Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 205 views

    6 - Arizala V CA

    Uploaded by

    Anselmo Rodiel IV
    This case involved four GSIS employees who occupied supervisory positions and were members of the GSIS Employees Association labor union. [1] They were charged with violating the Industrial Peace Act, which prohibited supervisors from joining rank-and-file unions. [2] However, during the pendency of their criminal cases, the 1973 Constitution and subsequent laws like the Labor Code repealed the provision of the Industrial Peace Act that made their membership illegal. [3] Therefore, the Supreme Court ruled that their criminal liability was extinguished, as their actions were no longer considered criminal due to the changes in law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    6 - Arizala V CA

    Uploaded by

    Anselmo Rodiel IV
    205 views2 pages
    This case involved four GSIS employees who occupied supervisory positions and were members of the GSIS Employees Association labor union. [1] They were charged with violating the Industrial Peace Act, which prohibited supervisors from joining rank-and-file unions. [2] However, during the pendency of their criminal cases, the 1973 Constitution and subsequent laws like the Labor Code repealed the provision of the Industrial Peace Act that made their membership illegal. [3] Therefore, the Supreme Court ruled that their criminal liability was extinguished, as their actions were no longer considered criminal due to the changes in law.

    Original Title

    6_Arizala v CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved four GSIS employees who occupied supervisory positions and were members of the GSIS Employees Association labor union. [1] They were charged with violating the Industrial Peace Act, which prohibited supervisors from joining rank-and-file unions. [2] However, during the pendency of their criminal cases, the 1973 Constitution and subsequent laws like the Labor Code repealed the provision of the Industrial Peace Act that made their membership illegal. [3] Therefore, the Supreme Court ruled that their criminal liability was extinguished, as their actions were no longer considered criminal due to the changes in law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    205 views2 pages

    6 - Arizala V CA

    Uploaded by

    Anselmo Rodiel IV
    This case involved four GSIS employees who occupied supervisory positions and were members of the GSIS Employees Association labor union. [1] They were charged with violating the Industrial Peace Act, which prohibited supervisors from joining rank-and-file unions. [2] However, during the pendency of their criminal cases, the 1973 Constitution and subsequent laws like the Labor Code repealed the provision of the Industrial Peace Act that made their membership illegal. [3] Therefore, the Supreme Court ruled that their criminal liability was extinguished, as their actions were no longer considered criminal due to the changes in law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    ARIZALA v.

    CA
    G.R. Nos. 43633-34
    Narvasa, J.

    FACTS:

    During the existence of the Industrial Peace Act, the GSIS became bound by a
    collective bargaining agreement executed between the entity and the labor
    organization representing the majority of its employees, the GSIS Employees
    Association. The CBA contained a maintenance-of-membership clause which
    provides that all employees who, at the time of the execution of said agreement,
    were members of the union or became members thereafter, were obliged to
    maintain their union membership in good standing for the duration of the
    agreement as a condition for their continued employment in the GSIS. Under the
    said Act, GOCC’s had the duty to bargain collectively. Also, supervisors are
    prohibited from being members of labor organizations composed of rank-and-file
    employees.

    Petitioners Arizala, Maribao, Joven, and Bulandus were employees occupying


    supervisory positions in the GSIS. Arizala and Maribao were the Chief of the
    Accounting Division, and the Billing Section of said Division, whereas the latter
    two were the Assistant Chief of the said division and the Assistant Chief of the
    Field Service and Non-Life Insurance Division. They were made to resign from
    the labor union as they were occupying supervisory positions. As they refused to
    do so, criminal cases for violation of the said Act were filed against them to which
    they were convicted. According to petitioners, the 1973 Constitution took effect
    pending the resolution of their cases, and that as the provisions of the said
    Constitution, and subsequently the Labor Code, repealed the Industrial Peace
    Act. The same provides that the employees in GOCC’s are now within the Civil
    Service, and that the terms and conditions of their employment are to be
    governed by the Civil Service Law, and hence, they should no longer be
    prosecuted as they are not anymore within the coverage of the Industrial Peace
    Act.

    ISSUE: w/n the petitioners’ criminal liability is deemed extinguished by reason of


    subsequent legislation and the provisions of the 1973 and the 1987 Constitutions

    HELD:
    YES. It is true that previously, both under the Labor Code and PD 807 (Civil
    Service Decree of the Philippines), government employees were precluded from
    bargaining as regards terms and conditions of employment. But EO 111,
    amending certain provisions of the Labor Code, restored the right to organize
    and to negotiate and bargain of employees of government corporations
    established under the Corporation Code. EO 180, providing guidelines for the
    exercise of the right to organize of government employees, and RA 6715, again
    further amending the Labor Code, granted to all government employees the right
    of collective bargaining or negotiation EXCEPT as regards those terms of their
    employment which were fixed by law. The Labor Code allowed supervisors, not
    otherwise managerial, to join rank-and-file unions. As the law prohibiting
    supervisors from joining labor organizations composed of employees under their
    supervision was repealed during the pendency of the petitioners’ criminal case,
    their act ceased to be a criminal act but became legal. Therefore, the Court
    should have dismissed the proceedings, as the penal laws pose a more
    favorable attitude towards the accused in relation to statutes that have been
    repealed. Where the offense ceases to be criminal, prosecution cannot be had.

    You might also like