Block C 2016

LABOR 2
Finals Reviewer: Prof. Battad

Azores, Bahjin, Chua, De Guzman, Haynes, Leynes, Licaros

SY 2013-2014
 b) Plenary Jurisdiction of Voluntary Arbitrator vis-à-vis Labor Arbiter 12
TABLE OF CONTENTS c) Procedures 13
d) Nature of Office and Function 14
VII. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: CONCEPT, PROCEDURES AND ISSUES 3
e) Interpretation Agreement 14
D. Bargainable Issues 3
f) Awards and Orders 14
E. Collective Bargaining Agreement 3 g) Finality and Execution of Awards 14
1. Definition 3 h) Appeal 15
2. Contents 4
VIII. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE 16
3. Beneficiaries 4
4. Contract Duration and Renewal 4 A. In general 16
5. Ratification 6 1. Definition and General Concept | Unfair Labor Practice vis-à-vis
Management Prerogative; Exception: 16
6. Registration 6
rd 2. Requisites 20
7. CBA and 3 Party Applicability 7
a) Employer-Employee Relationship 20
8. CBA and Disaffiliation 7
b) Act Must be Specifically Defined in the Law 21
9. Interpretation, Administration and Enforcement 8
3. Burden of Proof 22
a) Nature of Contract: Law Between Parties 8
4. Construction/Interpretation 22
b) Liberal Construction in Case of Doubt 8
5. Management Prerogative 22
c) Grievances 9
6. Inter-relations of ULP Acts 23
1) Contract Infirmity 9
2) Contract Ambiguity 9 B. Acts in Violation of Right to Self-Organization 25
d) Minutes of the Negotiation 9 1. Interference, Restraint and Coercion 25
e) Grievance Machinery/Voluntary Arbitration 10 a) Interrogation 26
b) Speech, Espionage, Economic Coercion 27
F. Voluntary Arbitration 11
c) Concerted Activities 28
1. Basis and Rationale 11
2. Non-Union Membership or Withdrawal Form Membership as a Condition
2. Arbitrable Issues 11
of Employment (Yellow-Dog Contract) 28
3. Arbitrator 12
3. Contracting Out to Discourage Unionism 28
a) Selection 12
4. Company Domination of Union 29
 5. Discrimination to Encourage/Discourage Unionism | Valid discrimination: IX. UNION CONCERTED ACTIVITIES 38
Union Security Clause 29
A. Basis of Right to Engage in Concerted Activities 38
a) Instances of Discrimination 30
1. Constitution 38
b) Valid Discrimination: Union Security Clause 30
2. Statutory 39
6. Retaliation Against Employee for His/Her Testimony/Indirect
Discrimination 31 3. Limitations 41
7. Illegal Exaction; Featherbedding 31
B. Types of Concerted Activities 41
C. Acts in Violation of Right to Collective Bargaining 31 1. Strike 41
1. Violation to Duty to Bargain 31 a) Definition, Nature, Purpose and Scope 41
2. Payment of Negotiation or Attorneys Fees 33 b) Rationale for Regulation by Law 42
3. Gross Violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement 33 c) Effect on Work Relationship 42
d) Types and Conversion 43
D. Motive, Conduct and Proof 34
1) Unfair Labor Practice 44
1. Employer Motive and Proof 34
2) Bargaining Deadlock: Economic/ULP 44
2. Totality of Evidence 34
3) Non-Conversion: Strike to Lockout 44
E. Enforcement, Remedies and Sanctions 34
e) Grounds 44
1. Parties Against Whom ULP Committed 34
1) Allowable Strikes 44
2. Parties Liable for Acts 36
2) Prohibited Strikes 44
a) Employer 36
f) Striking Party 46
b) Labor Organization 36
g) Procedural Requirements 47
3. Prosecution and Prescriptive Period 36
1) Effort to Bargain 48
a) Civil Aspect 36
2) Filing of Notice of Intention 49
b) Criminal Aspect 37
3) Observance of Cooling-Off Periods 49
4. Compromise 37
4) Strike Vote 49
5. Remedies and Sanctions 37
h) Test of Legality 50
a) Civil Remedies 37
1) Legal Strike 50
b) Penal Remedies 38
2) Illegal Strike 50
i) Employment of Strike Breakers 52
1|P a g e
 j) Improved Offer Balloting and Strikes 53 C. Lockouting Party 58
2. Picketing 53
D. Ground for Lockout 58
a) Definition, Nature, Purpose of Picket Line 53
E. Prohibited Lockout 58
b) Picketing and Libel Laws 53
c) Curtailment 54 F. Procedural Requirements 59
d) Regulation/Restrictions, Innocent Third Party Rule and Liabilities 54
G. Effect of Illegal Lockout 59
e) Prohibited Activities; Peaceful Picketing 54
3. Slowdown 54 XI. LABOR INJUNCTION 60

C. Assumption of Jurisdiction/Compulsory Arbitration 54 A. Definition and Nature 60

1. Definition; Nature of Dispute for Compulsory Arbitration 54
B. General Rule: Prohibition 60
2. Rationale 55
C. Exception: When Allowed 61
3. Process Initiation/Initiating Party 56
a) Secretary of Labor 56 D. Issuing Agency; Procedural Requirements 62
b) President 56 1. National Labor Relations Commission; Labor Arbiter 62
4. Arbitration Agencies 56 2. Procedural Requirements and Rules for the Issuance of labor Injunctions 63
5. Effect of Assumption/Certification Order 56 3. Temporary Restraining Order 63
6. Awards and Orders 56
7. Option – Voluntary Arbitration After Certification 57
8. Compulsory Arbitration and Labor Rights 57

D. Role of Peace Officers During Strikes and Picketing 57

1. Escorting 57
2. Arrest and Detention of Law Violators 57

X. EMPLOYER LOCKOUT 57

A. Basis, Definition, Limitation 57

B. Effect on Work Relationship 58

2|P a g e
VII. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: CONCEPT, PROCEDURES AND ISSUES 2. As to allegations of blue sky bargaining: Bank failed to show that the economic
demands made by the Union were exaggerated or unreasonable. Union based its
D. Bargainable Issues economic proposals on data of rank and file employees and the prevailing economic
benefits received by bank employees from other foreign banks doing business in
Art.262 Meaning of Duty to Bargain Collectively the Philippines and other branches of the Bank in the Asian region.
The duty to bargain collectively means the performance of a mutual obligation to Also, the suggestion of the Bank to exclude Federation from the bargaining table is
meet and convene promptly and expeditiously in good faith for the purpose of not anti-union conduct. Both are not guilty of ULP.
negotiation an agreement with respect to wages, hours of work and all other terms
and conditions of employment including proposals for adjusting any grievances or E. Collective Bargaining Agreement
questions arising under such agreement and executing a contract incorporating
such agreements if requested by either party but such duty does not compel any 1. Definition
party to agree to a proposal or to make any concession.
Book V, Rule I, Section 1. (j) Definition of Terms
 Manila Fashions, Inc. v. NLRC, 264 SCRA 104 (1996) (j) “Collective Bargaining Agreement” or “CBA” refers to the contract between a
Facts: CBA provides for the condonation on the part of the Union of the mandated legitimate labor union and the employer concerning wages, hours of work, and all
increases in the Wage Order. other terms and conditions of employment in a bargaining unit.

Held: Void because by agreeing to condone the implementation of the Wage  TSPI Corp. v. TSPI Corp. Employees Union, 545 SCRA 216 (2008)
Order, the parties thereby contravened its mandate on wage increase. It is only the
Tripartite Wage Productivity Board of the DOLE that could approve exemption of an Facts: Company notified certain employees that they had been overpaid, and had
establishment from coverage of a Wage Order. Instead of bargaining on the wage received the CBA increases in addition to the increase under Wage Order No. 8. CBA
increase the financially distressed company could have just applied for a wage provides: “that the salary/wage increase for the year 2001 shall be deemed
exemption inclusive of the mandated minimum wage increases under future wage orders.”
Held: It must be understood to mean that Company granted the salary increases
 Standard Chartered Bank Employees Union v. Confessor, 432 SCRA 308 under the condition that any wage order that may be subsequently issued shall be
(2004) credited against the previously granted increase.
Facts: During CBA negotiations, Union filed complaint against the Bank for refusing CBA refers to the negotiated contract between a legitimate labor organization and
to bargain (surface bargaining) while Bank alleged Union’s blue sky bargaining. the employer concerning wages, hours of work and all other terms and conditions
Held: of employment in a bargaining unit. As in all contracts, the parties in a CBA may
establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem
1. Surface bargaining is defined as “going through the motions of negotiating” convenient provided these are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public
without any legal intent to reach an agreement. The resolution of surface order or public policy. Thus, where the CBA is clear and unambiguous, it becomes
bargaining allegations never presents an easy issue. The determination of whether the law between the parties and compliance therewith is mandated by the express
a party has engaged in unlawful surface bargaining is usually a difficult one because policy of the law.
it involves, at bottom, a question of the intent of the party in question, and usually
such intent can only be inferred from the totality of the challenged party’s conduct  Lepanto Ceramics, Inc. v. Lepanto Ceramics Employees Association,
both at and away from the bargaining table. It involves the question of whether an 614 SCRA 63 (2010)
employer’s conduct demonstrates an unwillingness to bargain in good faith or is
merely hard bargaining. Facts: CBA provided for the grant of a Christmas gift package/bonus to the
members of the respondent Association. The Christmas bonus was one of the

3|P a g e
enumerated "existing benefits, practice of traditional rights" which "shall remain in absence of a new CBA, even beyond the three-year period provided by law? Are
full force and effect." Company failed to give Christmas Bonus. They allege that such employees hired after the stipulated term of a CBA entitled to the benefits provided
was not a demandable and enforceable obligation. It argued that the giving of extra thereunder? Yes to both.
compensation was based on the company’s available resources for a given year and
Held:
the workers are not entitled to a bonus if the company does not make profits.
Until a new CBA has been executed by the parties, they are duty-bound to keep the
Held: Generally, a bonus is not a demandable and enforceable obligation. For a
status quo and to continued in full force and effect the terms and conditions of the
bonus to be enforceable, it must have been promised by the employer and
existing agreement. “It shall be the duty of both parties to keep the status quo and
expressly agreed upon by the parties. Given that the bonus in this case is integrated
to continue in full force and effect the terms and conditions of the existing
in the CBA, the same partakes the nature of a demandable obligation. Verily, by
agreement during the 60-day period and/or until a new agreement is reached by
virtue of its incorporation in the CBA, the Christmas bonus due to respondent
the parties.”
Association has become more than just an act of generosity on the part of the
petitioner but a contractual obligation it has undertaken. The CBA is the law When a collective bargaining contract is entered into by the union representing the
between the parties and they are obliged to comply with its provisions employees and the employer, even the non-member employees are entitled to the
benefits of the contract. To accord its benefits only to members of the union
2. Contents without any valid reason would constitute undue discrimination against
See your sample CBA; Identify Basic Articles (and specific nonmembers.
provisions that promote gender equality in the workplace, if
there are any) 4. Contract Duration and Renewal
3. Beneficiaries Art.263 Duty to Bargain Collectively When There Exists a Collective Bargaining
Agreement
Art.266. Exclusive Bargaining Representation and Workers’ Participation in Policy and When there is a collective bargaining agreement, the duty to bargain collectively
Decision-Making shall also mean that neither party shall terminate nor modify such agreement
The labor organization designated or selected by the majority of the employees in during its lifetime. However, either party can serve a written notice to terminate or
an appropriate collective bargaining unit shall be the exclusive representative of the modify the agreement at least sixty (60) days prior to its expiration date. It shall be
employees in such unit for the purpose of collective bargaining. However, an the duty of both parties to keep the status quo and to continue in full force and
individual employee or group of employees shall have the right at any time to effect the terms and conditions of the existing agreement during the 60-day period
present grievances to their employer. and/or until a new agreement is reached b y the parties.
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
may promulgate, to participate in policy and decision-making processes of the Art.264 Terms of a Collective Bargaining Agreement
establishment where they are employed insofar as said processes will directly affect Any Collective Bargaining Agreement that the parties may enter into shall insofar as
their rights, benefits and welfare. For this purpose, workers and employers may the representation aspect is concerned, be for a term of five (5) years. No petition
form labor-management councils: Provided, That the representatives of the questioning the majority status of the incumbent bargaining agent shall be
workers in such labor-management councils shall be elected by at least the majority entertained and no certification election shall be conducted by the Department of
of all employees in said establishment. Labor and Employment outside of the sixty-day period immediately before the date
of expiry of such five-year term of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. All other
 New Pacific Timber and Supply Co., Inc. v. NLRC, 328 SCRA 404 (2000) provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement shall be renegotiated not later
Facts: May the term of a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) as to its economic than three (3) years after its execution.
provisions be extended beyond the term expressly stipulated therein, and, in the
4|P a g e
Any agreement on such other provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement Held: The 5-year term requirement is specific to the representation aspect. What
entered into within six (6) months from the date of expiry of the term of such other the law additionally requires is that a CBA must be renegotiated within 3 years after
provisions as fixed in such Collective Bargaining Agreement, shall retroact to the its execution. If no agreement is reached within 6 months from expiry date of the 3
day immediately following such date. If any such agreement is entered into beyond years that follow the CBA execution, the law expressly gives the parties - not
six months, the parties shall agree on the duration of retroactivity thereof. In case anybody else - the discretion to fix the effectivity of the agreement. Significantly,
of a deadlock in the renegotiation of the collective bargaining agreement, the the law does not specifically cover the situation where 6 months have elapsed but
parties may exercise their rights under this Code. no agreement has been reached with respect to effectivity. In this case, there’s no
sufficient legal ground to justify the retroactive application of the disputed CBA.
Hence, its effectivity should be counted from the date of the issuance of the SOLE’s
orders.
Book V, Rule XVII Section 7. Term of representation status; contract bar rule.
The representation status of the incumbent exclusive bargaining agent which is a  Rivera v. Espiritu and Laguesma, supra
party to a duly registered collective bargaining agreement shall be for a term of five
(5) years from the date of the effectivity of the collective bargaining agreement. No Facts: PALEA offered a 10 year moratorium on strikes and similar actions and a
petition questioning the majority status of the incumbent exclusive bargaining waiver of some of the economic benefits in the CBA. Petitioners allege that CBA
agent or petition for certification election filed outside of the sixty-day period suspension was unconstitutional.
immediately preceding the expiry date of such five-year term shall be entertained Held: It was PALEA, as the exclusive bargaining agent of PAL’s ground employees,
by the Department. that voluntarily entered into the CBA with PAL. It was also PALEA that voluntarily
The five-year representation status acquired by an incumbent bargaining agent opted for the 10-year suspension of the CBA. Either case was the union’s exercise
either through single enterprise collective bargaining or multi-employer bargaining of its right to collective bargaining. The right to free collective bargaining, after all,
shall not be affected by a subsequent collective bargaining agreement executed includes the right to suspend it. The sanctioning of the 10-year suspension of the
between the same bargaining agent and the employer during the same five-year PAL-PALEA CBA did not contravene the “protection to labor” policy of the
period. Constitution. The agreement afforded full protection to labor; promoted the
shared responsibility between workers and employers; and the exercised voluntary
modes in settling disputes, including conciliation to foster industrial peace.

Book V, Rule XVII Section 8. Re-negotiation of collective bargaining agreements.  FVC Labor Union – Phil. Transport & General Workers Org. v. Sama-
All provisions of a collective bargaining agreement, except the representation status samang Nagkakaisang Manggagawa sa FVC-SIGLO, 606 SCRA 198
of the incumbent bargaining agent shall, as a matter of right, be negotiated not (2009)
later than three (3) years after its execution.
In the event that the parties, by mutual agreement, enter into a renegotiated
The re-negotiated collective bargaining agreement shall be ratified and registered contract with a term of 3 years or one which does not coincide with the said 5-year
with the same Regional Office where the preceding agreement was registered. The term and said agreement is ratified by majority of the members in the bargaining
same requirements and procedure in the registration of collective bargaining unit, the subject contract is valid and legal and therefore, binds the contracting
agreements prescribed in the preceding rules shall be applied. parties. The same will however not adversely affect the right of another union to
challenge the majority status of the incumbent bargaining agent within 60 days
 Meralco Electric Co. v. Quisumbing, 302 SCRA 173 (1999) before the lapse of the original 5 year term of the CBA.
Facts: SOLE assumed jurisdiction and ordered that new CBA’ s effectivity will
retroact to the date of the commencement of the last two years of the effectivity of
the existing CBA. While the parties may agree to extend the CBA’s original five-year term together
with all other CBA provisions, any such amendment or term in excess of five years

5|P a g e
will not carry with it a change in the union’s exclusive collective bargaining status. (c) A statement that the collective bargaining agreement was ratified by the
By express provision of the above-quoted Article 253-A, the exclusive bargaining majority of the employees in the bargaining unit of the employer or employees
status cannot go beyond five years and the representation status is a legal matter concerned.
not for the workplace parties to agree upon. In other words, despite an agreement
for a CBA with a life of more than five years, either as an original provision or by  Associated Labor Unions, v. NLRC, 204 SCRA 913 (1991)
amendment, the bargaining union’s exclusive bargaining status is effective only for
Unless expressly assumed, labor contracts such as are not enforceable against a
five years and can be challenged within sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the
transferee of an enterprise, labor contracts being in personam, thus binding only
CBA’s first five years.
between the parties. 26 As a general rule, there is no law requiring a bona fide
 PICOP Resources, Inc (PRI) v. Tañeca, et al., supra purchaser of the assets of an on-going concern to absorb in its employ the
employees of the latter. 27 However, although the purchaser of the assets or
Facts: During the effectivity of CBA, members of said Union campaigned for and enterprise is not legally bound to absorb in its employ the employees of the seller
filed a PCE for another Union. Old Union recommended their dismissal pursuant to of such assets or enterprise, the parties are liable to the employees if the
a union security clause for acts of disloyalty. transaction between the parties is colored or clothed with bad faith. The sale or
Held: Illegal dismissal. Union already ceased to be recognized as the incumbent disposition must be motivated by good faith as an element of exemption from
bargaining representative upon the expiration of their CBA. While it is incumbent liability.
for the employer to continue to recognize the majority status of the incumbent
6. Registration
bargaining agent even after the expiration of the freedom period, they could only
do so when no petition for certification election was filed. When there is a
Art. 236 Registry of unions and file of collective agreements
representational issue, the status quo provision in so far as the need to await the
The Bureau shall keep a registry of legitimate labor organizations. The Bureau shall
creation of a new agreement will not apply. Otherwise, it will create an absurd
also maintain a file of all collective bargaining agreements and other related
situation where the union members will be forced to maintain membership by
agreements and records of settlement of labor disputes, and copies of orders, and
virtue of the union security clause existing under the CBA and, thereafter, support
decision of voluntary arbitrators. The file shall be open and accessible to interested
another union when filing a petition for certification election. If we apply it, there
parties under conditions prescribed by the Secretary of Labor and Employment,
will always be an issue of disloyalty whenever the employees exercise their right to
provided that no specific information submitted in confidence shall be disclosed
self-organization. The holding of a certification election is a statutory policy that
unless authorized by the Secretary, or when it is at issue in any judicial litigation or
should not be circumvented, or compromised.
when public interest or national security so requires.
5. Ratification Within thirty (30) days from the execution of a Collective Bargaining Agreement, the
parties shall submit copies of the same directly to the Bureau or the Regional
Book V, Rule XVII, Section 2. Requirements for registration. Offices of the Department of Labor and Employment for registration accompanied
The application for CBA registration shall be accompanied by the original and two with verified proofs of its posting in two conspicuous places in the place of work
(2) duplicate copies of the following documents which must be certified under oath and ratification by the majority of all the workers in the bargaining unit. The Bureau
by the representative(s) of the employer(s) and labor union(s) concerned: or Regional Offices shall act upon the application for registration of such Collective
(a) The collective bargaining agreement; Bargaining Agreement within five (5) calendar days from receipt thereof. The
Regional Offices shall furnish the Bureau with a copy of the Collective Bargaining
(b) A statement that the collective bargaining agreement was posted in at least Agreement within five (5) days from its submission.
two (2) conspicuous places in the establishment or establishments concerned for at
least five (5) days before its ratification; and The Bureau or Regional Office shall assess the employer for every Collective
Bargaining Agreement a registration fee of not less than one thousand pesos
(P1,000.00) or in any other amount as may be deemed appropriate and necessary

6|P a g e
by the Secretary of Labor and Employment for the effective and efficient 7. CBA and 3rd Party Applicability
administration of the Voluntary Arbitration Program. Any amount collected under
this provision shall accrue to the Special Voluntary Arbitration Fund.  Associated Labor Unions v. NLRC, supra
The Bureau shall also maintain a file, and shall undertake or assist in the Unless expressly assumed, labor contracts such as are not enforceable against a
publication, of all final decisions, orders and awards of the Secretary of Labor and transferee of an enterprise, labor contracts being in personam, thus binding only
Employment, Regional Directors and the Commission between the parties. 26 As a general rule, there is no law requiring a bona fide
purchaser of the assets of an on-going concern to absorb in its employ the
employees of the latter. 27 However, although the purchaser of the assets or
enterprise is not legally bound to absorb in its employ the employees of the seller
Book V, Rule XVII, Section 1. Where to file.
of such assets or enterprise, the parties are liable to the employees if the
Within thirty (30) days from execution of a collective bargaining agreement, the
transaction between the parties is colored or clothed with bad faith. The sale or
parties thereto shall submit two (2) duly signed copies of the agreement to the
disposition must be motivated by good faith as an element of exemption from
Regional Office which issued the certificate of registration/certificate of creation of
liability.
chartered local of the labor union-party to the agreement. Where the certificate of
creation of the concerned chartered local was issued by the Bureau, the agreement 8. CBA and Disaffiliation
shall be filed with the Regional Office which has jurisdiction over the place where it
principally operates.  Elisco-Elirol Labor Union v. Noriel, 80 SCRA 682 (1977)
Multi-employer collective bargaining agreements shall be filed with the Bureau. Facts: Local union disaffiliated from their mother union and registered itself.
Company refused to recognize local union.
Held: The employees and members of the local union did not actually form a new
Book V, Rule XVII, Section 2. Requirements for registration. union but merely registered the local union as was their right. Actually, local union
The application for CBA registration shall be accompanied by the original and two was the REAL principal party to the agreement. NAFLU acting as the mother union
(2) duplicate copies of the following documents which must be certified under oath in participation in the execution of the bargaining agreement with respondent
by the representative(s) of the employer(s) and labor union(s) concerned: company acted merely as agent of the local union which remained the basic unit of
(a) The collective bargaining agreement; the association. The petitioners had every right to disaffiliate themselves with
NAFLU when the circumstances warranted so.
(b) A statement that the collective bargaining agreement was posted in at
least two (2) conspicuous places in the establishment or establishments concerned In Benguet Consolidated: “during the effectivity of a CBA through their agent, the
for at least five (5) days before its ratification; and employees can change said agent but the contract continues to bind them up to its
expiration date. The only consideration involved is the employees’ interest. The
(c) A statement that the collective bargaining agreement was ratified by the majority of the employees is the true party in interest to the contract, holding rights
majority of the employees in the bargaining unit of the employer or employees through the agency of the union representative. Any exclusive interest claimed by
concerned. the agent is defeasible at the will of the principal.

Book V, Rule XVII, Section 3. Payment of registration fee.

The certificate of registration of collective bargaining agreement shall be issued by
the Regional Office upon payment of the prescribed registration fee.

7|P a g e
 9. Interpretation, Administration and Enforcement bargaining, strikes and lockouts, closed shop, wages, working conditions, hours of
labor and similar subjects
a) Nature of Contract: Law Between Parties

 Dole Phils., Inc. v. Pawis ng Makabayang Obrero, 395 SCRA 112 (2003)
Civil Code Art. 1702.
Facts: Interpretation of “free meals after three (3) hours of overtime work” in the In case of doubt, all labor legislation and all labor contracts shall be construed in
CBA. favor of the safety and decent living for the laborer.
Held: Provision should be interpreted in its literal sense. No amount of legal
semantics can convince the Court that “after more than” means the same as  Cirtek Employees Labor Union – FFW v. Cirtek Electronics, Inc, 650
“after”. SCRA 656 (2011)
The disputed provision of the CBA is clear and unambiguous. The terms are explicit Facts: SOLE gave arbitral awards higher than those provided for in the MOA.
and the language of the CBA is not susceptible to any other interpretation. Hence, Company wants to uphold the validity of the MOA between them and the Union.
the literal meaning of “free meals after three (3) hours of overtime work” shall Held: The MOA came about as a result of the constitution, at Company’s behest, of
prevail, which is simply that an employee shall be entitled to a free meal if he has the Labor-Management Council (LMC) which, in the first place, should not be used
rendered exactly, or no less than, three hours of overtime work, not “after more as an avenue for bargaining but for the purpose of affording workers to participate
than” or “in excess of” three hours overtime work. in policy and decision-making. Hence, the agreements embodied in the MOA were
Exercise of management prerogatives is not a valid justification when the opinion of not the proper subject of the LMC deliberation or procedure but of CBA
the management in interpreting a CBA provision is clearly contrary to its clear negotiations and, therefore, deserving little weight.
meaning. On the contention that the MOA should have been given credence because it was
validly entered into by the parties, the Court notes that even those who signed it
 Zuellig Pharma Corp. v. Alice M. Sibal, et al., G.R. No. 173587, 15 July expressed reservations thereto.
2013
A CBA (assuming in this case that the MOA can be treated as one) is a contract
Facts: Employees claim that they are entitled to avail of both redundancy pay and imbued with public interest. It must thus be given a liberal, practical and realistic,
retirement benefits under the terms and conditions of the CBA and the Retirement rather than a narrow and technical construction, with due consideration to the
and Gratuity Plan context in which it is negotiated and the purpose for which it is intended.
Held: Here, the parties’ CBA provides in no uncertain terms that whatever amount
of money the employees will receive as retirement gratuity shall be chargeable  Bank of Phil. Islands v. BPI Employees Union – Metro Manila, 678 SCRA
against separation pay. It is the unequivocal manifestation of their agreement that 674 (2012)
acceptance of retirement gratuity forecloses receipt of separation pay and vice Facts: CBA provides for loan benefits and relatively low interest rates. However,
versa. Company subsequently issued a “no negative data bank policy” in order to avail of
such loans.
b) Liberal Construction in Case of Doubt
Held: Although it can be said that BPI is authorized to issue rules and regulations
Civil Code Art. 1700. pertinent to the availment of the loans under the CBA, the additional rules and
The relations between capital and labor are not merely contractual. They are so regulations, however, must not impose new conditions which are not contemplated
impressed with public interest that labor contracts must yield to the common good. in the CBA and should be within the realm of reasonableness. The "no negative data
Therefore, such contracts are subject to the special laws on labor unions, collective bank policy" is a new condition which is never contemplated in the CBA. To include
such policy after the effectivity of the CBA is deceptive and goes beyond the original
8|P a g e
agreement between the contracting parties. It is also unreasonable for the 2) Contract Ambiguity
employees.
 Holy Cross of Davao College, Inc. v. Holy Cross Faculty Union-KAMAPI,
In case of doubt, all labor legislation and all labor contracts shall be construed in
favor of the safety and decent living of the laborer. 461 SCRA 319 (2005)
Facts: Involves the interpretation of a CBA provision: ” the Management shall grant
c) Grievances to all academic personnel a grant-in-aid program, where the academic teaching
personnel, whenever scholarship opportunities should arise, be afforded a leave of
1) Contract Infirmity absence to further their studies in Institutions of Higher Learning with a grant-in-aid
equivalent to their salary and allowance”.
 Associated Labor Unions v. Calleja, 173 SCRA 179 (1989)
Held: Employee is entitled to a leave of absence with a grant-in aid equivalent to
Facts: CBA is claimed to be defective for failure to compy with the posting her monthly salary and allowance, provided such grant is to promote her
requirements. professional growth or to enhance her studies in institutions of higher learning.
Held: Petitioners argue that this was not complied with because of the existence of Such provisions need no interpretation for they are clear. When there is no
a strike. Court found this justification unacceptable. In the first place, the posting of ambiguity, terms are to be interpreted according to their literal meaning and not
copies of the collective bargaining agreement is the responsibility of the employer beyond their obvious intendment.
which can easily comply with the requirement through a mere mechanical act. The
purpose of the requirement is precisely to inform the employees in the bargaining d) Minutes of the Negotiation
unit of the contents of said agreement so that they could intelligently decide
whether to accept the same or not. The assembly of the members of  Samahan ng Manggagawa sa Top Form Manufacturing v. NLRC, 295
SCRA 171 (1998)
ALU wherein the agreement in question was allegedly explained does not cure the
defect. The contract is intended for all employees and not only for the members of Facts: Union contends that they agreed to drop a provision in the CBA in re:
the purported representative alone. It may even be said that the need to inform the automatic across-the-board wage increase because of management’s pledge of
non-members of the terms thereof is more exigent and compelling since, in all sincerity to grant it anyway even if it’s not embodied in the CBA.
likelihood, their contact with the persons who are supposed to represent them is Held: If there was indeed a promise or undertaking on the part of management to
limited. obligate itself to grant an automatic across-the-board wage increase, Union should
have requested or demanded that such “promise or undertaking” be incorporated
in the CBA. After all, Union has the means under the law to compel Top to
Another t reason for annulling the CBA is the finding that 181out of the 281 workers incorporate this specific economic proposal in the CBA. Duty to bargain includes
who "ratified" the same now "strongly and vehemently deny and/or repudiate the “executing a contract incorporating such agreements if requested by either party.”
alleged negotiations and ratification of the CBA. " The CBA is the law between the contracting parties. Only provisions embodied in
the CBA should be so interpreted and complied with. Where a proposal raised by a
contracting party does not find print in the CBA, it is not a part thereof and the
In re contract bar rule: the delay of the right to select representatives can be proponent has no claim whatsoever to its implementation. If indeed Top promised
justified only where stability is deemed paramount. Excepted are those which do to continue with the practice of granting across-the-board salary increases ordered
not foster industrial stability, such as contracts where the identity of the by the government, such promise could only be demandable in law if incorporated
representative is in doubt. Any stability derived from such contracts must be in the CBA. By making such promise, Top can’t be considered in bad faith or at the
subordinated to the employees' freedom of choice because it does not establish the very least, resorting to the scheme of feigning to undertake the negotiation
type of industrial peace contemplated by the law. proceedings through empty promises. Union had the right to demand its
embodiment in the CBA but it didn’t, hence the promise remained a promise.
9|P a g e
 e) Grievance Machinery/Voluntary Arbitration Held: Improper. NLRC had the appellate authority to correct a claimed “erroneous
assumption of jurisdiction” on the part of the Labor Arbiter. Under the NLRC rules,
Art. 224 (c) Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters and the Commission no appeal may be taken from an order denying a motion to dismiss. Thus, the
(c) Cases arising from the interpretation of collective bargaining agreements and remedy of the aggrieved party, in case of denial of a motion to dismiss is to file an
those arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company personnel policies answer and interpose as a defense the ground relied upon in the motion to
shall be disposed of by the Labor Arbiter by referring the same to the grievance dismiss, proceed to trial and in case of adverse judgment, to elevate the entire
machinery and voluntary arbitration as may be provided in said agreements. case by appeal in due course. Company’s first recourse should be with the NLRC.
They should have submitted its position paper as ordered by the Labor Arbiter and
raise therein the question of supposed lack of jurisdiction.
Art.272 Grievance Machinery and Voluntary Arbitration  University of San Agustin Employees’ Union-FFW v. Court of Appeals,
The parties to a Collective Bargaining Agreement shall include therein provisions 485 SCRA 526 (2006)
that will ensure the mutual observance of it terms and conditions. They shall
establish a machinery for the adjustment and resolution of grievances arising from Facts: On July 27, 2000, the University entered into a CBA with the Union. The
the interpretation or implementation of their Collective Bargaining Agreement and conflict arose with regard to how the computation of salary increases was to be
those arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company personnel done what constituted 80% of the TIP (tuition incremental proceeds under RA No.
policies. 6728). Under the petitioner’s theory, it could rightfully subtract from the TIP the
cost of the scholarships and tuition fee discounts that it granted to its students, its
All grievances submitted to the grievance machinery which are not settle within
employees, and the dependents of the latter. According to the university, the term
seven (7) calendar days from the date of its submission shall automatically be
“salary increases” refers not only to the increase in salary but also to corresponding
referred to voluntary arbitration prescribed in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
increases in other benefits. The Union, on the other hand, was of the petition that
For this purpose, parties to a Collective Bargaining Agreement shall name and “salary increases” was to be construed strictly and limited only to actual increases
designate in advance a Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, or of salary. Due to failure to agree on what the terms of their CBA meant, the parties
include in the agreement a procedure for the selection of such Voluntary Arbitrator underwent voluntary arbitration.
or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, preferably from the listing of qualified Voluntary
Doctrine: WON the CBA provision applied only to salary increases to the exclusion
Arbitrators duly accredited by the Board. In case the parties fail to select a
of other benefits granted by the university – YES “Absent any proof that
Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, the Board shall designate the
petitioner’s consent was vitiated by fraud, mistake or duress, it is presumed that it
Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators as may be necessary,
entered into the CBA voluntarily, had full knowledge of the contents thereof, and
pursuant to the selection procedure agreed upon in the Collective Bargaining
was aware of its commitments under the contract.”
Agreement, which shall act with the same force and effect as if the Arbitrator or
panel of Arbitrators has been selected by the partied as described above. According to the Court, a plain reading of the CBA shows that the parties agreed
that 80% of the TIP or at least P1500 is to be allocated for individual salary
 Metro Drug Distribution, Inc. v. Metro Drug Corp. Employees increases. The CBA does not speak of any other benefits that would be covered by
Association, GR 142666, Sept. 26, 2005 471 SCRA 45 (2005) the share of employees in the TIP. As applied, the claim of the university that the
80% TIP should be taken to mean as covering all increases cannot be given merit.
Facts: Company filed a motion to dismiss with the LA alleging that Union’s Further, under the law, the duty to collectively bargain does not mean that one
complaint for ULP lodged in the NLRC is in excess of the latter’s jurisdiction and party has to accommodate all the demands of the other party. As again applied to
should be filed with the voluntary arbitrator instead. LA dismissed Company’s the case at bar, the university could have opposed the inclusion of such a provision
motion so the latter filed a petition for certiorari with CA. during the collective bargaining negotiations.

10 | P a g e
F. Voluntary Arbitration arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company personnel policies
referred to in the immediately preceding article. Accordingly, violations of a
1. Basis and Rationale Collective Bargaining Agreement, except those which are gross in character, shall no
longer be treated as unfair labor practice and shall be resolved as grievances under
1987 Const. Art. XIII, Sec. 3 the Collective Bargaining Agreement. For purposes of this article, gross violations of
The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, organized and Collective Bargaining Agreement shall mean flagrant and/or malicious refusal to
unorganized, and promote full employment and equality of employment comply with the economic provisions of such agreement.
opportunities for all.
The Commission, its Regional Offices and the Regional Directors of the Department
It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization, collective bargaining of Labor and Employment shall not entertain disputes, grievances or matters under
and negotiations, and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of
accordance with law. They shall be entitled to security of tenure, humane Voluntary Arbitrators and shall immediately dispose and refer the same to the
conditions of work, and a living wage. They shall also participate in policy and Grievance Machinery or Voluntary Arbitration provided in the Collective Bargaining
decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided by Agreement.
law.
The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between workers and
employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in settling disputes, Art.274 Jurisdiction over Other Labor Disputes
including conciliation, and shall enforce their mutual compliance therewith to foster The Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of voluntary Arbitrators, upon agreement of the
industrial peace. parties, shall also hear and decide all other labor disputes including unfair labor
practices and bargaining deadlocks.
The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers, recognizing
the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the right of
enterprises to reasonable returns to investments, and to expansion and growth.
Art. 224 (a) (5) (c)Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters and the Commission
(a) Except as otherwise provided under this Code the Labor Arbiters shall have
original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear ad decide, within thirty (30) calendar days
Art. 218 A (a) Declaration of Policy
after the submission of the case by the parties for decision without extension, even
A. It is the policy of the State:
in the absence of stenographic notes, the following cases involving all workers,
(a) To promote and emphasize the primacy of free collective bargaining and whether agricultural or non-agricultural:
negotiations, including voluntary arbitration, mediation and conciliation, as modes
5. Cases arising from any violation of Art. 264 of this Code, including
of settling labor or industrial disputes.
questions involving the legality of strikes and lockouts;
(c) Cases arising from the interpretation of collective bargaining agreements and
those arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company personnel policies
Art.272 (see page 10)
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.
2. Arbitrable Issues

Art.273 Jurisdiction of Voluntary Arbitrators or Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators

The Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators shall have original and
exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide all unresolved grievances arising from the
interpretation or implementation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and those
11 | P a g e
 3. Arbitrator 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
a) Selection conditions of employment;
4. Claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages arising
Art. 219 (n) Definitions
from the employer-employee relations;
(n) "Voluntary Arbitration" means any person accredited by the board as such, or
any person named or designated in the Collective Bargaining Agreement by the 5. Cases arising from any violation of Art. 264 of this Code, including
parties to act as their Voluntary Arbitrator, or one chosen with or without the questions involving the legality of strikes and lockouts;
assistance of the National Conciliation and Mediation Board, pursuant to a selection
6. Except claims for Employees Compensation, Social Security, Medicare and
procedure agreed upon in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, or any official that
maternity benefits, all other claims, arising from employer-employee relations,
may be authorized by the Secretary of Labor and Employment to act as Voluntary
including those of persons in domestic or household service, involving an amount
Arbitration upon the written request and agreement of the parties to a labor
exceeding P5,000.00 regardless of whether accompanied with a claim for
dispute.
reinstatement.
(b) The Commission shall have exclusive appellate jurisdiction over cases
decided by Labor Arbiters
Art. 272 (see page 10)
(c) Cases arising from the interpretation of collective bargaining agreements
b) Plenary Jurisdiction of Voluntary Arbitrator vis-à-vis Labor Arbiter and those arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company personnel
policies shall be disposed of by the Labor Arbiter by referring the same to the
Art. 273 (see page 11) grievance machinery and voluntary arbitration as may be provided in said
agreements.

Art. 274 (see page 11)  Negros Metal Corp. v. Armelo J. Lamayo, 629 SCRA 470 (2010)
Facts: Armelo was suspended for grinding his tool and subsequently dismissed.
Filed an illegal dismissal with the LA,. Company argued that the proper way was for
Art.277 (h) Strikes, Picketing, and Lockouts Respondent to have taken up 1st the grievance procedure under the CBA. Court
(h) Before or at any stage the compulsory arbitration process, the parties may opt ruled that LA had original and exclusive jurisdiction over labor disputes, absent any
to submit their dispute to voluntary arbitration. showing that the parties agreed to send it to a voluntary arbitrator. VA has no
original and exclusive juris over the action also since the CBA provision about
grievance proceedings did not expressly state that termination disputes can be a
Art. 224 (a) (c) Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters and the Commission subject of VA’ion. Even if it was, such was not applicable since Armelo quit the year
(a)Except as otherwise provided under this Code the Labor Arbiters shall have before his suspension and even denied invoking the grievance machinery.
original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear ad decide, within thirty (30) calendar days Who has jurisdiction? LA
after the submission of the case by the parties for decision without extension, even
in the absence of stenographic notes, the following cases involving all workers, HELD: Under Article 217, it is clear that the LA has original and exclusive jurisdiction
whether agricultural or non-agricultural: over termination disputes. On the other hand, under article 261, a VA has original
and exclusive jurisdiction over grievances arising from the interpretation or
1. Unfair labor practice cases; enforcement of company policies.
2. Termination disputes;

12 | P a g e
As a general rule then, termination disputes shold be brought before a LA, except  7 K Corporation v. Eddie Albarico, G.R. No. 182295, 26 June 2013
when the parties, under Article 262, unmistakably express that they agree to submit
the same to VA’ion Facts: Eddie was allegedly illegally dismissed. He submitted his money claims
against 7K for arbitration with the NCMB. The issue in the NCMB case was whether
In present case, the CBA provision on grievance machinery being invoked by P does Eddie was entitled to sep pay and sales commission, NOT the legality of his
not expressly state that termination disputes are included in the ambit of what may dismissal. VA ruled that 7K was liable for illegal dismissal. 7K argues that the VA is in
be brought before the company’s grievance machinery. GAD for ruling on an issue not expressly stated in the Submission Agreement. Held:
“For this purpose, a grievance is defined as any disagreement between the UNION VA correctly assumed jurisdiction, for to determine the basis of Eddie’s entitlement
and the EMPLOYER or between a worker or group of workers on one hand and the to sep pay and sales commission, the legality of his dismissal must first be resolved.
EMPLOYER on the one hand as to the application and interpretation of any of the W/N VA has jurisdiction. YES
provisions of this contract…”
While sep pay may be awarded for reasons other than illegal dismissal, the circs
Even assuming that the suspension of an EE may be considered a disagreement in this case show that Eddie’s claim of sep pay was premised on his allegation if
which bears on the application and interpretation of any of the provisions of the illegal dismissal (not premised on any authorized causes like retrenchment, nor
CBA, Armelo could not have brought such matter to grievance procedure or VA in premised on considerations of social justice). Thus, the voluntary arbitrator
light of the documented fact that he had resigned from the U one year before his properly AJ-ed over the issue of the legality of his dismissal.
suspension. He also denied having a hand in the preparation of the letter invoking
Even the NLRC was of the understanding that the NCMB arbitration case sought
the U’s grievance procedure.
to resolve the issue of the legality of the dismissal—it was the basis of the NLRC’s
Finding of the LA should therefore be accorded respect. finding of Eddie’s forum shopping and consequent dismissal of the case before it.
7K is also stopped from claiming otherwise since it acknowledged the issue of illegal
 Manila Pavilion Hotel v. Henry Delada, 664 SCRA 334 (2012) dismissal in its position paper and when it filed a MTD with the NLRC for forum
Delada, a head waiter, protested his transfer to another restaurant within the hotel. shopping.
He demanded a grievance meeting, and when he and the hotel could not reach a Sime Darby Pailipinas v Deputy Admin Magsalin: A voluntary arbitrator has plenary
settlement, they submitted it to a panel of VAs at the NCMB. The PVA ruled that the jurisdiction and authority to interpret an agreement to arbitrate and to determine
transfer was a valid exercise of management prerogative, but the suspension the scope of his own authority when the said agreement is vague—subject only, in a
imposed by the hotel was not, because it no longer had authority to discipline proper case, to the certiorari jurisdiction of the SC.
Delada.
c) Procedures
Held: Here, the PVA did not make a definitive ruling on the merits of the validity
of the 90-day suspension; hence, MPH did not lose authority to discipline Delada Art.275 Procedures
for his continued refusal to report to his new assignment. The Court, citing Allied The Voluntary Arbitrator or panel o Voluntary Arbitrators shall have the power to
Banking Corp. v. CA, reasoned that until and unless rules or orders issued by hold hearings, receive evidences and take whatever action is necessary to resolve
employers are declared illegal or improper by the competent authority, the the issue or issues subject to the dispute, including efforts to effect a voluntary
employees ignore or disobey these at their peril. There is a presumption of validity settlement between parties.
of the order issued by MPH.
All parties to the dispute shall be entitled to attend the arbitration proceedings. The
Since PVA eventually ruled that the transfer order was a valid exercise of
attendance of any third party or the exclusion of any witness from the proceedings
management prerogative, MPH had authority to continue with the administrative
shall be determined by the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators.
proceedings against Delada. The CA decision is hereby modified to reflect the fact
Hearing may be adjourned for cause or upon agreement by the parties.
that MPH retained authority to discipline Delada for insubordination and willful
disobedience.

13 | P a g e
Unless the parties agree otherwise, it shall be mandatory for the Voluntary contractual history. In this case, VA’s interpretation is correct and ruled in favor of
Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators to render an award or decision within the employees.
twenty (20) calendar days from the date of submission of the dispute to voluntary
arbitration. f) Awards and Orders
The award or decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators Art. 275 (see page 13)
shall contain the facts and the law on which it is based. It shall be final and executor
after ten (10) calendar days from receipt of the copy of the award of decision by the  Equitable PCI Banking Corp. v. RCBC Capital Corp, 574 SCRA 858 (2004)
parties.
Facts: RCBC and EPCIB went into arbitration after failing to settle the case amicably.
Upon motion of any interested party, the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary The 3-person tribunal gave a Partial Award to RCBC, which RCBC sent to the RTC for
Arbitrators or the Labor Arbiter in the region where the movant resides, in case of confirmation but petitioners wanted it vacated. RTC ruled in favor of RCBC.
the absence or incapacity of the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Petitioners directly appealed it to the SC. SC held that (1) appeal must be to CA first,
Arbitrators for any reason, may issue a writ of execution requiring either the sheriff (2) the action by RCBC was not time barred as Sec. 5 (h) was applicable and (3)
of the Commission or regular courts or any public official whom the parties may there was no denial of due process as they were given plenty of opportunities to be
designate in the submission agreement to execute the final decision, order or heard and they were also able to appeal the decisions multiple times.
award.
Held: The essence of due process is the opportunity to be heard. What the law
prohibits is not the absence of previous notice but the absolute absence thereof
and the lack of opportunity to be heard. Where an opportunity to be heard either
d) Nature of Office and Function through oral arguments or through pleadings is accorded, there is no denial of
procedural due process.
Art. 272 (see page 10)
g) Finality and Execution of Awards

Art. 219 (n) (see page 12) Art. 275 (see page 13)

e) Interpretation Agreement
 Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. Sales Force Union- PTGWO-BALAIS
 Lepanto Consolidated Mining Corp. v. Lepanto Local Staff union, 562 v. Coca-Cola Bottlers, Philippine, Inc., 464 SCRA 507 (2005)
SCRA 495 (2008)
Facts: A decision of the VA panel was received on Feb 20. But the dissenting opinion
Facts: There was a question on the application of CBA provisions re: night shift diff was not attached. Union only received it on Mar 2. On Mar 12 they filed MR. They
and longevity pay. appealed the decision to the CA but was dismissed because the MR they filed with
VA was filed out of time. The SC agrees with the CA that the 10 day period should
be counted from Feb. 20 when the main decision was received. The dissenting is
Held: In disposing of the issue, SC said that the terms and conditions of CBA not part of the decision.
constitute the law between the parties. If the terms of the CBA are clear and have
no doubt upon the intention of the contracting parties, the literal meaning of its WON appeal should be dismissed because the MR was filed out of time?
stipulation shall prevail. To ascertain the intention of the contracting parties, the VA Held: Decision in this case was dismissal by the Panel. Such decision was not
shall consider 1) contemporaneous and subsequent acts and 2) Negotiating and contained in the dissenting opinion. A dissenting opinion is not binding on the
parties as it is a mere expression of the individual view of the dissenting member

14 | P a g e
from the conclusion held by the majority. Even if they did not receive the dissenting Court of Appeals may grant an additional period of fifteen (15) days only within
opinion on Feb. 20, they did receive the main opinion and from that point on the which to file the petition for review. No further extension shall be granted except
counting of the 10 days began. Prescinding from the foregoing, the Court of Appeals for the most compelling reason and in no case to exceed fifteen (15) days. (n)
correctly dismissed the petition before it as it no longer had any appellate
Section 5. How appeal taken. — Appeal shall be taken by filing a verified petition for
jurisdiction to alter or nullify the decision of the Panel. The Panel’s Decision had
review in seven (7) legible copies with the Court of Appeals, with proof of service of
become final and executory, hence, unchallengeable.
a copy thereof on the adverse party and on the court or agency a quo. The original
copy of the petition intended for the Court of Appeals shall be indicated as such by
the petitioner.
h) Appeal
Upon the filing of the petition, the petitioner shall pay to the clerk of court of the
Rules of Court RULE 43 Court of Appeals the docketing and other lawful fees and deposit the sum of
Appeals From the Court of Tax Appeals and Quasi-Judicial Agencies to the Court of P500.00 for costs. Exemption from payment of docketing and other lawful fees and
Appeals the deposit for costs may be granted by the Court of Appeals upon a verified
motion setting forth valid grounds therefor. If the Court of Appeals denies the
Section 1. Scope. — This Rule shall apply to appeals from judgments or final orders motion, the petitioner shall pay the docketing and other lawful fees and deposit for
of the Court of Tax Appeals and from awards, judgments, final orders or resolutions costs within fifteen (15) days from notice of the denial. (n)
of or authorized by any quasi-judicial agency in the exercise of its quasi-judicial
functions. Among these agencies are the Civil Service Commission, Central Board of Section 6. Contents of the petition. — The petition for review shall (a) state the full
Assessment Appeals, Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of the President, names of the parties to the case, without impleading the court or agencies either as
Land Registration Authority, Social Security Commission, Civil Aeronautics Board, petitioners or respondents; (b) contain a concise statement of the facts and issues
Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer, National Electrification involved and the grounds relied upon for the review; (c) be accompanied by a
Administration, Energy Regulatory Board, National Telecommunications clearly legible duplicate original or a certified true copy of the award, judgment,
Commission, Department of Agrarian Reform under Republic Act No. 6657, final order or resolution appealed from, together with certified true copies of such
Government Service Insurance System, Employees Compensation Commission, material portions of the record referred to therein and other supporting papers;
Agricultural Invention Board, Insurance Commission, Philippine Atomic Energy and (d) contain a sworn certification against forum shopping as provided in the last
Commission, Board of Investments, Construction Industry Arbitration Commission, paragraph of section 2, Rule 42. The petition shall state the specific material dates
and voluntary arbitrators authorized by law. (n) showing that it was filed within the period fixed herein. (2a)

Section 2. Cases not covered. — This Rule shall not apply to judgments or final Section 7. Effect of failure to comply with requirements. — The failure of the
orders issued under the Labor Code of the Philippines. (n) petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements regarding the payment
of the docket and other lawful fees, the deposit for costs, proof of service of the
Section 3. Where to appeal. — An appeal under this Rule may be taken to the Court petition, and the contents of and the documents which should accompany the
of Appeals within the period and in the manner herein provided, whether the petition shall be sufficient ground for the dismissal thereof. (n)
appeal involves questions of fact, of law, or mixed questions of fact and law. (n)
Section 8. Action on the petition. — The Court of Appeals may require the
Section 4. Period of appeal. — The appeal shall be taken within fifteen (15) days respondent to file a comment on the petition not a motion to dismiss, within ten
from notice of the award, judgment, final order or resolution, or from the date of its (10) days from notice, or dismiss the petition if it finds the same to be patently
last publication, if publication is required by law for its effectivity, or of the denial of without merit, prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised therein
petitioner's motion for new trial or reconsideration duly filed in accordance with are too unsubstantial to require consideration. (6a)
the governing law of the court or agencya quo. Only one (1) motion for
reconsideration shall be allowed. Upon proper motion and the payment of the full Section 9. Contents of comment. — The comment shall be filed within ten (10) days
amount of the docket fee before the expiration of the reglementary period, the from notice in seven (7) legible copies and accompanied by clearly legible certified
true copies of such material portions of the record referred to therein together with
15 | P a g e
other supporting papers. The comment shall (a) point out insufficiencies or VIII. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE
inaccuracies in petitioner's statement of facts and issues; and (b) state the reasons
why the petition should be denied or dismissed. A copy thereof shall be served on A. In general
the petitioner, and proof of such service shall be filed with the Court of Appeals.
(9a) 1. Definition and General Concept | Unfair Labor Practice vis-à-vis
Section 10. Due course. — If upon the filing of the comment or such other pleadings Management Prerogative; Exception:
or documents as may be required or allowed by the Court of Appeals or upon the
expiration of the period for the filing thereof, and on the records the Court of ILO convention No. 98
Appeals finds prima facie that the court or agency concerned has committed errors Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949
of fact or law that would warrant reversal or modification of the award, judgment, Preamble
final order or resolution sought to be reviewed, it may give due course to the
petition; otherwise, it shall dismiss the same. The findings of fact of the court or The General Conference of the International Labour Organisation,
agency concerned, when supported by substantial evidence, shall be binding on the Having been convened at Geneva by the Governing Body of the International
Court of Appeals. (n) Labour Office, and having met in its Thirty-second Session on 8 June 1949, and
Section 11. Transmittal of record. — Within fifteen (15) days from notice that the Having decided upon the adoption of certain proposals concerning the application
petition has been given due course, the Court of Appeals may require the court or of the principles of the right to organise and to bargain collectively, which is the
agency concerned to transmit the original or a legible certified true copy of the fourth item on the agenda of the session, and
entire record of the proceeding under review. The record to be transmitted may be
abridged by agreement of all parties to the proceeding. The Court of Appeals may Having determined that these proposals shall take the form of an international
require or permit subsequent correction of or addition to the record. (8a) Convention,

Section 12. Effect of appeal. — The appeal shall not stay the award, judgment, final adopts this first day of July of the year one thousand nine hundred and forty-nine
order or resolution sought to be reviewed unless the Court of Appeals shall direct the following Convention, which may be cited as the Right to Organise and
otherwise upon such terms as it may deem just. (10a) Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949:

Section 13. Submission for decision. — If the petition is given due course, the Court Article 1
of Appeals may set the case for oral argument or require the parties to submit 1. Workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination
memoranda within a period of fifteen (15) days from notice. The case shall be in respect of their employment.
deemed submitted for decision upon the filing of the last pleading or memorandum
2. Such protection shall apply more particularly in respect of acts calculated to--
required by these Rules or by the court of Appeals. (n)
(a) make the employment of a worker subject to the condition that he shall not join
a union or shall relinquish trade union membership;
(b) cause the dismissal of or otherwise prejudice a worker by reason of union
membership or because of participation in union activities outside working hours
or, with the consent of the employer, within working hours.

Article 2
1. Workers' and employers' organisations shall enjoy adequate protection against
any acts of interference by each other or each other's agents or members in their
establishment, functioning or administration.

16 | P a g e
2. In particular, acts which are designed to promote the establishment of workers' Article 8
organisations under the domination of employers or employers' organisations, or to 1. This Convention shall be binding only upon those Members of the International
support workers' organisations by financial or other means, with the object of Labour Organisation whose ratifications have been registered with the Director-
placing such organisations under the control of employers or employers' General.
organisations, shall be deemed to constitute acts of interference within the 2. It shall come into force twelve months after the date on which the ratifications of
meaning of this Article. two Members have been registered with the Director-General.
Article 3 3. Thereafter, this Convention shall come into force for any Member twelve months
Machinery appropriate to national conditions shall be established, where after the date on which its ratification has been registered.
necessary, for the purpose of ensuring respect for the right to organise as defined in
the preceding Articles. Article 9
1. Declarations communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour
Article 4 Office in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 35 of the Constitution of the
Measures appropriate to national conditions shall be taken, where necessary, to International Labour Organisation shall indicate --
encourage and promote the full development and utilisation of machinery for
(a) the territories in respect of which the Member concerned undertakes that the
voluntary negotiation between employers or employers' organisations and workers'
provisions of the Convention shall be applied without modification;
organisations, with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment
by means of collective agreements. (b) the territories in respect of which it undertakes that the provisions of the
Convention shall be applied subject to modifications, together with details of the
Article 5 said modifications;
1. The extent to which the guarantees provided for in this Convention shall apply to
the armed forces and the police shall be determined by national laws or (c) the territories in respect of which the Convention is inapplicable and in such
regulations. cases the grounds on which it is inapplicable;

2. In accordance with the principle set forth in paragraph 8 of Article 19 of the (d) the territories in respect of which it reserves its decision pending further
Constitution of the International Labour Organisation the ratification of this consideration of the position.
Convention by any Member shall not be deemed to affect any existing law, award, 2. The undertakings referred to in subparagraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 of this
custom or agreement in virtue of which members of the armed forces or the police Article shall be deemed to be an integral part of the ratification and shall have the
enjoy any right guaranteed by this Convention. force of ratification.

Article 6 3. Any Member may at any time by a subsequent declaration cancel in whole or in
This Convention does not deal with the position of public servants engaged in the part any reservation made in its original declaration in virtue of subparagraph (b),
administration of the State, nor shall it be construed as prejudicing their rights or (c) or (d) of paragraph 1 of this Article.
status in any way. 4. Any Member may, at any time at which the Convention is subject to denunciation
in accordance with the provisions of Article 11, communicate to the Director-
Article 7
General a declaration modifying in any other respect the terms of any former
The formal ratifications of this Convention shall be communicated to the Director-
declaration and stating the present position in respect of such territories as it may
General of the International Labour Office for registration.
specify.

Article 10
1. Declarations communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour
Office in accordance with paragraph 4 or 5 of Article 35 of the Constitution of the
17 | P a g e
International Labour Organisation shall indicate whether the provisions of the Article 13
Convention will be applied in the territory concerned without modification or The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall communicate to the
subject to modifications; when the declaration indicates that the provisions of the Secretary-General of the United Nations for registration in accordance with Article
Convention will be applied subject to modifications, it shall give details of the said 102 of the Charter of the United Nations full particulars of all ratifications,
modifications. declarations and acts of denunciation registered by him in accordance with the
provisions of the preceding articles.
2. The Member, Members or international authority concerned may at any time by
a subsequent declaration renounce in whole or in part the right to have recourse to Article 14
any modification indicated in any former declaration. At such times as it may consider necessary the Governing Body of the International
3. The Member, Members or international authority concerned may, at any time at Labour Office shall present to the General Conference a report on the working of
which this Convention is subject to denunciation in accordance with the provisions this Convention and shall examine the desirability of placing on the agenda of the
of Article 11, communicate to the Director-General a declaration modifying in any Conference the question of its revision in whole or in part.
other respect the terms of any former declaration and stating the present position
in respect of the application of the Convention. Article 15
1. Should the Conference adopt a new Convention revising this Convention in whole
Article 11 or in part, then, unless the new Convention otherwise provides,
1. A Member which has ratified this Convention may denounce it after the (a) the ratification by a Member of the new revising Convention shall ipso jure
expiration of ten years from the date on which the Convention first comes into involve the immediate denunciation of this Convention, notwithstanding the
force, by an act communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour provisions of Article 11 above, if and when the new revising Convention shall have
Office for registration. Such denunciation shall not take effect until one year after come into force;
the date on which it is registered.
(b) as from the date when the new revising Convention comes into force, this
2. Each Member which has ratified this Convention and which does not, within the Convention shall cease to be open to ratification by the Members.
year following the expiration of the period of ten years mentioned in the preceding
paragraph, exercise the right of denunciation provided for in this Article, will be 2. This Convention shall in any case remain in force in its actual form and content
bound for another period of ten years and, thereafter, may denounce this for those Members which have ratified it but have not ratified the revising
Convention at the expiration of each period of ten years under the terms provided Convention.
for in this Article.
Article 16
Article 12 The English and French versions of the text of this Convention are equally
1. The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall notify all Members authoritative.
of the International Labour Organisation of the registration of all ratifications,
declarations and denunciations communicated to him by the Members of the
Organisation. Art. 219 (k) Definitions
2. When notifying the Members of the Organisation of the registration of the (k) "Unfair labor practice" means any unfair labor practice as expressly defined in
second ratification communicated to him, the Director-General shall draw the this Code
attention of the Members of the Organisation to the date upon which the
Convention will come into force.

18 | P a g e
Art. 256 Non-abridgement of right to self-organization jurisdiction over the same or certify it to the Commission for compulsory
It shall be unlawful for any person to restrain, coerce, discriminate against or arbitration. For this purpose, the contending parties are strictly enjoined to comply
unduly interfere with employees and workers in their exercise of the right to self- with such orders, prohibitions and/or injunctions as are issues by the Secretary or
organization. Such right shall include the right to form, join, or assist labor Labor and Employment or the Commission, under pain of immediate disciplinary
organizations for the purpose of collective bargaining through representatives of action, including dismissal or loss of employment status or payment by the locking-
their own choosing and to engage in lawful concerted activities for the same out employer of backwages, damages and other affirmative relief, even criminal
purpose or for their mutual aid and protection, subject to the provisions of Art. 264 prosecution against either or both of them.
of this Code The foregoing notwithstanding, the President of the Philippines shall not be
precluded from determining the industries that, in his opinion, are indispensable to
the national interest, and from intervening at any time and assuming jurisdiction
Art.277 (g) Strikes, Picketing, and Lockouts over any such labor dispute in order to settle or terminate the same.
(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  General Santos Coca-Cola Plant Free Workers Union-TUPAS v. Coca-
of Labor and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or Cola Bottlers Phils., Inc., 579 SCRA 414 (2009)
certify the same to the Commission for compulsory arbitration. Such assumption or
Facts: ER experienced decline in profits. Implemented early retirement program for
certification shall have the effect of automatically enjoining the intended or
EEs, w/c created vacancies and led Union to negotiate w/ LMC to fill these up w/
impending strike or lockout as specified in the assumption or certification order. If
permanent EEs. Due to freeze hiring directive, ER contracted-out jobs. Union filed
one has already taken place at the time of assumption or certification, all striking or
notice of strike for ER’s ULP in contracting-out. NLRC & CA ruled no ER ULP. SC
lock out employees shall immediately return to work and the employer shall
agreed. ER’s action to contract-out the services and functions performed by Union
immediately resume operations and readmit all workers under the same terms and
members did not constitute ULP as this was not directed at the members’ right to
conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout. The Secretary of Labor and
self-organization. WoN Coke’s contracting-out of jobs to JLBP amounted to ULP -
Employment or the Commission may seek the assistance of law enforcement
NO
agencies to ensure compliance with this provision as well as with such orders as he
may issue to enforce the same. Held: As correctly found by NLRC and CA, the company’s action to contract-out the
services and functions performed by Union members did not constitute ULP as this
In line with the national concern for and the highest respect accorded to the right of
was not directed at the members’ right to self-organization.
patients to life and health, strikes and lockouts in hospitals, clinics and similar
medical institutions shall, to every extent possible, be avoided, and all serious ART. 248. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE OF EMPLOYERS. – It shall be unlawful for an
efforts, not only by labor and management but government as well be exhausted to employer to commit any of the following unfair labor practices:
substantially minimize, if not prevent, their adverse effects on such life and health,
(c) To contract out services or functions being performed by union members when
through the exercise, however legitimate, by labor of its right to strike and by
such will interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right
management to lock out. In labor disputes adversely affecting the continued
to self-organization;
operation of such union, clinics, or medical institutions, it shall be the duty of the
striking union or locking-out employer to provide and maintain an effective skeletal Unfair labor practice refers to “acts that violate the workers’ right to organize.” The
workforce of medical and other health personnel whose movement and services prohibited acts are related to the workers’ right to self-organization and to the
shall be unhampered and unrestricted, as are necessary to insure the proper and observance of a CBA. Without that element, the acts, even if unfair, are not unfair
adequate protection of the life and health of its patients , most especially labor practices.
emergency cases, for the duration of the strike or lockout. In such cases, the
Both the NLRC and the CA found that Union was unable to prove its charge of ULP.
Secretary of Labor and Employment is mandated to immediately assume, within
It had the burden of adducing substantial evidence to support its allegations of ULP,
twenty-four (24) hours from knowledge of the occurrence of such strike or lockout,
which burden it failed to discharge.

19 | P a g e
 Philcom Employees Union v. Philippine Global Communications, 495 Held: ETPI cannot be held guilty of ULP for violating Arts. 248(c) and (e) of the LC.
SCRA 214 (2006) Under Art. 247 of the LC, ULP refers to ‘acts that violate the workers' right to
organize.’ The prohibited acts are related to the workers' right to self-organization
Facts: Parties started to negotiate renewal of their CBA. While this was ongoing, and to the observance of a CBA. Thus, an employer may only be held liable for ULP
PEU filed with NCMB a notice of strike due to a ULP. Company suspended nego, so if it can be shown that his acts affect in whatever manner the right of his employees
the union filed another notice of strike due to bargaining deadlock. At a conciliation to self-organize. Here, there is no showing that ETPI, in implementing its Right-
conference, parties agreed to consolidate the two notices and maintain status quo. Sizing Program, was motivated by ill will, bad faith or malice, or that it was aimed at
However, while some union officers were negotiating, some union officers staged a interfering with its employees’ right to self-organize. Both the LA and NLRC erred in
strike and barricaded the entrances and setting up a picket at the main entrance of finding ETPI guilty of ULP simply because of its failure to dispute Culili’s allegations.
the building. The next day, the company filed for the SOLE to AJ. Acting SOLE This is against the basic principle that good faith is presumed and he who alleges
Trajano issued a return to work order and a cease and desist order and required bad faith has the duty to prove the same. By imputing bad faith to the actuations of
both parties to submit their position papers within 10 days. The Union raised issues ETPI, Culili has the burden of proof to present substantial evidence to support the
(see ratio for enumeration) constituting ULP and that the SOLE has no jurisdiction allegation of ULP. Culili failed to discharge this burden and his bare allegations
over the strike since there was no petition to declare it illegal. The Company raised deserve no credit.
the illegality of the strike. WON the acts of the management constituted ULP? NO,
and thus the strike was illegal. 2. Requisites
Held: Unfair labor practice refers to acts that violate the workers' right to organize.
The prohibited acts are related to the workers' right to self-organization and to the a) Employer-Employee Relationship
observance of a CBA. Without that element, the acts, no matter how unfair, are not
unfair labor practices. The SOLE properly took cognizance of the issue of the
 Sterling Products International, Inc. v. Loreta C. Sol and CIR, 75 SCRA
legality of the strike since the reason for the AJ was the declaration of strike. The 446 (1963)
authority of the Secretary to assume jurisdiction over a labor dispute causing or Facts: Sol was dismissed from Sterling after filing a complaint for underpayment so
likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to national interest she filed a ULP case against Sterling. Sterling contends that Sol was only an
includes and extends to all questions and controversies arising from such labor independent contractor and that it was not guilty of ULP w/in the contemplation of
dispute. The power is plenary and discretionary in nature to enable him to Industrial Peace Act. SC held that Sol was an ee of Sterling as the latter exercised
effectively and efficiently dispose of the dispute. control and supervision over the means and method of Sol’s work. However,
PEU should have immediately resorted to the grievance machinery provided for in Sterling was not guilty of ULP because although Sol was an ee, she was not a
the CBA. In disregarding this procedure, the union leaders who knowingly member of any labor union nor has she attempted to join any.
participated in the strike have acted unreasonably. The law cannot interpose its WON company is guilty of ULP - NO
hand to protect them from the consequences of their illegal acts.
Held: Sterling is not guilty of ULP because Sol is not a member of any labor union.
 Nelson A. Culili v. Eastern Telecom. Phil., Inc., 642 SCRA 338 (2011) The term unfair labor practice has been defined as any of those acts listed in See. 4
of the Act. Sol has never been found to commit any of the acts mentioned in
Facts: Employee terminated due to redundancy, which was proven to have been paragraph (a) of Sec. 4. She was not connected with any labor organization, nor has
done in good faith. SC held that employer not guilty of ULP because the termination she ever attempted to join a labor organization, or to assist, or contribute to a labor
was done in its bona fide exercise of its management prerogatives and that in organization. The company cannot, therefore, be considered as having committed
charging ULP acts, the burden of proof lies on the one making the allegation, failure an unfair labor practice.
in the discharge of which would lead to the finding of no ULP on the part of the
employer. WON ETPI is guilty of ULP – NO

20 | P a g e
 American President Lines, Inc. v. Clave, 114 SCRA (1982) recognized collective bargaining agent, if such non-union members accept the
benefits under the collective agreement. Provided, That the individual authorization
Facts: There was a contract of security between the parties. Upon its expiration, required under Art. 242, par (o) of this Code shall not apply to the nonmembers of
petitioner hired a new security agency. The employees of MSA complained and filed the recognized collective bargaining agent;
ULP against the petitioner. The court held that since there was no ER-EE
relationship, the petitioner is not guilty of ULP. (f) To dismiss, discharge, or otherwise prejudice or discriminate against an
employee for having given or being about to give testimony under this Code;
WON company is guilty of ULP – NO. because there is no ee-er relationship.
(g) To violate the duty to bargain collectively as prescribed by this Code;
Held: Therefore, the absence of an ER-EE relationship means that the petitioner
could not be guilty of ULP because RA 875 specifically states that ULP can only be (h) To pay negotiation or attorney’s fees to the union or its officers or agents
committed within the context of an ER-EE relationship. Assuming that there was as part of the settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute;
such a relationship, APL is not guilty of ULP because the union failed to present or
evidence that it gave written proof of requests to bargain with APL. There was also (i) To violate a collective bargaining agreement.
no evidence proving that the dismissal of the respondents was due to union
activities. The simple fact is that the contract expired already. The provisions of the preceding paragraph notwithstanding, only the officers and
agents of corporations, associations or partnerships who have actually participated
b) Act Must be Specifically Defined in the Law in, authorized or ratified unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable.

Art. 258 Unfair Labor Practice of Employers

It shall be unlawful for any employer to commit any of the following unfair labor
Art. 259 Unfair Labor Practices of labor Organizations
practices:
It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or
(a)To interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their representatives:
right to self-organization;
(a) To restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right to self-
(b) To require as a condition of employment that a person or an employee organization. However, a labor organization shall have the right to prescribe its own
shall not join a labor organization or shall withdraw from one which he belongs; rules with respect to the acquisition or retention of membership;
(c) To contract out services or functions being performed by union members (b) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against an
when such will interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their employee, including discrimination against an employee with respect to whom
right to self-organization; membership in such organization has been denied or to terminate an employee on
(d) To initiate, dominate, assist or otherwise interfere with the formation or any ground other than the usual terms and conditions under which membership or
continuation of membership is made available to other members;
administration of any labor organization, including the giving of financial or other
support to it or its organizers or supporters; (c) To violate the duty, or refuse to bargain collectively with the employer,
(e)To discriminate in regard to wages, hours of work, and other terms and provided it is the representative of the employees;
conditions of employment in order to encourage or discourage membership in any (d) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to pay or deliver or agree to pay
labor organization. Nothing in this Code or in any other law shall stop the parties or deliver any money or other things of value, in the nature of an exaction, for
from requiring membership in a recognized collective bargaining agent as a services which are performed or not to be performed including the demand for fee
condition of employment, except those employees who are already members of for union negotiations;
another union at the time of the signing of the collective bargaining agreement.
(e) To ask for or accept negotiations or attorney’s fees from employers as part
Employees of an appropriate collective bargaining agent may be assessed a
of the settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute; or
reasonable fee equivalent to the dues and other fees paid by members of the
21 | P a g e
 (f) To violate a collective bargaining agreement. certification proceeding. CFMSA filed a notice of strike based on the grounds of
refusal to bargain and union busting. During the certification proceedings, Judge
The provisions of the preceding paragraph notwithstanding, only the officers, Tabigne instructed the parties to maintain status quo. He advised CFMSA not to go
members of governing boards, representatives or agents or members of labor on strike but making it clear that if there is indeed ULP, they can go on strike even
associations or organization who have actually participated in, authorized or ratified without notice. Based on what CFMSA considered as ULP, and after the BLR2 failed
unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable. to lead the parties to a compromise, the LO staged a strike. In response, the
company added to the petition he previously filed, denominated as an “urgent
3. Burden of Proof petition” to have the strike declared illegal and that the officers responsible be
declared to have lost their employment status. CFMSA filed a MTD questioning
 Schering Employees Labor Union v. Schering Plough Corporation, 451
CIR’s jurisdiction. CIR denied the MTD.
SCRA 689 (2005)
WON CFMSA conducted an illegal strike and the subsequent dismissal of CFMSA is
Facts: Sereneo was charged with willful violation of co. rules and was asked to warranted. NO. Strike is legal.
submit a written explanation. She did not reply because she believed that it would
be futile to do so due to her belief that the co. was bent on getting rid of her. She WON Caltex committed ULP in refusal to bargain and union busting. YES.
was later on dismissed. SC held that it is the union, therefore, who had the burden The Court first noted the role of an injunction order in labor disputes. The Court
of proof to present substantial evidence to support its allegations of unfair labor looked at the “urgent petition” filed by Caltex. The pleading is actually in the nature
practices committed by management. of an injunctive relief under RA 875 (Industrial Peace Act / Magna Carta for Labor).
WON ULP by the SPC was proven? NO. The scheme in RA 875 in achieving industrial peace rests on the premise of free and
private agreement. As such, there is a general prohibition in the issuance of an
Held: Under Article 282 of the Labor Code, as amended, fraud or willful breach by injunctive relief involving labor disputes. This prohibition is designed to give labor a
the employee of trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized comparable bargaining power against capital and must be liberally construed to
representative is a ground for terminating an employment. Petitioners’ accusation that end. There can be no injunction issued against any strike except in only one
of union busting is bereft of any proof. We scanned the records very carefully and instance: when a labor dispute arises in an industry indispensable to national
failed to discern any evidence to sustain such charge. interest. The injunction should not be directed against the strike itself but on the
It is the union, therefore, who had the burden of proof to present substantial unlawful activities.
evidence to support its allegations (of unfair labor practices committed by CONSTRUCTION/INTERPRETATION – injunction never used on strikes. Partial
management). In the case at bar the facts and the evidence did not establish even agreement construed in favor of labor. CFMSA accused Caltex of ULP and vice-
at least a rational basis why the union would wield a strike based on alleged unfair versa.
labor practices it did not even bother to substantiate during the conciliation
proceedings. It is not enough that the union believed that the employer committed 5. Management Prerogative
acts of unfair labor practice when the circumstances clearly negate even a prima
facie showing to warrant such a belief.”  San Miguel Corporation Employees v. Bersamira, 186 SCRA 496 (1990)
4. Construction/Interpretation Facts: SMC entered into contracts for merchandising services with Lipercon and
D'Rite. These companies are independent contractors duly licensed by DOLE. In
 Caltex Filipino Mangers and Supervisors Association v. CIR, 44 SCRA these contracts, it was expressly understood and agreed that the workers employed
350 (1972) by the contractors were to be paid by the latter and that none of them were to be
deemed employees or agents of SMC – no ER-EE relation between the contractors
Facts: CFMSA is a LO of Filipino managers and supervisors in Caltex. Caltex said that &/ its workers, on one hand, and SMC on the other.
CFMSA should institute a certification proceeding instead to remove doubts on
position titles to be included in the BU. CFMSA didn’t follow so Caltex filed the
22 | P a g e
the Union advised SMC that some Lipercon and D'Rite workers had signed up for 6. Inter-relations of ULP Acts
union membership and sought the regularization of their employment with SMC.
The Company refused. Series of pickets were staged by Lipercon and D'Rite workers Art.248 Equity of the Incumbent
in SMC plants and offices. SMC filed a verified Complaint for Injunction and All existing federation and national unions which meet the qualifications of a
Damages before Pasig RTC to enjoin the Union from acting for and in behalf of the legitimate labor organization and none of the grounds for cancellation shall
ees of LIPERCON &/ D'RITE for CB purposes, and from staging a strike to compel continue to maintain their existing affiliates regardless of the nature of the industry
SMC to hire the workers of LIPERCON & D'RITE to compel SMC to hire the workers and the location of the affiliates.
of LIPERCON & D'RITE, etc.
WON the case involves, or relates to a labor dispute. - YES.
WON the RTC correctly assumed jurisdiction over the present controversy and Art.249 Rights and Conditions of Membership in a Labor Organization
properly issued the Writ of Preliminary Injunction. – NO. It should therefore be The following are the rights and conditions of membership in a labor organization:
enjoined from taking any further action in the civil case. (a) No arbitrary or excessive initiation fees shall be required of the members
Held: labor dispute can nevertheless exist "regardless of whether the disputants of a legitimate labor organization nor shall arbitrary, excessive or oppressive fine
stand in the proximate relationship of er and ee" provided the controversy and forfeiture be imposed;
concerns, among others, t&c of employment or a "change" or "arrangement" (b) The members shall be entitled to full and detailed report from their
thereof. officers and representatives of all financial transactions as provide for in the
That a labor dispute, as defined by the law, does exist herein is evident. What the constitution and by-laws of the organization;
Union seeks is to regularize the status of the employees contracted by Lipercon and (c) The members shall directly elect their officers, including those of the
D'Rite so that they will be absorbed into the working unit of SMC. This matter national union or federation, trade center or any similar aggrupation to which their
definitely dwells on the working relationship between said employees vis-a-vis SMC. union is affiliated, by secret ballot at intervals of five (5) years. No qualification
As the case is indisputably linked with a labor dispute, jurisdiction belongs to the requirements for candidacy to any position shall be imposed other than
labor tribunals. As explicitly provided for in Art 217 LC, prior to its amendment by membership in good standing in subject labor organization. The secretary or any
RA6715 on Mar 21, 1989, since the suit was instituted on Mar 6, 1989, LAs have other responsible union officer shall furnish the Secretary of Labor and Employment
original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide the following cases involving with a list of the newly elected officers, together with the appointive officers or
all workers including "1. unfair labor practice cases; 2. those that workers may file agents who are entrusted with the handling of funds within thirty (30) calendar
involving wages, hours of work and other terms and conditions of employment; ... days after the election of officers or from the occurrence of any change in the list of
and 5. cases arising from any violation of Art 265 of this Code, including questions offices of the labor organization;
involving the legality of strikes and lockouts. ..." (d) The members shall determine by secret ballot, after due deliberation, any
The claim of SMC that the action is for damages under the CC would not suffice to question of major policy affecting the entire membership of the organization,
keep the case within the jurisdictional boundaries of Regular Courts. The said claim unless the nature of the organization of force majeure renders such secret ballot
for damages is interwoven with a labor dispute existing between the parties and impractical, in which case the board of directors of the organization may make the
would have to be ventilated before the administrative machinery established for decision in behalf of the general membership;
the expeditious settlement of those disputes. To allow the action filed below to (e) No labor organization shall knowingly admit as member or continue in
prosper would bring about "split jurisdiction" which is obnoxious to the orderly membership any individual who belongs to a subversive organization or who is
administration of justice. engaged directly or indirectly in any subversive activity;

23 | P a g e
(f) No person who has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (l) The treasurer of any labor organization and every officer thereof who is
shall be eligible for election as union officer or for appointment to any position in responsible for the account of such organization for the collection, management ,
the union; disbursement, custody or control of the funds, moneys, and other properties of the
organization, shall render to the organization and to its members a true and correct
(g) No officer, agent or member of a labor organization shall collect fees ,
account of all moneys received and paid by him since the last day on which he
dues, or other contributions in its behalf or make any disbursements of its money or
rendered such account, and of all bonds, securities and other properties of the
funds unless he is duly authorized pursuant to its constitution and by-laws;
organization entrusted to his custody or under his control. The rendering of such
(h) Every payment of fees, dues or other contributions by a member shall be account shall be made:
evidenced by a receipt signed by the officer or agent making the collection and (1) At least once a year within thirty (30) days after the close of its fiscal year;
entered into the record of the organization to be kept and maintained for the
purpose; (2) At such other times as may be required by a resolution of the majority of
the members of the organization; and
(i) The funds of the organization shall not be applied for any purpose or
object other than those expressly provided by its constitution and by-laws or those (3) Upon vacating his office.
expressly authorized by written resolution adopted by the majority of the members The account shall be duly audited and verified by affidavit and a copy thereof shall
at a general meeting duly called for the purpose; be furnished the Secretary of Labor
(j) Every income or revenue of the organization shall be evidenced by a (m) The books of accounts and other records of the financial activities of any
record showing its source, and every expenditure of its funds shall be evidenced by labor organization shall be open to inspection shall be open to inspection by any
a receipt from the person to whom the payment is made, which shall state the officer or member thereof during office hours;
date, place and purpose of such payment. Such record or receipt shall form part of
the financial records of the organization; (n) No special assessment or other extraordinary fees may be levied upon the
members of a labor organization unless authorized by a written resolution of a
Any action involving the funds of the organization shall prescribe after three (3) majority of all the members at a general membership meeting duly called for the
years from the date of submission of the annual financial report to the Department purpose. The secretary of the organization shall record the minutes of the meeting
of Labor and Employment or from the date the same should have been submitted including the list of all members present, the votes cast, the purpose of the special
as required by law, whichever comes earlier; Provided, That this provision shall assessment of fees and the recipient of such assessment or fees. The record shall be
apply only to a legitimate labor organization which has submitted the financial attested to by the president;
report requirements under this Code; Provided, further, That failure of any labor
organization to comply with the periodic financial reports required by law and such (o) Other than for mandatory activities under the Code, no special
rules and regulations promulgated thereunder six (6) months after the effectivity of assessments, attorney’s fees, negotiation fees or any other extraordinary fees may
this Act shall automatically result in the cancellation of union registration of such be checked off from any amount due to an employee without an individual written
labor organization; authorization duly signed by the employee. The authorization should specifically
state the amount, purpose and beneficiary of the deduction; and
(k) The officers of any labor organization shall not be paid any compensation
other than the salaries and expenses due to their positions as specifically provided (p) It shall be the duty of any labor organization and its officers to inform its
for in its constitution and by-laws, or in a written resolution duly authorized by a member on the provisions of its constitution and by-laws, collective bargaining
majority of all the members at a general membership meeting duly called for the agreement, the prevailing labor relations system and all their rights and obligations
purpose. The minutes of the meeting and the list of participants and ballots casts under existing labor laws.
shall be subject to inspection by the Secretary of Labor or his duly authorized For this purpose, registered labor organizations may assess reasonable dues to
representatives. Any irregularities in the approval of the resolutions shall be a finance labor relations seminars and other labor education activities.
ground for impeachment or expulsion for the organization;

24 | P a g e
Any violation of the above rights and conditions of membership shall be a ground management and the other representing the union. Nor could management select
for cancellation of union registration or expulsion of officers from office, whichever who would represent the latter or with whom to deal, otherwise in effect there
is appropriate. At least thirty percent (30%) of all the members of union or any would be only one party. Obviously there would then be no bargaining. To that end,
member or members specially concerned may report such violation to the Bureau. he finds that the dismissals amounted to interference, restraint or coercion, as
The Bureau shall have the power to hear and decide any reported violation to mete prohibited by the IAP.
the appropriate penalty.
B. Acts in Violation of Right to Self-Organization
 Republic Savings Bank v. CIR, 21 SCRA 226 (1967) – Fernando, J.,
concurring opinion, 240-241 1. Interference, Restraint and Coercion

Facts: 8 ees were dismissed by the bank due to an allegedly libelous letter they ILO Convention No. 98, Arts. 1, 2 (see page 16)
wrote to the bank president urging him to resign. The employees argue that such
violated certain provisions of the Industrial Peace Act, making it an unfair labor
practice. The Court agreed, stating that the employees were protected because Arts. 258 (a) (see page 21)
they were engaged in concerted activity for the purpose of mutual aid and
protection and that their dismissal amounted to interference, coercion or restraint
which made the Bank guilty of ULP. Art. 266 (see page 4)
WON the dismissal of the 8 employees constituted unfair labor practice? YES
Held: The Court held that the respondents were protected because they were Art.291 (g) (h) Miscellaneous Provisions
engaged in concerted activity, in the exercise of their right to self-organization (g) The Ministry shall help promote and gradually develop, with the
which includes concerted activities for mutual aid and protection, interference with agreement of labor organizations and employers, labor-management cooperation
which constitute an ULP. It is not necessary that union activity be involved or that programs at appropriate levels of the enterprise based on shared responsibility and
Collective Bargaining be contemplated. mutual respect in order to ensure industrial peace and improvement in
J.Fernando Concurring opinion productivity, working conditions and the quality of working life.

On the assumption that there was indeed a valid cause for grievance, a more (h) In establishments where no legitimate labor organization exists,
diplomatic approach could have been attempted or at least a procedure to settle labor0management committees may be formed voluntary by workers and
the grievance. But in this case the respondents issued an ultimatum. employers for the purpose of promoting industrial peace. The Department of Labor
and Employment shall endeavor to enlighten and educate the workers and
J. Fernando states that collective bargaining presupposes a give and take of employers on their rights and responsibilities through labor education with
discussion, with neither party adopting a hard-line position, at least at the start, emphasis on the policy thrusts of this Code.
from which there can be no retreat. The respondents here knew what they wanted
and they did not sugarcoat their desire to have the bank president removed due to
his misdeeds. Since that was the case, he finds it hard to agree that their dismissal
was a refusal to bargain collectively. He points out that the letters were signed not Art. 259 (a) Unfair Labor Practices of labor Organizations
as a union, but in each of the employees’ individual capacity. If the letter was It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or
indeed libelous then their dismissal would have been justified. representatives:
However he still agreed with the majority because of the mass dismissal made by (a) To restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right to self-
the company. The unions were left leaderless under the current circumstances. For organization. However, a labor organization shall have the right to prescribe its own
collective bargaining to be meaningful, there must be two parties, one representing rules with respect to the acquisition or retention of membership;
25 | P a g e
 anew on the economic terms of the CBA, the company committed a ULP of violating
duty to bargain.
 Hacienda Fatima v. National Federation of Sugarcane Workers-Food,
GMC’s refusal to make a counter-proposal to the union’s proposal for CBA
396 SCRA 518 (2003)
negotiation is an indication of its bad faith. Where the employer did not even
Facts: Mgt refused to bargain collectively with the Union. The former even went so bother to submit an answer to the bargaining proposals of the union, there is a
far as to not give the Union members and work assignments and also employed clear evasion of the duty to bargain collectively.
means to prevent the organizers from entering the premises. The Court held in this
case that there’s illegal dismissal and that the petitioners are guilty of ULP. Such  Prince Transport, Inc. & R. Claros v. Diosdado Garcia, 639 SCRA 312
acts by the petitioners interfered with the respondents’ right to self organization. (2011)
Facts: Respondents worked for PTI. In a series of meetings to negotiate their
commission rate, the President of the Company voiced out his objection to their
WoN there’s ULP and petitioners are liable for damages – YES
forming a Union. Nonetheless, they formed one to protect their own interests. PTI
Held: Petitioners are guilty of ULP. From respondents’ refusal to bargain, to their transferred union members to a subsidiary, Lubas, which the company neglected.
acts of economic inducements resulting in the promotion of those who withdrew Because of the neglect, Lubas closed down, which led to the respondents losing
from the union, the use of armed guards to prevent the 12 organizers to come in, their employment. They thus filed for ULP and ID, among others. SC held that there
and the dismissal of union officials and members, one cannot but conclude that the was no doubt that PTI was guilty of ULP. Their act of transferring the union
Ps didn't want a union in their hacienda – a clear interference in the right of the members and then leaving them hanging later on was a clear manifestation of their
workers to self-organization. The finding of ULP in BF carries with it the sanction of opposition to the formation of a union in the company, clearly violating the right of
moral and exemplary damages. the EEs to selforganization.

 General Milling Corporation v. Hon. Court of Appeals, 422 SCRA 514 WON PTI guilty of ULP. YES.
(2004) Held: reason to depart from CA findings that PTI guilty of ULP.
Facts: Union sent proposals for new CBA and requested for a counter-proposal. Respondents’ transfer to Lubas was designed by PTI as a subterfuge to foil their
GMC did not submit it’s counter-proposal, claiming that it received 13 letters of rights to organize themselves into a Union to protect their own interests. Under
withdrawal from union members and that the Union no longer had standing to Article 248 (a) and (e) of the Labor Code, an employer is guilty of unfair labor
negotiate a CBA. Union filed for ULP on ground of interference of right to self- practice if it interferes with, restrains or coerces its employees in the exercise of
organization. SC ruled that the letters sent by the workers clearly indicated that their right to self-organization or if it discriminates in regard to wages, hours of
GMC exerted pressure on its employees to prove that the union no longer enjoyed work and other terms and conditions of employment in order to encourage or
support. The fact that the resignation letters occurred during the pendency of the discourage membership in any labor organization. ULP is highlighted by the fact
case before the LA shows that it was a desperate attempt by GMC to cast doubt on that after their transfer to Lubas, PTI left them hanging as far as the operations of
the legitimate status of the Union and thus was an interference of the workers’ Lubas were concerned. Respondents were left virtually jobless as PTI refused to
right to self-org. maintain the vehicles which led to Lubas’ closure.
WON GMC is guilty of ULP. YES. Guilty of interfering with right to self-org (also for a) Interrogation
violating duty to bargain)
The union’s proposal was also submitted within the prescribed 3-year period from  Scoty’s Department Store v. Micaller, 99 Phil. 762 (1956)
the date of effectivity of the CBA, albeit just before the last day of said period. It Facts: Micaller was fired by Scoty's for refusing to reveal the members of the union
was obvious that GMC had no valid reason to refuse to negotiate in good faith with and her refusal to withdraw from the same. The CIR found the employer guilty of
the union. For refusing to send a counter-proposal to the union and to bargain ULP. The Court held that questioning of employees concerning union membership
26 | P a g e
and activities in a way that would hamper exercise of free choice among the jurisdiction is that subjection by the company of its employees to a series of
employees is an unfair labor practice. questionings regarding their membership in the union or their union activities, in
such a way as to hamper the exercise of free choice on theirpart, constitutes unfair
Whether Scoty's committed ULP. YES
labor practice”
Held: The Court no longer went to review the questions of fact that were raised by
the petitioners. They however, looked to American jurisprudence in determining b) Speech, Espionage, Economic Coercion
whether Scoty's did commit ULP when it fired Micaller for participating in union
activities. The SC found this case in all fours with the case of NLRB v. Harris-  The Insular Life Assurance Co. Ltd. Employees Association v. Insular
Woodson, which stated that: Life Assurance Co., Ltd., 37 SCRA 243 (1971)
Questioning of employees concerning union membership and activities and Facts: Company refused to send counterproposals, which prompted unions to go on
disparaging remarks by supervisory employees made in such away as to hamper the a strike. During the strike, the companies sent letters to each striking member,
exercise of free choice on the part of the employees, have been uniformly offering him benefits like food and bed, to leave the strike. The companies then
condemned as a violation of the Act sent strike-breakers causing injuries to both sides. After that, the company then
sent another letter threatening to replace them if they don’t return. Upon
 Philippine Steam Navigation Company v. Philippine Marine Officers returning, the company didn’t even readmit all of them, giving preference to those
Guild, 15 SCRA 174 (1965) who were not participants of the strike and even dismissing the union officers.
Facts: PMOG sent the company a set of demands including a request for collective The Court held that the companies (related companies) were guilty of ULP. One for
bargaining. In its reply the company required PMOG to first prove that it interfering with an EE’s right to concerted action (The letters), for discrimination
represented majority of its employees before its demands would be considered. On (readmitting only a few) and for dismissing the officers of the Union.
the same day, the company began interrogating and investigating its captains,
W/N Companies guilty of ULP – YES
deckofficers, and engineers in order to find out which of them had joined PMOG.
Subsequently, PMOG sent a reply that implored PHILSTEAM to first consider its Held:
requests and demands before requiring proof of majority representation. Forthe
1. Interference: The letters were addressed to the individual members
perceived failure of the company to collectively bargain with them and for alleged
without being coursed through the Union. It is ULP for an ER to negotiate with or to
ULPs, PMOG filed a notice of strike. attempt to negotiate with its EEs individually, since it is still under obligation to
WON the company’s act of interrogating its employees in this particular instance bargain with the Union as the EEs’ rep.
constituted ULP – YES
2. Discrimination: The Court took into consideration many factors: 1st was
Held: Contention of the company that it conducted interrogations only for the the fact that even though the non-strikers who caused violence had criminal
purpose of determining WON PMOG had attained majority representation was charges, they were still readmitted to work. Even if the strikers were able to get
untrue because it conducted interrogations before their clearances, 34 were still refused readmission. Olbes appointed employees who
participated in the strike-break (thus hostile to the others) to lead the screening
PMOG declined to give proof regarding its status as majority representative. Note
activities.
that the company conducted the interrogations the same day it replied to the initial
demand for collective bargaining. While the general rule is that an employer is not 3. Dismissal of U Officers: not a single dismissed worker was given the
denied the privilege of interrogating its employees as regards union affiliation, it opportunity to defend himself. Even when they reported back to work, they were
must be for a legitimate purpose and no adverse consequences must redound to not readmitted and were subsequently issued termination letters.
those who admit to union membership. In this particular case, the Court found that
the manner in which the company interrogated its employees restrained and
coerced the latter in their exercise of the right to self-organization. “The rule in this

27 | P a g e
 c) Concerted Activities
WoN VISTRANCO is guilty of ULP. YES.
 Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. Philippine
Blooming Mills, Co. v. 51 SCRA 189 (2006) Held: 4 point test of ER-EE relnship. As applied: Workers under the direction and
control of P’s officers, whose paymaster paid the compensation. The agencies
Facts: The Union staged a protest against police harassment, which had nothing to and/or LOs involved in such cases merely perform the role of a
do with management; however, because of their absence, and for allegedly representative/agent of the ER in the recruitment of men needed for the operation
violating the no strike/lockout provision of the CBA, the petitioner union leaders of the ER’s business. Workers not terminated at the end of every milling season—
were dismissed. The Court held that such dismissal was contrary to the merely on LoA without pay during the off-season. Er-EE relnship merely deemed
constitutional protection of the workers’ freedoms. Any losses sustained by the suspended.
company would only be an assertion of property rights, while the workers asserted
basic human freedoms—accordingly, it is the latter that must be given primacy. The workers belonging to UWFA who were not admitted to work were told by
Xauduro point-blank that severance oftheir connection with the UWFA was the
Whether the Union’s participation in the protest constituted unfair labor practice. remedy, if they wanted to continue working with the company.
NO. The protest was not directed towards management, and was a constitutionally
protected right. 3. Contracting Out to Discourage Unionism
Held: The Union’s protest was against alleged abuses of some Pasig policemen, not
against their employer. The protest was not rooted in any industrial dispute. As Art. 258. (c) Unfair labor practices of employers.
such, they were merely exercising their right to freedom of expression, their right of (c) To contract out services or functions being performed by union members when
assembly, and their right to petition for redress of grievances. such will interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right
to self-organization;
As a matter of fact, it was the duty of PBM to protect the Union and its members
from harassment by local police officers: it was thus in PBM’s interest to rally to its  Digital Telecommunications, Phil., Inc. v. Digitel Employees Union, et
employees’ defense, so that they may report to work free from harassment, al., 683 SCRA 466 (2012)
vexation, or peril, and thus may perform more efficiently their tasks and enhance
productivity and profits. But PBM did not even offer to intercede: its failure to Facts: Digitel was reluctant in negotiating with its SEBA. Subsequently, Digiserv, the
defend the employees only weakened their position. call center arm of Digitel, ceased its operations and 42 union members-ees were
retrenched. I-Tech was thereafter created to perform the same functions as
2. Non-Union Membership or Withdrawal Form Membership as a Digiserv and rehired some of the dismissed ees of Digiserv (presumably the non-
Condition of Employment (Yellow-Dog Contract) union members). Union now challenges the legality of dismissal of its 13 union
members (nag-alisan na kasi ung iba sa 42) and alleges ULP on the part of ER—
Art. 258. (b) Unfair labor practices of employers. contracting out to discourage unionism. SC ruled that Digiserv was a LOC, thus the
(b) To require as a condition of employment that a person or an employee shall not retrenched ees were in fact Digitel’s ees. They were illegally dismissed as the
join a labor organization or shall withdraw from one to which he belongs; retrenchment was not made in good faith. ER’s bad faith was evidenced by the
timing of and reasons for the closure and the timing of and reasons for the
 Visayan Stevedore Trans. Co. v. CIR, 19 SCRA 426 (1967) subsequent opening of I-Tech. Such dismissal also constitutes ULP because it
interferes with, restrains or coerces ees in the exercise of their rights to SO
Facts: P refused to engage the services of the 139 workers who were members of
UWFA allegedly because of their union activities. UWFA filed ULP. Held: ULP was WON Digiserv met the requirements of retrenchment. NO
substantially proved—Branch Mngr Xaudaro had told the workers point-blank that Only (1), (2) and (3) of the requisites of retrenchment were met:
severance of their connection with UWFA was the remedy, if they wanted to
continue working with the Company.

28 | P a g e
(1) That retrenchment is reasonably necessary and likely to prevent business losses when such will interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their
which, if already incurred, are not merely de minimis, but substantial, serious, rights to self-organization. At the height of the labor dispute, occasioned by Digitel’s
actual and real, or if only expected, are reasonably imminent as perceived reluctance to negotiate with the Union, I-tech was formed to provide, as it did
objectively and in good faith by the ER; provide, the same services performed by Digiserv, the Union members’ nominal
employer. 5th criterion was not also met because all ees of Digiserv were dismissed.
(2) That the ER served written notice both to the ees and to DOLE at least 1 month
prior to the intended date of retrenchment; 4. Company Domination of Union
(3) That the ER pays the retrenched ees separation pay equivalent to 1 month pay
or at least ½ month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher; Art. 258. (d) Unfair labor practices of employers.
(d) To initiate, dominate, assist or otherwise interfere with the formation or
(4) That the ER exercises its prerogative to retrench ees in good faith for the administration of any labor organization, including the giving of financial or other
advancement of its interest and not to defeat or circumvent the ees’ right to support to it or its organizers or supporters;
security of tenure; and
(5) That the ER used fair and reasonable criteria in ascertaining who would be
dismissed and who would be retained among the ees, such as status, efficiency,
Art. 219. (i) Definitions.
seniority, physical fitness, age, and financial hardship for certain workers
(i) “Company union” means any labor organization whose formation, function or
When SOLE AJ-ed, both ER and ees have to maintain the status quo. There is no administration has been assisted by any act defined as unfair labor practice by this
doubt that Digitel defied the assumption order when it abrubtly closed down Code;
Digiserv. The closure of a department is not illegal per se. What makes it unlawful is
when the closure is undertaken in bad faith. In St. John Colleges, Inc. v. St. John  Progressive Development Corporation v. CIR, 80 SCRA 434 (1977)
Academy Faculty and Employees Union, bad faith was evidenced by the timing of
Facts: Union was alleging that Company encouraged and assisted in the formation
and reasons for the closure and the timing of and reasons for the subsequent
of a new union and coerced the former’s members to disaffiliate and join the new
opening. Similar to St. John, bad faith was manifested by the timing of the closure
one. Those who refused to do so were terminated.
of Digiserv and the rehiring of some ees to Interactive Technology Solutions, Inc. (I-
tech), a corporate arm of Digitel. Held: Company is guilty of ULP for Union busting - discriminating against employees
who refuse to disaffiliate and aiding the creation of a Company Union.
(MAIN) The timing of the creation of I-tech is dubious:
(1) It was incorporated on 18 January 2005 while the labor dispute within Digitel 5. Discrimination to Encourage/Discourage Unionism | Valid
was pending. discrimination: Union Security Clause
(2) Itech’s primary purpose was to provide call center/customer contact service, the
Art. 258. (e) Unfair labor practices of employers.
same service provided by Digiserv.
(e) To discriminate in regard to wages, hours of work, and other terms and
(3) It conducts its business inside the Digitel office at 110 E. Rodriguez Jr. Avenue, conditions of employment in order to encourage or discourage membership in any
Bagumbayan, Quezon City. labor organization. Nothing in this Code or in any other law shall stop the parties
from requiring membership in a recognized collective bargaining agent as a
(4) The former head of Digiserv, Ms. Teresa Taniega, is also an officer of Itech.
condition for employment, except those employees who are already members of
(5) Thus, when Digiserv was closed down, some of the employees presumably non- another union at the time of the signing of the collective bargaining agreement.
union members were rehired by I-tech. Employees of an appropriate bargaining unit who are not members of the
recognized collective bargaining agent may be assessed a reasonable fee equivalent
It needs to be mentioned too that the dismissal constitutes a ULP under LC which
to the dues and other fees paid by members of the recognized collective bargaining
refers to contracting out services or functions being performed by union members
29 | P a g e
agent, if such non-union members accept the benefits under the collective possession, there was no existing Union yet. The Union of the respondents only
bargaining agreement: Provided, that the individual authorization required under filed for PCE when the CBA was already concluded
Article 242, paragraph (o) of this Code shall not apply to the non-members of the
recognized collective bargaining agent; b) Valid Discrimination: Union Security Clause

 Alabang Country Club, Inc. v. NLRC, 545 SCRA 351 (2008)

Art. 259. (b) Unfair labor practices of labor organizations. Facts: Former officers of the Union were expelled from the Union for malversation
It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or of funds. Company, after weighing the verbal and written explanations, terminated
representatives: the officers.

(b) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against an employee, Held:

including discrimination against an employee with respect to whom membership in 1. Union Shop - all new regular employees are required to join the union within a
such organization has been denied or to terminate an employee on any ground certain period as a condition for their continued employment.
other than the usual terms and conditions under which membership or
continuation of membership is made available to other members; 2. Membership shop - employees who are union members as of the effective date
of the agreement, or who thereafter become members, must maintain union
a) Instances of Discrimination membership as a condition for continued employment until they are promoted or
transferred out of the bargaining unit or the agreement is terminated.
 Del Monte Philippines, Inc. v. Zaldivar, supra Requisites for terminating an employee based on the CBA’s Union Security Clause:
Facts: Employees were charged with disloyalty to the Union. They were dismissed (1) the union security clause is applicable;
pursuant to a Union Security Clause of the CBA.
(2) the union is requesting for the enforcement of the union security provision in
Held: A "closed-shop" may be defined as an enterprise in which, by agreement the CBA; and (3) there is sufficient evidence to support the union's decision to expel
between the employer and his employees or their representatives, no person may the employee from the union.
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 The employees in this case were afforded due process and thus, were validly
standing of a union entirely comprised of or of which the employees in interest are dismissed.
a part A CBA provision for a closed shop is a valid form of union security and it is
not a restriction on the right or freedom of association guaranteed by the  General Milling Corp. v. Casio, et al., 615 SCRA 13 (2010)
Constitution. However, in doing so, the employer must observe substantive and Facts: Respondents were charged with acts inimical to the Union and thus were
procedural due process. Non-observance of either = illegal dismissal. expelled. Union then requested Company to immediately dismiss the aforesaid
employees with a threat of filing a ULP case if they fail to do so. Ultimately,
 Elcee Farms Inc. v. NLRC, 512 SCRA 602 (2007) respondents were dismissed.
Facts: Hacienda Trinidad was leased. The new management entered into a CBA with Held: Illegal dismissal for failure to observe procedural due process. No evidence
the Union providing for a closed shop agreement. The respondents refused to join. that respondents were actually notified of the charges against them or that they
Hence, they were dismissed. Respondents reason that they were already members were given the chance to explain their side.
of another Union even before the CBA was concluded.
Held: New management not liable to dismissed employees. They were dismissed
pursuant to a valid closed shop clause. At the time the management took legal

30 | P a g e
 PICOP Resources, Inc. v. Tañeca, et al., supra C. Acts in Violation of Right to Collective Bargaining
Facts: Employees were expelled from the Union. Latter sought their dismissal
1. Violation to Duty to Bargain
pursuant to the Union Security Clause. The CBA at this time however had already
expired.
Art. 258. (g) Unfair labor practices of employers.
Held: Illegal dismissal. When there is a representational issue, the status quo (g) To violate the duty to bargain collectively as prescribed by this Code;
provision in so far as the need to await the creation of a new agreement will not
apply. Otherwise, it will create an absurd situation where the union members will
be forced to maintain membership by virtue of the union security clause existing
Art. 259. (c) Unfair labor practices of labor organizations.
under the CBA and, thereafter, support another union when filing a petition for
It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or
certification election. If we apply it, there will always be an issue of disloyalty
representatives:
whenever the employees exercise their right to self-organization. The holding of a
certification election is a statutory policy that should not be circumvented, or (c) To violate the duty, or refuse to bargain collectively with the employer, provided
compromised. (Automatic renewal pertains only to the economic provisions of the it is the representative of the employees;
CBA, and does not include representational aspect of the CBA)

6. Retaliation Against Employee for His/Her Testimony/Indirect

Art. 260. Procedure in collective bargaining.
Discrimination
The following procedures shall be observed in collective bargaining:
Art. 258. (f) Unfair labor practices of employers. (a) When a party desires to negotiate an agreement, it shall serve a written notice
(f) To dismiss, discharge or otherwise prejudice or discriminate against an employee upon the other party with a statement of its proposals. The other party shall make a
for having given or being about to give testimony under this Code; reply thereto not later than ten (10) calendar days from receipt of such notice;
(b) Should differences arise on the basis of such notice and reply, either party may
 Itogon-Suyoc Mines, Inc. v. Baldo, 12 SCRA 599 (1964)
request for a conference which shall begin not later than ten (10) calendar days
Facts: Employee allegedly dismissed for having testified against the company in a from the date of request.
certification election case.
(c) If the dispute is not settled, the Board shall intervene upon request of either or
Held: ULP: Discrimination against employee for his/her testimony. both parties or at its own initiative and immediately call the parties to conciliation
meetings. The Board shall have the power to issue subpoenas requiring the
7. Illegal Exaction; Featherbedding attendance of the parties to such meetings. It shall be the duty of the parties to
participate fully and promptly in the conciliation meetings the Board may call;
Art. 259. (d) Unfair labor practices of labor organizations.
It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or (d) During the conciliation proceedings in the Board, the parties are prohibited from
representatives: doing any act which may disrupt or impede the early settlement of the disputes;
and
(d) 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 (e) The Board shall exert all efforts to settle disputes amicably and encourage the
which are not performed or not to be performed, including the demand for fee for parties to submit their case to a voluntary arbitrator.
union negotiations;

31 | P a g e
Art. 261. Duty to bargain collectively in the absence of collective bargaining obligation to live up to the terms of such a collective bargaining agreement if
agreements. entered into, it is undeniable that non-compliance therewith constitutes an unfair
In the absence of an agreement or other voluntary arrangement providing for a labor practice.
more expeditious manner of collective bargaining, it shall be the duty of employer
and the representatives of the employees to bargain collectively in accordance with  St. John Colleges, Inc. v. St. John Academy Faculty and Employees
the provisions of this Code. Union, 505 SCRA 764 (2006)
Facts: Union and Company entered in a bargaining deadlock. Strike! Pending
resolution of labor dispute by SOLE, Board of Directors passed a resolution closing
Art. 262. Meaning of duty to bargain collectively. the school.
The duty to bargain collectively means the performance of a mutual obligation to Held: Closure was done to defeat the parties’ agreement to refer the labor dispute
meet and convene promptly and expeditiously in good faith for the purpose of to the SOLE; to unilaterally end the bargaining deadlock; to render nugatory any
negotiating an agreement with respect to wages, hours of work and all other terms decision of the SOLE; and to circumvent the Union’s right to collective bargaining
and conditions of employment including proposals for adjusting any grievances or and its members’ right to security of tenure. By admitting that the closure was due
questions arising under such agreement and executing a contract incorporating to irreconcilable differences between the Union and school management,
such agreements if requested by either party but such duty does not compel any specifically, the financial aspect of the ongoing CBA negotiations, the School in
party to agree to a proposal or to make any concession. effect admitted that it wanted to end the bargaining deadlock and eliminate the
problem of dealing with the demands of the Union. This is precisely what the Labor
Code abhors and punishes as unfair labor practice since the net effect is to defeat
Art. 263. Duty to bargain collectively when there exists a collective bargaining the Union’s right to collective bargaining.
agreement.
When there is a collective bargaining agreement, the duty to bargain collectively  Union of Filipro Employees – DFA Unions KMU v. Nestle Phil. Inc., 547
shall also mean that neither party shall terminate nor modify such agreement SCRA 323 (2008)
during its lifetime. However, either party can serve a written notice to terminate or Facts: Union filed a complaint for ULP alleging Company’s refusal to bargain.
modify the agreement at least sixty (60) days prior to its expiration date. It shall be
the duty of both parties to keep the status quo and to continue in full force and Held: The failure to reach an agreement after negotiations have continued for a
effect the terms and conditions of the existing agreement during the 60-day period reasonable period does not establish a lack of good faith. For a charge of ULP to
and/or until a new agreement is reached by the parties. prosper, it must be shown that Company was motivated by ill will, bad faith, or
fraud, or was oppressive to labor, or done in a manner contrary to morals, good
 Shell Oil Workers Union v. Shell Company of the Philippines, Ltd., 39 customs, or public policy. It is not enough that the Union believes the ER committed
SCRA 276 (1971) acts of ULP when the circumstances clearly negate even a prima facie showing to
warrant such a belief. (Refusal to include Retirement Plan: 8 out of 9 BU’s already
Facts: Company dissolved its security guard section. This was in spite of an existing agreed that it is a unilaterally granted benefit)
CBA. Company reasons that it’s a valid exercise of management prerogatives.
 CABEU-NFL v. Central Azucarera de Bais, Inc., 635 SCRA 339 (2010)
Held: ULP. There can be no justification for Company's insistence on pushing
through its project of such dissolution without thereby incurring a violation of the Facts: Petitioner filed a ULP complaint against the Company after the latter
collective bargaining agreement. An unfair labor practice is committed by a labor concluded a CBA with another Union, pending conciliation proceedings.
union or its agent by its refusal 'to bargain collectively with the employer'.
Held: There was a mass disaffiliation from Petitioner. Company believed that
Collective bargaining does not end with the execution of an agreement, being a
Petitioner was no longer the representative of the workers. It just wanted to foster
continuous process, the duty to bargain necessarily imposing on the parties the
industrial peace by bowing to the wishes of the overwhelming majority of its rank
32 | P a g e
and file workers and by negotiating and concluding in good faith a CBA with the Collective Bargaining Agreement, except those which are gross in character, shall no
newly-formed Union. Such actions of the Company are nowhere tantamount to longer be treated as unfair labor practice and shall be resolved as grievances under
anti-unionism, the evil sought to be punished in cases of unfair labor practices. the Collective Bargaining Agreement. For purposes of this article, gross violations of
Furthermore, basic is the principle that good faith is presumed and he who alleges Collective Bargaining Agreement shall mean flagrant and/or malicious refusal to
bad faith has the duty to prove the same. Petitioner failed to substantiate comply with the economic provisions of such agreement.
allegations of bad faith.
The Commission, its Regional Offices and the Regional Directors of the Department
2. Payment of Negotiation or Attorneys Fees of Labor and Employment shall not entertain disputes, grievances or matters under
the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of
Art. 258. (h) Unfair labor practices of employers. Voluntary Arbitrators and shall immediately dispose and refer the same to the
(h) To pay negotiation or attorney’s fees to the union or its officers or agents as part Grievance Machinery or Voluntary Arbitration provided in the Collective Bargaining
of the settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute; Agreement.

 BPI Employees Union – Davao City – FUBU v. BPI, G.R. No. 174912, 24
July 2013
Art. 259. (e) Unfair labor practices of labor organizations.
It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or Facts: Union filed a complaint for ULP against Company alleging that its outsourcing
representatives: of functions formerly performed by union members violates the CBA.

(e) To ask for or accept negotiation or attorney’s fees from employers as part of the Held: Only GROSS violations of the economic provisions of the CBA are treated as
settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute; ULP. Otherwise, they are mere grievances. The alleged violation of the union shop
agreement, even assuming it was malicious and flagrant, is not a violation of an
3. Gross Violation of Collective Bargaining Agreement economic provision in the agreement. Company has exclusive rights and
prerogatives which included the hiring of employees, promotion, transfers and
Art. 258. (i) Unfair labor practices of employers. dismissals for just cause etc. Contracting out of services is an exercise of
(i) To violate a collective bargaining agreement. management prerogative. Absent proof that the management acted in a malicious
and arbitrary manner, the Court will not interfere with the exercise of judgment by
the employer.

Art. 259. (f) Unfair labor practices of labor organizations.  Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP)
It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or v. PAL, 559 SCRA 252 (2008)
representatives:
Facts: Pursuant to its Rehabilitation Plan, PAL enforced retrenchment on its cabin
(f) To violate a collective bargaining agreement. crew employees. Union filed for ULP.
Held: ULP claim is without basis. Violations of a CBA, except those which are gross
in character, shall no longer be treated as unfair labor practice and shall be resolved
Art. 273. Jurisdiction of voluntary arbitrators or panel of voluntary arbitrators. as grievances under the parties’ CBA. “Gross violations of CBA" refers to flagrant
The Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators shall have original and and/or malicious refusal to comply with the economic provisions of such
exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide all unresolved grievances arising from the agreement, which is not the issue in the instant case.1 There was no specific
interpretation or implementation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and those instance of union busting, oppression or harassment and similar acts of FASAP’s
arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company personnel policies officers. The fact that majority of FASAP’s officers were either retrenched or
referred to in the immediately preceding article. Accordingly, violations of a demoted does not prove restraint or coercion in their right to organize. Instead, we

33 | P a g e
see a simple retrenchment scheme gone wrong for failure to abide by the stringent the history of the employer's past conduct and like considerations, coupled with an
rules prescribed by law, and a failure to discharge the employer’s burden of proof in intimate connection between the employer's action and the union affiliations or
such cases. activities of the particular employee or employees taken as a whole raise a
suspicion as to the motivation for the employer's action, the failure of the employer
D. Motive, Conduct and Proof to ascribe a valid reason therefor may justify an inference that his unexplained
conduct in respect of the particular employee or employees was inspired by the
1. Employer Motive and Proof latter's union membership or activities.

 Me-Shurn Corporation v. Me-Shurn Workers Union, 448 SCRA 41 E. Enforcement, Remedies and Sanctions
(2005)
1. Parties Against Whom ULP Committed
Facts: Shortly after the Union filed PCE, corporation decided that it would
temporarily lay off employees and cease operations, on account of its alleged
Art. 258. Unfair labor practices of employers.
inability to meet the export quota required by the Board of Investment. Union: ULP
It shall be unlawful for an employer to commit any of the following unfair labor
(union busting and illegal lockout)
practice:
Held: Corporation failed to substantiate business losses. To constitute an unfair
(a) To interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right to
labor practice, the dismissal need not entirely and exclusively be motivated by the
self-organization;
union’s activities or affiliations. It is enough that the discrimination was a
contributing factor. If the basic inspiration for the act of the employer is derived (b) To require as a condition of employment that a person or an employee shall not
from the affiliation or activities of the union, the former’s assignment of another join a labor organization or shall withdraw from one to which he belongs;
reason, no matter how seemingly valid, is unavailing.
(c) To contract out services or functions being performed by union members when
To justify the closure of a business and the termination of the services of the such will interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their rights
concerned employees, the law requires the employer to prove that it suffered to self-organization;
substantial actual losses. The cessation of a company’s operations shortly after the
(d) To initiate, dominate, assist or otherwise interfere with the formation or
organization of a labor union, as well as the resumption of business barely a month
administration of any labor organization, including the giving of financial or other
after, gives credence to the employees’ claim that the closure was meant to
support to it or its organizers or supporters;
discourage union membership and to interfere in union activities. These acts
constitute unfair labor practices. (e) To discriminate in regard to wages, hours of work and other terms and
conditions of employment in order to encourage or discourage membership in any
2. Totality of Evidence labor organization. Nothing in this Code or in any other law shall stop the parties
from requiring membership in a recognized collective bargaining agent as a
 Royal Undergarment Corporation of the Philippines v. CIR, 185 SCRA condition for employment, except those employees who are already members of
278 (1990) another union at the time of the signing of the collective bargaining agreement.
Employees of an appropriate bargaining unit who are not members of the
Facts: Union President was dismissed on allegations of supervisors that the former,
recognized collective bargaining agent may be assessed a reasonable fee equivalent
under the influence of liquor, threatened to kill them.
to the dues and other fees paid by members of the recognized collective bargaining
Held: The totality of evidence supports the conclusion that UP has been unjustly agent, if such non-union members accept the benefits under the collective
dismissed by reason of his union activities. It has previously been indicated that an bargaining agreement: Provided, that the individual authorization required under
employer may treat freely with an employee and is not obliged to support his Article 242, paragraph (o) of this Code shall not apply to the non-members of the
actions with a reason or purpose. However, where the attendant circumstances, recognized collective bargaining agent;

34 | P a g e
(f) To dismiss, discharge or otherwise prejudice or discriminate against an employee associations or organizations who have actually participated in, authorized or
for having given or being about to give testimony under this Code; ratified unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable.
(g) To violate the duty to bargain collectively as prescribed by this Code;
(h) To pay negotiation or attorney’s fees to the union or its officers or agents as part
Art. 219. (e) (f) (g) Definitions.
of the settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute; or
(e) “Employer" includes any person acting in the interest of an employer, directly or
(i) To violate a collective bargaining agreement. indirectly. The term shall not include any labor organization or any of its officers or
agents except when acting as employer.
The provisions of the preceding paragraph notwithstanding, only the officers and
agents of corporations, associations or partnerships who have actually participated (f) "Employee" includes any person in the employ of an employer. The term shall
in, authorized or ratified unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable. not be limited to the employees of a particular employer, unless the Code so
explicitly states. It shall include 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
Art. 259. Unfair labor practices of labor organizations. employment.
It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its officers, agents or
representatives: (g) "Labor organization" means any union or association of employees which exists
in whole or in part for the purpose of collective bargaining or of dealing with
(a) To restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right to self-
employers concerning terms and conditions of employment.
organization. However, a labor organization shall have the right to prescribe its own
rules with respect to the acquisition or retention of membership;
 American President Lines v. Clave, supra
(b) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against an employee,
Facts: Union abolished itself due to termination of its contract with company
including discrimination against an employee with respect to whom membership in
(former provided security guard services to company for a period of 1 year, after
such organization has been denied or to terminate an employee on any ground
which their contract was not renewed) Union revived itself and filed ULP charges
other than the usual terms and conditions under which membership or
against company for illegal dismissal and union discrimination.
continuation of membership is made available to other members;
Held: There was no EE-ER relationship. ULP can only exist within the context of an
(c) To violate the duty, or refuse to bargain collectively with the employer, provided
EE-ER relationship. Even granting so, there was no proof of the “repeated
it is the representative of the employees;
requests”. Also, with regard to the termination of the contract between the
(d) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to pay or deliver or agree to pay or petitioner and the agency, there was no evidence that it bears any relationship to
deliver any money or other things of value, in the nature of an exaction, for services the alleged union activities of the individual members of the agency. The hard fact
which are not performed or not to be performed, including the demand for fee for is that the contract had a lifetime of one year. Hence, after that period, and without
union negotiations; it being renewed, it lived out its term. Moreover, it was pointed out that the
termination was caused primarily by a “misunderstanding” between the operator of
(e) To ask for or accept negotiation or attorney’s fees from employers as part of the
the agency and Captain of the petitioner. There was no indication that union
settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute; or
activities had something to do with such termination.
(f) To violate a collective bargaining agreement.
The provisions of the preceding paragraph notwithstanding, only the officers,
members of governing boards, representatives or agents or members of labor

35 | P a g e
 2. Parties Liable for Acts b) Labor Organization

a) Employer Art. 259 (last par) (see page 36)

Art. 258. (last par.) Unfair labor practices of employers.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph notwithstanding, only the officers and Art. 304 (see page 36)
agents of corporations, associations or partnerships who have actually participated
in, authorized or ratified unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable.  National Labor Union v. CIR, 116 SCRA 417 (1982)
Facts: Union started CBA negotiations with former owner. 4 days after the sale, the
CBA was concluded. After which, Union alleged that the new management hired 24
Art. 302. Penalties. new employees and that on the pretext of selling/closing its business, it locked out
Except as otherwise provided in this Code, or unless the acts complained of hinge and dismissed all members of the Union.
on a question of interpretation or implementation of ambiguous provisions of an
existing collective bargaining agreement, any violation of the provisions of this Code Held: It is irrational if not specious to assume that new owner bought a business
declared to be unlawful or penal in nature shall be punished with a fine of not less lock, stock, and barrel without inquiring into its labor-management situation and
than One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) nor more than Ten Thousand Pesos that his dismissal of all the union members without retaining a few experienced
(P10,000.00) or imprisonment of not less than three months nor more than three workers and their replacement with a completely new set of employees who were
years, or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court. strangers to the company was anything other than an attempt to rid the firm of
unwanted union activity. There is substantial evidence to sustain a finding of the
In addition to such penalty, any alien found guilty shall be summarily deported upon new owner’s knowledge of the bargaining negotiations and the resulting CBA and,
completion of service of sentence. consequently, of unfair labor practice on his part. Former and new owners are
Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding, any criminal offense punished jointly and severally liable for the payment of backwages.
in this Code, shall be under the concurrent jurisdiction of the Municipal or City
3. Prosecution and Prescriptive Period
Courts and the Courts of First Instance.
a) Civil Aspect

Art. 303. Who are liable when committed by other than natural person. Art. 257. Concept of unfair labor practice and procedure for prosecution thereof.
If the offense is committed by a corporation, trust, firm, partnership, association or Unfair labor practices violate the constitutional right of workers and employees to
any other entity, the penalty shall be imposed upon the guilty officer or officers of self-organization, are inimical to the legitimate interests of both labor and
such corporation, trust, firm, partnership, association or entity. management, including their right to bargain collectively and otherwise deal with
each other in an atmosphere of freedom and mutual respect, disrupt industrial
peace and hinder the promotion of healthy and stable labor-management relations.

Art. 304. Offenses. Consequently, unfair labor practices are not only violations of the civil rights of both
Offenses penalized under this Code and the rules and regulations issued pursuant labor and management but are also criminal offenses against the State which shall
thereto shall prescribe in three (3) years. be subject to prosecution and punishment as herein provided.

All unfair labor practice arising from Book V shall be filed with the appropriate Subject to the exercise by the President or by the Secretary of Labor and
agency within one (1) year from accrual of such unfair labor practice; otherwise, Employment of the powers vested in them by Articles 263 and 264 of this Code, the
they shall be forever barred. civil aspects of all cases involving unfair labor practices, which may include claims
for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages, attorney’s fees and other
36 | P a g e
affirmative relief, shall be under the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiters. The Labor 5. Remedies and Sanctions
Arbiters shall give utmost priority to the hearing and resolution of all cases involving
unfair labor practices. They shall resolve such cases within thirty (30) calendar days a) Civil Remedies
from the time they are submitted for decision.
Art. 257 (see page 36)
Recovery of civil liability in the administrative proceedings shall bar recovery under
the Civil Code.
No criminal prosecution under this Title may be instituted without a final judgment Art. 229. Appeal.
finding that an unfair labor practice was committed, having been first obtained in Decisions, awards, or orders of the Labor Arbiter are final and executory unless
the preceding paragraph. During the pendency of such administrative proceeding, appealed to the Commission by any or both parties within ten (10) calendar days
the running of the period of prescription of the criminal offense herein penalized from receipt of such decisions, awards, or orders. Such appeal may be entertained
shall be considered interrupted: Provided, however, that the final judgment in the only on any of the following grounds:
administrative proceedings shall not be binding in the criminal case nor be
(a) If there is prima facie evidence of abuse of discretion on the part of the Labor
considered as evidence of guilt but merely as proof of compliance of the
Arbiter;
requirements herein set forth.
(b) If the decision, order or award was secured through fraud or coercion, including
graft and corruption;
Art. 304 (see page 36) (c) If made purely on questions of law; and
(d) If serious errors in the findings of facts are raised which would cause grave or
b) Criminal Aspect irreparable damage or injury to the appellant.
Art. 257 (see page 36) In case of a judgment involving a monetary award, an appeal by the employer may
be perfected only upon the posting of a cash or surety bond issued by a reputable
bonding company duly accredited by the Commission in the amount equivalent to
Art. 304 (see page 36) the monetary award in the judgment appealed from.
In any event, the decision of the Labor Arbiter reinstating a dismissed or separated
4. Compromise employee, insofar as the reinstatement aspect is concerned, shall immediately be
executory, even pending appeal. The employee shall either be admitted back to
 CCLC E.G. Gochangco Workers Union v. NLRC, 161 SCRA 656 (1988) work under the same terms and conditions prevailing prior to his dismissal or
Facts: Union requested for permission from Company for some of its members to separation or, at the option of the employer, merely reinstated in the payroll. The
attend hearing for PCE. Company refused. After the hearing, several EE’s were posting of a bond by the employer shall not stay the execution for reinstatement
placed under suspension for “abandonment of work”. They were later dismissed. provided herein.
Union filed for ULP. Company seeks dismissal on the basis of an agreement
To discourage frivolous or dilatory appeals, the Commission or the Labor Arbiter
concluded in a separate case whereby there was a Waiver of Claims, Rights and
shall impose reasonable penalty, including fines or censures, upon the erring
Interests.
parties.
Held: Unfair labor practice cases are not, in view of the public interest involved,
In all cases, the appellant shall furnish a copy of the memorandum of appeal to the
subject to compromises. Furthermore, the alleged waivers do not appear to have
other party who shall file an answer not later than ten (10) calendar days from
been presented in the first instance. They cannot be introduced for the first time on
receipt thereof.
appeal.

37 | P a g e
The Commission shall decide all cases within twenty (20) calendar days from receipt include claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages, attorney’s
of the answer of the appellee. The decision of the Commission shall be final and fees, and other affirmative relief, shall be under the jurisdiction of the LA”.
executory after ten (10) calendar days from receipt thereof by the parties.
Any law enforcement agency may be deputized by the Secretary of Labor and
IX. UNION CONCERTED ACTIVITIES
Employment or the Commission in the enforcement of decisions, awards or orders.
A. Basis of Right to Engage in Concerted Activities

Art. 293. Security of tenure. 1. Constitution

In cases of regular employment, the employer shall not terminate the services of an
employee except for a just cause or when authorized by this Title. An employee 1987 Const., Art. XIII, Sec. 3 (see page 11)
who is unjustly dismissed from work shall be entitled to reinstatement without loss
of seniority rights and other privileges and to his full backwages, inclusive of  Bisig ng Manggagawa sa Concrete Aggregates, Inc. v. NLRC, 226 SCRA
allowances, and to his other benefits or their monetary equivalent computed from 499 (1993)
the time his compensation was withheld from him up to the time of his actual
Facts: Union conducted strike. NLRC granted Company’s Motion for Preliminary
reinstatement.
Injunction.
b) Penal Remedies Held: PI was not proper. In the Philippine milieu where social justice remains more
as a rhetoric than a reality, labor has vigilantly fought to safeguard the sanctity of
Art. 257 (see page 36) the right to strike. Its struggle to gain the right to strike has not been easy and
effortless.
• On June 17, 1953, Congress gave statutory recognition to the right to strike
Art. 302 (see page 36)
when it enacted RA 875, otherwise known as the Industrial Peace Act. For nearly
two (2) decades, labor enjoyed the right to strike until it was prohibited on
September 12, 1972 upon the declaration of martial law in the country. The 14-year
Art. 303 (see page 36) battle to end martial rule produced many martyrs and foremost among them were
the radicals of the labor movement. It was not a mere happenstance, therefore,
that after the final battle against martial rule was fought at EDSA in 1986, the new
Art. 304 (see page 36) government treated labor with a favored eye.
• For the first time in our constitutional history, the fundamental law of our
 Quadra v. Court of Appeals, 497 SCRA 221 (2006) land mandated the State to ". . . guarantee the rights of all workers to self-
organization, collective bargaining and negotiations, and peaceful concerted
Facts: Petitioner was allegedly dismissed because of his militant union activities. He activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law." This constitutional
was later reinstated and filed with the CIR a claim for moral and exemplary imprimatur given to the right to strike constitutes signal victory for labor. Our
damages. Constitutions of 1935 and 1973 did not accord constitutional status to the right to
Held: In 1967, SC rendered ruling upholding the jurisdiction of the CIR over claims strike. Even the liberal US Federal Constitution did not elevate the right to strike to
for damages incidental to an employee's illegal dismissal. Thus, Quadra properly a constitutional level. With a constitutional matrix, enactment of a law
filed his claim for damages. “The civil aspect of all cases involving ULP, which may implementing the right to strike was an inevitability. RA 6715 came into being on
March 21, 1989, an intentional replication of RA 875. In light of the genesis of the

38 | P a g e
right to strike, it ought to be obvious that the right should be read with a libertarian Section 2. Privileged communication. – Information and statements given in
latitude in favor of labor. In the wise words of Father Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J., a confidence at conciliation proceedings shall be treated as privileged
distinguished commissioner of the 1987 Constitutional Commission " . . . the communications. Conciliators and similar officials shall not testify in any court or
constitutional recognition of the right to strike does serve as a reminder that body regarding any matter taken up at conciliation proceedings conducted by them.
injunctions, should be reduced to the barest minimum"
Section 3. Issuance of subpoena. – The Board shall have the power to require the
2. Statutory appearance of any parties at conciliation meetings.
Section 4. Compromise agreements. – Any compromise settlement, including those
Art. 218. (a) (b) (c) Declaration of policy. involving labor standard laws, voluntarily agreed upon by the parties with the
A. It is the policy of the State: assistance of the Board and its regional branches shall be final and binding upon the
(a) To promote and emphasize the primacy of free collective bargaining and parties. The National Labor Relations Commission or any court shall not assume
negotiations, including voluntary arbitration, mediation and conciliation, as modes jurisdiction over issues involved therein except in case of non-compliance thereof
of settling labor or industrial disputes; or if there is prima facie evidence that the settlement was obtained through fraud,
misrepresentation, or coercion. Upon motion of any interested party, the Labor
(b) To promote free trade unionism as an instrument for the enhancement of Arbiter in the region where the agreement was reached may issue a writ of
democracy and the promotion of social justice and development; execution requiring a sheriff of the Commission or the courts to enforce the terms
(c) To foster the free and voluntary organization of a strong and united labor of the agreement.
movement; Section 5. Grounds for strike or lockout. - A strike or lockout may be declared in
cases of bargaining deadlocks and unfair labor practices. Violations of collective
bargaining agreements, except flagrant and/or malicious refusal to comply with its
economic provisions, shall not be considered unfair labor practice and shall not be
Art. 277. (a) (b) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
strikeable. No strike or lockout may be declared on grounds involving interunion
(a) It is the policy of the State to encourage free trade unionism and free collective
and intra-union disputes without first having filed a notice of strike or lockout or
bargaining.
without the necessary strike or lockout vote having been obtained and reported to
(b) Workers shall have the right to engage in concerted activities for purposes of the Board.
collective bargaining or for their mutual benefit and protection. The right of
Neither will a strike be declared after assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary or
legitimate labor organizations to strike and picket and of employers to lockout,
after certification or submission of the dispute to compulsory or voluntary
consistent with the national interest, shall continue to be recognized and respected.
arbitration or during the pendency of cases involving the same grounds for the
However, no labor union may strike and no employer may declare a lockout on
strike or lockout.
grounds involving inter-union and intra-union disputes.
Section 6. Who may declare a strike or lockout. - Any certified or duly recognized
bargaining representative may declare a strike in cases of bargaining deadlocks and
unfair labor practices. The employer may declare a lockout in the same cases. In the
Book V, Rules XXII. Conciliation, strikes and lockouts.
absence of a certified or duly recognized bargaining representative, any legitimate
Section 1. Conciliation of labor-management disputes. – The board may, upon
labor organization in the establishment may declare a strike but only on grounds of
request of either of both parties or upon its own initiative, provide conciliation-
unfair labor practices.
mediation services to labor disputes other than notices of strikes or lockouts.
Conciliation cases which are not subjects of notices of strike or lockout shall be Section 7. Notice of strike or lockout. - In bargaining deadlocks, a notice of strike or
docketed as preventive mediation cases. lockout shall be filed with the regional branch of the Board at least thirty (30) days
before the intended date thereof, a copy of said notice having been served on the

39 | P a g e
other party concerned. In cases of unfair labor practice, the period of notice shall be obtained by secret ballot in meetings or referenda called for the purpose. A
fifteen (15) days. decision to declare a lockout must be approved by a majority of the Board of
Directors of the employer, corporation or association or the partners in a
However, in case of unfair labor practice involving the dismissal from employment
partnership obtained by a secret ballot in a meeting called for the purpose.
of any union officer duly elected in accordance with the union constitution and by-
laws which may constitute union-busting where the existence of the union is The regional branch of the Board may, at its own initiative or upon request of any
threatened, the fifteen-day cooling-off period shall not apply and the union may affected party, supervise the conduct of the secret balloting. In every case, the
take action immediately after the strike vote is conducted and the results thereof union or the employer shall furnish the regional branch of the Board and the notice
submitted to the appropriate regional branch of the Board. of meetings referred to in the preceding paragraph at least twenty-four (24) hours
before such meetings as well as the results of the voting at least seven (7) days
Section 8. Contents of notice. - The notice shall state, among others, the names and
before the intended strike or lockout, subject to the cooling-off period provided in
addresses of the employer and the union involved, the nature of the industry to
this Rule.
which the employer belongs, the number of union members and of the workers in
the bargaining unit, and such other relevant data as may facilitate the settlement of Section 11. Declaration of strike or lockout. – Should the dispute remain unsettled
the dispute, such as a brief statement or enumeration of all pending labor disputes after the lapse of the requisite number of days from the filing of the notice of strike
involving the same parties. or lockout and of the results of the election required in the preceding section, the
labor union may strike or the employer may lock out its workers. The regional
In cases of bargaining deadlocks, the notice shall, as far as practicable, further state
branch of the Board shall continue mediating and conciliating.
the unresolved issues in the bargaining negotiations and be accompanied by the
written proposals of the union, the counter-proposals of the employer and the Section 12. Improved offer balloting. - In case of a strike, the regional branch of the
proof of a request for conference to settle the differences. In cases of unfair labor Board shall, at its own initiative or upon the request of any affected party, conduct
practices, the notice shall, as far as practicable, state the acts complained of and the a referendum by secret balloting on the improved offer of the employer on or
efforts taken to resolve the dispute amicably. before the 30th day of strike. When at least a majority of the union members vote
to accept the improved offer, the striking workers shall immediately return to work
In case a notice does not conform with the requirements of this and the foregoing
and the employer shall thereupon re-admit them upon the signing of the
section/s, the regional branch of the Board shall inform the concerned party of such
agreement.
fact.
In case of a lockout, the regional branch of the Board shall also conduct a
Section 9. Action on Notice. - Upon receipt of the notice, the regional branch of the
referendum by secret balloting on the reduced offer of the union on or before the
Board shall exert all efforts at mediation and conciliation to enable the parties to
30th day of the lockout. When at least a majority of the board of directors or
settle the dispute amicably. The regional branch of the Board may, upon agreement
trustees or the partners holding the controlling interest in the case of partnership
of the parties, treat a notice as a preventive mediation case.
vote to accept the reduced offer, the workers shall immediately return to work and
It shall also encourage the parties to submit the dispute to voluntary arbitration. the employer shall thereupon readmit them upon the signing of the agreement.
During the proceedings, the parties shall not do any act which may disrupt or Section 13. Peaceful picketing. - Workers shall have the right to peaceful picketing.
impede the early settlement of the dispute. They are obliged, as part of their duty No person engaged in picketing shall commit any act of violence, coercion or
to bargain collectively in good faith and to participate fully and promptly in the intimidation or obstruct the free ingress to or egress from the employer's premises
conciliation meetings called by the regional branch of the Board. for lawful purposes, or obstruct public thoroughfares.
A notice, upon agreement of the parties, may be referred to alternative modes of No person shall obstruct, impede or interfere with, by force, violence, coercion,
dispute resolution, including voluntary arbitration. threats or intimidation, any peaceful picketing by workers during any labor
controversy or in the exercise of the right to self-organization or collective
Section 10. Strike or lockout vote. - A decision to declare a strike must be approved
bargaining or shall aid or abet such obstruction or interference. No employer shall
by a majority of the total union membership in the bargaining unit concerned

40 | P a g e
use or employ any person to commit such acts nor shall any person be employed Held: The right to strike is one of the rights recognized and guaranteed by the
for such purpose. Constitution as an instrument of labor for its protection against exploitation by
management. The strike is indeed a powerful weapon of the working class. But
Section 14. Injunctions. - No court or entity shall enjoin any picketing, strike or
precisely because of this, it must be handled carefully, like a sensitive explosive, lest
lockout, except as provided in Articles 218 and 263 of the Labor Code.
it blow up in the workers' own hands. Any violation of the legal requirements and
The Commission shall have the power to issue temporary restraining orders in such strictures, such as a defiance of a return-to-work order in industries affected with
cases but only after due notice and hearing and in accordance with its rules. The public interest, will render the strike illegal, to the detriment of the very workers it
reception of evidence for the application of a writ of injunction may be delegated is supposed to protect. Even war must be lawfully waged. A labor dispute demands
by the Commission to any Labor Arbiter who shall submit his recommendations to no less observance of the rules, for the benefit of all concerned.
the Commission for its consideration and resolution.
B. Types of Concerted Activities
Any ex parte restraining order issued by the Commission, or its chairman or Vice-
Chairman where the Commission is not in session and as prescribed by its rules,
1. Strike
shall be valid for a period not exceeding twenty (20) days.
a) Definition, Nature, Purpose and Scope
 Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa (IBM) v. NLRC, 198 SCRA 586 (1991)
Facts: Union demanded for the correction of wage distortions pursuant ot the Art. 219. (o) Definitions.
Wage Rationalization Act. RA 6727 provides that when the application of increases (o) "Strike" means any temporary stoppage of work by the concerted action of
in wages results in wage distortions and gives rise to a dispute, such dispute shall employees as a result of an industrial or labor dispute.
first be settled voluntarily between the parties. In case of a deadlock, the dispute
shall be resolved through compulsory arbitration before the NLRC regional branch
having jurisdiction over the workplace. However, EE’s at the bottling plant declared Book V, Rule I, Sec.1 (uu)
that they refused to work beyond 8 hours a day, as a means of compelling Company (uu) “Strike” refers to any temporary stoppage of work by the concerted action of
to correct wage distortion. Company moved to declare the strike/slowdown illegal. employees as a result of a labor or industrial dispute.
Held: Strike/slowdown was illegal. Statute implicitly excluded strikes, lockouts or
other concerted activities as modes of settlement of issues arising from the  Bukluran ng Manggagawa sa Clothman Knitting Corporation –
application of wage increases. The legislative intent is that wage distortions are to Solidarity of Unions in the Philippines for Empowerment and Reforms
be solved by voluntary arbitration, and not by strikes, lockouts or other concerted (BMC-SUPER) v. Court of Appeals, 448 SCRA 642 (2005)
activities of the employees or management. Sec. 16, Chapter I of Rules
Facts: Union alleges that it could not have staged a strike because the operations at
Implementing RA 6727 states that “Any issue involving wage distortion shall not be
the Company were temporarily shut down. It insists that it merely protested the
a ground for a strike/lockout.” Also, it is prohibited by their CBA. Even if it wasn’t,
slowdown is considered illegal for being a strike on installment plan. unjustified closing of the Finishing Division by forming a picket in front of the
Company’s compound to urge the re-opening thereof.
3. Limitations Held: A strike is any temporary stoppage of work by the concerted action of
employees as a result of an industrial or labor dispute. A labor dispute includes any
 BLTB Co. v. NLRC, 212 SCRA 792 (1992) controversy or matter concerning terms or conditions of employment or the
Facts: After assumption of jurisdiction by SOLE, Union still went on a strike. A return association or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining,
to work order was issued but some Union members failed to comply therewith. changing or arranging the terms and conditions of employment, regardless of
They were later on dismissed. whether the disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee.

41 | P a g e
In this case, there was a temporary stoppage of work as a result of an industrial  Alex Q. Naranjo, et al. v. Biomedica Health Care, Inc., 681 SCRA 438
dispute. (2012)
Clearly, the petitioner union, its officers, members and supporters staged a strike. Facts: Petitioners absented themselves from work on the day of the Company
In order for a strike to be valid, the following requirements laid down in paragraphs President’s birthday. They received texts to return to the company premises but
(c) and (f) of Article 263 of the Labor Code must be complied with: (a) a notice of were barred from entry by the President and told to look for another work.
strike must be filed; (b) a strike-vote must be taken; and (c) the results of the strike- Petitioners were later on accused of conducting an illegal strike.
vote must be reported to the DOLE. It bears stressing that these requirements are
mandatory, meaning, non-compliance therewith makes the strike illegal. The Held: Individual absences did not amount to temporary stoppage of work. Even if
evident intention of the law in requiring the strike notice and strike vote report is to there was indeed an illegal strike, none of the employees involved were union
reasonably regulate the right to strike, which is essential to the attainment of officers. Therefore, they can only be dismissed for commission of illegal acts during
legitimate policy objectives embodied in the law strike which in this case there was none.

 Santa. Rosa Coca-Cola Plant Employees Union v. CBP, 512 SCRA 437 b) Rationale for Regulation by Law
(2007)
 Lapanday Workers Union v. NLRC, 248 SCRA 95 (1995)
Strike is a temporary stoppage of work by the concerted action of employees as a
Facts: A concurrence of several circumstances (portrayal of the union as a
result of an industrial or labor dispute. In Bangalisan v. Court of Appeals, the Court
subversive leftist group, death of a union board member at the hands of the
ruled that “the fact that the conventional term ‘strike’ was not used by the striking
company’s security personnel) led the union to skip work and to picket in front of
employees to describe their common course of action is inconsequential, since the
the offices of the company’s security agencies. It was only thereafter that they
substance of the situation, and not its appearance, will be deemed to be
conducted their strike vote and submitted the results to the NCMB.
controlling.” The term “strike” encompasses not only concerted work stoppages,
but also slowdowns, mass leaves, sit-downs, attempts to damage, destroy or Doctrine: Strike was held illegal for being held within the 7-day cooling off period.
sabotage plant equipment and facilities, and similar activities. The rational for the period is to ensure that the strike rests on rational basis and not
upon emotionality. Observance of the period is necessary for strike validity. The
Picketing involves merely the marching to and fro at the premises of the employer,
DOLE uses it to ascertain that such is held with the imprimatur of a majority of
usually accompanied by the display of placards and other signs making known the
union members. Strike is a last resort and must be resorted to upon a confirmation
facts involved in a labor dispute. As applied to a labor dispute, to picket means the
of unity amongst union members to ensure the best chances of its success.
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. c) Effect on Work Relationship
For a strike to be valid, the following procedural requisites must be observed: (a) a
notice of strike filed with the DOLE 30 days before the intended date thereof, or 15 Art. 291. (b) Miscellaneous provisions.
days in case of unfair labor practice; (b) strike vote approved by a majority of the (b) Subject to the constitutional right of workers to security of tenure and their right
total union membership in the bargaining unit concerned obtained by secret ballot to be protected against dismissal except for a just and authorized cause and
in a meeting called for that purpose, (c) notice given to the DOLE of the results of without prejudice to the requirement of notice under Article 283 of this Code, the
the voting at least seven days before the intended strike. These requirements are employer shall furnish the worker whose employment is sought to be terminated a
mandatory and the failure of a union to comply therewith renders the strike illegal. written notice containing a statement of the causes for termination and shall afford
the latter ample opportunity to be heard and to defend himself with the assistance
of his representative if he so desires in accordance with company rules and
regulations promulgated pursuant to guidelines set by the Department of Labor and
Employment. Any decision taken by the employer shall be without prejudice to the
right of the worker to contest the validity or legality of his dismissal by filing a
42 | P a g e
complaint with the regional branch of the National Labor Relations Commission.  Culver B. Suico v. NLRC, GR 163793, 513 SCRA 325 (2007)
The burden of proving that the termination was for a valid or authorized cause shall
rest on the employer. Facts: 3 consolidated cases, all dealing with strike that refused to stop despite
return-to-work order by SOLE. Suico and several other employees, all union
The Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment may suspend the members, were dismissed because of alleged illegal actions that resulted in the
effects of the termination pending resolution of the dispute in the event of a prima injury of other non-striking employees and one PLDT subscriber.
facie finding by the appropriate official of the Department of Labor and
Employment before whom such dispute is pending that the termination may cause Doctrine: PLDT’s company policies on the illegality of violent acts during strikes
were deemed to have ripened into a source of obligation and in fact supplemented
a serious labor dispute or is in implementation of a mass lay-off.
the provisions of the labor code. However, despite such supplementation, the
procedural requirements for dismissal must still be complied with. Failure to comply
with procedural requirements of dismissal makes the employer liable for damages.
Book VI, Rule I, Sec. 2 (d)
(d) In all cases of termination of employment, the following standards of due  Chuayuco Steel Manufacturing Corporation v. Buklod ng Manggagawa,
process shall be substantially observed: sa Chuayuco Steel Manufacturing Corporation, 513 SCRA 621 (2007)
For termination of employment based on just causes as defined in Article 282 of the Facts: Union went on strike because of alleged ULP. The company had the strike
Labor Code: declared illegal for being attended by unlawful and illegal acts (blocking of gates,
unruly, violent and intimidating behavior). Strike was declared illegal and
i. A written notice served on the employee specifying the ground or grounds for
participating employees were dismissed.
termination, and giving said employee reasonable opportunity within which to
explain his side; Doctrine: Strike was illegal for blocking the ingress and egress of the premises.
Union officers who knowingly participated in the strike, as well as union members
ii. A hearing or conference during which the employee concerned, with the
who participated in illegal acts may be deemed to have lost their employment.
assistance of counsel if he so desires is given opportunity to respond to the charge,
However, such liability for illegal acts is individual and not collective.
present evidence, or rebut the evidence presented against him.
iii. A written notice of termination served on the employee, indicating that upon d) Types and Conversion
due consideration of all the circumstances, grounds have been established to justify
his termination.  Master Iron Labor v. NLRC, 219 SCRA 47 (1993)
For termination of employment as defined in Article 283 of the Labor Code, the Facts: Master Iron implemented a “rotational” work schedule then began hiring
requirements of due process shall be deemed complied with upon service of a outside laborers for jobs usually and regularly performed by union members. One
written notice to the employee and the appropriate Regional Office of the union member protested and was suspended for insubordination; hence, a strike
Department of Labor and Employment at least thirty days before effectivity of the was held. Master Iron petitions for declaration of strike’s illegality for being
termination, specifying the ground or grounds for termination. contrary to “no strike” clause in the CBA.
If the termination is brought about by the completion of a contract of phase Doctrine: No strike clause only works to bar strikes held for economic purposes.
thereof, or by failure of an employee to meet the standards of the employer in the Since, the strike was clearly in protest of the company's contracting-out of work, it
case of probationary employment, it shall be sufficient that a written notice is is a ULP that cannot be held illegal under the said clause. Likewise, the strikers
served the employee within a reasonable time from the effective date of believed in good faith that there was ULP, and such presumption of legality prevails
termination. even if subsequently proven to be untrue.

43 | P a g e
 1) Unfair Labor Practice Doctrine: Strike is illegal. It failed to comply with the necessary requirements
according to Art. 264, and was also held pending voluntary arbitration. Dismissals of
Art. 277. (c) Strikes, picketing and lockouts. employees during VA are not enough grounds to stage wildcat strike. The strike was
(c) In case of bargaining deadlocks, the duly certified or recognized bargaining agent likewise attended by numerous unlawful acts.
may file a notice of strike or the employer may file a notice of lockout with the
Ministry at least 30 day before the intended date thereof. In cases of unfair labor e) Grounds
practice, the period of notice shall be 15 days and in the absence of a duly certified
or recognized bargaining agent, the notice of strike may be filed by any legitimate Book V, Rule XXI, Section 5. Grounds for strike or lockout.
labor organization in behalf of its members. However, in case of dismissal from A strike or lockout may be declared in cases of bargaining deadlocks and unfair
employment of union officers duly elected in accordance with the union labor practices. Violations of collective bargaining agreements, except flagrant
constitution and by-laws, which may constitute union busting, where the existence and/or malicious refusal to comply with its economic provisions, shall not be
of the union is threatened, the 15-day cooling-off period shall not apply and the considered unfair labor practice and shall not be strikeable. No strike or lockout
union may take action immediately. may be declared on grounds involving interunion and intra-union disputes without
first having filed a notice of strike or lockout or without the necessary strike or
 Shell Oil Workers Union v. Shell lockout vote having been obtained and reported to the Board.
Company of the Philippines, supra
Neither will a strike be declared after assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary or
2) Bargaining Deadlock: Economic/ULP after certification or submission of the dispute to compulsory or voluntary
arbitration or during the pendency of cases involving the same grounds for the
Art. 277 (c) (see page 44) strike or lockout.

 Consolidated Labor Association of the Phils. V. Marsman and Co., 11 1) Allowable Strikes
SCRA 589 (1964)
Art. 277 (c) (see page 44)
Facts: Strike because of CB deadlock on economic benefits. Employees eventually
returned to work upon learning that the union accepted the company’s offer of 2) Prohibited Strikes
economic benefits. However, some employees were denied entry under the
condition that they withdraw from the Union. Union revived their strike (2.1) Assumption of Jurisdiction
Doctrine: Deadlock on economic benefits is a valid ground for economic strike.
When the company started discriminating based on union membership, the strike Art. 277. (b) (g) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
turned into a ULP strike. No backwages may be awarded during an economic strike (b) Workers shall have the right to engage in concerted activities for purposes of
because of “no work, no pay”. collective bargaining or for their mutual benefit and protection. The right of
legitimate labor organizations to strike and picket and of employers to lockout,
3) Non-Conversion: Strike to Lockout consistent with the national interest, shall continue to be recognized and respected.
However, no labor union may strike and no employer may declare a lockout on
 Sukhothai Cuisine and Restaurant v. Court of Appeals, 495 SCRA 336 grounds involving inter-union and intra-union disputes.
(2006) (g) When, in his opinion, there exists a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a
Facts: PLAC (Union) filed their first notice of strike and submitted their strike vote strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest, the Secretary
results but held a wildcat strike thereafter. They refilled a second notice of strike to of Labor and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or
convert it to a sit-down strike, then into an actual strike. They claim that they certify the same to the Commission for compulsory arbitration. Such assumption or
complied with the requirements based on their previously filed notice. certification shall have the effect of automatically enjoining the intended or
44 | P a g e
impending strike or lockout as specified in the assumption or certification order. If (2.2) Intra-Union Dispute
one has already taken place at the time of assumption or certification, all striking or
locked out employees shall immediately return-to-work and the employer shall Book V, Rule XI, Section 1. Coverage.
immediately resume operations and readmit all workers under the same terms and A. Inter/intra-union disputes shall include:
conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout. The Secretary of Labor and
(a) conduct, or nullification of election of officers of unions and workers’
Employment or the Commission may seek the assistance of law enforcement
association;
agencies to ensure compliance with this provision as well as with such orders as he
may issue to enforce the same. (b) audit/accounts examination of union or workers’ association funds;
(c) deregistration of collective bargaining agreements;
(d) validity/invalidity of union affiliation or disaffiliation
Art. 278. (a) Prohibited activities.
(a) No labor organization or employer shall declare a strike or lockout without first (e) validity/invalidity of acceptance/non-acceptance for union membership;
having bargained collectively in accordance with Title VII of this Book or without
(f) validity/invalidity of voluntary recognition;
first having filed the notice required in the preceding Article or without the
necessary strike or lockout vote first having been obtained and reported to the (g) opposition to application for union of CBA registration;
Ministry.
(h) violations of or disagreements over any provision of the constitution and by-
No strike or lockout shall be declared after assumption of jurisdiction by the laws of a union or workers’ association;
President or the Minister or after certification or submission of the dispute to
(i) disagreements over chartering or registration of labor organizations or the
compulsory or voluntary arbitration or during the pendency of cases involving the
registration of collective bargaining agreements;
same grounds for the strike or lockout.
(j) violations of the rights and conditions of membership in a union or workers’
Any worker whose employment has been terminated as a consequence of any
association;
unlawful lockout shall be entitled to reinstatement with full backwages. Any union
officer who knowingly participates in an illegal strike and any worker or union (k) violations of the rights of legitimate labor organizations, except interpretation of
officer who knowingly participates in the commission of illegal acts during a strike collective bargaining agreements;
may be declared to have lost his employment status: Provided, That mere (l) validity/invalidity of impeachment/expulsion/suspension or any disciplinary
participation of a worker in a lawful strike shall not constitute sufficient ground for action meted against any officer and member, including those arising from non-
termination of his employment, even if a replacement had been hired by the compliance with the reportorial requirements under Rule V;
employer during such lawful strike.
(m) such other disputes or conflicts involving the rights to self-organization, union
 Bilflex Phils. Inc. Labor Union (NAFLU) v. Filflex Industrial and membership and collective bargaining;
Manufacturing Corporation and Biflex (Phils.), Inc., 511 SCRA 247 (1) between and among legitimate labor organizations; and
(2006)
(2) between and among members of a union or workers’ association.
Facts: members of the union joined in a “welga ng bayan” to protests the rise on
gasoline prices. They found themselves terminated and prevented from entering
the premises upon returning to work. B. Other labor relations disputes, not otherwise covered by Article 217 of the Labor
Doctrine: Joining a “welga ng bayan” is akin to a general strike or a sympathy strike, Code, shall include:
hence, the need for the strike requirements. Though it may be an exercise of (a) any conflict between:
freedom of expression, such is not absolute.
45 | P a g e
 (1) a labor union and the employer; or (2.3) No Strike Clause
(2) a labor union and a group that is not a labor organization; or  Panay Electric co., Inc. v. NLRC, 248 SCRA 688 (1995)
(3) a labor union and an individual who is not a member of such union; Facts: An employee was dismissed for insubordination in refusing a
(b) cancellation of registration of unions and workers associations filed by recommendation to be a “Report Clerk”. The Union claims that the dismissal was
individual/s other than its members, or group that is not a labor organization; and because of the company’s suspicion that the employee was the writer of the “red
column” in the union publication. They then held a strike, despite the no strike
(c) a petition for interpleader involving labor relations.
clause, claiming that they believed in good faith that the company had committed
ULP.
Doctrine: While the no strike clause only bars economic strikes and not ULP strikes,
Book V, Rule XI, Section 2. Effects of the filing/pendency of inter/intra-union and other the one held in this case cannot be held to have been done in good faith because
related labor relations disputes. there was sufficient time to bring the dismissal to the grievance machinery. The
The rights, relationships and obligations of the parties litigants against each other Union failed to substantiate its claims of ULP.
and other parties-in-interest prior to the institution of the petition shall continue to
remain during the pendency of the petition and until the date of finality of the  Malayang Samahan ng Manggagawa sa M. Greenfield (MSMG-UWP) v.
decision rendered therein. Thereafter, the rights, relationships and obligations of Ramos, 357 SCRA 77 (2000) (Supra)
the parties litigants against each other and other parties-in-interest shall be
governed by the decision so ordered. f) Striking Party
The filing or pendency of any inter/intra-union dispute and other related labor
relations dispute is not a prejudicial question to any petition for certification Art. 277. (b) (c) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
election and shall not be a ground for the dismissal of a petition for certification b. Workers shall have the right to engage in concerted activities for purposes of
election of suspension of proceedings for certification election. collective bargaining or for their mutual benefit and protection. The right of
legitimate labor organizations to strike and picket and of employers to lockout,
 Employees Union of Bayer Phil., et al. v. Bayer Phili., Inc., 636 SCRA consistent with the national interest, shall continue to be recognized and respected.
473 (2010) However, no labor union may strike and no employer may declare a lockout on
Facts: Internal dispute between union members led to difficulties in negotiations grounds involving inter-union and intra-union disputes.
for wage increases. Union membership was divided into two factions, with each
c. In case of bargaining deadlocks, the duly certified or recognized bargaining agent
filing ULP complaints for the company’s inaction with regard to their CB proposals.
may file a notice of strike or the employer may file a notice of lockout with the
In the meantime, the Company concluded a CBA with one of the factions.
Ministry at least 30 day before the intended date thereof. In cases of unfair labor
Doctrine: The NLRC cannot take cognizance of the legality of the actions of the practice, the period of notice shall be 15 days and in the absence of a duly certified
union leaders, it being a purely intra-union dispute. As such, the dispute is within or recognized bargaining agent, the notice of strike may be filed by any legitimate
the jurisdiction of VA. They can, however, take cognizance of the ULP of the labor organization in behalf of its members. However, in case of dismissal from
company in utterly disregarding the existing CBA with the SEBA in concluding a new employment of union officers duly elected in accordance with the union
CBA with one of the factions. constitution and by-laws, which may constitute union busting, where the existence
of the union is threatened, the 15-day cooling-off period shall not apply and the
union may take action immediately.

46 | P a g e
Book V Rule XXII Sec. 6. Who may declare a strike or lockout. laws which may constitute union-busting where the existence of the union is
Any certified or duly recognized bargaining representative may declare a strike in threatened, the fifteen-day cooling-off period shall not apply and the union may
cases of bargaining deadlocks and unfair labor practices. The employer may declare take action immediately after the strike vote is conducted and the results thereof
a lockout in the same cases. In the absence of a certified or duly recognized submitted to the appropriate regional branch of the Board.
bargaining representative, any legitimate labor organization in the establishment
may declare a strike but only on grounds of unfair labor practices.
Book V. Rule XXII, Section 8. Contents of notice.
g) Procedural Requirements The notice shall state, among others, the names and addresses of the employer and
the union involved, the nature of the industry to which the employer belongs, the
Book V. Rule XXII, Section 5. Grounds for strike or lockout
number of union members and of the workers in the bargaining unit, and such
A strike or lockout may be declared in cases of bargaining deadlocks and unfair
other relevant data as may facilitate the settlement of the dispute, such as a brief
labor practices. Violations of collective bargaining agreements, except flagrant
statement or enumeration of all pending labor disputes involving the same parties.
and/or malicious refusal to comply with its economic provisions, shall not be
considered unfair labor practice and shall not be strikeable. No strike or lockout In cases of bargaining deadlocks, the notice shall, as far as practicable, further state
may be declared on grounds involving interunion and intra-union disputes without the unresolved issues in the bargaining negotiations and be accompanied by the
first having filed a notice of strike or lockout or without the necessary strike or written proposals of the union, the counter-proposals of the employer and the
lockout vote having been obtained and reported to the Board. proof of a request for conference to settle the differences. In cases of unfair labor
practices, the notice shall, as far as practicable, state the acts complained of and the
Neither will a strike be declared after assumption of jurisdiction by the Secretary or
efforts taken to resolve the dispute amicably.
after certification or submission of the dispute to compulsory or voluntary
arbitration or during the pendency of cases involving the same grounds for the In case a notice does not conform with the requirements of this and the foregoing
strike or lockout. section/s, the regional branch of the Board shall inform the concerned party of such
fact.

Book V. Rule XXII, Section 6. Who may declare a strike or lockout.

Any certified or duly recognized bargaining representative may declare a strike in Book V. Rule XXII, Section 9. Action on Notice.
cases of bargaining deadlocks and unfair labor practices. The employer may declare Upon receipt of the notice, the regional branch of the Board shall exert all efforts at
a lockout in the same cases. In the absence of a certified or duly recognized mediation and conciliation to enable the parties to settle the dispute amicably. The
bargaining representative, any legitimate labor organization in the establishment regional branch of the Board may, upon agreement of the parties, treat a notice as
may declare a strike but only on grounds of unfair labor practices. a preventive mediation case.
It shall also encourage the parties to submit the dispute to voluntary arbitration.
During the proceedings, the parties shall not do any act which may disrupt or
Book V. Rule XXII, Section 7. Notice of strike or lockout. impede the early settlement of the dispute. They are obliged, as part of their duty
In bargaining deadlocks, a notice of strike or lockout shall be filed with the regional to bargain collectively in good faith and to participate fully and promptly in the
branch of the Board at least thirty (30) days before the intended date thereof, a conciliation meetings called by the regional branch of the Board.
copy of said notice having been served on the other party concerned. In cases of
unfair labor practice, the period of notice shall be fifteen (15) days. A notice, upon agreement of the parties, may be referred to alternative modes of
dispute resolution, including voluntary arbitration.
However, in case of unfair labor practice involving the dismissal from employment
of any union officer duly elected in accordance with the union constitution and by-

47 | P a g e
Book V. Rule XXII, Section 10. Strike or lockout vote. officer who knowingly participates in the commission of illegal acts during a strike
A decision to declare a strike must be approved by a majority of the total union may be declared to have lost his employment status: Provided, That mere
membership in the bargaining unit concerned obtained by secret ballot in meetings participation of a worker in a lawful strike shall not constitute sufficient ground for
or referenda called for the purpose. A decision to declare a lockout must be termination of his employment, even if a replacement had been hired by the
approved by a majority of the Board of Directors of the employer, corporation or employer during such lawful strike.
association or the partners in a partnership obtained by a secret ballot in a meeting
called for the purpose.
The regional branch of the Board may, at its own initiative or upon request of any Art. 260. Procedure in collective bargaining.
affected party, supervise the conduct of the secret balloting. In every case, the The following procedures shall be observed in collective bargaining:
union or the employer shall furnish the regional branch of the Board and the notice
a. When a party desires to negotiate an agreement, it shall serve a written notice
of meetings referred to in the preceding paragraph at least twenty-four (24) hours
upon the other party with a statement of its proposals. The other party shall make a
before such meetings as well as the results of the voting at least seven (7) days
reply thereto not later than ten (10) calendar days from receipt of such notice;
before the intended strike or lockout, subject to the cooling-off period provided in
this Rule. b. Should differences arise on the basis of such notice and reply, either party may
request for a conference which shall begin not later than ten (10) calendar days
from the date of request.

Book V. Rule XXII, Section 11. Declaration of strike or lockout. c. If the dispute is not settled, the Board shall intervene upon request of either or
Should the dispute remain unsettled after the lapse of the requisite number of days both parties or at its own initiative and immediately call the parties to conciliation
from the filing of the notice of strike or lockout and of the results of the election meetings. The Board shall have the power to issue subpoenas requiring the
required in the preceding section, the labor union may strike or the employer may attendance of the parties to such meetings. It shall be the duty of the parties to
lock out its workers. The regional branch of the Board shall continue mediating and participate fully and promptly in the conciliation meetings the Board may call;
conciliating. d. During the conciliation proceedings in the Board, the parties are prohibited from
doing any act which may disrupt or impede the early settlement of the disputes;
1) Effort to Bargain and

Art. 278. (a) Prohibited activities. e. The Board shall exert all efforts to settle disputes amicably and encourage the
a. No labor organization or employer shall declare a strike or lockout without first parties to submit their case to a voluntary arbitrator.
having bargained collectively in accordance with Title VII of this Book or without
first having filed the notice required in the preceding Article or without the
necessary strike or lockout vote first having been obtained and reported to the
Art. 261. Duty to bargain collectively in the absence of collective bargaining
Ministry.
agreements.
No strike or lockout shall be declared after assumption of jurisdiction by the In the absence of an agreement or other voluntary arrangement providing for a
President or the Minister or after certification or submission of the dispute to more expeditious manner of collective bargaining, it shall be the duty of employer
compulsory or voluntary arbitration or during the pendency of cases involving the and the representatives of the employees to bargain collectively in accordance with
same grounds for the strike or lockout. the provisions of this Code.
Any worker whose employment has been terminated as a consequence of any
unlawful lockout shall be entitled to reinstatement with full backwages. Any union
officer who knowingly participates in an illegal strike and any worker or union

48 | P a g e
Art. 262. Meaning of duty to bargain collectively. However, in case of unfair labor practice involving the dismissal from employment
The duty to bargain collectively means the performance of a mutual obligation to of any union officer duly elected in accordance with the union constitution and by-
meet and convene promptly and expeditiously in good faith for the purpose of laws which may constitute union-busting where the existence of the union is
negotiating an agreement with respect to wages, hours of work and all other terms threatened, the fifteen-day cooling-off period shall not apply and the union may
and conditions of employment including proposals for adjusting any grievances or take action immediately after the strike vote is conducted and the results thereof
questions arising under such agreement and executing a contract incorporating submitted to the appropriate regional branch of the Board.
such agreements if requested by either party but such duty does not compel any
party to agree to a proposal or to make any concession. 3) Observance of Cooling-Off Periods

2) Filing of Notice of Intention Art. 277 (c) (e) (see page 49)

Art. 277. (c) (d) (e) Strikes, picketing and lockouts. 4) Strike Vote
c. In case of bargaining deadlocks, the duly certified or recognized bargaining agent
may file a notice of strike or the employer may file a notice of lockout with the Art. 277. (f) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
Ministry at least 30 day before the intended date thereof. In cases of unfair labor f. A decision to declare a strike must be approved by a majority of the total union
practice, the period of notice shall be 15 days and in the absence of a duly certified membership in the bargaining unit concerned, obtained by secret ballot in meetings
or recognized bargaining agent, the notice of strike may be filed by any legitimate or referenda called for that purpose. A decision to declare a lockout must be
labor organization in behalf of its members. approved by a majority of the board of directors of the corporation or association
or of the partners in a partnership, obtained by secret ballot in a meeting called for
However, in case of dismissal from employment of union officers duly elected in that purpose.
accordance with the union constitution and by-laws, which may constitute union
busting, where the existence of the union is threatened, the 15-day cooling-off The decision shall be valid for the duration of the dispute based on substantially the
period shall not apply and the union may take action immediately. same grounds considered when the strike or lockout vote was taken.

d. The notice must be in accordance with such implementing rules and regulations The Ministry may, at its own initiative or upon the request of any affected party,
as the Minister of Labor and Employment may promulgate. supervise the conduct of the secret balloting.

e. During the cooling-off period, it shall be the duty of the Ministry to exert all In every case, the union or the employer shall furnish the Ministry the results of the
efforts at mediation and conciliation to effect a voluntary settlement. Should the voting at least seven days before the intended strike or lockout, subject to the
dispute remain unsettled until the lapse of the requisite number of days from the cooling-off period herein provided.
mandatory filing of the notice, the labor union may strike or the employer may
declare a lockout.

Art. 278 (a) (see page 48) Art. 278 (a) (see page 48)

 Sukhothai Cuisine and Restaurant v. Court of Appeals, supra

Book V. Rule XXII, Section 7. Notice of strike or lockout.
 National Union of Workers in Hotels, Restaurants and Allied
In bargaining deadlocks, a notice of strike or lockout shall be filed with the regional
branch of the Board at least thirty (30) days before the intended date thereof, a
Industries-Manila Pavilion Hotel Chapter v. NLRC, 570 SCRA 598 (2008)
copy of said notice having been served on the other party concerned. In cases of Facts: After notice of strike was filed, and the strike vote was conducted, the
unfair labor practice, the period of notice shall be fifteen (15) days. employees of Manila Pavillion Hotel came to work with shaved heads. They were

49 | P a g e
prevented from entering the premises for violating the Hotel’s grooming standards. (1.2) Guidelines and Balancing of Interest
The employees held a picket in response
 Shell Oil Workers Union v. Shell Company of the Philippines, supra
Doctrine: Deliberate and concerted act of shaving their heads was a willful violation
of the Hotel’s grooming policy was considered a strike because it resulted in a
 Stamford Marketing Corporation v. Josephine Julian, 423 SCRA 633
deliberate stoppage of work. Also, the strike failed to comply with the 30-day
(2004)
cooling-off period and the 7-day strike ban.
Facts: Julian’s union sent the company a letter seeking recognition as SEBA, when it
h) Test of Legality had not yet registered with the BLR. Julian was dismissed upon receipt of the letter,
while several others were dismissed pursuant to the strike held because of her
1) Legal Strike dismissal.

(1.1) Purpose and Means Test Doctrine: The dismissal of officers held to be ineffectual for not complying with the
requirements of procedural due process, but was not ULP because the strike was
 Reliance Surety and Insurance Co., Inc. v. NLRC, 193 SCRA 365 (1991) still illegal for being without notice. However, nothing in Art 264 authorizes
immediate dismissal of officers without notice; Officers to be paid backwages. No
Facts: Reliance Surety changed the seating arrangements of its office employees to proof of the dismissals intending to prohibit union membership, therefore, no ULP.
decrease work inefficiency, leading the latter to file ULP for union discrimination.
Reliance dismissed the employees after refusal to comply. Union members went on (1.3) Defenses: Good Faith
strike, barricading the entrances and exits.
Doctrine: Rearrangement of seats is a valid management prerogative. The strike  Master Iron Labor Union v. NLRC, supra
failed to satisfy the strike requirements (defective strike) and was also attended by
illegal activities (illegal strike).  National Union of Workers Hotels, Restaurant and Allied Industries v.
NLRC, 287 SCRA 192 (1998)
 San Miguel Corp. v. NLRC, 403 SCRA 418 (2003) Facts: “Junta” faction of NUWHRAIN conducted impeachment proceedings of its
Facts: SMC Union submitted notice of strike with NCMB upon which the latter officers and elected new ones. When the national office of NUWHRAIN refused to
ordered preventive mediation. Union proceeded with strike vote and wanted to recognize their new officers, they filed a notice of strike for interference. NCMB
push through with the strike despite repeatedly being reminded of the order. dismissed the notice for being a non-strikeable issue (intra-union). Junta held a
Company petitioned for issuance of injunction but was denied after reaching an wildcat strike when one of its new officers was suspended.
agreement with the union to end hostilities. Doctrine: The general rule is that strikes held for non-strikeable grounds are illegal,
Doctrine: The strike was illegal for being held without notice since the NCMB order unless it can be shown that the union believed, in good faith, that ULP was
for preventive mediation was an effective dismissal of the previously filed notice of committed. However, such belief in good faith must be substantiated by the
strike. Injunction should have been issued by the NLRC because of the existing circumstances and not merely alleged. Junta’s refusal to abide by NCMB’s
threat of revival of the strike, as could be seen from circulation union pamphlets prohibition of the strike is evident bad faith on their part.
stating: “ipaalala sa management na hindi iaatras and ating notice of strike at
anumang oras ay puwede nating itirik muli and picket line”. 2) Illegal Strike

(2.1) Basis of Illegality

Arts. 277 (b) (c) (see page 46)

50 | P a g e
Art. 278 (a) (see page 48) 4. Employment of unlawful means
5. In violation of an existing injunction or prohibition

Art. 279. Improved offer balloting. 6. Contrary to an existing agreement.

In an effort to settle a strike, the Department of Labor and Employment shall
conduct a referendum by secret ballot on the improved offer of the employer on or  A. Soriano Aviation v. Employees Association of A. Soriano Aviation,
before the 30th day of the strike. 596 SCRA 189 (2009)
When at least a majority of the union members vote to accept the improved offer Facts: The company suspended 8 of its mechanics for allegedly violating the no
the striking workers shall immediately return to work and the employer shall strike clause when they refused to render overtime work (1st strike). The union
thereupon readmit them upon the signing of the agreement. filed a notice of strike and held it (2nd strike) when no settlement was reached.
NLRC held illegality of strikes until reversed by CA.
In case of a lockout, the Department of Labor and Employment shall also conduct a
referendum by secret balloting on the reduced offer of the union on or before the Doctrine: The first strike (refusal to render OT) was a temporary stoppage of work
30th day of the lockout. in violation of the no strike clause; therefore, illegal because it was a non-strikeable
ground. The second strike was legal at the onset for complying with the requisites,
When at least a majority of the board of directors or trustees or the partners but became illegal because of unlawful acts (violence and intimidation).
holding the controlling interest in the case of a partnership vote to accept the Intermittence of the violence does not lessen the illegality of the strike.
reduced offer, the workers shall immediately return to work and the employer shall
thereupon readmit them upon the signing of the agreement.  Magdala Multipurpose & Livelihood Coop v. Kilusang Manggagawa ng
LGS, et al., 659 SCRA 768 (2011)
 Toyota Motors Philippines Workers Association v. NLRC, 537 SCRA 171
(2007) Facts: Union filed notice and conducted strike vote despite only becoming
registered the day after the vote. Strike was staged and was attended by illegal acts.
Facts: The union filed a notice of strike because the company refused to recognize
them as SEBA, despite their winning the certification election. Hearings were held in Doctrine: Strike was illegal because the union had not yet acquired legal personality
the BLR to determine the union’s representation status but the company prohibited when it filed the notice and held the strike vote. Only legitimate labor organizations
the union members from attending. Union members held mass actions in front of may validly file notices of strike and hold strike votes. Prohibitied acts were likewise
the BLR office and were subsequently dismissed for illegal strike. committed (ingress/egress).

Doctrine: Participation in the mass action was an illegal strike. It was a temporary (2.2) Illegal Acts/Prohibited Activities
stoppage of work arising from a labor dispute that lacked the needed requisites,
and was attended by unlawful acts (blocking free ingress/egress). Union cannot Art. 270. Employer as Bystander.
claim similarity with mass actions held in Phil. Blooming Mills because the activities In all cases, whether the petition for certification election is filed by an employer or
in the latter were not spurred by a labor dispute. The strike also violated the a legitimate labor organization, the employer shall not be considered a party
company’s code of conduct, the penalty for which is dismissal. thereto with a concomitant right to oppose a petition for certification election. The
employer's participation in such proceedings shall be limited to: (1) being notified
6 types of illegal strikes:
or informed of petitions of such nature; and (2) submitting the list of employees
1. Contrary to prohibition by law during the pre-election conference should the Med-Arbiter act favorably on the
2. Violates specific requirements of the law petition.

3. When declared for unlawful purposes

51 | P a g e
 Bagong Pagkakaisa ng Manggagawa ng Triumph Internatioal v. Doctrine: While the strike validly complied with the strike requirements, the
Secretary of DOLE, et al., 623 SCRA 185 (2010) subsequent unlawful act of blocking free ingress to and egress from the company
premises rendered it illegal. The officers stand to be dismissed pursuant to Art
Facts: A strike was held in response to a notice of lockout (because of slowdown), 264a, par. 3 for knowingly participating in an illegal strike. The members on the
but was enjoined by SOLE’s AJ and RTWO. The company refused to take back other hand will only be dismissed upon particular identification of having
several union officers and shop stewards pending preventive mediation participated in illegal activities.
proceedings regarding the unlawful acts by the officers, their refusal to abide by the
RTWO, and the illegal slowdown.  Solidbank Corporation v. Solidbank Union, 634 SCRA 554 (2010)
Doctrine: All three acts done by the union officers were unlawful acts, namely: the Facts: CBA negotiations reached a deadlock. Union filed a Notice of Strike. SOLE
work slowdown without filing notice of strike beforehand; the blocking of assumed jurisdiction. Union performed “mass leaves”, “protest actions” and pickets
ingress/egress during the strike; and their refusal to end the strike despite the at DOLE and other offices of the company. 199 of 712 defied the return to work
SOLE’s assumption of jurisdiction and issuance of two RTWO’s. The company need order.
not allege unlawful acts for them to dismiss on those grounds.
Issues: What is the liability of the officers and members? What are the appropriate
 C. Alcantara & Sons, INc. v. Court of Appeals, Nagkahiusang damages?
Mamumuo sa Alsons-SPFL (NAMAAL-SPFC), et al., 668 SCRA 136 (2011) Ratio: Union officer may be terminated for knowingly participating in an illegal
Facts: Strike by the union was held to be illegal for violating the no strike/no lock strike. A union member may be terminated for knowingly participating in the
out provision of the CBA, resulting in the dismissal of both union officers and commission of an illegal act. ON BACKWAGES, “fair day’s wage for a fair day’s
members. The courts vacillated on WON to pay the union members back wages labor”, UNLESS, the laborer was able, willing and ready to work but was illegally
and/or separation pay. locked out, suspended or dismissed or otherwise illegally prevented from working.
But for this to apply, strike must be legal. ON SEPARATION PAY, since union
Doctrine: The LA’s order of reinstatement is immediately executory, even pending members are entitled to reinstatement and did not perform any prohibited act,
appeal. Union members must be paid their wages from the time they were ordered they are entitled to separation pay.
reinstated by the LA, but the company failed to do so. These are not necessarily
back wages, but are liabilities for failure to exercise options of reinstatement. No i) Employment of Strike Breakers
separation pay when dismissed for participating in illegal strikes.
Art. 278. (c) Prohibited activities.
(2.3) Effect of Illegality; Liabilities of Participating c. No employer shall use or employ any strike-breaker, nor shall any person be
Officer/Member employed as a strike-breaker.

Art. 278 (a) (see page 48)

Art. 219. (r) Definitions.

 Phimco Industires, INc. v. Phimco Industries Labor Association (PILA), r."Strike-breaker" means any person who obstructs, impedes, or interferes with by
force, violence, coercion, threats, or intimidation any peaceful picketing affecting
et al., 628 SCRA 119 (2020)
wages, hours or conditions of work or in the exercise of the right of self-
Facts: A strike was held and subsequently enjoined by ex parte TRO, upon a finding organization or collective bargaining.
by the NLRC that the union members had blocked the free ingress and egress of the
company premises.

52 | P a g e
 j) Improved Offer Balloting and Strikes Issue: What is the nature of a picket line?

Art. 279. (see page 51) Ratio: “The picket line is an explosive front, charged with emotions and
fierce loyalties of the union-management dispute. It may be marked by
colorful name-calling, intimidating threats or sporadic fights between the
Book V, Rule XXII, Section 12. Improved offer balloting. pickets and those who pass the line.” Regarding the fist fight, “[t]he picket
In case of a strike, the regional branch of the Board shall, at its own initiative or line being the natural result of the respondent’s unfair labor practice,
upon the request of any affected party, conduct a referendum by secret balloting Ibarra's misconduct is at most a misdemeanor which is not a bar to
on the improved offer of the employer on or before the 30th day of strike. When at reinstatement.”
least a majority of the union members vote to accept the improved offer, the
striking workers shall immediately return to work and the employer shall thereupon  Santa Rosa Coca-Cola Plant Employees Union v. Coca-Cola Bottlers,
re-admit them upon the signing of the agreement. Phil., supra
In case of a lockout, the regional branch of the Board shall also conduct a Facts: SUPRA
referendum by secret balloting on the reduced offer of the union on or before the
30th day of the lockout. When at least a majority of the board of directors or Issue: What is the definition and purpose of a picket?
trustees or the partners holding the controlling interest in the case of partnership
Ratio: “Picketing involves merely the marching to and fro at the premises of
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.
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
2. Picketing 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
Book V, Rule XXII, Section 13. Peaceful picketing. means of peaceable persuasion.”
Workers shall have the right to peaceful picketing. No person engaged in picketing
shall commit any act of violence, coercion or intimidation or obstruct the free b) Picketing and Libel Laws
ingress to or egress from the employer's premises for lawful purposes, or obstruct
public thoroughfares.  Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank v. Philnabank Employees
Association, 105 SCRA 314 (1981)
No person shall obstruct, impede or interfere with, by force, violence, coercion,
threats or intimidation, any peaceful picketing by workers during any labor Facts: Union picketed PNB with placards and signboards with statement “PCIB BAD
controversy or in the exercise of the right to self-organization or collective ACCOUNTS TRANDFERRED TO PNB-NIDC?” PCIB filed a libel case against the union.
bargaining or shall aid or abet such obstruction or interference.
Issues: WON picket and signs constitute libel. / NO.
No employer shall use or employ any person to commit such acts nor shall any
Ratio: Peaceful picketing is part of the freedom of speech guarantee of the
person be employed for such purpose.
Constitution. Labor disputes give rise to strong emotional response. Therefore, it is
far from likely that the language employed would be both courteous and polite.
a) Definition, Nature, Purpose of Picket Line

 Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. Employees Association v. Insular Life

Assurance Co., Ltd., supra
Facts: SUPRA

53 | P a g e
 c) Curtailment

 Nagkaisang Manggagawa sa Cuizon Hotel v. Libron, 124 SCRA 448 Book V, Rule XXII, Section 13. (see page 53)
(1983)
3. Slowdown
Facts: This case arose from a clarificatory order of respondent labor arbiter that
stated “[t]he consequences resulting from the declaration of a strike as illegal  Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa (IBM) v. NLRC, supra
carries with it sanctions on the immediate incidents thereto such as picketing X X
X.” Facts: SUPRA
Issue: WON picketing is illegal per se. / NO. Issue: WON the slowdown is a strike. / YES.
Ratio: Peaceful picketing is embraced in freedom of expression. PD 849 accorded Ratio: The Court is in substantial agreement with the petitioner's concept of
picketing due recognition. It is to be understood that the peaceful picketing a slowdown as a "strike on the installment plan"; as a wilfull reduction in
authorized cannot countenance acts of illegality. 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
d) Regulation/Restrictions, Innocent Third Party Rule and Liabilities
activity by which workers, without a complete stoppage of work, retard
 Liwayway Publishing Co., Inc. v. Permanent Concrete Workers Union, production or their performance of duties and functions to compel
108 SCRA 161 (1981) management to grant their demands. The Court also agrees that such a
slowdown is generally condemned as inherently illicit and unjustifiable,
Facts: Union is picketing Permanent Conrete. Liwayway is a sublessee of an
because while the employees "continue to work and remain at their
adjacent bodega but is separate and distinct company engaged in a completely
positions and accept the wages paid to them," they at the same time
different business. Union prevented Liwayway from getting supplies from its
bodega. Liwayway filed this case. "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
Issue: WON the appellee is a third party or an "innocent bystander" whose right has work;" in other words, they "work on their own terms”.
been invaded.
Ratio: If peacefully carried out, picketing cannot be curtailed even in the absence of C. Assumption of Jurisdiction/Compulsory Arbitration
employer-employee relationship. However, the right may be regulated at the
instance of third parties or "innocent-bystanders" if it appears that the inevitable 1. Definition; Nature of Dispute for Compulsory Arbitration
result of its exercise is to create an impression that a labor dispute with which they
have no connection or interest exists between them and the picketing union or Art. 277. (g) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
constitute an invasion of their rights. 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
e) Prohibited Activities; Peaceful Picketing of Labor and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or
certify the same to the Commission for compulsory arbitration.
Art. 278. (b) Prohibited activities. Such assumption or certification shall have the effect of automatically enjoining the
b. No person shall obstruct, impede, or interfere with, by force, violence, coercion, intended or impending strike or lockout as specified in the assumption or
threats or intimidation, any peaceful picketing by employees during any labor certification order. If one has already taken place at the time of assumption or
controversy or in the exercise of the right to self-organization or collective certification, all striking or locked out employees shall immediately return-to work
bargaining, or shall aid or abet such obstruction or interference.

54 | P a g e
and the employer shall immediately resume operations and readmit all workers Issue: WON assumption of jurisdiction is proper. / NO.
under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout.
Ratio: Production and publication of telephone directories can scarcely be
The Secretary of Labor and Employment or the Commission may seek the assistance described as an industry affecting national interest. The expected income tax to be
of law enforcement agencies to ensure compliance with this provision as well as received by the Government is not enough to constitute national interest to justify
with such orders as he may issue to enforce the same. an assumption of jurisdiction. Its services cannot be deemed to be in the same
category of such essential activities as "the generation or distribution of energy" or
In line with the national concern for and the highest respect accorded to the right of
those undertaken by "banks, hospitals, and export-oriented industries." It cannot
patients to life and health, strikes and lockouts in hospitals, clinics and similar
be regarded as playing as vital a role in communication as other mass media.
medical institutions shall, to every extent possible, be avoided, and all serious
efforts, not only by labor and management but government as well, be exhausted 2. Rationale
to substantially minimize, if not prevent, their adverse effects on such life and
health, through the exercise, however legitimate, by labor of its right to strike and  University of Immaculate Concepcion, Inc. v. Sec. of Labor, supra
by management to lockout. In labor disputes adversely affecting the continued
operation of such hospitals, clinics or medical institutions, it shall be the duty of the Facts: During CBA negotiations, the issue of the inclusion exclusion of
striking union or locking-out employer to provide and maintain an effective skeletal certain positions in the collective bargaining unit was unresolved. Pending
workforce of medical and other health personnel, whose movement and services the motion for reconsideration filed by the union with the panel of
shall be unhampered and unrestricted, as are necessary to insure the proper and voluntary arbiters, the union filed a Notice of Strike. SOLE assumed
adequate protection of the life and health of its patients, most especially jurisdiction.
emergency cases, for the duration of the strike or lockout.
Issue: WON SOLE exceeded her jurisdiction in the assumption of jurisdiction
In such cases, therefore, the Secretary of Labor and Employment may immediately
and subsequent order of reinstatement of employees excluded by the panel
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 of VA. / NO.
compulsory arbitration. Ratio: One of the substantive evils which Article 263(g) of the Labor Code
For this purpose, the contending parties are strictly enjoined to comply with such seeks to curb is the exacerbation of a labor dispute to the further detriment
orders, prohibitions and/or injunctions as are issued by the Secretary of Labor and of the national interest. The main reason or rationale for the exercise of the
Employment or the Commission, under pain of immediate disciplinary action, SOLE’s power is the maintenance and upholding of the status quo while the
including dismissal or loss of employment status or payment by the locking-out dispute is being adjudicated.
employer of backwages, damages and other affirmative relief, even criminal
prosecution against either or both of them.
The foregoing notwithstanding, the President of the Philippines shall not be
precluded from determining 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.

 GTE Directories Corp. v. GTE Directories Corp. Employees Union, 197

SCRA 452 (1991)
Facts: Company implemented new Sales Evaluation and Production Policy. Union
filed a Notice of Strike. Assumption of Jurisdiction based on national interest in the
income tax paid by the company (P 10 M)
55 | P a g e
 3. Process Initiation/Initiating Party Issue: WON Motions divested NLRC with jurisdiction. / NO.
Ratio: A return-to-work order is immediately executory even if a motion for
Art. 277 (g) (see page 54)
reconsideration was filed. Defiance of the AJ order is considered an illegal act.
a) Secretary of Labor  YSS Employees Union – Philippine Transport & General Workers
Organization v. YSS Laboratories, Inc., 607 SCRA 187 (2009)
b) President
Facts: Company retrenched 11 employees, 9 of which are union officers and
4. Arbitration Agencies members. Union held a strike. SOLE certified for compulsory arbitration and issued
a return-to-work order. Company refused to accept retrenched employees.
 Union of Filipro Employees v. Nestle Phils., Inc., supra
Issue: WON company may refuse to accept retrenched employees after AJ. / NO.
Facts: A deadlock was reached over the ground rules of the negotiations
Ratio: Since the strike was specifically because of the retrenchment, the company
due to the issue of the retirement plan and other one-time gratuities. Union
may not refuse to accept the said employees. All striking employees are covered
filed a Notice of Strike. Company requested SOLE to assume jurisdiction. under the status quo ante order. They must return to work and the company must
SOLE assumed jurisdiction and requested parties to submit pleadings accept them under the same status before the strike.
regarding various issues not included in the Notice of Strike.
6. Awards and Orders
Issue: WON SOLE exceeded authority in tackling issues of the CBA in the AJ.
/ NO. Art. 277. (i) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
Ratio: This Court maintains its original position in the Decision that, based i. The Secretary of Labor and Employment, the Commission or the voluntary
on the Notices of Strike filed by UFE-DFA-KMU, the Secretary of the DOLE arbitrator shall decide or resolve the dispute, as the case may be. The decision of
the President, the Secretary of Labor and Employment, the Commission or the
rightly decided on matters of substance. That the union later on changed its
voluntary arbitrator shall be final and executory ten (10) calendar days after receipt
mind is of no moment because to give premium to such would make the
thereof by the parties.
legally mandated discretionary power of the SOLE subservient to the whims
of the parties.

5. Effect of Assumption/Certification Order Art. 291. (i) Miscellaneous provisions.

i. To ensure speedy labor justice, the periods provided in this Code within which
Art. 277 (g) (see page 54) decisions or resolutions of labor relations cases or matters should be rendered shall
be mandatory. For this purpose, a case or matter shall be deemed submitted for
decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading or memorandum required
 Manila Hotel Employees Association and its Members v. Manila Hotel by the rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself, or the Labor Arbiter, or
Corp., 517 SCRA 349 (2007) the Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations or Med-Arbiter, or the Regional
Director.
Facts: Union filed a Notice of Strike. SOLE certified case for compulsory arbitration
and enjoined any strike or lockout. Union held a strike. A copy of the order was Upon expiration of the corresponding period, a certification stating why a decision
served on the picket lines. Union filed a Motion to Set Aside Order and a Motion for or resolution has not been rendered within the said period shall be issued forthwith
Reconsideration. Union alleged that NLRC had no jurisdiction because of the by the Chairman of the Commission, the Executive Labor Arbiter, or the Director of
motions. the Bureau of Labor Relations or Med Arbiter, or the Regional Director, as the case
may be, and a copy thereof served upon the parties.
56 | P a g e
Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the aforesaid officials arbitrarily. The interests of both the employers and employees are intended to be
shall, without prejudice to any liability which may have been incurred as a protected and not one of them is given undue preference.
consequence thereof, see to it that the case or matter shall be decided or resolved
without any further delay. D. Role of Peace Officers During Strikes and Picketing

 LMG Chemicals Corp. v. Sec. of Labor and Employment, 356 SCRA 577 1. Escorting
(2001)
Art. 278. (d) Prohibited activities.
Facts: CBA negotiations reached a deadlock on wage increases. Union held a strike. d. No public official or employee, including officers and personnel of the New
Company presented an improved offer of P 135/day for 3 years. Assumption of Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Integrated National Police, or armed person,
jurisdiction awarded P140/day based on the improved offer of the company and shall bring in, introduce or escort in any manner, any individual who seeks to
claim of loss in one department only. replace strikers in entering or leaving the premises of a strike area, or work in place
Issue: WON SOLE’s award was issued with grave abuse of discretion. / NO. of the strikers. The police force shall keep out of the picket lines unless actual
violence or other criminal acts occur therein: Provided, That nothing herein shall be
Ratio: Grave abuse of discretion means a whimsical and capricious exercise of interpreted to prevent any public officer from taking any measure necessary to
power. Since the SOLE had substantial basis on its award, the order was not issued maintain peace and order, protect life and property, and/or enforce the law and
with grave abuse of discretion. Since the losses were reported to be from one legal order.
division only, the SC stated that “the loss in one is usually offset by the gains in the
others.” Furthermore, since the company made an improved offer of P135/day for 2. Arrest and Detention of Law Violators
3 years and recent increases granted to supervisory employees, the decision of the
SOLE has sufficient basis. Art. 280. Requirement for arrest and detention.
Except on grounds of national security and public peace or in case of commission of
7. Option – Voluntary Arbitration After Certification a crime, no union members or union organizers may be arrested or detained for
union activities without previous consultations with the Secretary of Labor.
Art. 277. (h) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
h. Before or at any stage of the compulsory arbitration process, the parties may opt
to submit their dispute to voluntary arbitration.
X. EMPLOYER LOCKOUT
8. Compulsory Arbitration and Labor Rights
A. Basis, Definition, Limitation
 Philread Workers Union (PTWU), et al. v. Confessor, 296 SCRA 393
Art. 277. (b) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
(1997)
b. Workers shall have the right to engage in concerted activities for purposes of
Facts: Union filed a Notice of Strike. Company subsequently filed a Notice of collective bargaining or for their mutual benefit and protection. The right of
Lockout for illegal work slowdowns. SOLE assumed jurisdiction. legitimate labor organizations to strike and picket and of employers to lockout,
consistent with the national interest, shall continue to be recognized and respected.
Issue: WON the assumption of jurisdiction impeded the right to strike. / NO.
However, no labor union may strike and no employer may declare a lockout on
Ratio: The assumption of jurisdiction clearly does not interfere with the workers’ grounds involving inter-union and intra-union disputes.
right to strike but merely regulates it, when in the exercise of such right, national
interests will be affected. The rights granted by the Constitution are not absolute.
They are still subject to control and limitation to ensure that they are not exercised

57 | P a g e
Art. 219. (p) Definitions. Art. 277. (g) Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
p. "Lockout" means any temporary refusal of an employer to furnish work as a g. When, in his opinion, there exists a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a
result of an industrial or labor dispute. strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest, the Secretary
of Labor and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or
certify the same to the Commission for compulsory arbitration.
Book V, Rule I, Sec. 1 (gg) Such assumption or certification shall have the effect of automatically enjoining the
(gg) "Lockout" refers to the temporary refusal of an employer to furnish work as a intended or impending strike or lockout as specified in the assumption or
result of a labor or industrial dispute. certification order. If one has already taken place at the time of assumption or
certification, all striking or locked out employees shall immediately return-to work
B. Effect on Work Relationship and the employer shall immediately resume operations and readmit all workers
under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout.
Art. 219 (p) (see page 58) The Secretary of Labor and Employment or the Commission may seek the assistance
of law enforcement agencies to ensure compliance with this provision as well as
C. Lockouting Party with such orders as he may issue to enforce the same.

Art. 277 (b) (see page 57) In line with the national concern for and the highest respect accorded to the right of
patients to life and health, strikes and lockouts in hospitals, clinics and similar
medical institutions shall, to every extent possible, be avoided, and all serious
Art. 277. (c) Strikes, picketing and lockouts. efforts, not only by labor and management but government as well, be exhausted
c. In case of bargaining deadlocks, the duly certified or recognized bargaining agent to substantially minimize, if not prevent, their adverse effects on such life and
may file a notice of strike or the employer may file a notice of lockout with the health, through the exercise, however legitimate, by labor of its right to strike and
Ministry at least 30 day before the intended date thereof. In cases of unfair labor by management to lockout. In labor disputes adversely affecting the continued
practice, the period of notice shall be 15 days and in the absence of a duly certified operation of such hospitals, clinics or medical institutions, it shall be the duty of the
or recognized bargaining agent, the notice of strike may be filed by any legitimate striking union or locking-out employer to provide and maintain an effective skeletal
labor organization in behalf of its members. workforce of medical and other health personnel, whose movement and services
shall be unhampered and unrestricted, as are necessary to insure the proper and
However, in case of dismissal from employment of union officers duly elected in adequate protection of the life and health of its patients, most especially
accordance with the union constitution and by-laws, which may constitute union emergency cases, for the duration of the strike or lockout.
busting, where the existence of the union is threatened, the 15-day cooling-off
period shall not apply and the union may take action immediately. In such cases, therefore, the Secretary of Labor and Employment may immediately
assume, within twenty four (24) hours from knowledge of the occurrence of such a
D. Ground for Lockout strike or lockout, jurisdiction over the same or certify it to the Commission for
compulsory arbitration.
Art. 277 (c) (see page 58) 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 Labor and
E. Prohibited Lockout Employment or the Commission, under pain of immediate disciplinary action,
including dismissal or loss of employment status or payment by the locking-out
Art. 277 (b) (see page 57) employer of backwages, damages and other affirmative relief, even criminal
prosecution against either or both of them.

58 | P a g e
The foregoing notwithstanding, the President of the Philippines shall not be maintain peace and order, protect life and property, and/or enforce the law and
precluded from determining the industries that, in his opinion, are indispensable to legal order.
the national interest, and from intervening at any time and assuming jurisdiction e. No person engaged in picketing shall commit any act of violence, coercion or
over any such labor dispute in order to settle or terminate the same. intimidation or obstruct the free ingress to or egress from the employer’s premises
for lawful purposes, or obstruct public thoroughfares.

Art. 278. (a) Prohibited activities.

a. No labor organization or employer shall declare a strike or lockout without first Book V, Rule XXI (see page 39)
having bargained collectively in accordance with Title VII of this Book or without
first having filed the notice required in the preceding Article or without the  Philtread Tire and Rubber Corporation v. NLRC, 218 SCRA 805 (1993)
necessary strike or lockout vote first having been obtained and reported to the
Ministry. Facts: Union filed a Notice of Strike. Company filed a Notice of Lockout. Union
picketed and gave away flyers claiming the products of the company had defects.
No strike or lockout shall be declared after assumption of jurisdiction by the
SOLE certified for compulsory arbitration with a return-to-work order. Company
President or the Minister or after certification or submission of the dispute to issued a call back of striking employees but refused to accept the 36 union officers.
compulsory or voluntary arbitration or during the pendency of cases involving the
In proceedings, union officers agreed to accept financial concessions to suspend the
same grounds for the strike or lockout.
return-to-work order. Union officers were still awarded backwages from call back
Any worker whose employment has been terminated as a consequence of any until agreement to financial concessions.
unlawful lockout shall be entitled to reinstatement with full backwages. Any union
Issue: WON backwages are proper. / YES.
officer who knowingly participates in an illegal strike and any worker or union
officer who knowingly participates in the commission of illegal acts during a strike Ratio: Since a return-to-work order was issued, the company was required to
may be declared to have lost his employment status: Provided, That mere accept the striking employees under the same status as before the strike. Since the
participation of a worker in a lawful strike shall not constitute sufficient ground for company refused to accept the union officers, the company is liable for backwages
termination of his employment, even if a replacement had been hired by the from the date of the call back, regardless of whether or not the strike was legal.
employer during such lawful strike. Since the union officers accepted the financial concessions, the computation of
backwages are until said agreement only.
F. Procedural Requirements
G. Effect of Illegal Lockout
Art. 278 (a) (see page 59)
Art. 278. (a) par. 3. Prohibited activities
Any worker whose employment has been terminated as a consequence of any
Art. 278. (d) (e) Prohibited activities. unlawful lockout shall be entitled to reinstatement with full backwages. Any union
d. No public official or employee, including officers and personnel of the New officer who knowingly participates in an illegal strike and any worker or union
Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Integrated National Police, or armed person, officer who knowingly participates in the commission of illegal acts during a strike
shall bring in, introduce or escort in any manner, any individual who seeks to may be declared to have lost his employment status: Provided, That mere
replace strikers in entering or leaving the premises of a strike area, or work in place participation of a worker in a lawful strike shall not constitute sufficient ground for
of the strikers. The police force shall keep out of the picket lines unless actual termination of his employment, even if a replacement had been hired by the
violence or other criminal acts occur therein: Provided, That nothing herein shall be employer during such lawful strike.
interpreted to prevent any public officer from taking any measure necessary to

59 | P a g e
 XI. LABOR INJUNCTION opposition thereto, if offered, and only after a finding of fact by the Commission, to
the effect:
A. Definition and Nature 1. That prohibited or unlawful acts have been threatened and will be committed
and will be continued unless restrained, but no injunction or temporary restraining
 Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. NLRC, 287 SCRA 672 (1998) order shall be issued on account of any threat, prohibited or unlawful act, except
Facts: Private respondents were dismissed for violations of the Code of Discipline against the person or persons, association or organization making the threat or
based on claims of being involved in currency smuggling in Hong Kong. Private committing the prohibited or unlawful act or actually authorizing or ratifying the
respondents filed for a writ of temporary injunction with the NLRC. same after actual knowledge thereof;
Issue: WON NLRC had jurisdiction to issue a writ of temporary injunction. / NO. 2. That substantial and irreparable injury to complainant’s property will follow;

Ratio: “An injunction is a preservative remedy for the protection of one’s 3. That as to each item of relief to be granted, greater injury will be inflicted upon
substantive rights or interest. It is not a cause of action in itself but merely a complainant by the denial of relief than will be inflicted upon defendants by the
provisional remedy, an adjunct to a main suit.” For an injunction to issue, it is granting of relief;
necessary that 1) the complaint alleges facts which appear sufficient to constitute a 4. That complainant has no adequate remedy at law; and
proper basis for injunction and 2) that on the entire showing from the contending
parties, the injunction is reasonably necessary to protect the legal rights of the 5. That the public officers charged with the duty to protect complainant’s property
plaintiff pending the litigation. It is a special equitable relief granted only in case are unable or unwilling to furnish adequate protection.
where there is no plain, adequate and complete remedy at law. Since the issue of Such hearing shall be held after due and personal notice thereof has been served, in
illegal dismissal could have been filed with the LA, the NLRC exceeded its such manner as the Commission shall direct, to all known persons against whom
jurisdiction. relief is sought, and also to the Chief Executive and other public

B. General Rule: Prohibition officials of the province or city within which the unlawful acts have been threatened
or committed, charged with the duty to protect complainant’s property: Provided,
Art. 265. Injunction prohibited. however, that if a complainant shall also allege that, unless a temporary restraining
No temporary or permanent injunction or restraining order in any case involving or order shall be issued without notice, a substantial and irreparable injury to
growing out of labor disputes shall be issued by any court or other entity, except as complainant’s property will be unavoidable, such a temporary restraining order
otherwise provided in Articles 218 and 264 of this Code. may be issued upon testimony under oath, sufficient, if sustained, to justify the
Commission in issuing a temporary injunction upon hearing after notice.
Such a temporary restraining order shall be effective for no longer than twenty (20)
Art. 225. (e) Powers of the Commission. days and shall become void at the expiration of said twenty (20) days. No such
The Commission shall have the power and authority: temporary restraining order or temporary injunction shall be issued except on
condition that complainant shall first file an undertaking with adequate security in
e. To enjoin or restrain any actual or threatened commission of any or all prohibited an amount to be fixed by the Commission sufficient to recompense those enjoined
or unlawful acts or to require the performance of a particular act in any labor for any loss, expense or damage caused by the improvident or erroneous issuance
dispute which, if not restrained or performed forthwith, may cause grave or of such order or injunction, including all reasonable costs, together with a
irreparable damage to any party or render ineffectual any decision in favor of such reasonable attorney’s fee, and expense of defense against the order or against the
party: Provided, That no temporary or permanent injunction in any case involving or granting of any injunctive relief sought in the same proceeding and subsequently
growing out of a labor dispute as defined in this Code shall be issued except after denied by the Commission.
hearing the testimony of witnesses, with opportunity for cross-examination, in
support of the allegations of a complaint made under oath, and testimony in
60 | P a g e
The undertaking herein mentioned shall be understood to constitute an agreement Act No. 875; the purpose of such injunction is not to enjoin the strike itself, but
entered into by the complainant and the surety upon which an order may be ONLY unlawful activities.
rendered in the same suit or proceeding against said complainant and surety, upon
a hearing to assess damages, of which hearing, complainant and surety shall have C. Exception: When Allowed
reasonable notice, the said complainant and surety submitting themselves to the
jurisdiction of the Commission for that purpose. But nothing herein contained shall Art. 265 (see page 60)
deprive any party having a claim or cause of action under or upon such undertaking
from electing to pursue his ordinary remedy by suit at law or in equity: Provided,
further, That the reception of evidence for the application of a writ of injunction Art. 225 (e) (see page 60)
may be delegated by the Commission to any of its Labor Arbiters who shall conduct
such hearings in such places as he may determine to be accessible to the parties
and their witnesses and shall submit thereafter his recommendation to the Art. 278 (see page 54)
Commission.
 Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa (IBM) v. NLRC, supra
Summary of injunction requirements under IBM v NLRC
Book V, Rule XXII, Section 14. Injunctions.
No court or entity shall enjoin any picketing, strike or lockout, except as provided in Requisites to issue an injunction:
Articles 218 and 263 of the Labor Code. a) a HEARING held "after DUE AND PERSONAL NOTICE thereof has been served"
The Commission shall have the power to issue temporary restraining orders in such b) reception at the hearing of "TESTIMONY of witnesses, with opportunity for
cases but only after due notice and hearing and in accordance with its rules. The CROSS-EXAMINATION";
reception of evidence for the application of a writ of injunction may be delegated
by the Commission to any Labor Arbiter who shall submit his recommendations to c) a FINDING OF FACT by the Commission, to the effect:
the Commission for its consideration and resolution. (1)That PROHIBITED OR UNLAWFUL ACTS have been threatened and will
Any ex parte restraining order issued by the Commission, or its chairman or Vice- be committed and will be continued unless restrained;
Chairman where the Commission is not in session and as prescribed by its rules, (2)That SUBSTANTIAL AND IRREPARABLE INJURY to complainant's
shall be valid for a period not exceeding twenty (20) days. property will follow;
(3)That as to each item of relief to be granted, GREATER INJURY will be
 Caltex Filipino Managers and Supervisors Association v. CIR, supra
inflicted upon complainant by the denial of relief than will be inflicted
Facts: SUPRA upon defendants by the granting of relief;
Issue: WON an injunction may be issued against a strike. / Generally, NO. (4)That complainant has NO ADEQUATE REMEDY AT LAW; and
Ratio: The prohibition to issue labor injunctions is designed to give labor a (5)That the PUBLIC OFFICERS charged with the duty to protect
comparable bargaining power with capital and must be liberally construed to that complainant's property are UNABLE OR UNWILLING to furnish
end. It is said that the prohibition creates substantive and not purely procedural adequate protection.
law. There can be no injunction issued against any strike EXCEPT in only one
instance, that is, when a labor dispute arises in an industry indispensable to the
national interest and such dispute is certified. As a corollary to this, an injunction in TRO EX PARTE:
an uncertified case must be based on the strict requirement See. 9 (d) of Republic

61 | P a g e
a) the complainant "shall also allege that, unless a temporary restraining order shall
be issued without notice, a SUBSTANTIAL AND IRREPARABLE INJURY to
complainant's property will be unavoidable; D. Issuing Agency; Procedural Requirements
b) there is "TESTIMONY under oath, SUFFICIENT, if sustained, TO JUSTIFY the
Art. 225 (e) (see page 60)
Commission in issuing a temporary injunction upon hearing after notice;"
c) the "complainant shall first file an undertaking with ADEQUATE SECURITY in an 1. National Labor Relations Commission; Labor Arbiter
amount to be fixed by the Commission sufficient to recompense those enjoined for
any LOSS, EXPENSE OR DAMAGE caused by the IMPROVIDENT OR ERRONEOUS  National Mines and Allied Workers Union v. Vera, 133 SCRA 259 (1984)
ISSUANCE OF SUCH ORDER OR INJUNCTION.; " and
Facts: Union filed a case of ULP against Phil. Iron Mines. Union was awarded P 4M.
d) the "temporary restraining order shall be effective for NO LONGER THAN A writ of execution was granted to the Union. Said writ was unsatisfied, hence the
TWENTY (20) DAYS and shall become void at the expiration of said twenty (20) sheriff levied the properties of Phil. Iron Mines. Respondent companies filed a
days. complaint for "Injunction with Preliminary Injunction” since said companies bought
the properties in an auction sale due to the foreclosure of mortgage contracts of
 Ravago v. Eastern Marine, Ltd., 453 SCRA 381 (2005) Phil. Iron Mines.
Facts: Pet. was a seafarer. P worked for the more than 22 years for the Respondent Issue: WON CFI had jurisdiction to issue a writ of injunction. / YES.
company under various contracts. P was shot in the leg and found unfit for work. P
Ratio: Union is trying to enforce a writ of execution issued by the NLRC on
later had another physician examine him and was found able to return to work. P
properties not belonging to the Phil. Iron Mines, Inc., the judgment debtor, but to
filed for illegal dismissal and money claims. Respondent filed an Urgent Application
herein plaintiffs. When the sheriff, acting beyond the bounds of his authority, seizes
for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and Writ of Preliminary
a stranger's property, the writ of injunction, which is issued to stop the auction
Injunction.
sale of that property, is not an interference with the writ of execution issued by
Issue: WON the CA had jurisdiction to issue said TRO and Writ of Preliminary another court because the writ of execution was improperly implemented by the
Injunction. / YES. sheriff. Under that writ, he could attach the property of the judgment debtor. He is
not authorized to levy upon the property of the third party claimant. The private
Ratio: The law proscribes the issuance of injunctive relief only in those cases
respondents are not parties to the said NLRC case.
involving or growing out of a labor dispute. The case before the NLRC neither
involves nor grows out of a labor dispute. It did NOT involve the fixing of terms or
 Nestle Phils., Inc. v. NLRC, 195 SCRA 340 (1991)
conditions of employment or representation of persons with respect thereto. In
fact, the petitioner’s complaint revolves around the issue of his alleged dismissal Facts: Private respondents are sales reps and med reps of the company. Said
from service and his claim for backwages, damages and attorney’s fees. Moreover, respondents availed of the Company’s car loan policy, where the company retained
Article 254 of the Labor Code specifically provides that the NLRC may grant title until fully paid. The R’s held an illegal strike and were subsequently dismissed.
injunctive relief under Article 218 thereof. The company filed a case with the RTC for the recovery of the cars. R’s sought a TRO
in the NLRC.
The indispensable conditions for granting temporary injunctive relief are:
Issue: WON the NLRC had jurisdiction to issue the TRO. / NO.
(a) that the complaint alleges facts which appear to be satisfactory to establish
a proper basis for injunction, and Ratio: The terms of the car loan agreements are not in issue in the labor case. The
rights and obligations of the parties under those contracts may be enforced by a
(b) that on the entire showing from the contending parties, the injunction is
separate civil action in the regular courts, not in the NLRC.
reasonably necessary to protect the legal rights of the plaintiff pending the
litigation.

62 | P a g e
 2. Procedural Requirements and Rules for the Issuance of labor
Injunctions

 Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa (IBM) v. NLRC, supra

See page 61.

 Bisig ng Manggagawa sa Concrete Aggregates, Inc. v. NLRC, supra

Facts: “Kahit ipis hindi makakapasok at hindi makakalabas” case. Union held a
strike for ULP and union busting. Company filed a petition for injunction with the
NLRC. The NLRC granted the TRO.
Issue: WON the NLRC issued the TRO with grave abuse of discretion. / YES.
Ratio: The Company failed to prove 2 of the 5 required findings of fact:
(4) That complainant has no adequate remedy at law; and
(5) That the public officers charged with the duty to protect complainants
property are unable or unwilling to furnish adequate protection.
The Company failed to call on police or security to escort the employees of the
company.

 Ravago v. Eastern Marine, Ltd., supra

See page 62

3. Temporary Restraining Order

 Dinio v. Laguesma, 273 SCRA 109 (1997)

Facts: Two unions are vying for union elections. Party for Reform (led by petitioner)
filed a Petition for injunction w/ TRO against COMELEC. Med-Arbiter granted TRO,
but only Metro Manila suspended elections.
Issue: WON Med-Arbiter validly granted TRO. / NO.
Ratio: Though an injunction or TRO may be granted at the discretion of the proper
authority, it must be issued only upon compliance with the guidelines set by law.
The petition filed by the petitioners is manifestly insufficient to show grave or
irreparable injury.

63 | P a g e