Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 52 views

    Manila Diamond Hotel Ee Union Vs CA GR 140518

    Uploaded by

    LIERA
    The Manila Diamond Hotel Employees Union filed a petition for a certification election that was dismissed by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). Despite this, the Union informed the Hotel of its desire to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement, but the Hotel refused citing the DOLE dismissal. A strike followed along with confrontations between the Union and Hotel. The Hotel claimed the strike was illegal and dismissed employees, while the Union accused the Hotel of illegal dismissals. The Union then filed a petition for the Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction. The Secretary ordered strikers back to work and the Hotel to accept them, but the Hotel refused and sought reconsideration. Upon reconsideration, payroll reinstatement in lieu of actual reinstatement was ordered.

    Copyright:

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

    Manila Diamond Hotel Ee Union Vs CA GR 140518

    Uploaded by

    LIERA
    52 views2 pages
    The Manila Diamond Hotel Employees Union filed a petition for a certification election that was dismissed by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). Despite this, the Union informed the Hotel of its desire to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement, but the Hotel refused citing the DOLE dismissal. A strike followed along with confrontations between the Union and Hotel. The Hotel claimed the strike was illegal and dismissed employees, while the Union accused the Hotel of illegal dismissals. The Union then filed a petition for the Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction. The Secretary ordered strikers back to work and the Hotel to accept them, but the Hotel refused and sought reconsideration. Upon reconsideration, payroll reinstatement in lieu of actual reinstatement was ordered.

    Original Description:

    22. Manila Diamond Hotel Ee Union vs CA GR 140518

    Original Title

    22. Manila Diamond Hotel Ee Union vs CA GR 140518

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Manila Diamond Hotel Employees Union filed a petition for a certification election that was dismissed by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). Despite this, the Union informed the Hotel of its desire to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement, but the Hotel refused citing the DOLE dismissal. A strike followed along with confrontations between the Union and Hotel. The Hotel claimed the strike was illegal and dismissed employees, while the Union accused the Hotel of illegal dismissals. The Union then filed a petition for the Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction. The Secretary ordered strikers back to work and the Hotel to accept them, but the Hotel refused and sought reconsideration. Upon reconsideration, payroll reinstatement in lieu of actual reinstatement was ordered.

    Copyright:

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

    Manila Diamond Hotel Ee Union Vs CA GR 140518

    Uploaded by

    LIERA
    The Manila Diamond Hotel Employees Union filed a petition for a certification election that was dismissed by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). Despite this, the Union informed the Hotel of its desire to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement, but the Hotel refused citing the DOLE dismissal. A strike followed along with confrontations between the Union and Hotel. The Hotel claimed the strike was illegal and dismissed employees, while the Union accused the Hotel of illegal dismissals. The Union then filed a petition for the Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction. The Secretary ordered strikers back to work and the Hotel to accept them, but the Hotel refused and sought reconsideration. Upon reconsideration, payroll reinstatement in lieu of actual reinstatement was ordered.

    Copyright:

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

    Manila Diamond Hotel Ee Union vs CA GR 140518

    Facts:

    The Union filed a petition for a certification election, which was dismissed by the DOLE. Despite the
    dismissal of their petition, the Union sent a letter to the Hotel informing the latter  of its desire to
    negotiate for a collective bargaining agreement. The Hotel, however, refused to
    negotiate with the Union, citing the earlier dismissal of the Union’s petition for certification by DOLE.

    Failing to settle the issue, the Union staged a strike against the Hotel. Numerous
    confrontations followed, further straining the relationship between the Union and the Hotel. The Hotel
    claims that the strike was illegal and dismissed some employees for their participation in the
    allegedly illegal concerted activity. The Union, on the other hand, accused the Hotel of illegally
    dismissing the workers.

    A Petition for Assumption of Jurisdiction under Article 263(g) of the Labor Code was later filed by the
    Union before the Secretary of Labor. Thereafter, Secretary of Labor Trajano issued an Order directing
    the striking officers and members of the Union to return to work within twenty-four (24) hours and the
    Hotel to accept them back under the same terms and conditions prevailing prior to the strike.

    After receiving the above order the members of the Union reported for work, but the Hotel refused to
    accept them and instead filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Secretary’s Order.

    Acting on the motion for reconsideration, then Acting Secretary of Labor Español modified the  one
    earlier issued by Secretary Trajano and instead directed that the strikers be reinstated only in  the
    payroll.

    Issue:

    Whether or not payroll reinstatement is proper in lieu of actual reinstatement under Article 263(g)
    of the Labor Code.

    Held:

    Payroll reinstatement in lieu of actual reinstatement is not sanctioned under the provision of the  said
    article.

    The Court noted the difference between UST vs. NLRC and the instant case. In UST case the teachers
    could not be given back their academic assignments since the order of the Secretary  for them to return
    to work was given in the middle of the first semester of the academic year.
    The NLRC was, therefore, faced with a situation where the striking teachers were entitled to a  return to
    work order, but the university could not immediately reinstate them since it would be  impracticable and
    detrimental to the students to change teachers at that point in time.

    In the present case, there is no similar compelling reason that called for payroll reinstatement as an
    alternative remedy. A strained relationship between the striking employees and management is no
    reason for payroll reinstatement in lieu of actual reinstatement.

    Under Article 263(g), all workers must immediately return to work and all employers must  readmit all of
    them under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout.

    You might also like