐off
Period
• During
this
time,
all
efforts
at
mediation
and
conciliation
to
effect
a
voluntary
settlement
shall
be
exerted
.
If
dispute
still
unsettled
after
the
required
period
elapses,
strike/lockout
may
be
declared.
(263(e))
d. Vote
• A
decision
to
declare
a
strike:
1. Must
be
approved
by
a
majority
of
the
total
union
membership
in
the
bargaining
unit
concerned
2. obtained
by
secret
ballot
3. in
meetings
or
referenda
called
for
the
purpose.
53
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• Such
decision
shall
be
valid
for
the
duration
of
the
dispute
based
on
substantially
the
same
grounds
considered
when
the
strike
or
lockout
vote
was
taken
• Conduct
of
secret
balloting
may
be
supervised
by
NCMB,
either
at
its
own
initiation
or
upon
request
by
the
affected
party
• The
union
shall
furnish
the
Regional
Board
of
NCMB:
1. the
notice
of
meetings
at
least
24
hours
before
such
meetings
for
strike/lockout
vote;
and
2. results
of
the
voting
at
least
7
days
before
the
intended
strike,
subject
to
the
cooling-‐off
period
(263(f),
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
10)
• This
requirement
of
the
7-‐day
strike
ban
should
be
observed
to
give
the
Department
of
Labor
and
Employment
(DOLE)
an
opportunity
to
verify
whether
the
projected
strike
really
carries
the
approval
of
the
majority
of
the
union
members.
(Pilipino
Telephone
Corp
v
PILTEA)
• In
case
of
ULP
amounting
to
union
busting,
only
the
15-‐day
cooling-‐off
period
after
the
notice
of
strike
does
not
apply.
The
other
mandatory
requirements
(strike
vote
+
report
of
the
results
of
the
strike
vote
to
DOLE
+
7-‐day
strike
ban)
are
still
required.(Sukhothai
Cuisine
and
Restaurant
v
CA)
• Even
if
the
strike
is
valid
because
its
objective
or
purpose
is
lawful,
the
strike
may
still
be
declared
invalid
where
the
means
employed
are
illegal…In
cases
not
falling
within
the
prohibition
against
strikes,
the
legality
of
a
strike
depends
upon
the
purpose,
and
second,
upon
the
means
employed.
o Purpose:
If
the
purpose
intended
to
be
accomplished
is
trivial,
unreasonable
or
unjust,
or
if
the
strikers
commit
violence
or
injure
persons
or
damage
property,
the
strike,
although
not
prohibited
by
injunction,
may
be
declared
illegal.
o Means:
A
strike
held
with
coercion,
force,
intimidation,
violence,
injuries,
sabotage
and
unnecessary
and
obscene
language
cannot
be
justified,
lest
abuses
and
terrorism
be
encouraged
and
the
purpose
of
the
law
providing
for
peaceful
settlement
of
labor
disputes
subverted.
(Chuayuco
Steel
v
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa)
• In
determining
the
validity
of
a
strike,
it
is
imperative
that
utmost
consideration
should
be
given
to
the
particular
circumstances
of
each
case,
with
a
view
to
having
the
most
comprehensive
understanding
of
the
motivations
of
the
parties,
in
the
light
of
human
needs
on
the
part
of
labor,
and
in
the
perspective
of
the
orderly
and
economical
conduct
of
business
and
industry,
on
the
part
of
management
(Shell
Oil
Workers
Union
v
Shell)
• The
right
to
strike,
while
constitutionally
recognized,
is
not
without
legal
restrictions.
The
Labor
Code
regulates
the
exercise
of
said
right
by
balancing
the
interests
of
labor
and
management.
Art
263
(c)
-‐
(f)
mandate
the
procedural
steps
to
be
followed
before
a
strike
is
to
be
staged:
filing
of
notice
of
strike,
taking
of
strike
vote,
and
reporting
strike
vote
to
DOLE.
The
steps
are
mandatory
and
non-‐
compliance
makes
the
strike
illegal.
(Stamford
Mark
v
Julian)
• A
strike
would
be
considered
valid
even
though
it
may
have
been
called
to
offset
what
the
strikers
believed
in
good
faith
to
be
ULP.
Such
presumption
of
legality
prevails
even
if
the
allegations
of
ULP
were
found
to
be
untrue.
(Master
Iron
v
NLRC)
54
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• General
rule
is
that
a
strike
based
on
a
“non-‐strikeable”
ground
is
an
illegal
strike.
Corollarily,
a
strike
grounded
on
ULP
is
illegal
if
no
such
acts
actually
exist.
o Exception:
even
if
no
ULP
acts
are
committed
by
the
employer,
if
the
employees
believe
in
good
faith
that
ULP
acts
exist
so
as
to
constitute
a
valid
ground
to
strike,
then
the
strike
held
pursuant
to
such
belief
may
be
legal.
Circumstances
must
warrant
such
belief
(National
Union
of
Workers
v
NLRC)
b. Illegal Strikes
• In
accordance
with
Art.
264,
even
an
the
otherwise
legal
strike
may
be
rendered
illegal
if
the
means
employed
were
illegal.
Even
if
the
acts
were
committed
on
non-‐consecutive
days,
the
acts
were
still
pervasive.
Art.
264
doesn’t
require
that
violence
must
be
continuous
or
that
they
should
exist
for
the
entire
duration
of
the
strike.
(A
Soriano
Aviation
v
Employees
Association)
• As listed in 264 (a), 1st and 2nd pars it is illegal:
• To
obstruct,
impede,
or
interfere
with
peaceful
picketing
(See
Prohibited
Activities
under
Picketing
below)
(264(b))
• Employment of Strike Breakers (See heading under the same name below)
• Escorting done by peace officers (See Role of Peace Officers During Strikes and Picketing below)
• A
strike
may
be
regarded
as
invalid
although
the
labor
union
has
complied
with
the
strict
requirements
when
the
same
is
held
contrary
to
an
existing
agreement,
such
as
a
no
strike
clause
or
conclusive
arbitration
clause.
(C
Alcantara
&
Sons
v
CA)
• Art.
263
and
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
6
provide
that
only
the
duly
certified
or
recognized
bargaining
agent
(or
any
legitimate
labor
organization
in
behalf
of
its
members,
as
the
case
may
be
*See
“8.
Striking
Party”
above)
may
declare
a
strike.
o If
the
union
had
not
yet
acquired
legal
personality,
it
could
not
legally
represent
the
eventual
union
and
its
members.
Consequently,
if
the
union
makes
a
notice
of
strike,
conducts
a
strike
vote
and
reports
the
same
to
DOLE
even
before
it
acquired
legal
personality
as
a
legitimate
labor
organization,
the
aforementioned
acts
would
be
ineffective.
Considering
that
the
requisites
are
deemed
ineffective,
the
strike
that
the
union
will
be
conducting
will
be
declared
illegal
for
failure
to
comply
with
the
mandatory
requisites.(Magdala
Multipurpose
v
Kilusang
Manggagawa)
• Art.
264,
in
providing
the
consequences
of
an
illegal
strike,
makes
a
distinction
between
union
officers
and
members
who
participated
therein:
o Union
Officers-‐
knowingly
participating
in
an
illegal
strike
is
a
valid
ground
for
termination
of
employment.
Participating
union
officers
have
to
be
identified
(Yolito
Fabriquelan
v
Monterey)
o Union
Members-‐
mere
participation
in
an
illegal
strike
isn’t
sufficient
ground
for
termination.
There
must
also
be
illegal
acts
committed
by
the
union
member
(i.e.
there
must
be
substantial
evidence
of
the
illegal
acts
during
the
strike
+
striker
who
participated
in
the
illegal
acts
must
be
identified)
(Sukhothai
Cuisine
v
CA,
Phimco
v
Phimco,
Danilo
Escario
v
NLRC)
• Art.
264
authorizes
the
award
of
full
backwages
only
when
the
termination
of
employment
is
a
consequence
of
an
unlawful
lockout
and
not
as
a
result
of
an
illegal
strike
(Escario
v
NLRC)
• As
the
term
“assume
jurisdiction”
connotes,
the
intent
of
the
law
is
to
give
the
Labor
Secretary
full
authority
to
resolve
all
matters
within
the
dispute
that
gave
rise
to
or
which
arose
out
of
the
strike
or
lockout;
it
includes
and
extends
to
all
questions
and
controversies
arising
from
or
related
to
the
dispute,
including
cases
over
which
the
labor
arbiter
has
exclusive
jurisdiction.
(Bagong
Pagkakaisa
ng
Manggagawa
ng
Triumph
v
Secretary)
• The
assumption
of
jurisdiction
in
Art.
263(g)..[is]…
viewed
as
an
exercise
of
the
police
power
of
the
State
with
the
aim
of
promoting
the
common
good…
and
it
is
incumbent
upon
the
Secretary
to
bring
about
soonest,
a
fair
and
just
solution
to
the
differences
between
the
employer
and
the
employees,
so
that
the
damage
such
labor
dispute
might
cause
upon
the
national
interest
may
be
minimized
as
much
as
possible.
(YSS
Employees
v
YSS
Laboratories)
• In
order
to
achieve
this,
the
assumption
or
certification
order
shall
have
the
effect
of
automatically
enjoining
the
intended
or
impending
strike
or
lockout,
as
specified
in
the
assumption/certification
order.
o
If
strike
has
already
taken
place,
all
striking/locked
out
employees
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
employer
shall
immediately
resume
operations
and
readmit
all
workers
under
the
same
terms
and
conditions
prevailing
before
the
strike
or
lockout
(263(g),
Bagong
Pagkakaisa
ng
Manggagawa
ng
Triumph
v
Secretary)
Mass Leave (considered as illegal strike in the Solidbank case)
• In
the
case
of
Solidbank
Corp
v
EU
Gamier,
despite
the
Union’s
argument
that
it
held
a
mass
action
not
to
exert
any
undue
pressure
on
the
employer,
but
to
express
dissatisfaction
over
the
decision
of
the
Labor
Secretary
subsequent
to
his
assumption
of
jurisdiction,
the
Court
still
held
that
the
mass
action
is
a
strike.
o Shrouded
as
demonstrations,
they
were
in
reality
temporary
stoppages
of
work
perpetrated
through
the
concerted
action
of
the
employees
who
deliberately
failed
to
report
for
work
on
the
convenient
excuse
that
they
will
hold
a
rally
at
the
BLR
and
DOLE
offices.
Because
they
held
such
mass
action
after
the
assumption
order,
the
strike
was
held
to
be
illegal.
11. In case of illegal strike, illegal lockout/ in pari delicto doctrine-‐ Status quo ante
• In
case
of
illegal
strike
and
illegal
lockout
at
the
same
time,
the
in
pari
delicto
doctrine
is
applicable.
Such
situation
warrants
the
restoration
of
the
status
quo
ante
and
bringing
the
parties
back
to
the
respective
positions
before
the
illegal
strike
and
illegal
lockout.
(Automotive
Engine
Rebuilders
v
Progresibong
Unyon)
56
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
12.
Employment
of
Strike
Breakers
• No
employer
shall
use
or
employ
any
strike-‐breaker,
nor
shall
any
person
be
employed
as
a
strike-‐breaker.
(264(c))
• "Strike-‐breaker"
-‐
any
person
who
o obstructs,
impedes,
or
interferes
with
o by
force,
violence,
coercion,
threats,
or
intimidation.
o any
peaceful
picketing:
• affecting
wages,
hours
or
conditions
of
work
• in
the
exercise
of
the
right
of
self-‐organization
or
collective
bargaining
(212(r))
13.
Improved
Offer
Balloting
and
Strikes
• On
or
before
the
30th
day
of
the
strike,
DOLE
shall
conduct
a
referendum
by
secret
ballot
on
the
improved
offer
of
the
employer
o When
a
majority
of
the
members
vote
to
accept
the
improved
offer,
the
striking
workers
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
the
employer
shall
readmit
them
upon
the
signing
of
the
agreement
(265,
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
12)
C.
Slowdown
as
Concerted
Activity
• “Slowdown
is
generally
condemned
as
inherently
illicit
and
unjustifiable,
because
while
the
employees
"continue
to
work
and
remain
at
their
positions
and
accept
the
wages
paid
to
them,"
they
at
the
same
time
"select
what
part
of
their
allotted
tasks
they
care
to
perform
of
their
own
volition
or
refuse
openly
or
secretly,
to
the
employer's
damage,
to
do
other
work"
in
other
words,
they
"work
on
their
own
terms.”
(Ilaw
at
Bukod
v
NLRC)
D.
Picketing
1.
Definition
• Picketing
is
the
marching
to
and
fro
at
the
employer’s
premises,
usually
accompanied
by
the
display
of
placards
and
other
signs
(IBM
v
NLRC)
2.
Nature
and
Purpose
of
Picket
Line
•
“Picketing
involves
merely
the
marching
to
and
fro
at
the
premises
of
the
employer,
usually
accompanied
by
the
display
of
placards
and
other
signs
making
known
the
facts
involved
in
a
labor
dispute.
As
applied
to
a
labor
dispute,
to
picket
means
the
stationing
of
one
or
more
persons
to
observe
and
attempt
to
observe.
The
purpose
of
pickets
is
said
to
be
a
means
of
peaceable
persuasion”
(Sta
Rosa
Coca-‐Cola
Union
v.
CCBP)
• “The
heated
altercations
and
occasional
blows
exchanged
on
the
picket
line
do
not
affect
or
diminish
the
right
to
strike…some
disorder
is
unfortunately
quite
usual
in
any
extensive
or
long
drawn
out
strike.
Fist-‐fighting
between
union
and
non-‐union
employees
in
the
midst
of
a
strike
is
no
bar
to
reinstatement"
(Insular
Life
v
Insular)
3.
Picketing
and
Libel
Laws
57
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• It
is
a
fact
of
industrial
life
that
in
the
continuing
confrontation
between
labor
and
management,
it
is
far
from
likely
that
the
language
employed
would
be
both
courteous
and
polite.
As
first
announced
by
the
Court
through
Justice
Malcolm
in
US
vs.
Bustos,
the
judiciary,
in
deciding
suits
for
libel,
must
ascertain
whether
or
not
the
alleged
offending
words
may
be
embraced
by
the
guarantees
of
free
speech
and
free
press.
(Philippine
Commercial
and
Industrial
Bank
v
Philnabank
Employees)
4.
Curtailment
• The
wholesale
condemnation
of
peaceful
picketing
is
bereft
of
support
in
law.
Peaceful
picketing
is
embraced
in
freedom
of
expression…
and
is
part
of
the
freedom
of
speech
guarantee
of
the
Constitution.
Such
cannot
be
prohibited
as
long
as
it
doesn’t
involve
acts
of
illegality.
(Nagkahiusang
Manggagawa
v
Libron)
• The
Union’s
right
to
strike,
although
guaranteed
by
the
Constitution,
may
be
regulated
if
the
rights
of
third
parties
or
“innocent
bystanders”
are
affected.
(Liwayway
Publishing
Co
v
Permanent
Concrete
Workers
Union)
6.
Prohibited
Activities
–
Peaceful
Picketing
• Limitations
for
picketers:
No
person
engaged
in
picketing
shall
commit
o any
act
of
violence,
coercion
or
intimidation
,
or
o obstruct
the
free
ingress
to
or
egress
from
the
employer's
premises
for
lawful
purposes,
or
o obstruct
public
thoroughfares.
• Generally,
no
union
members
or
union
organizers
may
be
arrested
or
detained
for
union
activities
without
previous
consultations
with
the
Secretary
of
Labor
o Exceptions:
They
can
be
arrested
on
ground
of
national
security
and
public
peace
commission
of
a
crime
(266)
Bulleted
Version:
Book
V,
Rule
XXII
(Conciliation,
Strikes
and
Lockouts)
1. Conciliation
of
Labor
Management
disputes
• NCMB
may
provide
conciliation-‐mediation
services
to
labor
disputes
other
than
notices
of
strikes
or
lockouts
o Upon
request
of
either
or
both
parties,
or
o Upon
its
own
initiative
• Conciliation
cases
not
subjects
of
notices
of
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
docketed
as
preventive
mediation
cases
2. Privileged
Communication
• Include
information
and
statements
given
in
confidence
at
conciliation
proceedings
• Conciliators
and
similar
officials
shall
not
testify
in
court
or
body
regarding
any
matter
taken
up
at
conciliation
proceedings
3. Issuance
of
Subpoena
• NCMB
has
the
power
to
require
appearance
at
conciliation
meetings
thru
a
subpoena
4. Compromise
Agreements
• Final
and
binding
upon
the
parties
if
o Voluntarily
agreed
upon
by
the
parties
o With
the
assistance
of
NCMB
and
its
regional
branches
• NCMB
cannot
assume
jurisdiction
over
issues
involved
in
compromise
agreements,
unless
o Non-‐compliance
o Prima
facie
evidence
that
settlement
was
obtained
thru
fraud,
misrepresentation,
or
coercion
• Labor
Arbiter
has
power
to
issue
writ
of
execution
in
order
to
require
courts
or
sheriff
of
NLRC
to
enforce
agreement
5. Grounds
for
Strike
or
Lockout
• Allowable
grounds:
bargaining
deadlocks
and
ULP.
Violations
of
CBA
not
considered
ULP
and
not
strikeable,
except
o Flagrant
and/or
malicious
refusal
to
comply
with
its
economic
provisions
• When
strike
not
allowed:
o Intra-‐union/inter-‐union
disputes
o Without
filing
notice
of
strike/lockout
o Without
obtaining
strike/lockout
vote
o Without
reporting
results
of
the
vote
to
NCMB
o After
assumption
of
jurisdiction
by
Secretary
of
Labor
o Certification
of
dispute
to
compulsory
arbitration
o Submission
to
voluntary
arbitration
o Pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
grounds
for
strike
or
lockout
6. Who
may
declare
strike
or
lockout
• For
bargaining
deadlocks:
Any
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative
may
declare
a
strike
• For
unfair
labor
practices:
Any
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative
59
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
o In
the
absence
of
a
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative,
any
legitimate
labor
organization
in
the
establishment
may
declare
a
strike(Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
6)
7. Notice
of
Strike
or
Lockout
• Notice
must
be
filed
at
the
prescribed
period
with
the
Regional
Branch
of
the
NCMB,
a
copy
of
which
having
been
served
on
the
other
party
concerned.
• Prescribed
periods:
o Bargaining
Deadlocks:
30
days
before
intended
date
o ULP:
15
days
before
intended
date
ULP
involving
the
dismissal
of
union
officers
which
may
constitute
union-‐busting,
where
existence
of
union
threatened:
cooling-‐off
period
of
15
days
DOES
NOT
APPLY,
but
the
mandatory
requirements
for
strike
vote
+
submission
of
the
results
to
the
DOLE
shall
still
apply
8. Contents
of
Notice
1) Names
and
addresses
of
employer
and
union
involved
2) Nature
of
Industry
to
which
the
employer
belongs
3) Number
of
union
members
and
of
the
workers
in
the
bargaining
unit
4) Other
relevant
data
as
may
facilitate
the
settlement
of
the
dispute,
such
as
a
brief
statement
or
enumeration
of
all
pending
labor
disputes
involving
the
same
parties.
5) Additional
requirement
in
case
of
bargaining
deadlocks:
o As
far
as
practicable,
it
shall
further
state
the
(1)
unresolved
issues
in
the
bargaining
negotiations
and
be
accompanied
by
the
written
proposals
of
the
union,
(2)
the
counter-‐
proposals
of
the
employer
and
(3)
the
proof
of
a
request
for
conference
to
settle
the
differences.
6) Additional
requirement
in
case
of
ULP:
o As
far
as
practicable,
it
shall
state
the
acts
complained
of
and
the
efforts
taken
to
resolve
the
dispute
amicably.
**Effect
of
non-‐conformance
with
the
requirements
for
notice:
The
Regional
Branch
of
the
Board
shall
inform
the
concerned
party
of
such
fact.
9. Action
of
Regional
Branch
of
NCMB
on
the
Notice:
• Must
exert
all
efforts
at
mediation
and
conciliation
to
enable
the
parties
to
settle
the
dispute
amicably
and
also
encourage
the
parties
to
submit
the
dispute
to
voluntary
arbitration.
• Upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
notice
may:
o be
treated
as
a
preventive
mediation
case.
o be
referred
to
alternative
modes
of
dispute
resolution,
including
voluntary
arbitration
• During
the
proceedings,
the
parties
shall:
o not
do
any
act
which
may
disrupt
or
impede
the
early
settlement
of
the
dispute
o
bargain
collectively
in
good
faith
and
o participate
fully
and
promptly
in
the
conciliation
meetings
called
by
the
NCMB
10. Rules
on
Strike
or
lockout
vote:
•
Strike
vote
requisites:
o approved
by
a
majority
of
the
total
union
membership
in
the
bargaining
unit
concerned
o obtained
by
secret
ballot
o in
meetings
or
referenda
called
for
the
purpose.
• Lockout
vote
requisites:
o approved
by
a
majority
of
the
Board
of
Directors
of
the
employer,
corporation
or
association
or
the
partners
in
a
partnership
o obtained
by
a
secret
ballot
o in
a
meeting
called
for
the
purpose.
• Conduct
of
secret
balloting
may
be
supervised
by
NCMB,
either
at
its
own
initiation
or
upon
request
by
the
affected
party
• The
union
or
the
employer
shall
furnish
the
Regional
Board
of
NCMB:
o the
notice
of
meetings
at
least
24
hours
before
such
meetings
for
strike/lockout
vote;
and
60
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
o results
of
the
voting
at
least
7
days
before
the
intended
strike
or
lockout,
subject
to
the
cooling-‐off
period
11. Declaration
of
Strike
or
Lockout
• Declaration
of
strike
or
lockout
may
be
made
if
the
dispute
remains
unsettled
after
the
required
period
for
cooling-‐off
+
7-‐day
period
after
submitting
the
results
of
the
strike/lockout
vote.
• Meanwhile,
the
Regional
Branch
of
NCMB
shall
continue
mediating
and
conciliating.
12. Improved
Offer
Balloting
IN
CASE
OF
A
STRIKE
• On
or
before
the
30th
day
of
the
strike
• Regional
Branch
of
NCMB
shall
conduct
a
referendum
o At
its
own
initiative,
or
o Upon
the
request
of
any
affected
party
• By
secret
ballot
• on
the
improved
offer
of
the
employer
o When
a
majority
of
the
members
vote
to
accept
the
improved
offer,
the
striking
workers
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
the
employer
shall
readmit
them
upon
the
signing
of
the
agreement
IN
CASE
OF
A
LOCKOUT
• On
or
before
the
30th
day
of
the
strike
• Regional
Branch
of
NCMB
shall
conduct
a
referendum
o At
its
own
initiative,
or
o Upon
the
request
of
any
affected
party
• By
secret
ballot
• On
the
reduced
offer
of
the
union
o When
majority
of
the
board
of
directors
or
trustees
or
the
partners
holding
the
controlling
interest
in
the
case
of
partnership
vote
to
accept
the
reduced
offer,
the
workers
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
the
employer
shall
thereupon
readmit
them
upon
the
signing
of
the
agreement.
13. Peaceful
Picketing:
• Workers
shall
have
the
right
to
peaceful
picketing.
• Limitations
for
picketers-‐-‐No
person
engaged
in
picketing
shall
commit:
o any
act
of
violence,
coercion
or
intimidation
,
or
o obstruct
the
free
ingress
to
or
egress
from
the
employer's
premises
for
lawful
purposes,
or
o obstruct
public
thoroughfares.
• Prohibited
acts
against
picketers:
o Obstructing,
impeding
or
interfering
with,
by
force,
violence,
coercion,
threats
or
intimidation,
any
peaceful
picketing
by
workers:
o
during
any
labor
controversy
or
o in
the
exercise
of
the
right
to
self-‐organization
or
collective
bargaining
o Aiding
or
abetting
such
obstruction
or
interference.
o No
employer
shall
use
or
employ
any
person
to
commit
such
acts
nor
shall
any
person
be
employed
for
such
purpose
14. Injunctions
• Court
or
entity
cannot
enjoin
picketing,
strikes,
or
lockouts,
except
in
cases
under
Art.
218
and
263
o 218
(e):
NLRC
has
power
to
enjoin
or
restrain
any
actual
or
threatened
commission
of
any
or
all
prohibited
or
unlawful
acts
or
to
require
performance
of
a
particular
act
in
any
labor
dispute,
which,
if
not
restrained
or
performed
therewith,
may
cause
grave
or
irreparable
damage
to
any
party
or
render
ineffectual
any
decision
in
favor
of
such
party.
o 263(g):
Assumption
of
jurisdiction
• NLRC
has
power
to
issue
TROs
in
such
cases,
but
only
after
due
notice
+
hearing
61
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
In
case
of
an
application
for
a
writ
of
injunction,
reception
may
be
delegated
by
NLRC
to
a
Labor
•
Arbiter
who
shall
submit
recommendations
to
the
NLRC
for
consideration
and
resolution
• Ex
parte
restraining
orders
issued
by
NLRC,
Chairman
or
vice
chairman
valid
for
a
period
not
exceeding
20
days
15. Assumption
by
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
• When
there
exists
a
labor
dispute
involving
an
industry
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
• Sec
of
Labor
may:
o Assume
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute
and
decide
it
o Certify
the
same
to
the
NLRC
for
Compulsory
Arbitration
• Requisite
for
assumption
of
jurisdiction
(only
one
needed)
o Both
parties
have
requested
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
to
assume
jurisdiction
over
the
labor
dispute;
OR
o After
a
conference
called
by
the
Office
of
the
Secretary
on
the
propriety
of
its
issuance,
motu
proprio
or
upon
a
request
or
petition
by
either
parties
to
the
labor
dispute.
• Effect:
o Automatically
enjoins
the
intended
or
impending
strike
or
lockout
o If
strike
has
already
taken
place,
all
striking/locked
out
employees
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
employer
shall
immediately
resume
operations
and
readmit
all
workers
under
the
same
terms
and
conditions
prevailing
before
the
strike
or
lockout
• Notwithstanding,
parties
may
agree
at
any
time
to
submit
the
dispute:
o to
the
Secretary
or
his
representative
as
voluntary
arbitrator
o to
a
duly
accredited
voluntary
arbitrator
o to
a
panel
of
voluntary
arbitrators
16. Requirement
for
Minimum
Operational
Service
• In
labor
disputes
adversely
affecting
continued
operation
of
hospitals,
clinics,
and
similar
medical
institutions,
• It
shall
be
the
duty
of
the
union
or
employer:
o to
provide
and
maintain
an
effective
skeletal
workforce
of
medical
and
other
health
personnel
for
the
duration
of
the
strike/lockout
o
the
movement
and
services
of
such
personnel
shall
be
unhampered
and
unrestricted,
as
are
necessary
to
insure
the
proper
and
adequate
protection
of
the
life
and
health
of
its
patients,
most
especially
emergency
cases
17. Decision
of
the
Assumed
Labor
Dispute;
Finality
• NLRC,
voluntary
arbitrator,
or
panel
of
voluntary
arbitrators
decisions:
o When
rendered:
within
30
calendar
days
from
submission
of
case
for
resolution
o When
final
and
executory:
10
calendar
days
upon
receipt
of
the
decision
by
the
parties
18. Prohibitions
On
Law
Enforcement
Agencies
Or
Public
Officials/Employees,
Armed
Persons,
Private
Security
Guards
And
Similar
Personnel
In
The
Private
Security
Agency.
Exception.
• Applies
to:
o
public
official
or
employee
including
officers
and
personnel
of
the
armed
forces
of
the
Philippines
or
the
Philippine
National
Police,
or
o armed
person,
private
security
guards
and
similar
personnel
in
the
private
security
agency
• Prohibited
Activities
of
such
persons
o bring
in,
introduce
or
escort
in
any
manner
any
individual
who:
• seeks
to
replace
strikers
in
entering
or
leaving
the
premises
of
a
strike
area
or
• work
in
place
of
the
strikers.
• General
Rule:
They
shall
keep
out
of
the
picket
lines
unless
actual
violence
or
other
criminal
acts
occur
therein.
• But
any
public
officer,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
or
the
NLRC
may
seek
the
assistance
of
law
enforcement
agencies
to:
o
maintain
peace
and
order
o protect
life
and
property,
and/or
62
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
The
State
shall
regulate
the
relations
between
workers
Art.
211-‐A
(a)
(b)
(c).
Declaration
of
Policy—A.
It
is
and
employers,
recognizing
the
right
of
labor
to
its
just
the
policy
of
the
State:
share
in
the
fruits
of
production
and
the
right
of
(a)
To
promote
and
emphasize
the
primacy
of
free
enterprises
to
reasonable
returns
to
investments,
and
collective
bargaining
and
negotiations,
including
to
expansion
and
growth.
voluntary
arbitration,
mediation
and
conciliation,
as
modes
of
settling
labor
or
industrial
disputes;
Bisig
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC
63
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
(b)
To
promote
free
trade
unionism
as
an
instrument
Section
4.
Compromise
Agreements.
-‐
Any
for
the
enhancement
of
democracy
and
the
promotion
compromise
settlement,
including
those
involving
of
social
justice
and
development;
labor
standard
laws,
voluntarily
agreed
upon
by
the
parties
with
the
assistance
of
the
Board
and
its
(c)
To
foster
the
free
and
voluntary
organization
of
a
regional
branches
shall
be
final
and
binding
upon
the
strong
and
united
labor
movement;
parties.
The
National
Labor
Relations
Commission
or
any
court
shall
not
assume
jurisdiction
over
issues
involved
therein
except
in
case
of
non-‐compliance
Art.
263
(a)
(b).
Strikes,
Picketing
and
Lockouts.
thereof
or
if
there
is
prima
facie
evidence
that
the
settlement
was
obtained
through
fraud,
(a)
It
is
the
policy
of
the
State
to
encourage
free
trade
misrepresentation,
or
coercion.
Upon
motion
of
any
unionism
and
free
collective
bargaining.
interested
party,
the
Labor
Arbiter
in
the
region
where
the
agreement
was
reached
may
issue
a
(b)
Workers
shall
have
the
right
to
engage
in
writ
of
execution
requiring
a
sheriff
of
the
concerted
activities
for
purposes
of
collective
Commission
or
the
courts
to
enforce
the
terms
of
the
bargaining
or
for
their
mutual
benefit
and
protection.
agreement.
The
right
of
legitimate
labor
organizations
to
strike
and
picket
and
of
employers
to
lockout,
consistent
Section
5.
Grounds
for
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
A
strike
or
with
the
national
interest,
shall
continue
to
be
lockout
may
be
declared
in
cases
of
bargaining
recognized
and
respected.
However,
no
labor
union
deadlocks
and
unfair
labor
practices.
Violations
of
may
strike
and
no
employer
may
declare
a
lockout
on
collective
bargaining
agreements,
except
flagrant
grounds
involving
inter-‐union
and
intra-‐union
and/or
malicious
refusal
to
comply
with
its
economic
disputes.
provisions,
shall
not
be
considered
unfair
labor
practice
and
shall
not
be
strikeable.
No
strike
or
lockout
may
be
declared
on
grounds
involving
inter
union
and
intra-‐union
disputes
OR
without
first
Book
V,
Rule
XXII
having
filed
a
notice
of
strike
or
lockout
or
without
the
necessary
strike
or
lockout
vote
having
been
obtained
Book
V.
(Labor
Relations),
Rule
XXII
(Conciliation,
and
reported
to
the
Board.
Neither
will
a
strike
be
Strikes,
and
Lockouts).
declared
after
assumption
of
jurisdiction
by
the
Secretary
or
after
certification
or
submission
of
the
Section
1.
Conciliation
of
labor-‐management
disputes.
-‐
dispute
to
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration
or
The
board
may,
upon
request
of
either
of
both
parties
during
the
pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
or
upon
its
own
initiative,
provide
conciliation-‐
grounds
for
the
strike
or
lockout.
(Amended
by
DO
40-‐
mediation
services
to
labor
disputes
other
than
A-‐03
to
include
“or”)
notices
of
strikes
or
lockouts.
Conciliation
cases
which
are
not
subjects
of
notices
of
strike
or
lockout
Section
6.
Who
may
declare
a
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
Any
shall
be
docketed
as
preventive
mediation
cases.
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative
may
declare
a
strike
in
cases
of
bargaining
deadlocks
Section
2.
Privileged
communication.
-‐
Information
and
unfair
labor
practices.
The
employer
may
declare
and
statements
given
in
confidence
at
conciliation
a
lockout
in
the
same
cases.
In
the
absence
of
a
proceedings
shall
be
treated
as
privileged
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
communications.
Conciliators
and
similar
officials
representative,
any
legitimate
labor
organization
in
shall
not
testify
in
any
court
or
body
regarding
the
establishment
may
declare
a
strike
but
only
on
any
matter
taken
up
at
conciliation
proceedings
grounds
of
unfair
labor
practices.
conducted
by
them.
Section
3.
Issuance
of
subpoena.
-‐
The
Board
shall
Section
7.
Notice
of
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
In
bargaining
have
the
power
to
require
the
appearance
of
any
deadlocks,
a
notice
of
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
filed
parties
at
conciliation
meetings.
with
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
at
least
thirty
(30)
days
before
the
intended
date
thereof,
a
copy
of
64
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
said
notice
having
been
served
on
the
other
party
bargain
collectively
in
good
faith
and
to
participate
concerned.
In
cases
of
unfair
labor
practice,
the
fully
and
promptly
in
the
conciliation
meetings
called
period
of
notice
shall
be
fifteen
(15)
days.
by
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board.
However,
in
case
of
unfair
labor
practice
involving
the
dismissal
from
employment
of
any
union
officer
A
notice,
upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
may
be
duly
elected
in
accordance
with
the
union
referred
to
alternative
modes
of
dispute
resolution,
constitution
and
by-‐laws
which
may
constitute
including
voluntary
arbitration.
union-‐busting
where
the
existence
of
the
union
is
Section
10.
Strike
or
lockout
vote.
-‐
A
decision
to
threatened,
the
fifteen-‐day
cooling-‐off
period
shall
not
declare
a
strike
must
be
approved
by
a
majority
of
the
apply
and
the
union
may
take
action
immediately
after
total
union
membership
in
the
bargaining
unit
the
strike
vote
is
conducted
and
the
results
thereof
concerned
obtained
by
secret
ballot
in
meetings
or
submitted
to
the
appropriate
regional
branch
of
the
referenda
called
for
the
purpose.
A
decision
to
declare
Board.
a
lockout
must
be
approved
by
a
majority
of
the
Board
Section
8.
Contents
of
notice.
-‐
The
notice
shall
state,
of
Directors
of
the
employer,
corporation
or
among
others,
the
names
and
addresses
of
the
association
or
the
partners
in
a
partnership
obtained
employer
and
the
union
involved,
the
nature
of
the
by
a
secret
ballot
in
a
meeting
called
for
the
purpose.
industry
to
which
the
employer
belongs,
the
number
The
regional
branch
of
the
Board
may,
at
its
own
of
union
members
and
of
the
workers
in
the
initiative
or
upon
request
of
any
affected
party,
bargaining
unit,
and
such
other
relevant
data
as
may
supervise
the
conduct
of
the
secret
balloting.
In
every
facilitate
the
settlement
of
the
dispute,
such
as
a
brief
case,
the
union
or
the
employer
shall
furnish
the
statement
or
enumeration
of
all
pending
labor
regional
branch
of
the
Board
and
the
notice
of
disputes
involving
the
same
parties.
meetings
referred
to
in
the
preceding
paragraph
at
In
cases
of
bargaining
deadlocks,
the
notice
shall,
least
twenty-‐four
(24)
hours
before
such
meetings
as
as
far
as
practicable,
further
state
the
unresolved
well
as
the
results
of
the
voting
at
least
seven
(7)
days
issues
in
the
bargaining
negotiations
and
be
before
the
intended
strike
or
lockout,
subject
to
the
accompanied
by
the
written
proposals
of
the
union,
cooling-‐off
period
provided
in
this
Rule
the
counter-‐proposals
of
the
employer
and
the
proof
Section
11.
Declaration
of
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
Should
the
of
a
request
for
conference
to
settle
the
differences.
In
dispute
remain
unsettled
after
the
lapse
of
the
cases
of
unfair
labor
practices,
the
notice
shall,
as
far
requisite
number
of
days
from
the
filing
of
the
notice
as
practicable,
state
the
acts
complained
of
and
the
of
strike
or
lockout
and
of
the
results
of
the
election
efforts
taken
to
resolve
the
dispute
amicably.
required
in
the
preceding
section,
the
labor
union
may
In
case
a
notice
does
not
conform
with
the
strike
or
the
employer
may
lock
out
its
workers.
The
requirements
of
this
and
the
foregoing
section/s,
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall
continue
mediating
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall
inform
the
and
conciliating.
concerned
party
of
such
fact.
Section
12.
Improved
offer
balloting.
-‐
In
case
of
a
Section
9.
Action
on
Notice.
-‐
Upon
receipt
of
the
strike,
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall,
at
its
notice,
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall
exert
own
initiative
or
upon
the
request
of
any
affected
all
efforts
at
mediation
and
conciliation
to
enable
the
party,
conduct
a
referendum
by
secret
balloting
on
the
parties
to
settle
the
dispute
amicably.
The
regional
improved
offer
of
the
employer
on
or
before
the
30th
branch
of
the
Board
may,
upon
agreement
of
the
day
of
strike.
When
at
least
a
majority
of
the
union
parties,
treat
a
notice
as
a
preventive
mediation
case.
members
vote
to
accept
the
improved
offer,
the
It
shall
also
encourage
the
parties
to
submit
the
striking
workers
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
dispute
to
voluntary
arbitration.
the
employer
shall
thereupon
re-‐admit
them
upon
the
signing
of
the
agreement.
During
the
proceedings,
the
parties
shall
not
do
any
act
which
may
disrupt
or
impede
the
early
settlement
In
case
of
a
lockout,
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
of
the
dispute.
They
are
obliged,
as
part
of
their
duty
to
shall
also
conduct
a
referendum
by
secret
balloting
on
65
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
the
reduced
offer
of
the
union
on
or
before
the
30th
Section
15.
Assumption
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
day
of
the
lockout.
When
at
least
a
majority
of
the
Employment.
–
When
a
labor
dispute
causes
or
is
likely
board
of
directors
or
trustees
or
the
partners
holding
to
cause
a
strike
or
lockout
in
an
industry
the
controlling
interest
in
the
case
of
partnership
vote
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
the
secretary
of
to
accept
the
reduced
offer,
the
workers
shall
labor
and
employment
may
assume
jurisdiction
over
immediately
return
to
work
and
the
employer
shall
the
dispute
and
decide
it
or
certify
the
same
to
the
thereupon
readmit
them
upon
the
signing
of
the
National
Labor
Relations
Commission
for
compulsory
agreement.
arbitration,
provided,
that
any
of
the
following
conditions
is
present:
Section
13.
Peaceful
picketing.
-‐
Workers
shall
have
the
right
to
peaceful
picketing.
No
person
engaged
in
1.
Both
parties
have
requested
the
Secretary
of
Labor
picketing
shall
commit
any
act
of
violence,
coercion
and
Employment
to
assume
jurisdiction
over
the
labor
or
intimidation
or
obstruct
the
free
ingress
to
or
dispute;
or
egress
from
the
employer's
premises
for
lawful
purposes,
or
obstruct
public
thoroughfares.
2.
After
a
conference
called
by
the
office
of
the
secretary
of
labor
and
employment
on
the
propriety
of
No
person
shall
obstruct,
impede
or
interfere
with,
by
its
issuance,
motu
proprio
or
upon
a
request
or
force,
violence,
coercion,
threats
or
intimidation,
any
petition
by
either
parties
to
the
labor
dispute.
peaceful
picketing
by
workers
during
any
labor
controversy
or
in
the
exercise
of
the
right
to
self-‐ Such
assumption
shall
have
the
effect
of
automatically
organization
or
collective
bargaining
or
shall
aid
or
enjoining
an
impending
strike
or
lockout.
If
a
abet
such
obstruction
or
interference.
No
employer
strike/lockout
has
already
taken
place
at
the
time
of
shall
use
or
employ
any
person
to
commit
such
acts
assumption,
all
striking
or
locked
out
employees
and
nor
shall
any
person
be
employed
for
such
purpose.
other
employees
subject
of
the
notice
of
strike
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
the
employer
shall
Section
14.
Injunctions.
-‐
No
court
or
entity
shall
enjoin
immediately
resume
operations
and
readmit
all
any
picketing,
strike
or
lockout,
except
as
provided
in
employees
under
the
same
terms
and
conditions
Articles
218
and
263
of
the
Labor
Code.
prevailing
before
the
strike
or
lockout.
The
Commission
shall
have
the
power
to
issue
Notwithstanding
the
foregoing,
parties
to
the
case
may
temporary
restraining
orders
in
such
cases
but
only
agree
at
any
time
to
submit
the
dispute
to
the
after
due
notice
and
hearing
and
in
accordance
with
its
Secretary
of
Labor
or
his
duly
authorized
rules.
The
reception
of
evidence
for
the
application
of
representative
as
voluntary
arbitrator
or
to
a
duly
a
writ
of
injunction
may
be
delegated
by
the
accredited
voluntary
arbitrator
or
to
a
panel
of
Commission
to
any
Labor
Arbiter
who
shall
submit
his
voluntary
arbitrators.
recommendations
to
the
Commission
for
its
consideration
and
resolution.
Section
16.
Requirement
for
Minimum
Operational
Any
ex
parte
restraining
order
issued
by
the
Service.
–
In
labor
disputes
adversely
affecting
the
Commission,
or
its
chairman
or
Vice-‐Chairman
where
continued
operation
of
hospitals,
clinics
or
medical
the
Commission
is
not
in
session
and
as
prescribed
by
institutions,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
the
striking
union
or
its
rules,
shall
be
valid
for
a
period
not
exceeding
locking-‐out
employer
to
provide
and
maintain
an
twenty
(20)
days.
effective
skeletal
workforce
of
medical
and
other
health
personnel
whose
movement
and
services
shall
*Section
15.
Criminal
prosecution.
-‐
The
regular
courts
be
unhampered
and
unrestricted,
as
are
necessary
to
shall
have
jurisdiction
over
any
criminal
action
ensure
the
prosper
and
adequate
protection
of
the
life
under
Article
272
of
the
Labor
Code.
and
health
of
its
patients,
most
especially
emergency
cases,
for
the
duration
of
the
strike
or
lockout.
*(DO
40-‐G-‐03.
S
2010
has
amended
Book
V,
Rule
XXII
and
added
new
provisions.
Sections
15-‐19
now
read):
Section
17.
Decision
of
the
Assumed
Labor
Dispute;
Finality.
–
The
decision
of
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
66
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Employment,
the
NLRC
or
voluntary
arbitrator
or
slowdown
is
illegal
panel
of
voluntary
arbitrators
shall
be
rendered
within
Held:
Refusal
of
employees
to
adhere
to
the
usual
thirty
(30)
calendar
days
from
submission
of
the
case
work
schedule
(accdg
to
SMC,
a
slowdown)
is
illegal.
It
for
resolution
and
shall
be
final
and
executory
ten
(10)
is
prohibited
by
the
law
and
also
by
their
own
CBA.
calendar
days
after
receipt
thereof
by
the
parties.
Regardless
of
whether
it
is
a
slowdown
or
not,
it
is
still
Section
18.
Prohibitions
on
law
enforcement
agencies
or
prohibited
by
their
CBA.
The
legality
of
concerted
public
officials/employees,
armed
persons,
private
activities
usually
depends
on
the
legality
of
the
security
guards
and
similar
personnel
in
the
private
purpose.
It
can
be
restricted
by
law
or
contract.
In
this
security
agency.
Exception.
–
No
public
official
or
case,
the
law
is
Sec.
3
of
RA6727,
which
prescribes
employee,
including
officers
and
personnel
of
the
specific
procedure
for
the
correction
of
wage
armed
forces
of
the
Philippines
or
the
Philippine
distortion
and
implicitly
excluded
strikes,
lockouts
or
National
Police,
or
armed
person,
private
security
other
concerted
activities
as
means
of
settling
the
guards
and
similar
personnel
in
the
private
security
issue.
agency
shall
bring
in,
introduce
or
escort
in
any
manner,
any
individual
who
seeks
to
replace
strikers
3.
Limitations
in
entering
or
leaving
the
premises
of
a
strike
area,
or
BLT
Bus
Co
v
NLRC
work
in
place
of
the
strikers.
Facts:
A
dispute
arose
between
BLTB
Co.
and
its
union;
The
police
force
shall
keep
out
of
the
picket
lines
the
union
eventually
went
on
strike.
The
Secretary
unless
actual
violence
or
other
criminal
acts
occur
assumed
jurisdiction
of
the
case
and
certified
it
to
the
therein.
NLRC
for
arbitration.
Despite
this,
the
strike
continued.
A
return-‐to-‐work
order
was
issued
by
the
But
any
public
officer,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
NLRC,
but
the
190
members/respondents
here
did
not
Employment
or
the
NLRC
may
seek
the
assistance
of
return
to
work
within
the
period
given.
However,
the
law
enforcement
agencies
to
maintain
peace
and
NLRC
still
directed
BLTB
to
reinstate
these
members.
order,
protect
life
and
property,
and/or
enforce
the
law
and
legal
order
pursuant
to
the
provisions
of
the
joint
DOLE-‐DILG-‐PEZA
Guidelines
in
the
conduct
of
Held:
While
“a
strike
that
is
undertaken
despite
the
PNP
Personnel,
Economic
Zone
Police
and
security
issuance
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
of
an
assumption
or
guards,
company
security
guards
and
similar
certification
order
becomes
a
prohibited
activity
and
personnel
during
labor
disputes.
thus
illegal”,
the
NLRC
did
not
declare
a
wholesale
Section
19.
Criminal
prosecution.
-‐
The
regular
courts
forfeiture
of
employment
to
all
who
participated
in
the
shall
have
jurisdiction
over
any
criminal
action
under
strike
in
this
case,
because
there
was
inadequate
Article
272
of
the
Labor
Code,
as
amended,
but
subject
service
of
the
certification
order
on
the
union
as
of
the
to
the
required
clearance
from
the
DOLE
on
cases
date
the
strike
was
declared.
Any
violation
of
the
legal
arising
out
of
or
related
to
a
labor
dispute
pursuant
to
requirements
and
strictures,
such
as
a
defiance
of
a
the
Ministry
of
Justice
(now
the
Department
of
Justice)
return-‐to-‐work
order
in
industries
affected
with
Circular
No.
15,
Series
of
1982
and
Circular
No.
9
public
interest,
will
render
the
strike
illegal,
to
the
Series
of
1986.
(As
amended
by
DO
40-‐G-‐03,
S.
2010)
detriment
of
the
very
workers
it
is
supposed
to
protect.
Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC
B.
Strike
Facts:
Due
to
the
passage
of
a
new
law,
the
employees
alleged
that
a
wage
distortion
had
arisen
and
should
1.
Definition
be
acted
upon
by
SMC.
Since
they
allege
that
the
Art.
212
(o).
Definitions
–
company
didn’t
act
on
their
demand,
they
stopped
working
overtime
(their
regular
work
schedule
(o)
"Strike"
means
any
temporary
stoppage
of
work
by
incorporated
overtime
every
shift).
SMC
filed
a
the
concerted
action
of
employees
as
a
result
of
an
complaint
against
the
union,
arguing
that
the
industrial
or
labor
dispute.
67
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
strike-‐vote
report
submitted
to
the
DOLE
at
least
7
management.
It
is
a
weapon
that
can
either
breathe
days
before
the
intended
date
of
the
strike,
there
was
life
to
or
destroy
the
union
and
its
members
in
their
non-‐observance
of
cooling-‐off
period
prescribed
by
struggle
with
management
for
a
more
equitable
due
of
law,
and
there
was
non-‐observance
of
7-‐day
visiting
their
labors.
The
decision
to
wield
the
weapon
of
period
after
submission
of
strike
vote.
strike
must,
therefore,
rest
on
a
rational
basis,
free
from
emotionalism,
unswayed
by
the
tempers
and
2.
Nature
and
Purpose
tantrums
of
a
few
hotheads,
and
firmly
focused
on
the
BLT
Bus
Co
v
NLRC
legitimate
interest
of
the
union
which
should
not,
however,
be
antithetical
to
the
public
welfare.
Thus,
Facts:
A
dispute
arose
between
BLTB
Co.
and
its
union;
our
laws
require
the
decision
to
strike
to
be
the
the
union
eventually
went
on
strike.
The
Secretary
consensus
of
the
majority
for
while
the
majority
is
not
assumed
jurisdiction
of
the
case
and
certified
it
to
the
infallible,
still,
it
is
the
best
hedge
against
haste
and
NLRC
for
arbitration.
Despite
this,
the
strike
error.
In
addition,
a
majority
vote
assures
the
union
it
continued.
A
return-‐to-‐work
order
was
issued
by
the
will
go
to
war
against
management
with
the
strength
NLRC,
but
the
190
members/respondents
here
did
not
derived
from
unity
and
hence,
with
better
chance
to
return
to
work
within
the
period
given.
However,
the
succeed.
NLRC
still
directed
BLTB
to
reinstate
these
members.
4.
Scope
of
the
term
“strike”
Held:
The
right
to
strike
is
one
of
the
rights
recognized
Sta.
Rosa
Coca-‐Cola
Plant
Employees
Union
v
CCBP
and
guaranteed
by
the
Constitution
as
an
instrument
of
labor
for
its
protection
against
exploitation
by
Facts:
Company
alleged
that
Union
conducted
an
management.
By
virtue
of
this
right,
the
workers
are
illegal
strike.
Union
claimed
that
they
did
not
strike,
able
to
press
their
demands
for
better
terms
of
but
only
exercised
their
right
to
picket.
employment
with
more
energy
and
persuasiveness,
Held:
It
was
a
strike.
Art.
212(o)
of
the
LC
defines
poising
the
threat
to
strike
as
their
reaction
to
the
strike
as
a
temporary
stoppage
of
work
by
the
employer's
intransigence.
The
strike
is
indeed
a
concerted
action
of
employees
as
a
result
of
an
powerful
weapon
of
the
working
class.
But
precisely
industrial
or
labor
dispute.
It
can
mean
work
stoppages,
slowdowns,
mass
leaves,
attempts
to
because
of
this,
it
must
be
handled
carefully,
like
a
damage
equipment,
and
other
similar
activities.
sensitive
explosive,
lest
it
blow
up
in
the
workers'
own
(Picketing
involves
merely
marching
to
and
fro
at
the
hands.
Thus,
it
must
be
declared
only
after
the
most
premises
of
the
employer,
usually
accompanied
by
the
thoughtful
consultation
among
them,
conducted
in
the
display
of
placards
making
known
the
facts
involved
in
only
way
allowed,
that
is,
peacefully,
and
in
every
case
a
labor
dispute.)
conformably
to
reasonable
regulation.
5.
Effect
on
Work
Relationship
3.
Rationale
for
Regulation
by
Law
Art.
212
(o),
supra
p.
67
69
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
basis,
not
collectively,
according
to
Art.
264(a).
a.
Unfair
Labor
Practice
Art.
263
(c).
Strikes,
Picketing
and
Lockouts.
–
G&S
Transport
Corp
v.
Tito
S.
Infante
(c)
In
case
of
bargaining
deadlocks,
the
duly
certified
or
recognized
bargaining
agent
may
file
a
notice
of
Facts:
G&S
allegedly
received
a
letter
from
the
Union
strike
or
the
employer
may
file
a
notice
of
lockout
with
demanding
the
dismissal
of
2
employees
on
the
the
Ministry
at
least
30
day
before
the
intended
date
ground
that
they
were
guilty
of
committing
acts
of
thereof.
In
cases
of
unfair
labor
practice,
the
period
of
disloyalty
by
filing
a
petition
calling
for
a
local
election.
notice
shall
be
15
days
and
in
the
absence
of
a
duly
G&S
acceded
and
dismissed
these
2
employees.
certified
or
recognized
bargaining
agent,
the
notice
of
Subsequently,
the
respondents
(employed
by
G&S
as
strike
may
be
filed
by
any
legitimate
labor
drivers)
learned
of
this
incident
and
stopped
driving
organization
in
behalf
of
its
members.
However,
in
their
taxicabs
in
sympathy
for
their
dismissed
case
of
dismissal
from
employment
of
union
officers
colleagues.
duly
elected
in
accordance
with
the
union
constitution
Held:
Illegal
strike.
Under
Art.
212,
a
valid
strike
and
by-‐laws,
which
may
constitute
union
busting,
presupposes
the
existence
of
a
labor
dispute.
Here,
where
the
existence
of
the
union
is
threatened,
the
there
is
no
such
labor
dispute.
As
such,
they
15-‐day
cooling-‐off
period
shall
not
apply
and
the
committed
an
illegal
strike
in
the
form
of
a
sit-‐down
union
may
take
action
immediately.
(As
amended
strike.
Pursuant
to
Art.
264,
Union
officers
may
be
by
Executive
Order
No.
111,
December
24,
1986).
dismissed
by
mere
participation
and
members
cannot
be
dismissed
since
there
was
no
proof
of
illegal
acts.
Shell
Oil
Workers
Union
v
Shell
Co
of
the
Phils
Facts:
Shell
dissolved
its
security
guard
section,
6.
Types
and
Conversion
despite
such
section
being
covered
and
assured
by
the
Master
Iron
Labor
v
NLRC
existing
CBA.
The
Union
held
a
strike.
Shell
argued
that
the
move
was
within
its
management
prerogative.
Facts:
MILU
enters
into
a
CBA
with
Master
Iron
with
a
Held:
Shell
committed
ULP
in
dissolving
the
security
provision
that
there
will
be
no
strike,
lockout,
or
any
guard
section.
Even
though
such
is
normally
within
interruption
of
work,
and
an
extra
service
allowance
management
prerogative,
in
this
case,
Shell
violated
for
all
those
employees
performing
work
outside
the
the
CBA,
which
protected
the
said
section.
The
duty
to
plant.
To
circumvent
the
second
provision,
Master
Iron
bargain
is
a
continuous
process
which
imposes
on
the
hires
casual
employees
to
do
all
the
work
to
be
done
parties
the
obligation
to
live
up
to
the
terms
of
the
outside
the
plant.
MILU
tries
to
reconcile
through
the
agreement.
As
such,
it
is
undeniable
that
non-‐
DOLE,
but
Master
Iron
ignores
them
and
refuses
to
compliance
to
the
agreement
constitutes
an
unfair
follow
any
agreements
between
the
parties.
MILU
labor
practice.
Consequently,
the
strike
held
by
the
stages
a
strike.
The
LA
and
NLRC
declare
this
strike
Union
was
not
illegal
because
it
was
only
made
as
a
illegal
and
terminated
those
who
participated.
response
to
the
company’s
commission
of
a
ULP.
a. Bargaining
Deadlock
–
Economic/ULP
Held:
SC
says
that
a
no-‐strike
clause
in
a
CBA
is
Art.
263
(c),
supra
applicable
only
to
economic
strikes,
if
the
strike
is
founded
on
an
unfair
labor
practice
of
the
employer,
a
Consolidated
Labor
Association
of
the
Phils.
v
strike
declared
by
the
union
cannot
be
considered
a
Marsman
and
Co
violation
of
the
no-‐strike
clause.
Since
the
strike
was
only
for
implementation
of
a
provision
of
the
CBA,
it
is
Facts:
The
Union
staged
a
strike
when
they
failed
to
not
an
economic
one.
reach
an
agreement
with
the
Company.
The
Company
called
the
employees
back
and
promised
to
discuss
with
the
Union
their
demands.
However,
the
Company
refused
the
admittance
of
some
workers
unless
they
ceased
to
be
active
union
members.
As
a
result,
the
70
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
strike
was
resumed.
the
assumption
or
certification
order.
If
one
has
already
taken
place
at
the
time
of
assumption
or
Held:
Company
guilty
of
ULP
in
its
refusal
to
reinstate
certification,
all
striking
or
locked
out
employees
shall
complaints
because
of
their
union
activities.
The
immediately
return-‐to-‐work
and
the
employer
shall
striking
employees
have
a
right
of
reinstatement
since
immediately
resume
operations
and
readmit
all
the
economic
strike
was
converted
to
a
ULP
strike.
workers
under
the
same
terms
and
conditions
Although
it
started
as
an
economic
strike
that
arose
prevailing
before
the
strike
or
lockout.
The
Secretary
from
a
deadlock
with
regard
to
economic
benefits,
it
of
Labor
and
Employment
or
the
Commission
may
was
converted
when
the
reason
for
strike
became
the
seek
the
assistance
of
law
enforcement
agencies
to
Company’s
refusal
to
reinstate
employees
due
to
union
ensure
compliance
with
this
provision
as
well
as
activities.
with
such
orders
as
he
may
issue
to
enforce
the
same.
c.
Non-‐conversion—Strike
to
Lockout
In
line
with
the
national
concern
for
and
the
highest
Sukhothai
Cuisine
and
Restaurant
v
CA
respect
accorded
to
the
right
of
patients
to
life
and
health,
strikes
and
lockouts
in
hospitals,
clinics
and
Facts:
Members
of
the
Union
filed
a
Notice
of
Strike
similar
medical
institutions
shall,
to
every
extent
and
conducted
a
Strike
vote.
The
Union
and
the
possible,
be
avoided,
and
all
serious
efforts,
not
only
company
eventually
entered
into
a
Submission
by
labor
and
management
but
government
as
well,
be
agreement,
agreeing
to
submit
the
ULP
issue
for
exhausted
to
substantially
minimize,
if
not
prevent,
voluntary
arbitration.
During
the
pendency
of
the
their
adverse
effects
on
such
life
and
health,
through
arbitration,
the
company
dismissed
two
union
the
exercise,
however
legitimate,
by
labor
of
its
members,
which
triggered
a
strike.
right
to
strike
and
by
management
to
lockout.
In
labor
disputes
adversely
affecting
the
continued
Held:
Strike
was
illegal.
No
strike
or
lockout
can
be
made
during
the
pendency
of
the
case/s.
Voluntary
operation
of
such
hospitals,
clinics
or
medical
institutions,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
the
striking
union
or
arbitration
was
entered
into
precisely
to
discuss
the
locking-‐out
employer
to
provide
and
maintain
an
ULP
issue.
There
can
be
no
good
faith
here
as
the
effective
skeletal
workforce
of
medical
and
other
Union
was
fully
aware
of
the
proceedings.
health
personnel,
whose
movement
and
services
shall
7.
Grounds
be
unhampered
and
unrestricted,
as
are
necessary
to
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
5,
supra
p.
64
insure
the
proper
and
adequate
protection
of
the
life
and
health
of
its
patients,
most
especially
emergency
a.
Allowable
Strikes
cases,
for
the
duration
of
the
strike
or
lockout.
In
such
cases,
therefore,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Art.
263
(c),
supra
p.
70
Employment
may
immediately
assume,
within
twenty
four
(24)
hours
from
knowledge
of
the
occurrence
of
b.
Prohibited
Strikes
such
a
strike
or
lockout,
jurisdiction
over
the
same
or
Art.
263
(b),
supra.
p.
64
certify
it
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
arbitration.
For
this
purpose,
the
contending
parties
are
strictly
enjoined
to
comply
with
such
orders,
Art.
263
(g).
Strikes,
Picketing
and
Lockouts.
prohibitions
and/or
injunctions
as
are
issued
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
or
the
(g)
When,
in
his
opinion,
there
exists
a
labor
dispute
Commission,
under
pain
of
immediate
disciplinary
causing
or
likely
to
cause
a
strike
or
lockout
in
an
action,
including
dismissal
or
loss
of
employment
industry
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
the
status
or
payment
by
the
locking-‐out
employer
of
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
may
assume
backwages,
damages
and
other
affirmative
relief,
even
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute
and
decide
it
or
certify
criminal
prosecution
against
either
or
both
of
them.
the
same
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
arbitration.
Such
assumption
or
certification
shall
The
foregoing
notwithstanding,
the
President
of
the
have
the
effect
of
automatically
enjoining
the
Philippines
shall
not
be
precluded
from
determining
intended
or
impending
strike
or
lockout
as
specified
in
the
industries
that,
in
his
opinion,
are
indispensable
to
71
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
the
national
interest,
and
from
intervening
at
any
time
Employment
shall
also
conduct
a
referendum
by
and
assuming
jurisdiction
over
any
such
labor
dispute
secret
balloting
on
the
reduced
offer
of
the
union
on
or
in
order
to
settle
or
terminate
the
same.
before
the
30th
day
of
the
lockout.
When
at
least
a
majority
of
the
board
of
directors
or
trustees
or
the
partners
holding
the
controlling
interest
in
the
case
of
a
partnership
vote
to
accept
the
reduced
offer,
the
Art.
264
(a).
Prohibited
Activities.
–
workers
shall
immediately
return
to
work
and
the
(a)
No
labor
organization
or
employer
shall
declare
employer
shall
thereupon
readmit
them
upon
the
a
strike
or
lockout
without
first
having
bargained
signing
of
the
agreement.
(Incorporated
by
Section
28,
collectively
in
accordance
with
Title
VII
of
this
Book
Republic
Act
No.
6715,
March
21,
1989).
or
without
first
having
filed
the
notice
required
in
the
preceding
Article
or
without
the
necessary
strike
or
i.
Assumption
of
jurisdiction
lockout
vote
first
having
been
obtained
and
reported
Art.
263
(g),
supra
p.
71
to
the
Ministry.
Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
(IBM)
v
NLRC
No
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
declared
after
assumption
of
jurisdiction
by
the
President
or
the
Minister
or
after
certification
or
submission
of
the
dispute
to
Facts:
Employees
alleged
wage
distortion
and
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration
or
during
the
demanded
that
the
Company
(SMC)
make
the
pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
grounds
for
the
necessary
adjustments.
When
the
Company
allegedly
strike
or
lockout.
did
nothing,
they
stopped
working
overtime.
Note
that
overtime
was
included
in
their
regular
work
schedule.
Any
worker
whose
employment
has
been
Held:
The
employees’
refusal
to
adhere
to
the
usual
terminated
as
a
consequence
of
any
unlawful
work
schedule
is
illegal,
prohibited
by
both
law
and
lockout
shall
be
entitled
to
reinstatement
with
full
contract.
Although
engaging
in
concerted
activities
is
a
backwages.
Any
union
officer
who
knowingly
right
granted
to
both
employees
and
employers,
there
participates
in
an
illegal
strike
and
any
worker
or
are
limitations
to
the
exercise
of
this
right.
It
is
union
officer
who
knowingly
participates
in
the
prohibited
by
law
since
Sec.
3
of
RA
6727
provides
for
commission
of
illegal
acts
during
a
strike
may
be
a
specific
procedure
to
correct
wage
distortions.
It
is
declared
to
have
lost
his
employment
status:
also
prohibited
by
contract,
as
their
CBA
clearly
Provided,
That
mere
participation
of
a
worker
in
a
proscribed
strikes
or
similar
concerted
activities
as
a
lawful
strike
shall
not
constitute
sufficient
ground
for
mode
of
resolving
disputes
(instead
the
issue
should
termination
of
his
employment,
even
if
a
replacement
only
go
through
the
prescribed
grievance
procedure).
had
been
hired
by
the
employer
during
such
lawful
strike.
management
has
the
prerogative
to
terminate
their
courts
of
criminal
and
civil
liabilities
arising
from
employment
or
reinstate
them
after
the
illegal
strike
violations
of
the
rights
and
conditions
of
union
ceases.
membership.
in
the
CBA.
20,
Republic
Act
No.
6715,
March
21,
1989).
Held:
Not
an
illegal
strike
even
though
there
was
a
“no
strike,
no
lockout
clause”
in
the
CBA.
Such
clause
can
only
be
used
against
strikes
undertaken
as
economic
Art.
251.
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
in
the
absence
of
leverage,
and
not
in
cases
of
ULP
(whether
or
not
such
collective
bargaining
agreements.
–
In
the
absence
of
ULP
is
later
on
proven).
an
agreement
or
other
voluntary
arrangement
providing
for
a
more
expeditious
manner
of
collective
8.
Striking
Party
bargaining,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
employer
and
the
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
6,
supra
p.
64
representatives
of
the
employees
to
bargain
collectively
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
this
9.
Procedural
Requirements
Code.
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
5-‐11,
supra
p.
64
(d)
During
the
conciliation
proceedings
in
the
Board,
b.
Filing
of
Notice
of
Intention
the
parties
are
prohibited
from
doing
any
act
which
Art.
263
(c),
supra
p.70
may
disrupt
or
impede
the
early
settlement
of
the
disputes;
and
(e)
The
Board
shall
exert
all
efforts
to
settle
disputes
Art.
263
(d).
Strikes,
Picketing
and
Lockouts.
–
amicably
and
encourage
the
parties
to
submit
their
(d)
The
notice
must
be
in
accordance
with
such
case
to
a
voluntary
arbitrator.
(As
amended
by
Section
implementing
rules
and
regulations
as
the
Minister
of
74
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Art.
263
(e).
Strikes,
Picketing
and
Lockouts.
–
Art.
264
(a),
supra
p.
72
(e)
During
the
cooling-‐off
period,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
Pilipino
Telephone
Corp
v
PILTEA
the
Ministry
to
exert
all
efforts
at
mediation
and
conciliation
to
effect
a
voluntary
settlement.
Should
Facts:
The
Union
filed
two
notices
of
strike.
After
the
the
dispute
remain
unsettled
until
the
lapse
of
the
filing
of
the
first,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
issued
an
requisite
number
of
days
from
the
mandatory
filing
of
assumption
order
and
directed
both
parties
not
to
do
the
notice,
the
labor
union
may
strike
or
the
employer
anything
that
would
exacerbate
the
situation.
Despite
may
declare
a
lockout.
the
order,
the
Union
filed
a
second
notice
and
went
on
strike.
Held:
The
strike
was
illegal
for
non-‐compliance
with
Art.
264
(a),
supra
p.72
procedural
requirements
and
defiance
of
the
Secretary’s
order.
The
Union
did
not
comply
with
the
mandatory
requirements
as
set
forth
in
Art.
263
in
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
7,
supra
p.
64
that
they
did
not
observe
(1)
the
required
strike-‐vote
before
the
commencement
of
the
strike
and
(2)
the
c.
Observance
of
Cooling-‐off
Period
mandatory
cooling-‐off
period
between
notice
and
Art.
263
(c),
supra
p.
70
actual
strike.
As
to
the
cooling-‐off
period,
there
was
no
union
busting
that
took
place,
which
would
have
warranted
its
nonobservance.
75
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
after
investigation,
dismissed.
The
Union
held
a
strike.
right
by
providing
procedural
steps
before
a
strike
Note
that
the
Union
failed
to
observe
procedural
may
be
conducted.
Failure
to
follow
the
mandated
requirements
(notice,
2/3
strike
vote
by
secret
ballot,
steps
will
render
the
strike
illegal.
and
submission
of
the
strike
vote
to
the
DOLE
seven
days
prior
to
the
strike)
and
some
strikers
harassed
iii.
Defenses—Good
Faith
non-‐strikers
and
committed
acts
of
violence.
Master
Iron
Labor
Union
v
NLRC
Held:
The
strike
was
illegal.
In
jurisprudence,
good
faith
is
a
valid
defense
against
claims
of
illegality
of
a
Facts:
The
CBA
contained
a
provision
providing
an
strike,
but
here
union
officers
clearly
staged
the
strike
extra
service
allowance
for
all
those
employees
in
bad
faith.
Rather
than
a
finding
of
good
faith,
there
performing
work
outside
the
plant.
To
circumvent
the
was
a
finding
of
arrogance,
pride,
and
cynicism.
second
provision,
Master
Iron
hires
casual
employees
to
do
all
the
work
to
be
done
outside
the
plant.
Ii.
Guidelines
and
Balancing
of
Interest
Eventually,
MILU
staged
a
strike
in
spite
of
a
no-‐strike
clause
also
being
provided
for
in
the
CBA.
Shell
Oil
Workers
Union
v
Shell
Co
of
Phils
Held:
A
no-‐strike
clause
in
a
CBA
is
applicable
only
to
economic
strikes..
Here,
the
purpose
of
the
strike
was
Facts:
Union
staged
a
strike
because
the
security
guard
for
the
implementation
of
a
provision
of
the
CBA
and
section
was
dissolved
contrary
to
their
CBA.
was
thus
not
for
economic
reasons.
As
is
in
this
case
wherein
the
strikers
believed
in
good
faith
that
ULP
Held:
Strike
was
valid.
The
determination
of
the
existed,
the
presumption
of
legality
prevails
even
if
the
legality
or
illegality
of
a
strike,
particularly
in
this
allegations
of
ULP
are
subsequently
found
out
to
be
enlightened
era
of
progressive
thinking
on
labor-‐
untrue.
management
relations
is
something
that
cannot
be
achieved
by
mere
straight-‐jacketed
legalistic
argumentation
and
rationalization;
the
process
is
broader
and
deeper
than
that,
for
to
do
justice
in
National
Union
of
Workers
Hotels,
Restaurant
and
deciding
such
an
issue,
it
is
imperative
that
utmost
Allied
Industries
v
NLRC
consideration
should
be
given
to
the
particular
circumstances
of
each
case,
with
a
view
to
having
the
Facts:
The
“rebel
union”
filed
a
notice
of
strike
on
the
most
comprehensive
understanding
of
the
motivations
basis
of
ULP.
NCMB
dismissed
the
notice
because
the
of
the
parties,
in
the
light
of
human
needs
on
the
part
issue
was
a
non-‐strikeable,
being
an
intra-‐union
of
labor,
and
in
the
perspective
of
the
orderly
and
dispute.
Meanwhile,
the
Hotel
dismissed
one
of
their
economical
conduct
of
business
and
industry,
on
the
officers,
which
led
to
a
wildcat
strike.
part
of
management
Held:
Illegal
strike.
Even
when
the
employer
did
not
commit
ULP,
a
strike
is
still
legal
provided
that
the
strikers
believed
in
good
faith
that
ULP
acts
existed.
Stamford
Mark
Corp
v
Julian
This
belief
must
be
warranted
by
the
circumstances.
Such
is
not
the
case
here.
The
dismissal
of
one
of
their
officers
was
not
a
sufficient
ground
to
justify
the
Facts:
Upon
receiving
a
letter
that
the
employees
had
strike.
For
one,
there
were
alternative
remedies,
such
formed
a
union,
the
management
of
the
companies
as
questioning
the
dismissal’s
legality.
began
dismissing
employees.
Employees
went
on
strike.
2. Illegal
Strikes
Held:
Illegal
strike.
There
was
no
showing
that
the
i.
Basis
of
Illegality
Union
was
a
legitimate
labor
organization
entitled
to
file
a
notice
of
strike.
Furthermore,
the
requirements
Art.
263
(b),
supra
p.
64
prescribed
in
Art.
263(c)-‐(f)
were
not
complied
with.
Although
the
right
to
strike
is
embedded
in
the
Constitution,
the
Law
regulates
the
exercise
of
the
said
76
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Art.
263
(c),
supra
p.
70
lockout
shall
be
entitled
to
reinstatement
with
full
backwages.
Any
union
officer
who
knowingly
participates
in
an
illegal
strike
and
any
worker
or
union
officer
who
knowingly
participates
in
the
Art.
265,
supra
p.
72
commission
of
illegal
acts
during
a
strike
may
be
declared
to
have
lost
his
employment
status:
Provided,
That
mere
participation
of
a
worker
in
a
lawful
strike
shall
not
constitute
sufficient
ground
for
Art.
264
(a),
supra
p.
72
termination
of
his
employment,
even
if
a
replacement
had
been
hired
by
the
employer
during
such
lawful
A.
Soriano
Aviation
v
Employees
Association
of
A.
strike.
Soriano
Aviation
(b)
No
person
shall
obstruct,
impede,
or
interfere
with,
by
force,
violence,
coercion,
threats
or
intimidation,
Facts:
Following
the
suspension
of
eight
mechanics,
any
peaceful
picketing
by
employees
during
any
labor
the
Union
went
on
strike
against
the
Company.
Over
a
controversy
or
in
the
exercise
of
the
right
to
self-‐
period
of
9
non-‐consecutive
days
across
8
months,
organization
or
collective
bargaining,
or
shall
aid
or
strikers
shouted
insults
using
a
megaphone,
threw
abet
such
obstruction
or
interference.
water
at
a
personnel
manager,
shouted
at
the
COO,
a
manager,
non-‐striking
employees,
and
officers,
threw
(c)
No
employer
shall
use
or
employ
any
strike-‐
gravel
and
sand
at
the
car
of
the
company’s
lead
man,
breaker,
nor
shall
any
person
be
employed
as
a
strike-‐
etc.
breaker.
Held:
It
was
an
illegal
strike.
In
accordance
with
Art.
(d)
No
public
official
or
employee,
including
officers
264,
even
an
the
otherwise
legal
strike
may
be
and
personnel
of
the
New
Armed
Forces
of
the
rendered
illegal
if
the
means
employed
were
illegal.
Philippines
or
the
Integrated
National
Police,
or
Even
if
the
acts
were
committed
on
non-‐consecutive
armed
person,
shall
bring
in,
introduce
or
escort
in
days,
the
acts
were
still
pervasive.
Art.
264
doesn’t
any
manner,
any
individual
who
seeks
to
replace
require
that
violence
must
be
continuous
or
that
they
strikers
in
entering
or
leaving
the
premises
of
a
strike
should
exist
for
the
entire
duration
of
the
strike.
area,
or
work
in
place
of
the
strikers.
The
police
force
ii.
Illegal
Acts/Prohibited
Activities
shall
keep
out
of
the
picket
lines
unless
actual
violence
or
other
criminal
acts
occur
therein:
Provided,
That
Art.
264.
Prohibited
Activities.
–
nothing
herein
shall
be
interpreted
to
prevent
any
(a)
No
labor
organization
or
employer
shall
declare
public
officer
from
taking
any
measure
necessary
to
a
strike
or
lockout
without
first
having
bargained
maintain
peace
and
order,
protect
life
and
property,
collectively
in
accordance
with
Title
VII
of
this
Book
and/or
enforce
the
law
and
legal
order.
(As
amended
or
without
first
having
filed
the
notice
required
in
the
by
Executive
Order
No.
111,
December
24,
1986).
preceding
Article
or
without
the
necessary
strike
or
(e)
No
person
engaged
in
picketing
shall
commit
any
lockout
vote
first
having
been
obtained
and
reported
act
of
violence,
coercion
or
intimidation
or
obstruct
to
the
Ministry.
the
free
ingress
to
or
egress
from
the
employer’s
No
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
declared
after
assumption
premises
for
lawful
purposes,
or
obstruct
public
of
jurisdiction
by
the
President
or
the
Minister
or
after
thoroughfares.
(As
amended
by
Batas
Pambansa
certification
or
submission
of
the
dispute
to
Bilang
227,
June
1,
1982).
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration
or
during
the
pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
grounds
for
the
Bagong
Pagkakaisa
ng
Manggagawa
ng
Triumph
strike
or
lockout.
Intl
v
DOLE
Sec
Any
worker
whose
employment
has
been
Facts:
The
Labor
Secretary
took
jurisdiction
and
terminated
as
a
consequence
of
any
unlawful
issued
a
return
to
work
order.
The
Union
stopped
some
employees
from
going
back
to
work
by
blocking
77
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
the
entrances.
The
Secretary
issued
another
return
to
grounds
that
the
Union
interposed
for
denying
work
order,
with
police
assistance,
but
the
Company
admission
of
the
photos
are
also
not
binding
on
the
stopped
21
employees
from
entering
the
premises
and
NLRC.
eventually
dismissed
them.
iii.
Effect
of
Union
Non-‐registration
Held:
Illegal
strike.
The
Labor
Secretary's
assumption
of
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute
or
its
certification
to
Magdala
Multipurpose
&
Livelihood
Coop
v
the
NLRC
for
compulsory
arbitration
automatically
Kilusang
Manggagawa
enjoins
the
impending
strike
or
lockout
and
all
employees
shall
immediately
return
to
work.
The
Facts:
KMLMS
filed
a
notice
of
strike
and
conducted
its
Union
and
its
officers,
as
well
as
the
workers,
defied
strike
vote
before
its
registration
as
an
independent
the
Secretary's
assumption
of
jurisdiction
and
the
labor
organization
was
granted
by
the
DOLE.
return
to
work
order.
This
defiance
made
the
strike
a
Held:
The
strike
is
illegal.
When
KMLMS
filed
their
prohibited
activity
under
Art.
264.
As
such,
the
notice
of
strike,
it
had
not
yet
acquired
legal
dismissal
of
union
officers
for
mere
participation
was
personality
and,
thus,
could
not
legally
represent
the
valid.
eventual
union
and
its
members.
Also,
when
KMLMS
conducted
the
strike-‐vote,
there
was
still
no
union
to
speak
of.
It
only
acquired
legal
personality
as
an
C.
Alcantara
&
Sons
Inc.
v
CA
independent
legitimate
labor
organization
the
day
after
it
conducted
its
strike-‐vote.
Consequently,
the
mandatory
notice
of
strike
and
the
conduct
of
the
Facts:
ALSONS
and
its
labor
union
had
a
CBA
and
strike-‐vote
report
were
ineffective.
The
law,
in
agreed
on
a
“no
strike,
no
lockout”
clause.
Union
still
providing
who
may
declare
a
strike
or
lockout,
refers
held
a
strike.
to
a
“duly
certified
or
recognized
bargaining
agent”
Held:
Court
held
that
even
if
the
procedural
and
(Art.
263
of
the
Labor
Code)
and
“legitimate
labor
requirements
were
complied
with,
the
strike
was
organization”
(Rule
XXII,
Book
V
of
the
Omnibus
Rules
illegal
because
of
the
“no
strike,
no
lockout”
agreement
Implementing
the
Labor
Code).
in
the
CBA.
Since
the
strike
was
illegal,
the
Union
officers
can,
in
accordance
with
law,
be
terminated
iv.
Effect
of
Illegality
from
employment
for
their
actions.
This
includes
the
Art.
264
(a),
supra
p.
72
shop
stewards.
As
regards
the
rank
and
file
Union
members,
Art.
264
of
the
Labor
Code
provides
that
Sukhothai
Cuisine
and
Restaurant
v
CA
termination
is
not
warranted
by
the
mere
fact
that
a
union
member
has
taken
part
in
an
illegal
strike.
It
Facts:
The
union
filed
a
Notice
of
Strike
and
conducted
must
be
shown
that
such
a
union
member,
clearly
a
strike
vote.
The
union
and
the
company
eventually
identified,
performed
an
illegal
act
or
acts
during
the
entered
into
a
Submission
Agreement,
agreeing
to
strike.
In
the
case
at
bar,
substantial
evidence
supports
submit
the
ULP
issue
for
voluntary
arbitration.
During
the
termination
of
certain
union
members.
Affidavits
the
pendency
of
the
arbitration,
the
company
and
testimonies,
the
NLRC
Sheriff’s
report,
and
photos
dismissed
2
union
members.
The
union
staged
a
taken
of
the
strike
all
reveal
that
those
union
members
wildcat
strike.
LA
declared
the
strike
illegal
and
the
threatened,
coerced,
and
intimidated
non-‐striking
members’
termination
valid.
NLRC
granted
employees,
officers,
suppliers
and
customers;
respondents’
appeal.
CA
affirmed
the
NLRC.
obstructed
the
free
ingress
to
and
egress
from
the
company
premises;
and
resisted
and
defied
the
Held:
SC
ruled
in
favor
of
petitioner.
Strike
was
illegal.
implementation
of
the
writ
of
preliminary
injunction
Art.
264
of
the
Labor
Code
states
that
it
is
prohibited
issued
against
them.
The
mere
fact
that
the
criminal
for
a
strike
or
lockout
to
be
declared
after
assumption
complaints
filed
against
such
union
members
were
of
jurisdiction
by
the
President
or
the
Secretary
of
subsequently
dismissed
does
not
extinguish
their
Labor,
or
after
certification
or
submission
of
the
liability
under
the
Labor
Code,
nor
does
it
bar
the
dispute
to
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration,
or
admission
of
the
evidence
presented.
The
technical
during
the
pendency
of
the
cases
involved
in
the
78
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
lockout.
At
the
time
the
strike
was
staged,
voluntary
be
validly
dismissed
for
illegally
blocking
ingress
to
arbitration
between
the
parties
was
ongoing
by
virtue
and
egress
from
company
premises
during
the
illegal
of
the
Submission
Agreement.
In
Samahang
strike,
as
they
were
individually
identified
through
Manggagawa
sa
Sulpicio
Lines,
Inc.-‐NAFLU
v
Sulpicion
affidavits
of
other
PHIMCO
employees.
Lines,
Inc.,
the
Court
explained
that
the
effect
of
illegal
strikes
(as
outlined
in
Art.
264)
differs
between
Liabilities
of
participating
members/officers
of
workers
and
union
officers
who
participate
in
them.
the
union
An
ordinary
striking
worker
cannot
be
terminated
for
Art.
264
(a),
supra
p.
72
mere
participation;
there
must
be
proof
that
he
committed
illegal
acts,
he
must
be
identified
based
on
Danilo
Escario
et
al
v
NLRC
substantial
evidence,
and
liability
is
to
be
determined
on
an
individual
basis.
A
union
officer,
on
the
other
Facts:
Petitioners
were
employees
of
Pinakamasarap
hand,
may
be
terminated
upon
proof
that
he
Corporation
who
engaged
in
a
strike.
The
Labor
knowingly
participated
in
an
illegal
strike,
whether
or
Arbiter
found
the
strike
to
be
illegal.
This
was
affirmed
not
he
committed
illegal
acts.
by
the
NLRC
but
the
latter
reversed
the
ruling
on
abandonment
and
reinstated
the
union
members
who
were
terminated.
Petitioners
sought
payment
of
full
Phimco
Industries
Inc
v
Phimco
Industries
Labor
backwages
(from
the
date
of
their
dismissal
to
the
date
Association
of
their
reinstatement),
pursuant
to
Art.
279
of
the
Labor
Code.
Facts:
PILA
staged
a
strike
and
picketed
outside
of
Held:
Petitioners
are
not
entitled
to
backwages,
PHIMCO
premises.
PHIMCO
dismissed
the
union
because
their
dismissal
is
not
covered
by
Art.
279
officers
and
participating
employees.
Strike
was
also
(employee
unjustly
dismissed
due
to
employer’s
declared
illegal
by
the
NLRC.
failure
to
observe
substantive
or
procedural
due
Held:
Strike
was
valid,
but
the
means
employed
process),
but
rather,
Art.
264.
Art.
264
authorizes
the
rendered
it
illegal.
Although
the
requirements
for
a
award
of
full
backwages
only
when
the
termination
of
valid
strike
were
complied
with,
the
picketers
employment
is
a
consequence
of
an
unlawful
lockout.
prevented
the
ingress
and
egress
of
PHIMCO
managers
For
those
that
result
from
illegal
strike,
the
provision
and
non-‐participating
employees
from
the
company
distinguishes
between
a
union
officer
and
a
union
premises.
The
picketing
also
created
an
intimidating
member.
The
petitioners
were
terminated
for
joining
a
atmosphere.
Thus
the
strike
was
held
illegal.
IN
this
strike
that
was
later
declared
to
be
illegal.
The
NLRC
case,
the
10
union
officers
stand
to
be
dismissed
as
ordered
their
reinstatement,
or
in
lieu
of
their
participating
union
officers
because
they
knowingly
reinstatement,
the
payment
of
backwages,
because
participated
in
an
illegal
strike.
In
Samahang
they
were
mere
rank
and
file
workers
whom
the
Manggagawa
sa
Sulpicio
Lines,
Inc.-‐NAFLU
v
Sulpicio
union’s
officers
had
misled
into
joining
the
illegal
Lines,
Inc.,
the
Court
explained
that
the
effect
of
illegal
strike.
They
were
not
unjustly
dismissed
from
work.
strikes
(as
outlined
in
Art.
264)
differs
between
workers
and
union
officers
who
participate
in
them.
An
ordinary
striking
worker
cannot
be
terminated
for
Yolito
Fabriquelan
v
Monterey
Foods
Corp
mere
participation;
there
must
be
proof
that
he
committed
illegal
acts,
he
must
be
identified
based
on
Facts:
The
union
filed
a
notice
of
strike.
The
DOLE
substantial
evidence,
and
liability
is
to
be
determined
Secretary
assumed
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute.
The
on
an
individual
basis.
A
union
officer,
on
the
other
union
filed
another
notice
of
strike.
The
company
then
terminated
the
employment
of
17
union
officers.
The
hand,
may
be
terminated
upon
proof
that
he
union
filed
a
third
notice
of
strike.
The
DOLE
Secretary
knowingly
participated
in
an
illegal
strike,
whether
or
included
the
last
2
notices
of
strike
in
his
assumption
not
he
commits
illegal
acts.
In
the
case
at
bar,
the
order.
The
DOLE
Secretary
upheld
termination
of
the
participating
union
officers
may
be
validly
dismissed
union
officers.
because
they
knowingly
participated
in
an
illegal
Held:
Of
the
17
union
officers,
only
4
were
illegally
strike,
while
37
participating
union
members
may
also
79
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
dismissed.
While
an
ordinary
worker
who
participated
forum.
This
was
done
for
the
promotion
of
the
in
an
illegal
strike
cannot
be
terminated
unless
it
is
common
good,
considering
that
a
lingering
strike
also
proved
that
he
committed
illegal
acts
during
the
could
be
inimical
to
the
interest
of
both
employer
and
strike,
a
union
officer
can
be
terminated
upon
proof
employee.
that
he
knowingly
participated
in
an
illegal
strike,
whether
or
not
he
committed
illegal
acts.
In
termination
cases,
the
burden
of
proof
is
upon
the
employer
to
show
that
the
dismissal
was
for
just
Bagong
Pagkakaisa
ng
Manggagawa
ng
Triumph
v.
cause.
In
this
case,
the
company
was
not
able
to
show
DOLE,
supra.
that
all
17
officers
deserved
to
be
dismissed.
Fabriquelan,
the
union
president,
was
illegally
Facts:
Long
dispute
between
the
Union
and
the
dismissed.
His
dismissal
was
based
on
a
security
company
over
the
increase
in
daily
wage
proposals
for
guard’s
report.
The
report,
however,
stated
that
it
was
the
new
CBA.
Secretary
of
Labor
assumed
jurisdiction
a
different
employee,
who
participated
in
the
and
issued
return-‐to-‐work
order.
Union
stopped
some
slowdown.
Clearly,
his
dismissal
was
based
on
his
employees
from
going
back
to
work
by
blocking
the
being
the
union
president.
3
other
union
officers
were
company
entrances.
Secretary
issued
another
return-‐
likewise
illegally
dismissed
because
evidence
shows
to-‐work
order,
complete
with
police
assistance.
Union
that
they
did
not
participate
in
the
strike.
agreed
to
go
back
to
work,
but
company
stopped
21
v.
Effect
of
Assumption/Certification
Order
employees
(union
officers)
from
entering
the
Art.
263
(g),
supra
p.
71
premises,
and
placed
them
on
preventive
suspension
and
1st
notice
with
chance
to
explain.
Employees
went
to
Secretary
for
relief,
and
the
latter
ordered
the
YSS
Employees
v
YSS
Laboratories
company
to
reinstate
them.
Company
reinstated
them
Facts:
Due
to
business
losses
the
company
only
in
payroll
and
issued
another
1st
notice
with
implemented
retrenchment
program.
Of
the
11
chance
to
explain,
based
on
different
grounds.
retrenched
employees,
9
were
members
and
officers
of
the
union.
The
union
staged
a
strike
claiming
Employees
offered
explanation
but
were
terminated
discrimination
on
the
implementation
of
the
anyway.
CA
affirmed
Secretary’s
award
of
daily
wage
retrenchment
program.
After
several
conciliation
increase
for
the
new
CBA,
but
resolved
the
issue
of
proceedings
and
the
parties
not
having
reached
an
illegal
dismissal
itself,
holding
that
only
1
dismissal
agreement,
the
Labor
Secretary
issued
an
order
was
supported
by
substantial
evidence.
certifying
the
labor
dispute
to
a
compulsory
arbitration.
The
order
directed
that
all
the
employees
Held:
5
of
6
employees
were
legally
dismissed.
It
is
the
return
to
their
work
and
that
the
company
to
accept
company’s
prerogative
to
dismiss
employees
on
legal
them.
The
company
accepted
all
workers
except
those
grounds,
and
the
violation
of
the
Secretary’s
return-‐to-‐
who
were
previously
retrenched.
The
company
work
order,
as
well
as
the
prevention
of
other
workers
claimed
grave
abuse
of
discretion
when
the
return-‐to-‐
from
returning
to
work,
was
a
legal
ground
for
work
order
included
the
retrenched
employees.
dismissal.
Under
the
law,
the
Secretary’s
assumption
Held:
The
Labor
Secretary
did
not
gravely
abuse
his
of
jurisdiction
over
a
labor
dispute
(or
its
certification
discretion
in
certifying
the
dispute
to
compulsory
to
the
NLRC
for
compulsory
arbitration)
shall
have
the
arbitration
and
in
including
retrenched
employees
in
the
return-‐to-‐work-‐order.
Pursuant
to
Art.
263(g)
of
effect
of
automatically
enjoining
the
intended
or
the
Labor
Code
on
the
settlement
of
labor
disputes,
impending
strike
or
lockout,
and
all
striking
or
locked
assumption
and
certification
orders
are
executory
in
out
employees
shall
immediately
return
to
work,
and
character
and
are
to
be
strictly
complied
with
by
the
the
employer
shall
immediately
resume
operations
parties,
even
during
the
pendency
of
any
petition
and
readmit
all
workers
under
the
same
terms
and
questioning
their
validity.
The
certification
attests
to
conditions
before
the
strike
or
lockout.
The
union
the
urgency
of
the
matter,
affecting
as
it
does
an
defied
the
Secretary’s
return-‐to-‐work
order,
which
industry
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
while
the
order
is
issued
in
the
exercise
of
the
court’s
made
the
strike
illegal
and
thus
a
valid
ground
for
compulsory
power
of
arbitration,
and
therefore
must
dismissal
under
Art.
264
of
the
Labor
Code.
The
union
be
obeyed
until
set
aside.
In
the
case
at
bar,
the
orders
officers
were
liable
not
only
for
defying
the
Secretary,
were
issued
to
preserve
the
status
quo
ante
while
the
but
also
for
leading,
instigating,
and
participating
in
a
main
issues
(validity
of
the
retrenchment
and
legality
work
slowdown
during
the
CBA
negotiations
without
of
the
strike)
were
being
threshed
out
in
the
proper
complying
with
the
mandatory
legal
requirements
of
a
80
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
strike
notice
and
strike
vote.
delicto.
The
situation
warrants
the
restoration
of
the
status
quo
ante,
bringing
the
parties
back
to
their
Mass
Leave
respective
positions
before
the
illegal
strike
and
illegal
Solidbank
Corp
v
EU
Gamier
lockout
through
the
reinstatement
of
the
employees
(Philippines
Inter-‐Fashion,
Inc.
v
NLRC).
But
while
Facts:
Solidbank
and
the
Union
reached
a
bargaining
they
are
entitled
to
reinstatement,
the
employees
are
deadlock
regarding
their
CBA.
The
Secretary
of
Labor
not
entitled
to
backwages,
as
these
are
only
ordered
assumed
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute
and
directed
under
exceptional
circumstances
(e.g.
employer
is
both
parties
to
desist
from
committing
any
acts
guilty
of
oppression
and
union-‐busting
activities,
and
exacerbating
the
situation.
Respondents
staged
a
mass
strikers
ordered
reinstated
are
denied
such
protest
anyway,
allegedly
not
to
exert
pressure
on
the
reinstatement).
Since
the
strike
was
illegal,
the
company,
but
to
express
dissatisfaction
over
the
principle
of
“no
work,
no
pay”
is
applicable.
decision
of
the
Labor
Secretary
subsequent
to
his
12.
Employment
of
Strike
Breakers
assumption
of
jurisdiction.
The
bank
terminated
those
employees
that
did
not
immediately
go
back
to
work.
Art.
264
(c),
supra
p.77
81
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
purpose
of
restricting
the
output
of
the
employer,
in
blotter
reported
that
the
picketing
was
peaceful.
relation
to
a
labor
dispute;
as
an
activity
by
which
Moreover,
although
the
companies
during
the
strike
workers,
without
a
complete
stoppage
of
work,
retard
were
holding
offices
elsewhere,
some
managerial
production
or
their
performance
of
duties
and
employees
were
told
to
report
for
work
at
the
building
functions
to
compel
management
to
grant
their
being
picketed,
most
likely
to
create
such
an
incident.
demands.
A
slowdown
is
an
inherently
illegal,
because
Under
the
circumstances,
the
picketers
were
not
while
the
employees
“continue
to
work
and
remain
at
legally
bound
to
yield
their
grounds
and
withdraw
their
positions
and
accept
the
wages
paid
to
them,”
from
the
picket
lines.
Being
where
the
law
expects
they
“select
what
part
of
their
allotted
tasks
they
care
them
to
be
in
the
legitimate
exercise
of
their
rights,
to
perform
of
their
own
volition,
or
refuse,
openly
or
they
had
every
reason
to
defend
themselves
and
their
secretly,
to
the
employer’s
damage,
to
do
other
work.”
rights
from
any
assault
or
unlawful
transgression.
Besides,
some
disorder
is
to
be
expected
in
any
D.
Picketing
extensive
or
long
drawn-‐out
strike.
The
heated
altercations
and
occasional
blows
exchanged
on
the
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sec.
13,
supra
p.
64
picket
line
do
not
affect
or
diminish
the
right
to
strike.
The
incident
that
occurred
was
a
necessary
incident
of
1.
Definition
the
strike
and
should
not
be
considered
as
a
bar
to
reinstatement.
2.
Nature
and
Purpose
of
Picket
Line
Insular
Life
Assurancce
Co
Ltd.
Employees
Assn.
v
Insular
Life
Assurance
Co.
Sta.
Rosa
Coca-‐Cola
Plant
Employees
Union
v
CCBP
Facts:
Unions
jointly
submitted
proposals
to
modify
Facts:
The
union
members
held
a
strike,
to
the
the
renewal
of
their
respective
CBAs.
Negotiations
detriment
of
the
company.
Union
claimed
it
was
not
a
were
conducted
but
there
was
a
deadlock.
The
unions
strike
but
only
their
exercise
of
their
right
to
picket.
eventually
went
on
strike.
To
try
and
get
the
Held:
Petitioners
staged
a
strike,
and
not
merely
a
employees
back
to
work,
the
companies
sent
2
letters.
picket.
Picketing
involves
merely
the
marching
to
and
In
the
first,
they
“bribed”
the
workers
with
promises
of
fro
at
the
premises
of
the
employer,
usually
free
meals,
comfortable
cots,
overtime
pay,
free
coffee
accompanied
by
the
display
of
placards
and
other
and
occasional
movies,
as
well
as
more
benefits
for
signs
making
known
the
facts
involved
in
a
labor
their
families
while
in
the
second,
they
subtly
dispute.
In
a
labor
dispute,
it
means
the
stationing
of
threatened
the
strikers
by
saying
that
they
could
no
one
or
more
persons
to
observe
and
attempt
to
longer
hold
the
strikers’
positions
open
and
by
giving
observe.
The
purpose
of
a
picket
is
to
be
a
means
of
an
ultimatum.
The
companies
also
attempted
to
break
peaceable
persuasion
(Dache
v.
Rose).
On
the
other,
the
picket
lines,
filed
criminal
charges
against
some
Art.
212
of
the
Labor
Code
defines
a
strike
as
“a
strikers,
and
used
2
employees
who
were
the
former
temporary
stoppage
of
work
by
the
concerted
action
legal
counsels
of
the
unions.
of
employees
as
a
result
of
an
industrial
or
labor
Held:
The
Companies
were
guilty
of
violating
the
dispute.”
However,
the
term
“strike”
encompasses
not
employees’
right
to
organize,
form
and
join
labor
only
concerted
work
stoppages,
but
also
slowdowns,
organizations.
The
companies
didn’t
just
discriminate
mass
leaves,
sit-‐downs,
attempts
to
damage,
destroy
against
all
the
strikers
in
general—they
separated
the
or
sabotage
plant
equipment
and
facilities,
and
similar
active
from
the
less
active
unionists
on
the
basis
of
activities.
What
is
definitive
of
whether
an
action
is
a
their
militancy
on
the
picket
lines.
Active
unionists
strike
and
not
merely
a
picket
is
the
totality
of
the
were
refused
readmission
even
after
they
were
able
to
circumstances
surrounding
the
situation.
As
the
action
secure
clearances
from
the
competent
authorities
with
in
the
case
at
bar
was
a
strike
and
an
illegal
one
at
that,
respect
to
the
criminal
charges
filed
against
them.
the
individual
officers
and
shop
stewards
of
the
union
There
are
grounds
to
believe
that
the
picketers
were
may
be
validly
dismissed.
not
responsible
for
the
alleged
violent
incident
upon
which
the
criminal
charges
were
based.
The
police
82
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Held:
The
SC
did
not
agree.
Citing
PCIB
v.
Philnabank,
E.
Role
of
Peace
Officers
During
Strikes
and
the
court
reiterated
that
from
the
time
of
Mortrera
v.
Picketing
CIR
(1947),
it
has
been
committed
to
the
view
that
peaceful
picketing
is
part
of
the
freedom
of
speech
1.
Escorting
guarantee
of
the
Constitution.
Thus,
picketing
cannot
Art.
264
(d),
supra
p.77
be
prohibited
as
long
as
it
is
done
peacefully.
However,
peaceful
picketing
cannot
countenance
acts
of
2.
Arrest
and
Detention
of
Law
Violators
illegality.
Art.
266.
Requirement
for
Arrest
and
Detention.
–
Except
on
grounds
of
national
security
and
public
5.
Regulation/Restrictions,
Innocent
Third
Party
peace
or
in
case
of
commission
of
a
crime,
no
union
Rule
and
Liabilities
members
or
union
organizers
may
be
arrested
or
Liwayway
Publishing
Co.
Inc.
v
Permanent
detained
for
union
activities
without
previous
Concrete
Workers
Union
consultations
with
the
Secretary
of
Labor.
83
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
Summary:
Employer
Lockout
“Episode
X:
The
Employer
Strikes
Back”
84
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• Any
worker
whose
employment
has
been
terminated
as
a
consequence
of
such
shall
be
entitled
to
reinstatement
and
full
backwages.
X. Employer Lockout
A.
Basis,
Limitation
and
Definition
30
days
before
the
intended
date
thereof.
Xxx
(As
amended
by
E.O.
No.
111,
December
24,
1986)
Art.
263(b).
Strikes,
picketing
and
lockouts.
–
D.
Prohibited
Lockout
(b)
Workers
shall
have
the
right
to
engage
in
concerted
activities
for
purposes
of
collective
Art.
263(b)(g).
Strikes,
picketing
and
lockouts.
–
bargaining
or
for
their
mutual
benefit
and
protection.
The
right
of
legitimate
labor
organizations
to
strike
(b)
Xxx.
The
right
of
xxx
of
employers
to
lockout,
and
picket
and
of
employers
to
lockout,
consistent
consistent
with
the
national
interest,
shall
continue
to
with
the
national
interest,
shall
continue
to
be
be
recognized
and
respected.
However,
xxx
no
recognized
and
respected.
However,
no
labor
union
employer
may
declare
a
lockout
on
grounds
involving
may
strike
and
no
employer
may
declare
a
lockout
on
inter-‐union
and
intra-‐union
disputes.
grounds
involving
inter-‐union
and
intra-‐union
disputes.
(g)
When,
in
his
opinion,
there
exists
a
labor
dispute
causing
or
likely
to
cause
a
strike
or
lockout
in
an
industry
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
may
assume
Art.
212(p)
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute
and
decide
it
or
certify
the
same
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
(p)
"Lockout"
means
any
temporary
refusal
of
an
arbitration.
Such
assumption
or
certification
shall
have
employer
to
furnish
work
as
a
result
of
an
industrial
or
the
effect
of
automatically
enjoining
the
intended
or
labor
dispute.
impending
strike
or
lockout
as
specified
in
the
assumption
or
certification
order.
If
one
has
already
taken
place
at
the
time
of
assumption
or
certification,
xxx
the
employer
shall
immediately
resume
Omnibus
Rules,
Book
V,
Rule
1,
sec.
1(gg)
operations
and
readmit
all
workers
under
the
same
terms
and
conditions
prevailing
before
the
strike
or
"Representation
Officer"
refers
to
a
person
duly
lockout.
The
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
or
authorized
to
conduct
and
supervise
certification
the
Commission
may
seek
the
assistance
of
law
elections
in
accordance
with
Rule
VI
of
this
Book.
enforcement
agencies
to
ensure
compliance
with
this
provision
as
well
as
with
such
orders
as
he
may
issue
B.
Effect
on
Work
Relationship
to
enforce
the
same.
Art.
212(p),
supra
In
line
with
the
national
concern
for
and
the
highest
respect
accorded
to
the
right
of
patients
to
life
and
C.
Ground
for
Lockout
health,
strikes
and
lockouts
in
hospitals,
clinics
and
similar
medical
institutions
shall,
to
every
extent
Art.
263(c).
Strikes,
picketing
and
lockouts.
–
possible,
be
avoided,
and
all
serious
efforts,
not
only
by
labor
and
management
but
government
as
well,
be
(c)
In
case
of
bargaining
deadlocks,
xxx
the
employer
exhausted
to
substantially
minimize,
if
not
prevent,
may
file
a
notice
of
lockout
with
the
Ministry
at
least
their
adverse
effects
on
such
life
and
health,
through
the
exercise,
however
legitimate,
by
labor
of
its
right
85
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
to
strike
and
by
management
to
lockout.
In
labor
strike
or
lockout.
disputes
adversely
affecting
the
continued
operation
of
such
hospitals,
clinics
or
medical
institutions,
it
shall
Any
worker
whose
employment
has
been
terminated
be
the
duty
of
the
striking
union
or
locking-‐out
as
a
consequence
of
any
unlawful
lockout
shall
be
employer
to
provide
and
maintain
an
effective
skeletal
entitled
to
reinstatement
with
full
backwages.
workforce
of
medical
and
other
health
personnel,
whose
movement
and
services
shall
be
unhampered
E.
Procedural
Requirements
and
unrestricted,
as
are
necessary
to
insure
the
proper
and
adequate
protection
of
the
life
and
health
of
its
Art.
264(a)(c)(d)(e).
Prohibited
activities.
–
patients,
most
especially
emergency
cases,
for
the
(a)
No
labor
organization
or
employer
shall
declare
a
duration
of
the
strike
or
lockout.
In
such
cases,
strike
or
lockout
without
first
having
bargained
therefore,
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment
collectively
in
accordance
with
Title
VII
of
this
Book
or
may
immediately
assume,
within
twenty-‐four
(24)
without
first
having
filed
the
notice
required
in
the
hours
from
knowledge
of
the
occurrence
of
such
a
preceding
Article
or
without
the
necessary
strike
or
strike
or
lockout,
jurisdiction
over
the
same
or
certify
lockout
vote
first
having
been
obtained
and
reported
it
to
the
Commission
for
compulsory
arbitration.
For
to
the
Ministry.
this
purpose,
the
contending
parties
are
strictly
enjoined
to
comply
with
such
orders,
prohibitions
No
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
declared
after
assumption
and/or
injunctions
as
are
issued
by
the
Secretary
of
of
jurisdiction
by
the
President
or
the
Minister
or
after
Labor
and
Employment
or
the
Commission,
under
pain
certification
or
submission
of
the
dispute
to
of
immediate
disciplinary
action,
including
dismissal
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration
or
during
the
or
loss
of
employment
status
or
payment
by
the
pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
grounds
for
the
locking-‐out
employer
of
backwages,
damages
and
strike
or
lockout.
other
affirmative
relief,
even
criminal
prosecution
against
either
or
both
of
them.
(c)
No
employer
shall
use
or
employ
any
strike-‐
breaker,
nor
shall
any
person
be
employed
as
a
strike-‐
The
foregoing
notwithstanding,
the
President
of
the
breaker.
Philippines
shall
not
be
precluded
from
determining
the
industries
that,
in
his
opinion,
are
indispensable
to
(d)
No
public
official
or
employee,
including
officers
the
national
interest,
and
from
intervening
at
any
time
and
personnel
of
the
New
Armed
Forces
of
the
and
assuming
jurisdiction
over
any
such
labor
dispute
Philippines
or
the
Integrated
National
Police,
or
armed
in
order
to
settle
or
terminate
the
same.
person,
shall
bring
in,
introduce
or
escort
in
any
manner,
any
individual
who
seeks
to
replace
strikers
in
entering
or
leaving
the
premises
of
a
strike
area,
or
work
in
place
of
the
strikers.
The
police
force
shall
Art.
264(a).
Prohibited
activities.
–
keep
out
of
the
picket
lines
unless
actual
violence
or
other
criminal
acts
occur
therein:
Provided,
That
(a)
No
labor
organization
or
employer
shall
declare
a
nothing
herein
shall
be
interpreted
to
prevent
any
strike
or
lockout
without
first
having
bargained
public
officer
from
taking
any
measure
necessary
to
collectively
in
accordance
with
Title
VII
of
this
Book
or
maintain
peace
and
order,
protect
life
and
property,
without
first
having
filed
the
notice
required
in
the
and/or
enforce
the
law
and
legal
order.
(As
amended
preceding
Article
or
without
the
necessary
strike
or
by
E.O.
No.
111,
December
24,
1986)
lockout
vote
first
having
been
obtained
and
reported
to
the
Ministry.
(e)
No
person
engaged
in
picketing
shall
commit
any
act
of
violence,
coercion
or
intimidation
or
obstruct
No
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
declared
after
assumption
the
free
ingress
to
or
egress
from
the
employer’s
of
jurisdiction
by
the
President
or
the
Minister
or
after
premises
for
lawful
purposes,
or
obstruct
public
certification
or
submission
of
the
dispute
to
thoroughfares.
(As
amended
by
B.P.
Bilang
227,
June
1,
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration
or
during
the
1982)
pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
grounds
for
the
86
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
of
notice
shall
be
fifteen
(15)
days.
However,
in
case
of
unfair
labor
practice
involving
the
dismissal
from
Art.
263(e).
Strikes,
picketing
and
lockouts.
–
employment
of
any
union
officer
duly
elected
in
accordance
with
the
union
constitution
and
by-‐laws
(e)
During
the
cooling-‐off
period,
it
shall
be
the
duty
of
which
may
constitute
union-‐busting
where
the
the
Ministry
to
exert
all
efforts
at
mediation
and
existence
of
the
union
is
threatened,
the
fifteen-‐day
conciliation
to
effect
a
voluntary
settlement.
Should
cooling-‐off
period
shall
not
apply
and
the
union
may
the
dispute
remain
unsettled
until
the
lapse
of
the
take
action
immediately
after
the
strike
vote
is
requisite
number
of
days
from
the
mandatory
filing
of
conducted
and
the
results
thereof
submitted
to
the
the
notice,
the
labor
union
may
strike
or
the
employer
appropriate
regional
branch
of
the
Board.
may
declare
a
lockout.
Section
8.
Contents
of
notice.
-‐
The
notice
shall
state,
among
others,
the
names
and
addresses
of
the
employer
and
the
union
involved,
the
nature
of
the
Omnibus
Rules,
Book
V,
Rule
XXII,
Sections
5-‐11
industry
to
which
the
employer
belongs,
the
number
of
union
members
and
of
the
workers
in
the
Section
5.
Grounds
for
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
A
strike
or
bargaining
unit,
and
such
other
relevant
data
as
may
lockout
may
be
declared
in
cases
of
bargaining
facilitate
the
settlement
of
the
dispute,
such
as
a
brief
deadlocks
and
unfair
labor
practices.
Violations
of
statement
or
enumeration
of
all
pending
labor
collective
bargaining
agreements,
except
flagrant
disputes
involving
the
same
parties.
and/or
malicious
refusal
to
comply
with
its
economic
provisions,
shall
not
be
considered
unfair
labor
In
cases
of
bargaining
deadlocks,
the
notice
shall,
as
practice
and
shall
not
be
strikeable.
No
strike
or
far
as
practicable,
further
state
the
unresolved
issues
lockout
may
be
declared
on
grounds
involving
inter-‐ in
the
bargaining
negotiations
and
be
accompanied
by
union
and
intra-‐union
disputes
OR
without
first
the
written
proposals
of
the
union,
the
counter-‐
having
filed
a
notice
of
strike
or
lockout
or
without
the
proposals
of
the
employer
and
the
proof
of
a
request
necessary
strike
or
lockout
vote
having
been
obtained
for
conference
to
settle
the
differences.
In
cases
of
and
reported
to
the
Board.
Neither
will
a
strike
be
unfair
labor
practices,
the
notice
shall,
as
far
as
declared
after
assumption
of
jurisdiction
by
the
practicable,
state
the
acts
complained
of
and
the
Secretary
or
after
certification
or
submission
of
the
efforts
taken
to
resolve
the
dispute
amicably.
dispute
to
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration
or
during
the
pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
In
case
a
notice
does
not
conform
with
the
grounds
for
the
strike
or
lockout.
(Amended
by
DO
40-‐ requirements
of
this
and
the
foregoing
section/s,
the
A-‐03)
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall
inform
the
concerned
party
of
such
fact.
Section
6.
Who
may
declare
a
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
Any
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative
Section
9.
Action
on
Notice.
-‐
Upon
receipt
of
the
notice,
may
declare
a
strike
in
cases
of
bargaining
deadlocks
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall
exert
all
efforts
and
unfair
labor
practices.
The
employer
may
declare
at
mediation
and
conciliation
to
enable
the
parties
to
a
lockout
in
the
same
cases.
In
the
absence
of
a
settle
the
dispute
amicably.
The
regional
branch
of
the
certified
or
duly
recognized
bargaining
representative,
Board
may,
upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
treat
a
any
legitimate
labor
organization
in
the
establishment
notice
as
a
preventive
mediation
case.
It
shall
also
may
declare
a
strike
but
only
on
grounds
of
unfair
encourage
the
parties
to
submit
the
dispute
to
labor
practices.
voluntary
arbitration.
Section
7.
Notice
of
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
In
bargaining
During
the
proceedings,
the
parties
shall
not
do
any
deadlocks,
a
notice
of
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
filed
act
which
may
disrupt
or
impede
the
early
settlement
with
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board
at
least
thirty
of
the
dispute.
They
are
obliged,
as
part
of
their
duty
to
(30)
days
before
the
intended
date
thereof,
a
copy
of
bargain
collectively
in
good
faith
and
to
participate
said
notice
having
been
served
on
the
other
party
fully
and
promptly
in
the
conciliation
meetings
called
concerned.
In
cases
of
unfair
labor
practice,
the
period
by
the
regional
branch
of
the
Board.
87
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
A
notice,
upon
agreement
of
the
parties,
may
be
FACTS:
The
Union
filed
a
Notice
of
Strike.
Philtread
referred
to
alternative
modes
of
dispute
resolution,
filed
a
notice
of
lockout
charging
the
union
with
acts
of
ULP,
and
terminated
union
officers.
The
union
filed
a
including
voluntary
arbitration.
complaint
for
illegal
dismissal.
The
Secretary
of
Labor
issued
a
return-‐to-‐work
order;
NLRC
called
the
parties
Section
10.
Strike
or
lockout
vote.
–
Xxx.
A
decision
to
to
conciliation
meetings,
then
ordered
reinstatement
declare
a
lockout
must
be
approved
by
a
majority
of
for
all
dismissed.
The
company
partially
complied,
but
the
Board
of
Directors
of
the
employer,
corporation
or
refused
to
reinstate
36
supervisors
facing
charges
of
association
or
the
partners
in
a
partnership
obtained
libel
filed
by
the
company.
by
a
secret
ballot
in
a
meeting
called
for
the
purpose.
HELD:
The
NLRC
decision
was
rendered
with
due
process.
Pursuant
to
Art.
263,
the
Secretary
of
Labor,
The
regional
branch
of
the
Board
may,
at
its
own
upon
finding
that
the
labor
dispute
was
causing
or
was
initiative
or
upon
request
of
any
affected
party,
likely
to
cause
a
strike
or
lockout
in
an
industry
supervise
the
conduct
of
the
secret
balloting.
In
every
indispensable
to
the
national
interest,
certified
the
case,
the
union
or
the
employer
shall
furnish
the
dispute
to
the
NLRC
for
compulsory
arbitration,
which
regional
branch
of
the
Board
and
the
notice
of
is
what
the
Commissioner
did.
The
NLRC
also
found
meetings
referred
to
in
the
preceding
paragraph
at
that
the
company
had
complied
with
the
procedural
requirements
of
a
valid
lockout.
The
Company,
in
least
twenty-‐four
(24)
hours
before
such
meetings
as
resorting
to
a
lockout,
wanted
to
obtain
industrial
well
as
the
results
of
the
voting
at
least
seven
(7)
days
peace,
which
seemed
unobtainable
as
long
as
the
before
the
intended
strike
or
lockout,
subject
to
the
dismissed
employees
obstructively
formed
part
of
its
cooling-‐off
period
provided
in
this
Rule.
operation.
Thus,
the
Company
incurred
no
liability
as
to
the
lockout.
However,
the
company
should
be
Section
11.
Declaration
of
strike
or
lockout.
-‐
Should
the
penalized
for
its
failure
to
fully
comply
with
the
dispute
remain
unsettled
after
the
lapse
of
the
return-‐to-‐work
order
by
refusing
to
reinstate
the
36
requisite
number
of
days
from
the
filing
of
the
notice
supervisors.
of
strike
or
lockout
and
of
the
results
of
the
election
required
in
the
preceding
section,
the
labor
union
may
F.
Effect
of
Illegal
Lockout
strike
or
the
employer
may
lock
out
its
workers.
The
regional
branch
of
the
Board
shall
continue
mediating
Art.
264(a)
par.
3,
1st
sentence
and
conciliating.
Any
worker
whose
employment
has
been
terminated
as
a
consequence
of
any
unlawful
lockout
shall
be
Philtread
v.
NLRC
entitled
to
reinstatement
with
full
backwages.
Summary:
Labor
Injunction
A.
Definition
and
Nature
(as
explained
in
PAL
v
NLRC)
• Injunction
is
a
preservative
remedy
for
the
protection
of
one’s
substantive
rights
or
interest.
• It
is
not
a
cause
of
action
in
itself;
but
a
mere
provisional
remedy
adjunct
to
a
main
suit,
a
special
equitable
relief
granted
only
in
cases
where
there
is
no
plain,
adequate,
and
complete
remedy
at
law.
B.
General
Rule
–
Prohibition
• The
general
rule
is
that
injunction
is
prohibited
(Art.
254).
• As
seen
in
Art.
211(a),
it
is
the
State’s
policy
to
promote
and
emphasize
the
primacy
of
free
collective
bargaining
and
negotiations.
Injunctions
and
restraining
orders
are
generally
frowned
upon
(Dinio
v
Laguesma).
C.
Exceptions
–
When
Allowed
88
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
• Art.
218(e)
empowers
the
NLRC
to
enjoin
any
actual/threatened
prohibited/unlawful
act
OR
to
require
the
performance
of
a
particular
act
in
cases
wherein
if
not
restrained
or
performed
forthwith,
may
cause
grave
or
irreparable
damage
to
any
party
or
render
ineffectual
any
decision
in
favor
of
such
party.
o Note
that
the
unlawful
acts
spoken
of
here
are
found
in
Art.
264.
• The
requirements
for
such
issuance
are:
o Complaint
made
under
oath
o Hearing
of
the
testimony
of
witnesses
with
opportunity
for
cross
examination
in
support
of
the
complaint
Held
after
due
and
personal
notice
to
(1)
all
known
persons
against
whom
relief
is
sought,
(2)
the
Chief
Executive,
and
(3)
other
public
officials
charged
with
the
duty
to
protect
the
complainant’s
property.
o Testimony
in
opposition
to
the
complaint
(if
offered)
o A
finding
of
fact
by
the
Commission,
to
the
effect:
1. The
prohibited
or
unlawful
acts
have
been
threatened
and
will
be
committed
OR
will
be
continued,
unless
restrained;
2. That
substantial
and
irreparable
injury
to
complainant’s
property
will
follow;
3. Denial
of
relief
will
result
to
greater
injury;
4. Complainant
has
no
adequate
remedy;
5. The
public
officers
charged
with
the
duty
to
protect
complainant’s
property
are
unable
or
unwilling
to
furnish
adequate
protection.
HOWEVER,
if
a
complainant
shall
also
allege
that,
unless
there
issue
a
TRO
or
temporary
injunction
without
notice
(ex-‐parte)
a
substantial
and
irreparable
injury
to
complainant’s
property
will
be
unavoidable,
such
TRO
may
be
issued:
o Upon
testimony
under
oath
o Upon
condition
that
complainant
first
file
an
undertaking
with
adequate
security
in
an
amount
fixed
by
the
Commission
(sufficient
to
recompense
those
enjoined
for
any
damages
in
case
of
erroneous
issuance)
o If
the
allegation
is
sustained
(upon
hearing
and
after
notice),
it
can
justify
the
Commission’s
issuance
of
such
temporary
injunction
o Effective
no
longer
than
20
days;
void
after
20
o See:
Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC
• Note
that
the
CIR
is
generally
not
allowed
to
grant
injunctive
relief.
o Exception:
When
a
labor
dispute
arises
in
an
industry
indispensible
to
the
national
interest;
and
Such
is
certified
to
the
CIR
by
the
President.
HOWEVER,
in
such
a
case
the
enjoinment
is
not
on
the
strike
itself,
but
only
on
unlawful
acts.
(As
clarified
in
Caltex
Managers
and
Supervisors
Assoc.
v
CIR.)
D.
Issuing
Agency
1. NLRC;
Labor
Arbiter
o Hearing,
etc.
relating
to
injunctions
may
be
delegated
by
the
Commission
to
any
of
its
Labor
Arbiters
(Art.
218(e))
2. Procedural
Requirements
and
Rules
for
the
Issuance
of
Injunctions
o Art.
218
provides
the
procedural
and
substantive
requirements
which
must
strictly
be
complied
with
before
any
injunction
can
issue
(Bisig
ng
Manggagawa
sa
Concrete
v
NLRC).
o The
reception
of
evidence
for
the
application
of
a
writ
of
injunction
may
be
delegated
by
the
NLRC
to
any
Labor
Arbiter,
who
shall
conduct
hearings
and
submit
thereafter
his
recommendation
(Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
v
NLRC).
3. Temporary
Restraining
Order
(TRO)
o Art.
218
is
explicit
in
that
such
TROs
are
only
valid
for
a
maximum
of
20
days.
89
Labor
2
reviewer.
C2015.
AY2012-‐2013
XI.
Labor
Injunction
A.
Definition
and
Nature
Sec.
9(d)
of
RA875
and
Social
Security
Employees
Assoc.
(c)
No
employer
shall
use
or
employ
any
strike-‐
v
Hon.
Soriano).
However,
in
this
exception,
the
breaker,
nor
shall
any
person
be
employed
as
a
strike-‐
purpose
of
the
injunction
is
not
to
enjoin
the
strike
breaker.
itself,
but
only
unlawful
activities.
(d)
No
public
official
or
employee,
including
officers
C.
Exceptions
–
When
Allowed
and
personnel
of
the
New
Armed
Forces
of
the
Philippines
or
the
Integrated
National
Police,
or
armed
Art.
254,
supra
p.
90
person,
shall
bring
in,
introduce
or
escort
in
any
manner,
any
individual
who
seeks
to
replace
strikers
in
entering
or
leaving
the
premises
of
a
strike
area,
or
work
in
place
of
the
strikers.
The
police
force
shall
Art.
218(e),
supra
p.
90
keep
out
of
the
picket
lines
unless
actual
violence
or
other
criminal
acts
occur
therein:
Provided,
That
nothing
herein
shall
be
interpreted
to
prevent
any
public
officer
from
taking
any
measure
necessary
to
Art.
264.
Prohibited
activities.
–
maintain
peace
and
order,
protect
life
and
property,
(a)
No
labor
organization
or
employer
shall
declare
a
and/or
enforce
the
law
and
legal
order.
(As
amended
strike
or
lockout
without
first
having
bargained
by
EO
No.
111,
December
24,
1986)
collectively
in
accordance
with
Title
VII
of
this
Book
or
(e)
No
person
engaged
in
picketing
shall
commit
any
without
first
having
filed
the
notice
required
in
the
act
of
violence,
coercion
or
intimidation
or
obstruct
preceding
Article
or
without
the
necessary
strike
or
the
free
ingress
to
or
egress
from
the
employer’s
lockout
vote
first
having
been
obtained
and
reported
premises
for
lawful
purposes,
or
obstruct
public
to
the
Ministry.
thoroughfares.
(As
amended
by
BP
Bilang
227,
June
1,
No
strike
or
lockout
shall
be
declared
after
assumption
1982)
of
jurisdiction
by
the
President
or
the
Minister
or
after
certification
or
submission
of
the
dispute
to
D.
Issuing
Agency
compulsory
or
voluntary
arbitration
or
during
the
1.
National
Labor
Relations
Commission;
Labor
pendency
of
cases
involving
the
same
grounds
for
the
Arbiter
strike
or
lockout.
Art.
218(e),
supra
p.
90
Any
worker
whose
employment
has
been
terminated
as
a
consequence
of
any
unlawful
lockout
shall
be
Ilaw
at
Buklod
ng
Manggagawa
(IBM)
v
NLRC,
infra
entitled
to
reinstatement
with
full
backwages.
Any
HELD:
Art.
218
expressly
confers
upon
the
NLRC
the
union
officer
who
knowingly
participates
in
an
illegal
power
to
enjoin
or
restrain
any
actual
or
threatened
strike
and
any
worker
or
union
officer
who
knowingly
prohibited
or
unlawful
acts
in
a
labor
dispute
which
participates
in
the
commission
of
illegal
acts
during
a
would
otherwise
cause
grave
or
irreparable
damage
to
strike
may
be
declared
to
have
lost
his
employment
a
party
or
render
ineffectual
any
favorable
decision.
status:
Provided,
That
mere
participation
of
a
worker
in
a
lawful
strike
shall
not
constitute
sufficient
ground
for
termination
of
his
employment,
even
if
a
2.
Procedural
Requirements
and
Rules
for
the
replacement
had
been
hired
by
the
employer
during
Issuance
of
Labor
Injunctions
such
lawful
strike.
Art.
218(e),
supra
p.
90
NLRC
issued
a
TRO
ex
parte
against
the
Union.
FACTS:,
The
election
of
officers
of
the
Union
was
HELD:
Generally,
such
restraining
orders
or
scheduled.
PFR,
headed
by
Dinio,
filed
with
the
BLR
a
injunctions
do
not
issue
ex
parte,
but
only
after
petition
for
injunction
with
prayer
for
issuance
of
TRO,
compliance
with
certain
requisites
enumerated
in
the
which
the
Med-‐Arbiter
granted
a
day
before
the
provision.
However,
a
TRO
may
be
issued
ex
parte
election.
After
the
lapse
of
the
TRO,
the
Union
Comelec
under
the
following
conditions:
(a)
when
unless
a
TRO
proceeded
with
the
election,
wherein
Dinio
lost.
PFR
is
issued,
a
substantial/irreparable
injury
to
then
filed
another
petition
to
nullify
the
result
of
said
complainant’s
property
is
unavoidable;
(b)
testimony
elections,
which
the
Med-‐Arbiter
also
granted.
Their
under
oath
sufficient
to
justify
the
NLRC
in
issuing
a
Comelec
filed
a
MR,
which
the
DOLE
Undersecretary
TRO;
(c)
the
complainant
files
an
undertaking
with
granted,
overturning
the
Med-‐Arbiter.
adequate
security
sufficient
to
recompense
those
HELD:
Injunctions
or
restraining
orders
are
frowned
enjoined
for
any
loss,
expense,
or
damage
cause
by
the
upon
as
a
matter
of
labor
relations
policy.
The
right
improvident/erroneous
issuance
of
such
must
be
clear,
the
injury
impending
or
threatened,
so
order/injunction;
and
(d)
the
TRO
shall
be
effective
for
as
to
be
averted
only
by
the
protecting
preventive
no
longer
than
20
days.
The
reception
of
evidence
for
process
of
injunction.
The
issuance
of
a
TRO
is
the
application
of
a
writ
of
injunction
may
be
addressed
to
the
sound
discretion
of
the
Med-‐Arbiter,
delegated
by
the
NLRC
to
any
Labor
Arbiter,
who
shall
and
should
be
exercised
based
upon
the
grounds
and
conduct
hearings
and
submit
thereafter
his
in
the
manner
provided
by
law,
i.e.
instances
where
recommendation.
the
complainant
will
suffer
“grave
or
irreparable
damages”.
Such
is
not
the
case
here,
wherein
the
act
complained
of
may
not
be
said
to
cause
“grave
or
irreparable
damage”
to
the
complainant.
Also,
there
Bisig
ng
Manggagawa
sa
Concrete
v
NLRC
was
another
[administrative]
remedy
available
FACTS:
The
Union
held
a
strike.
The
Company
filed
a
(protest).
petition
for
injunction,
but
the
Union
was
not
Art.
218
explicitly
states
that
TROs
issued
in
labor
furnished
a
copy.
The
NLRC
issued
a
TRO
to
enjoin
the
disputes
also
have
a
lifetime
of
only
20
days,
so
there
strike,
and
the
Union
was
again
not
furnished
a
copy
of
is
no
sense
in
saying
that
the
20-‐day
rule
should
not
the
decision.
Union
filed
for
petition
for
injunction
to
apply.
enjoin
the
company
from
asking
the
aid
of
police/military,
while
the
company
filed
for
immediate
issuance
of
preliminary
injunction,
alleging
that
the
Union
was
still
striking.
The
NLRC
issued
the
preliminary
injunction
in
favor
of
the
company.
HELD:
The
NLRC
failed
to
comply
with
the
letter
and
spirit
of
Art.
218
in
issuing
its
order
granting
the
company’s
motion
for
preliminary
injunction.
Art.
218
provides
the
procedural
and
substantive
requirements
which
must
strictly
be
complied
with
before
any
injunction
can
issue.
The
Union
was
denied
the
right
to
attend
the
hearing
because
they
did
not
receive
any
copy
of
the
company’s
petition
for
injunction.
The
issuance
of
an
ex
parte
TRO
in
a
labor
dispute
should
be
characterized
by
care
and
caution,
for
the
law
requires
that
it
be
clearly
justified
by
considerations
of
extreme
necessity.
Imprudently
issued
TROs
can
unduly
tilt
the
balance
of
labor
warfare
in
favor
of
capital.
Dinio v Laguesma
93