Labor Law 2

BACKGROUND MATERIAL

A2010

-1-

Disini

FROM COMPULSORY ARBITRATION TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN THE PHILIPPINES Cicero Calderon 2 Contrasting Approaches to the Regulation of Labor Relations 1. System of Compulsory Arbitration (1936) 2. Collective Bargaining COMPULSORY ARBITRATION Factors that Contributed to its Adoption - On the basis of Art. 2, sec. 5 and Art. 14, sec. 6 of the 1935 Constitution, the National Assembly of the Philippines in 1936, adopted compulsory arbitration by providing for a Court of Industrial Relation under C.A. No. 103 - The adoption of compulsory arbitration was a deliberate response of the policy-makers to the social scene characterized by acute agrarian and industrial unrest of disturbing proportions. Other factors contributing to the adoption were: 1. the poor state of organization of the workers and farm workers and the resultant 2. lack of effective collective bargaining 3. the customary reliance of the Filipino upon courts of justice in the adjudication of controversies of whatever nature 3. the desire to experiment with compulsory arbitration which had been rejected at least 3 times under American Rule 4. the apparent inadequacy or effectiveness of the Government’s policy of non-intervention in the area of labor management relations 5. the strong influence of the then President, Manuel L. Quezon who advocated its adoption before the National Assembly Court of Industrial Relation - The CIR was organized at the close of 1936 but started to function only in 1937. - The Court’s docket started to clog in 1947. This number rose very rapidly on the succeeding 6 years, from 137 in 1948 to over 1, 500 in 1953. - The adjudication of labor disputes was being delayed and that the main machinery to enforce the system of compulsory arbitration was unable, or was no longer able, to cope adequately and effectively with h responsibilities placed upon it. - Major factors responsible for the accumulation of cases: 1. Lack of adequate support from the Government itself 2. Consequent inefficiency of the Court 3. The extremely generous discretionary powers vested in the Court to grant continuances, modify its orders and hear motions for reconsideration (sitting as full court) and to other aspects of its procedure. Weaknesses of the System of Compulsory Arbitration 1. There were varied concepts of what constituted “fair and just wage,” “just or unjust cause for dismissal,” public interest,” “social justice” and other technical abstractions. Under such conditions instability and confusion characterized labor management relations. 2. A judicial approach was adopted to the settlement of labor disputes, with the result that policy considerations and economic factors played a less important role than technicalities of law. 3. Excessive dependence on the CIR. 4. The system of compulsory arbitration and the law failed to provide adequate protection for the exercise of the right of selforganization by the workers. 5. The Supreme Court and the CIR failed to perceive that the best means of protecting the workers was to help them build strong unions free from company domination. 6. The legal provisions on strikes and the wide latitude given to the CIR in exercising powers to issue injunctions made it difficult to use strikes and other concerted activities, or the threat of them, as a means of improving the bargaining position of labor.

7. The CIR found that not all differences between workers and employers could be proper subjects of compulsory arbitration. 8. The failure of the CIR to resolve conflicting demands for recognition of unions for collective bargaining purposes did not lead to stability in labor management relations. An Evaluation of the System of Compulsory Arbitration - The basic objectives underlying the adoption of compulsory arbitration 1. To afford protection to labor because of the great disparity in bargaining power - On the whole, terms and conditions of employment were improved for those workers who had the courage and staying power to fight their case before the CIR. But its effectiveness in affording protection to labor was greatly reduced when disputes dragged out in interminable litigation and the Government failed to meet the increased demand for the Court’s services. 2. Stability in Labor Management Relations - Labor management greatly improved for a while. The effectiveness of the system in promoting stability of labormanagement relations was greatly reduced, however, during the post-war years. - Under compulsory arbitration an interesting phenomenon developed: the emergence of a labor movement under the leadership of lawyers. 3. Stability of Society in General - The Cir appeared effective in playing the role from its organization until the Philippines were engulfed in the Second World War in 1941. - It was unable to play the role ineffectively during the postwar years. This failure contributed to no small measure to the resurgence of agrarian unrest and strikes in the country. THE ADOPTION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING - Collective bargaining was adopted as the labor relations policy of the Philippines on June 17, 1953, when R.A. No. 875 was approved. - Its adoption can be attributed to several factors the most significant of which were: 1. The rising discontent of labor groups with the operation of the CIR because of protracted delays in the adjudication cases. 2. The exposure of Filipino labor leaders to concepts of collective bargaining resulting either from contacts with foreign labor leaders visiting the Philippines or from visits made to other countries by several of the Filipino labor leaders 3. The participation by the Philippines in the adoption of 2 important Conventions by the International .Labor Conference namely the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948, and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949. 4. The influence of experience in the United States under the National Labor Relations Act of 1953 ( Wagner Act), which greatly encouraged the development of trade unions and collective bargaining in that country and the enactment of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (TaftHartley). Basic Features of the Act of 1953 1. Registration of Labor Organizations - to obtain the status of a legitimate labor organization and to avail itself of the right to be certified as the exclusive bargaining representative in an appropriate bargaining unit and act as such – a labor organization, association or union must register with the Department of Labor by filing with the Office of the Secretary of Labor notice of its organization and existence. 2. Certification Election

Labor Law 2

A2010

-2-

Disini

- When a number of union seeks to bargain for a particular group of workers or when the employer doubts the claim of a particular union to be representative of the majority of the workers in his factory or establishment, the CIR shall order the Department of Labor to conduct a certification election by secret ballot, either on its own initiative or when it is petitioned to do so by the employer or by at least 10% of the employees in the appropriate unit. 3. Collective Bargaining Process - In recognition “the real industrial peace cannot be achieved by compulsion of law” and that sound stable industrial relations must rest, in keeping with the spirit of… democratic institutions, on an essentially voluntary basis” the Act provides that “no court of the Philippines shall have the power to set wages, rates of pay, hours of employment or conditions of employment except as in this Act is otherwise provided.” 4. Unfair Labor Practice - The Act prohibits certain practices on the part of employers and trade unions which it characterizes as “unfair labor practices.” 5. Procedure for the Prevention of Unfair Labor Practices - The Act gives the CIR, following a special procedure, the power to prevent unfair labor practices, with exclusive jurisdiction to hear all complaints relating thereto. 6. Labor Disputes in Industries Indispensable to the National Interest - In cases of labor disputes in industries indispensable to the national interest and certified as such by the President of the Philippines to the CIR, the Court is empowered by the Act to issue restraining orders enjoining an employer from locking out his employees and employees from striking. 7. The Labor Injunction - The Act provides that, except in labor disputes affecting the national, no restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction shall be issued in any case involving or growing out of a labor dispute except to restrain the commission of violence, fraud and other illegal acts committed in the course of the labor dispute. 8. Role of State Agencies - Though the Industrial Peace Act was designed to reduce the role of the State in the field of labor-management relations to a minimum, it also recognizes that the State cannot merely perform a passive role. 2 state agencies play an important part in the collective bargaining process, namely the Court of Industrial Relations and the Department of Labor and are charged with various functions under the Act. Effects of the New Policy - Increase in the number of trade unions - Development of a more cohesive labor movement - Emergence of union leadership from the rank and file - Collective bargaining agreements - Labor disputes Difficulties Encountered - Ease of registering unions - Delay in determination of unfair labor practice cases - Delay in hearing petitions for certification elections - Excessive use of injunctions in labor disputes - Failure to adopt voluntary arbitration as a method of settling disputes. Possible Avenues of Improvement - Requiring the officers of a union applying for registration to make a sworn statement that the union is free from employer support, control or influence. - The CIR should be given exclusive power to issue labor injunctions and conduct certification elections. The appeals to the Supreme Court should not be allowed in certification election cases. - The CIR should not be limited to granting of relief in the form of “cease and desist” orders or reinstatement with or without back

pay in cases where workers have been dismissed for trade union membership or activity; it should be empowered to award damages in proper cases. - The Labor Management Advisory Council of the Department of Labor should bring the various Chambers of Commerce and the major labor \federations together to discuss the question of voluntary arbitration as a final step in the grievance machinery and a substitute for direct action in the enforcement of collective bargaining and assume responsibility for the adoption of appropriate measures for its general introduction. - The Conciliation Service should be provided with enough trained conciliators to ensure that the process of collective bargaining will operate smoothly. - Backing these measures is the program of workers’ education. Conclusion - 3 important stages of development of the labor relations policy of the Philippines Government: 1. Before 1936 – pattern of non-interference on the part of the Government 2. As early as 1933 – when the world found itself in the throes of economic depression, Frank Murphy, stated before the Legislature that “ a responsibility rests upon government for control and guidance in a field that was formerly left to the automatic regulation of self-interest and individual ambition” and the policy of non-interference was completely abandoned when compulsory arbitration was adopted under C.A. 103. 3. Re-examination of policy and the adoption of collective bargaining under the Industrial Peace Act of 1953 reflected as new and new objectives.

I. INTRODUCTORY MATERIALS 1.1 STATUTORY BASIS
B.F. GOODRICH PHILIPPINES, INC. vs. B.F. GOODRICH (MARIKINA FACTORY) CONFIDENTIAL & SALARIED EMPLOYEES UNION-NATU, B.F. GOODRICH (MAKATI OFFICE) CONFIDENTIAL & SALARIED EMPLOYEES UNION-NATU, and COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS 49 SCRA 532 FERNANDO; February 28, 1973
Facts: The Goodrich Unions were seeking to be recognized as the bargaining agent of BF Goodrich Phils’ employees so that there could negotiations for a collective contract. BF Goodrich countered this by filing for two petitions for certification election with the CIR. Strike notices were sent to the company by the union demanding recognition and soon after a strike was actually held. The company then filed a case of illegal strike and unfair labor practice against the unions. ISSUE: WON the determination of an unfair labor practice case, brought against unions, must precede the holding of a certification election HELD: No.

REASONING:
- If under the circumstances disclosed, management is allowed to have its way, the result might be to dilute or

Labor Law 2

A2010

-3-

Disini

fritter away the strength of an organization bent on a more zealous defense of labor's prerogatives. - This is not to say that management is to be precluded from filing an unfair labor practice case. It is merely to stress that such a suit should not be allowed to lend itself as a means, whether intended or not, to prevent a truly free expression of the will of the labor group as to the organization that will represent it.

The prevailing principle then on questions as to certification, as well as in other labor cases, is that only where there is a showing of clear abuse of discretion would this Tribunal be warranted in reversing the actuation of respondent Court. There is no showing of such a failing in this case.

DISPOSITIVE: The petition for certiorari is dismissed.

-

There is no valid reason then for the postponement sought. This is one instance that calls for the application of the maxim, lex dilationes semper exhorret. (The law abhors delays.) - The law clearly contemplates all the employees, not only some of them, to take part in the certification election. (Some of the employees could possibly lose such status, by virtue of a pending unfair labor practice case, if such case is to be resolved first before the election.) - Another reason (re: no point in the postponement of said election) is that even if the company wins in the pending case, it does not mean that the employees involved automatically would lose their jobs making them ineligible to participate in the cert. election. (Ergo the respondent court decided in the negative.)

1.2 DEFINITIONS 1.2.1 Employer and employee
FEATI UNIVERSITY V BAUTISTA 18 SCRA 1191 ZALDIVAR; December 27, 1966
NATURE Consolidated cases/petitions for certiorari, prohibition w/ writ of preliminary injunction FACTS -Jan 14, 1963: the President of the Faculty Club wrote to the President of the University a letter informing the latter of the organization of the Faculty Club as a labor union, duly registered with the Bureau of Labor Relations -Jan 22, 1963: another letter was sent, to which was attached a list of demands consisting of 26 items, and asking the President of the University to answer within ten days from date of receipt thereof. -The University questioned the right of the Faculty Club to be the exclusive representative of the majority of the employees and asked proof that the Faculty Club had been designated or selected as exclusive representative by the vote of the majority of said employees. -Feb 1, 1963: the Faculty Club filed with the Bureau of Labor Relations a notice of strike alleging as reason therefore the refusal of the University to bargain collectively with the representative of the faculty members. -Feb 18, 1963: the members of the Faculty Club went on strike and established picket lines in the premises of the University, thereby disrupting the schedule of classes. -March 1, 1963: the Faculty Club filed Case No. 3666-ULP for unfair labor practice against the University, but which was later dismissed (on April 2, 1963 after Case 41-IPA was certified to the CIR). -March 7, 1963: a petition for certification election, Case No. 1183-MC, was filed by the Faculty Club in the CIR ISSUES 1. WON the definition of employer in RA875 covers an educational institution like Feati University 2. WON the members of the Faculty Club are independent contractors (If they are, then they are not employees within the purview of the said Act.) HELD 1. YES. It is true that the SC has ruled that certain educational institutions and other juridical entities are beyond the purview of RA875 in the sense that the CIR has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of ULP charges against them, but the principal reason in ruling in those cases is that those entities are not organized, maintained and operated for profit and do not declare dividends to stockholders. -In the decisions in the cases of the Boy Scouts of the Philippines, the University of San Agustin, the UST, and LaConsolacion College, this Court was not unanimous in the view that the Industrial Peace Act (Republic Act No. 875) is not applicable to charitable, or non-profit organizations which include educational institutions not operated for profit. There are members of this Court who hold the view

-

Besides, it was said in General Maritime Stevedores' Union v. South Sea Shipping Line: the question of whether or not a certification election shall be held "may well be left to the sound discretion of the Court of Industrial Relations, considering the conditions involved in the case…."

FN 25 under page 542

-

As a matter of fact, the only American Supreme Court decision cited in the petition, National Labor Relations Board v. A.J. Tower Co., 25 likewise, sustains the same principle (under Gen. Maritime case). It was there held that the discretion of the labor tribunal, in this case, the National Labor Relations Board of the United States, is not lightly to be interfered with. (The issue in that case, concerns the procedure used in elections under the National Labor Relations Act in which employees choose a statutory representative for purposes of collective bargaining. The propriety of the National Labor Relations Board's refusal to accept an employers post-election challenge to the eligibility of a voter who participated in a consent election must be determined. The First Circuit Court of Appeals set aside the Board's order and so the matter was then taken to the US SC on certiorari.) In reversing the Circuit Court of Appeals, Justice Murphy made clear the acceptance of such a doctrine in the light of the National Labor Relations Act thus: "As we have noted before, Congress has entrusted the Board with a wide degree of discretion in establishing the procedure and safeguards necessary to insure the fair and free choice of bargaining representatives by employees." In the United States as in the Philippines, the decision in such matters by the administrative agency is accorded the utmost respect. CJ Concepcion: “in such proceedings, the determination of what is an appropriate bargaining unit is "entitled to almost complete finality."

-

-

25

329 US 324 (1946). Reference was made in the earlier portion of this opinion that the petition contains "copious references to National Labor Relations Board cases." While not to be discouraged as the Industrial Peace Act owes much to the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, commonly known as the Warner Act, as well as to the Norris-La Guardia Act of 1932, still their persuasive force would depend on the fuller discussion of the facts in each of the cases cited and the rulings arrived at. Such feature is conspicuously lacking in the petition.

to hire. individuals in domestic service of the home. However. 875. It was in the subsequent legislation the Labor Management Relation Act (Taft-Harley Act) that "independent contractors" together with agricultural laborers. The University engaged the services of the professors. is likewise untenable. "Running through the word `employ' is the thought that there has been an agreement on the part of one person to perform a certain service in return for compensation to be paid by an employer. -RA 875 does not give a comprehensive but only a complementary definition of the term "employer". and. including any political subdivision or instrumentality thereof. in so far as governmental functions are concerned. still they would be covered by RA 875. 618).. an employee must be one who is engaged in the service of another. the statutory definition includes not only "a principal employer but also a person acting in the interest of the employer". the Minimum Wage Law. This Court. -This definition. firstly. and in consonance with the rulings in the decisions of this Court. however. it must be declared beyond the purview of Republic Act No. In this case. above cited. the Social Security Act. This Court takes judicial notice that a university controls the work of the members of its faculty. Republic Act No. p. still it is included in the term "employer". that the professors' work is characterized by regularity and continuity for a fixed duration. they can be included in the term "employer". therefore. We consider it a settled doctrine of this Court. but rather that such definition should be complementary to what is commonly understood as employer. and paid them compensation or salary for their services. has ruled that those educational institutions that are not operated for profit are not within the purview of Republic Act No. In using the word "includes" and not "means". and (3) the Government and any political subdivision or instrumentality thereof insofar as the right to strike for the purpose of securing changes or modifications in the terms and conditions of employment is concerned (Section 11). therefore. Congress intended the term to be understood in a broad meaning because. -Under none of these definitions may the University be excluded. 2(c)]. one for whom employees work and who pays their wages or salaries. one who engages or keeps in service. the Act itself specifically enumerated those who are not included in the term "employer". or in connection with. This law modelled after the Wagner Act. The lexical definition is "one who employs. of the United States. employees of the University. Costs against Feati University. NO. that professors are compensated for their services by wages and salaries. 2. (2) anyone acting in the capacity of officer or agent of such labor organization [Sec. Under this circumstance. Writ of preliminary injunction dissolved. -The contention of the University that the professors and/or instructors are independent contractors." [see full case for other definitions of the word employer as provided for by the Workmen's Compensation Act. hence. even if university professors are considered independent contractors. All these indicate that the university has control over their work. did not exclude "independent contractors" from the orbit of "employees". but if it does. the only exception being the Government. Sec 2(c): The term employer includes any person acting in the interest of an employer. 875. who works for salary or wages." What is commonly meant by "employer"? The term "employer" has been given several acceptations. secondly. -It is admitted by the University that the striking professors and/or instructors are under contract to teach particular courses and that they are paid for their services. that the professors and/or instructors cannot substitute others to do their work without the consent of the university. directly or indirectly. supervisors. This Court has defined the term "employer" as "one who employs the services of others. or the National Labor Relations Act. and professors are. who performs services for another. -RA 875. to engage one's service. and that the professors can be laid off if their work is found not satisfactory. in the Far Eastern University case this Court is unanimous in supporting the view that an educational institution that is operated for profit comes within the scope of the Industrial Peace Act. -RA 875. V NLRC (PUBLICO) 397 SCRA 607 QUISUMBING. Disposition Petition for certiorari & prohibition with preliminary injunction dismissed. Writs prayed for therein denied. 2003 NATURE Petition for review on certiorari FACTS . PHILS. -Moreover. rather than by profits. any current labor dispute or because of any unfair labor practice and who has not obtained any other substantially equivalent and regular employment. NYK INTERNATIONAL KNITWEAR CORP. The term encompasses those that are in ordinary parlance "employers. employees and not independent contractors. but shall not include any labor organization (otherwise than when acting as an employer) or any one acting in the capacity or agent of such labor organization. educational institutions are not included. Congress did not intend to give a complete definition of "employer". and when and where to teach.Labor Law 2 A2010 -4- Disini that the Industrial Peace Act would apply also to non-profit organizations or entities. that a university prescribes the courses or subjects that professors teach. 875 must apply to it. etc] -Jurisprudence: An employer is one who employs the services of others. 4th ed." and "to employ" is "to provide work and pay for. that the Industrial Peace Act is applicable to any organization or entity whatever may be its purpose when it was created. CIR also found that the University is not for strictly educational purposes and that "It realizes profits and parts of such earning is distributed as dividends to private stockholders or individuals. provided them work. They are. -It will be noted that in defining the term "employer" the Act uses the word "includes" and not the word "means". it is obvious that Republic Act No. Among these statutory exemptions. Feati University itself admits that it has declared dividends. namely: (1) a labor organization (otherwise than when acting as an employer). Correlatively. 875 is applicable to herein petitioner Feati University. February 17.Petitioner NYK hired respondent Virginia Publico as a . Even if the University may be considered as a lessee of services under a contract between it and the members of its Faculty. -TEST: Does the University operate as an educational institution for profit? Does it declare dividends for its stockholders? If it does not. therefore. by the use of the term “include” is again complementary. Section 2 (d): The term "employee" shall include any employee and shall not be limited to the “employee” of a particular employer unless the act explicitly states otherwise and shall include any individual whose work has ceased as a consequence of. and others were excluded. because the University does not exercise control over their work. one for whom employees work and who pays their wages or salaries (Black Law Dictionary. one who uses.

257 is mandatory and give him no other choice than to conduct a certification election upon the receipt of the corresponding petition. 1997 Publico left the work place early as she was not feeling well due to flu. and was required to work from 8 AM to 12 midnight. ISSUE/S WON the union can be composed of supervisory and rank and file employees HELD NO. in her capacity as manager. Ransom Labor union-CCLU v NLRC . Petitions in unorganized establishments. OF LABOR (RUIZ) 300 SCRA 120 PUNO. who may be held jointly and severally liable for the obligations of the corporation to its dismissed employees. being the “person acting in the interest of the employer. She was paid on a piece-rate basis. Cathy Ng." The emphasis of Industrial Peace Act is clearly on the pourposes for which a union or association of employees established rather than that membership therein should be limited only to the employees of a particular employer. 1998 NATURE Petition for certiorari 1 A.2 LABOR ORGANIZATIONLEGITIMATE LABOR ORGANIZATION AIRLINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES V. WON there was illegal dismissal.2.May 7. 875 defines "labor organization" as any union or association of employees which exist. Regional Office No. DECEMBER 11. She cannot be exonerated from her liability in the payment to private respondent. is deemed the employer.” Reasoning Public respondent gravely misappreciates the basic antipathy between the interest of supervisors and the interest of rank-and-file employees. 1977 Definition of Legitimate Labor Organization: Section 2(e) of R. FACTS . Publico was informed by Stephen Ng (owner of NYK) that she was dismissed. April 15.The mediator arbiter granted the petition of the union. YES Ratio The petitioners’ allegations of abandonment cannot stand the unswerving conclusion by the NLRC and Labor Arbiter. which the collective interests of all the employees. a certification election shall automatically be conducted by the Med-Arbiter upon the filing of a petition by a legitimate labor organization. Finding of facts of the NLRC.”1 In this case. Sec. August 1995 247 SCRA 1 Facts -The Med-Arbiter. "Art. The secretary of labor affirmed. .In any establishment where there is no certified bargaining agent. Due to this absence. Disposition Petition is granted. sustained by the Secretary of Labor and Employment. Disposition Instant petition is denied. whether or not employed by the employer or employee whom he represents. . (2) that a single certification election cannot be conducted jointly among supervisory and rankand-file employees. for the purpose of the collective bargaining or dealing with employers concerning terms and conditions of employment. 1. it must have an officer who can be presumed to be the employer. . -Appropriate bargaining unit: Group of employees of a giver employer. particularly in a case where the NLRC and the Labor Arbiter are in agreement.A 875 "representative" is define as including "a legitimate labor organization or any officer or agent of such organization. CIR 76 SCRA 274 CASTRO." It cannot be overemphasized likewise that labor dispute can exist "regardless of whether the disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee. has ruled that Art. . It can be remedied thru the exclusion-inclusion proceedings wherein those employees who are occupying rank and file positions will be excluded from the list of eligible voters. and is thus solidarily liable regardless of absence malice. ISSUE/S 1. composed of all or less than the entire body of employees. Under Section 2(h) of R. 257. consistent with equity to the employer. office and technical employees of the petitioner company before the DOLE. . Reasoning Petitioners raised factual questions which are improper in a petition for review on certiorari. III. are deemed binding and conclusive upon this Court. 2.A.C. Ratio Article 245 of the Labor Code clearly provides that "supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rank-and-file employees.” Lopez Sugar Corporation v. It said that the contention of the respondent that the petitioning union is composed of both supervisory and rank and file employees is not sufficient to dismiss the petition." -National Congress of Unions in the Sugar Industry of the Philippines-TUCP ("NACUSIP-TUCP") filed with the Department of Labor and Employment ("DOLE") a petition for direct certification or for certification election to DUNLOP SLAZENGER V SEC.Respondent alleges that it is composed only of supervisory employees and that it has no obligation to attach its books of accounts since it is a legitimate labor organization. Publico did not come to work the next day.Petitioner company filed a motion to dismiss based on 1) that the respondent union is comprised of supervisory and rank-and-file employees and cannot act as bargaining agent for the proposed unit.Labor Law 2 A2010 -5- Disini sewer.Respondent union filed a Petition for Certification Election among the supervisory. HELD 1. of Labor (and NATIONAL CONGRESS OF UNIONS IN THE SUGAR INDUSTRY OF THE PHILIPPINES (NACUSIP) and COMMERCIAL AND AGROINDUSTRIAL LABOR ORGANIZATION (CAILO)) Vitug . Reasoning Since a corporation is an artificial person. in whole or in part. indicate to be best suited to serve reciprocal rights and duties. There is a irreconcilability of their interests which cannot be cured even in the exclusion-inclusion proceedings. YES Ratio Cathy Ng falls within the meaning of an “employer” as contemplated by the Labor Code. WON petitioners are solidarily liable to pay backwages and separation pay as there was no malice or bad faith. and (3) that the respondent union lacks legal standing since it failed to submit its books of accounts. 2.

the law did not reduce the Med-Arbiter to an automaton which can instantly be set to impulse by the mere filing of a petition for certification election. Issue WON the certification election should push through Held No. and the books of accounts all of which are certified under oath by the secretary or treasurer. NACUSIP-TUCP averred that it was a legitimate national labor organization. in the case at bench. a statement on the set of officers. of the NACUSIP-TUCP Lopez Sugar Central Supervisory Chapter. December 27. being merely. the assailed Decision of the Secretary of Labor. because the labor organization is not legitimate. Lopez Sugar Corporation ("LSC"). in Progressive Development.' " Indeed. "Absent compliance with these mandatory requirements. -LSC contended it. the local or chapter does not become legitimate labor organization. Book V of the Implementing Rules likewise defines a legitimate labor organization as 'any labor organization duly registered with the DOLE and includes any branch. 1963: the members of the Faculty Club went on strike and established picket lines in the premises of the University. federations or national unions shall be observed. and that there was no legal impediment either to a direct certification of NACUSIP-TUCP or to the holding of a certification election. The local chapter. Secretary. 1183-MC. of Labor denied it. local or affiliate thereof . -March 1." The only document extant on record to establish the legitimacy of the NACUSIP-TUCP Lopez Sugar Central Supervisory Chapter is a charter certificate and nothing else. duly registered with the Bureau of Labor Relations -Jan 22. Disposition WHEREFORE. Petition for certiorari was filed. 1963: a petition for certification election. the documentary requirements are found in Rule II. -Feb 1. and among the legal requirements is that the petitioning union must be a legitimate labor organization in good standing. should also be a legitimate labor organization in good standing. that LSC was employing 55 supervisory employees. and "2) The constitution and by-laws. several requirements applicable to independent union registration are no longer required in the case of the formation a local or chapter. dated 20 July 1989. -March 7. 1963: another letter was sent. and asking the President of the University to answer within ten days from date of receipt thereof. Sec. 003-89. paragraph 2. that there was no existing collective bargaining agreement covering said employees. the procedure governing the reporting of independently registered unions. an agent for the local organization (the NACUSIP-TUCP Lopez Sugar Central Supervisory Chapter). but which was later dismissed (on April 2. Article 212(h) defines a legitimate labor organization as 'any labor organization duly registered with the DOLE and includes any branch or local thereof. set of officers and books of accounts submitted by the local and chapter must likewise comply with these requirements. it follows that the constitution and by-laws.3 LABOR DISPUTE FEATI UNIVERSITY V BAUTISTA 18 SCRA 1191 ZALDIVAR. 1963: the President of the Faculty Club wrote to the President of the University a letter informing the latter of the organization of the Faculty Club as a labor union. 1963: the Faculty Club filed Case No. Moreover. and attested to by its president. Accordingly. Section 3(e). -Feb 18.' Rule 1. He is still tasked to satisfy himself that all the conditions of the law are met. The policy of the law in conferring greater bargaining power upon labor unions must be balanced with the policy of providing preventive measures against the commission of fraud. Book V of the Implementing Rules. 1963 after Case 41-IPA was certified to the CIR). a national labor organization duly registered with the DOLE. set of officers and books of accounts. to which was attached a list of demands consisting of 26 items. -The University questioned the right of the Faculty Club to be the exclusive representative of the majority of the employees and asked proof that the Faculty Club had been designated or selected as exclusive representative by the vote of the majority of said employees. ISSUES WON there is a labor dispute between the University and the Faculty Club . which we again quote as follows: "'(c ) The local or chapter of a labor federation or national union shall have and maintain a constitution and by laws. The petition for certification election is dismissed. Department of Labor and Employment: "But while Article 257 cited by the Solicitor General directs the automatic conduct of a certification election in an unorganized establishment. is ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. -LSC appealed to the DOLE and asseverated that the order was a patent nullity and that the Med-Arbiter acted with grave abuse of discretion. The same rationale for requiring the submission of duly subscribed documents upon union registration exists in the case of union affiliation. 1963: the Faculty Club filed with the Bureau of Labor Relations a notice of strike alleging as reason therefor the refusal of the University to bargain collectively with the representative of the faculty members. the majority of whom were members of the union. "A local or chapter therefore becomes a legitimate labor organization only upon submission of the following to the BLR: "1) A charter certificate.' "Since the 'procedure governing the reporting independently registered unions' refers to the certification and attestation requirements contained in Article 235. 1966 NATURE Consolidated cases/petitions for certiorari. we elucidated: "In the case of union affiliation with a federation. of such local or chapter. For reporting purposes. there is greater reason to exact compliance with the certification and attestation requirements because. as the case may be. dated 06 March 1990. as its principal. was filed by the Faculty Club in the CIR. 1. within 30 days from its issuance by the labor federation or national union. affirming that of the MedArbiter. NACUSIP-TUCP submitted Charter Certificate No. that no other labor organization was claiming membership over the supervisory employees. prohibition w/ writ of preliminary injunction FACTS -Jan 14. as previously mentioned. The petition for certification election. It was held in Progressive Development Corporation vs. thereby disrupting the schedule of classes. the federation's bona fide status alone would not suffice. Section 1(j). 3666-ULP for unfair labor practice against the University. was filed by the NACUSIP-TUCP. however.2. it also requires that the petition for certification election must be filed by a legitimate labor organization.Labor Law 2 A2010 -6- Disini determine the sole and exclusive collective bargaining representative of the supervisory employees of herein petitioner. The legitimate status of NACUSIPTUCP might be conceded. Case No.

WON RTC correctly assumed jurisdiction over the controversy and properly issued the Writ of Preliminary Injunction. June 13. . In said contracts. 875. .Series of pickets were staged by L&D workers in various SMC plants and offices. tenure or condition of employment" or "representation. and the question of representation. Costs against Feati University.Union advised SMC that some L&D workers had signed up for union membership and sought the regularization of their employment with SMC. All phases of the labor dispute and the employer-employee relationship may be threshed out before the CIR. and then a second notice. the terms and conditions of employment or a "change" or "arrangement" thereof” The existence of a labor dispute is not negatived by the fact that the plaintiffs and defendants do not stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee. -To certify a labor dispute to the CIR is the prerogative of the President under the law. There was to be no employer-employee relation between the contractors and/or its workers. Labor Arbiters have original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide the following cases involving all workers including: [a] unfair labor practice cases. issued Injunction. or concerning the association or representation of persons in negotiating. among others. independent contractors duly licensed by DOLE. The parties involved in the case may appeal to the Supreme Court from the order or orders thus issued by the CIR. Writs prayed for therein denied." -All the admitted facts show that the controversy between the University and the Faculty Club involved terms and conditions of employment. An affirmative answer would bring the case within the original and exclusive jurisdiction of labor tribunals to the exclusion of the regular Courts. . SMC RTC to enjoin the Union from: representing and or acting for and in behalf of the employees of L&D for the purposes of collective bargaining. is the matter of whether or not the case at bar involves.As the case is indisputably linked with a labor dispute. much less curtail. It was then demanded that the employment status of these workers be regularized. RTC reasoned that the absence of ER-EE relationship negates the existence of labor dispute. Their CBA provides that temporary. Union alleged that this group of EEs. [b] those that workers may file involving wages. . and this Court will not interfere in. -The test of whether a controversy comes within the definition of "labor dispute" depends on whether the controversy involves or concerns "terms. or contract EEs . . So. the CIR may exercise its broad powers as provided in Commonwealth Act 103. the matter re terms. 1990 NATURE Special civil action for certiorari FACTS . Hence. (A212 LC) Reasoning Crucial to the resolution of the question on jurisdiction. said Court may cause to be issued a restraining order forbidding the employees to strike or the employer to lockout the employees. That claim for damages is interwoven with a labor dispute. have been continuously working for SMC for a period of 6 months to 15 years and that their work is neither casual nor seasonal as they are performing work or activities necessary or desirable in the usual business or trade of SMC. calling for and holding a strike vote to compel plaintiff to hire the employees or workers of L&D. Hence. or is in connection with. In this case. HELD 1. hours of work and other terms and conditions of employment. among others. and if no other solution to the dispute is found. are excluded from the bargaining unit and outside scope of CBA.Labor Law 2 A2010 -7- Disini HELD YES. so court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of SMC's grievance. and that there exists a "laboronly" contracting situation.Petitioner SMCEU-PTWGO (Union) is duly authorized representative of the monthly paid rank-and-file EEs of SMC. fixing. probationary. sec10: When in the opinion of the President of the Philippines there exists a labor dispute in an industry indispensable to the national interest and when such labor dispute is certified by the President to the Court of Industrial Relations. NO Re: Definition of Labor Dispute (p4 of Outline) Ratio A labor dispute can nevertheless exist “regardless of whether the disputants stand in the proximate relationship of employer and employee. jurisdiction belongs to the labor tribunals. Disposition Petition for certiorari & prohibition with preliminary injunction dismissed. ISSUE 1.Union filed a Motion to Dismiss SMC's Complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the case/nature of the action. and so Union filed a notice of strike. or seeking to arrange terms or conditions of employment regardless of whether the disputants stand in proximate relation of employer and employees. This was not acted upon by SMC. tenure and conditions of EE’s employment and the arrangement of those terms as well as the matter of representation bring these issues within the scope of a labor dispute. this action. changing. Hence it is the labor tribunals that have jurisdiction and not the regular courts Re: ER Functions and ULP (p30 of Outline) . as contemplated by Republic Act No. and the CIR may issue such order or orders as may be necessary to make effective the exercise of its jurisdiction. Writ of preliminary injunction dissolved. there was a labor dispute between the University and the Faculty Club. maintaining.SMC entered into contracts for merchandising services with Lipercon and D'Rite (L&D). the Court may issue an order fixing the terms and conditions of employment. To allow the SAN MIGUEL EMPLOYEES UNION V BERSAMIRA 186 SCRA 496 MELENCIO-HERRERA. the exercise of that prerogative. including questions involving the legality of striker and lockouts. provided the controversy concerns. 20 and 21 of CC is not enough to keep the case within the jurisdictional boundaries of regular Courts. tenure or conditions of employment. or relates to a labor dispute. -Recall: RA 875. on the one hand. and [c] cases arising from any violation of A265 LC. it was expressly understood and agreed that the EEs employed by the contractors were to be paid by the latter and that none of them were to be deemed EEs or agents of SanMig. Once the jurisdiction is acquired pursuant to the presidential certification.SMC’s claim that the action is for damages under A19. which was denied by respondent Judge. -RA 875 provides that the term "labor dispute" includes any controversy concerning terms. while appearing to be contractual workers of supposedly independent contractors. And after several hearings. which motion was opposed by SMC. and SMC on the other.

of the parties to submit their respective position papers as required. by the terms of those agreements. INC. The Company's motion for reconsideration of the said resolution was denied on January 25. with the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) on ground of unresolved economic issues in collective bargaining. the company advances the purchase price of a car to be paid back by the employee through monthly deductions from his salary. It involves debtor-creditor relations. 1978. the Union furnished the Company with two copies of its proposed collective bargaining agreement. on February 14. However. 1986 NATURE: Petition for certiorari to annul the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission FACTS: . the Pambansang Kilusang Paggawa (Union for short) was subsequently certified in a resolution dated November 29. this petition for certiorari alleging that the NLRC acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction when it issued a labor injunction without legal basis and in the absence of any labor dispute related to the same. fixing. Nestlé directed the private respondents to either settle the remaining balance of the cost of their respective cars. . . and if they cannot afford it. . It also requested the Company for its counter proposals. who were employed by Nestlé either as sales representatives or medical representatives.On July 20. . The private respondents sought a temporary restraining order in the NLRC to stop the company from cancelling their car loans and collecting their monthly amortizations. . .SC recognizes the proprietary right of SMC to exercise an inherent management prerogative and its best business judgment to determine whether it should contract out the performance of some of its work to independent contractors. availed of the petitioner's car loan policy.After having participated in an illegal strike. 1991 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . For failure however. the company retaining the ownership of the motor vehicle until it shall have been fully paid for. . or return them to the company for proper disposition. There is no labor aspect involved in the enforcement of those obligations. Disposition Petition is granted. and peaceful concerted activities. . is not a labor.Conciliation proceedings then followed during the thirtyday statutory cooling-off period. V NLRC (NUÑEZ) 195 SCRA 340 GRIÑO-AQUINO. . 1979. 1978.Petitioner contends that the National Labor Relations Commission acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in rendering the challenged decision. or. 1978. the rights of all workers to self-organization. A13. maintaining. The options given to the private respondents are civil in nature arising from contractual obligations. Those contending interests must be placed in proper perspective and equilibrium.The private respondents. The NLRC gravely abused its discretion and exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing the writ of injunction to stop the company from enforcing the civil obligation of the private respondents under the car loan agreements and from protecting its interest in the cars which. belong to it (the company) until their purchase price shall have been fully paid by the employee. Reasoning Whether or not the private respondents remain as employees of the petitioner. granted their petition for injunction. regardless of whether the disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee. filed a "Notice of Strike".The Bureau of Labor Relations to certify the case to the National Labor Relations Commission for compulsory arbitration. . dispute.. the return of the cars to the company. ISSUE WON there is a labor dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents HELD NO Ratio Paragraph (1) of Article 212 of the Labor Code defines a labor dispute as follows: "(1) 'Labor dispute' includes any controversy or matters concerning terms or conditions of employment or the association or representation of persons in negotiating. not in the NLRC. 1.Private respondents failed and refused to avail of either option. en banc. The NLRC.The Union submitted its position paper. the private respondents were dismissed from service. 1979.December 7. collective bargaining and negotiations.The Union. Both requests were ignored and remained unacted upon by the Company.The labor arbiter set the initial hearing for April 29. the National Labor Relations Commission rendered its decision declaring the respondent guilty of unjustified refusal to bargain .3.3 LABOR RELATIONS POLICY 1. Under that policy. including the right to strike in accordance with law (S3.In a certification election held on October 3. rather than employeeemployer relations. NESTLE PHILS. changing or arranging the terms and conditions of employment. March 18. there is no escape from their obligation to pay their outstanding accountabilities to the petitioner.1 Method Dispute Settlement KIOK LOY VS NLRC (PAMBANSANG KILUSAN NG PAGGAWA) 141 SCRA 179 CUEVAS: January 22. in the alternative. to return the cars assigned to them. the said hearing was cancelled and reset to another date. 1979.The company filed a motion for reconsideration. so the company filed in the Regional Trial Court of Makati a civil suit to recover possession of the cars. 1987 Constitution) equally call for recognition and protection. The rights and obligations of the parties under those contracts may be enforced by a separate civil action in the regular courts. but it was denied for tardiness. The terms of the car loan agreements are not in issue in the labor case.Labor Law 2 A2010 -8- Disini action filed below to prosper would bring about "split jurisdiction" which is obnoxious to the orderly administration of justice. 1978 by the Bureau of Labor Relations as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of the rank-and-file employees of Sweden Ice Cream Plant (Company for short). Hence. . Disposition Petition is GRANTED." Nestlé’s demand for payment of the private respondents' amortizations on their car loans. . but a civil.

-after a few months.the teachers could not be given back their academic assignments because the semester was already halfway. However. if requested by either party. what is enjoined by the Labor Code to bargain in good faith. (a) of the New Labor Code . Declaration of Policy.Labor Law 2 A2010 -9- Disini . the employer. And under this rule. The order was modified (by a different Secretary) such that reinstatement was to be done only in the payroll. 1. par. the law uses the phrase “under the same terms and conditions” which contemplates only ACTUAL REINSTATEMENT. the State encourages an environment wherein employers and employees themselves must deal with their problems in a manner that mutually suits them best (as embodied in Art 3. and (3) a demand to bargain under Article 251. 1972. . 1988 NATURE Review of Order of Labor Secretary reversing decision of NLRC FACTS . Hence a voluntary instead of compulsory mode of dispute settlement is the general rule. .From the over-all conduct of petitioner company in relation to the task of negotiation. . is not under any legal duty to initiate contract negotiation. there is no showing that the facts called for payroll reinstatement as an ALTERNATIVE remedy. the UST case was made in light of a very important fact. On September 11. It is a mutual responsibility of the employer and the Union and is characterized as a legal obligation. after having been served with a written bargaining proposal by the petitioning Union. however. and all other terms and conditions of employment including proposals for adjusting any grievance or question arising under such an agreement and executing a contract incorporating such agreement. (1) possession of the status of majority representation of the employees' representative in accordance with any of the means of selection or designation provided for by the Labor Code. 2004 Nature Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the Court of Appeals Facts -Union filed a petition for certification election to be declared the exclusive bargaining representative of the Hotel’s employees. 750-V. par.263(g).3. -Union filed a Notice of Strike with the NCMB alleging the Hotel’ refusal to bargain and for acts of unfair labor practices. Union sent a letter to Hotel informing it of its desire to negotiate for a collective bargaining agreement. This petition was dismissed by DOLE for lack of legal requirements. (2) proof of majority representation. after having been served with a written bargaining proposal by the petitioning Union. Case was referred to the CA. And Union members were directed to return to work and for Hotel to accept them back. Union however suddenly went on strike -Secretary of DOLE assumed jurisdiction and ordered compulsory arbitration pursuant to art. (g) of the Labor Code makes it an unfair labor practice for an employer to refuse "to meet and convene promptly and expeditiously in good faith for the purpose of negotiating an agreement with respect to wages.3.Strikers filed case with NLRC for reinstatement. did not even bother to submit an answer or reply to the said proposal Ratio Unfair labor practice is committed when it is shown that the respondent employer. (c) To foster the free and voluntary organization of a strong and united labor movement. CA affirmed that the “payroll reinstatement” was not a grave abuse of discretion.Petition dismissed employee’s bargaining agent as their petition for cetification election was denied. So much so that Article 249. The mechanics of collective bargaining is set in motion only when the following jurisdictional preconditions are present.3 WORKER ENLIGHTENMENT VICTORIA V INCIONG 157 SCRA 339 FERNAN.Petitioner further contends that the National Labor Relations Commission's finding of unfair labor practice for refusal to bargain is not supported by law ISSUE/S: WON the respondent is guilty of unjustified refusal to bargain HELD: YES unfair labor practice is committed when it is shown that the respondent employer. and failure to live up to. This was rejected by the Hotel stating that the Union was not the 1. . there can be no doubt that the Union has a valid cause to complain against its (Company's) attitude. 263 (g) of LC. did not even bother to submit an answer or reply to the said proposal Reaspmomg Collective bargaining which is defined as negotiations towards a collective agreement. Civil Case No. -as to the nature of art. for the issuance of an injunction and a prayer that the strike be declared illegal. It is the policy of the State: (b) To promote free trade unionism as an instrument for the enhancement of democracy and the promotion of social justice and development. 1972.2 TRADE UNIONISM ART. hours of work. On September 8. DISPOSITION: . designed to stabilize the relation between labor and management and to create a climate of sound and stable industrial peace. -Art.Complainant Saturno Victoria is the president of the Far East Broadcasting Company Employees Union.A. While it is a mutual obligation of the parties to bargain. namely. 211. -Union filed for certiorari alleging grave abuse of discretion. Hotel refused to accept the employees return. Sec 3 of the Constitution). is one of the democratic frameworks under the New Labor Code. MANILA DIAMOND HOTEL EMPLOYEES UNION V CA (MANILA DIAMOND HOTEL) 447 SCRA 97 AZCUNA. the said union declared a strike against respondent company for refusal to recognize them. January 26. NCMB summoned both parties and held series of dialogues. the totality of which is indicative of the latter's disregard of. December 16. In the present case. ISSUE WON the CA commit grave abuse of discretion in affirming the validity of “payroll reinstatement” HELD Yes -CA based its decision on the UST v NLRC case which affirms validity of payroll reinstatement. respondent filed with the Court of First Instance of Bulacan. 263 (g) is an exception to this rule by allowing the Secretary of the DOLE to assume jurisdiction over a dispute involving an industry indispensable to the national interest.

The CA Reasoning All references in the amended Section 9 of BP No.00. herein petitioner filed before the Commission a third-party claim asserting ownership over the property levied upon and subject of the Sheriff’s notice of sale.Labor Law 2 A2010 . Further. Hence this present petition. Before the scheduled auction sale. Sec. and not the CA . the strikers must accept all the risks attendant upon their choice. He bears the responsibility of guiding the union along the path of law and to cause the union to demand what is not legally demandable. must see to it that the policies and activities of the union in the conduct of labor relations are within the precepts of law and any deviation from the legal boundaries shall be imputable to the leader. petitioner filed with the RTC a complaint for injunction and damages. Petitioner as a union leader. Sheriff Ventura then proceeded to enforce the writ by garnishing certain personal properties of respondents. DELTA VENTURES V. WON company should obtain clearance under Art. and as such.Complainant filed for illegal dismissal. CABATO 327 SCRA 521 QUISUMBING. 2000 NATURE Special civil action for certiorari seeks to annul the Order Judge Cabato of the RTC.stemmed from a complaint for illegal dismissal . by all means. NLRC granted. would foment anarchy which is a prelude to chaos. protect and enforce.Labor Arbiter in that case declared that no employer-employee relationship existed between the parties. jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is conferred by law and 1. considering that Section 9 of BP 129 seems to say that there are cases which fall within the appellate jurisdiction of the SC in accordance with the labor code. Labor Arbiter Rivera thus issued an order directing the suspension of the auction sale until the merits of petitioner's claim has been resolved. The manifestation. in solidum plus attorney's fees in the amount of P10. ISSUES 1. Roberto Ongpin and Almus Alabe guilty of Illegal Dismissal and Unfair Labor Practice and ordering them to pay the complainants. Finding that said judgment debtors do not have sufficient personal properties to satisfy the monetary award. Inciong reversed. If they succeed and the employer succumbs. Consequently. as well as the Order denying motion for reconsideration.Strike was declared illegal because company was a non-profit organization. But if they fail. and all pertinent recorsd thereof ordered to be FORWARDED. 129 to supposed appeals from the NLRC to the Supreme Court are interpreted and declared to mean and refer to petitions for certiorari under Rule 65. NO The purpose in requiring a prior clearance from the Secretary of Labor in cases of shutdown or dismissal of employees. LA issued a writ of execution directing NLRC Deputy Sheriff Adam Ventura to execute the judgment.4 MACHINERY DISPUTE SETTLEMENT ST MARTIN FUNERAL HOME V NLRC (ARICAYOS) 495 SCRA 295 REGALADO. ISSUE WON the trial court may take cognizance of the complaint filed by petitioner and consequently provide the injunctive relief sought. a resort thereto by laborers shall be deemed to be a choice of remedy peculiarly their own and outside of the statute. Sheriff Ventura proceeded to levy upon a real property registered in the name of Roberto Ongpin. Disposition The instant petition for certiorari is REMANDED. petitioner filed with the Commission a manifestation questioning the latter's authority to hear the case. MARCH 9. HELD 1.000. . dismissing petitioner's amended third-party complaint. September 16. is to afford the Secretary ample opportunity to examine and determine the reasonableness of the request. 1998 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS . all such petitions should be initially filed in the CA in strict observance of the doctrine on the hierarchy of courts. FACTS A Decision was rendered by LA declaring the Green Mountain Farm. Basic as a hornbook principle. The decision of the acting Secretary of Labor is AFFIRMED in toto.3. the law will not stand in their way in the enjoyment of the lawful fruits of their victory. HELD 1. Almus Alabe is also ordered to answer in exemplary damages in the amount of P5.10 - Disini Reinstatement granted without prejudice to outcome of Civil Case 750-V. HELD NO. the matter being within the jurisdiction of the regular courts. Judge Cabato issued a temporary restraining order. However.petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration which the NLRC denied.the private-respondent “employee” appealed to the NLRC. to the CA for approporiate action and disposition. they cannot thereafter invoke the protection of the law for the consequences of their conduct unless the right they wished vindicated is one which the law will. Reasoning As a strike is an economic weapon at war with the policy of the Constitution and the law at that time. was dismissed by Labor Arbiter Rivera.000. ISSUE/S 1. . one of the respondents in the labor case. the petition is dismissed. enjoining respondents in the civil case before him to hold in abeyance any action relative to the enforcement of the decision in the labor case. 267 before dismissing complainant. private respondent acted in good faith when it terminated the employment of petitioner upon a declaration of illegality of the strike. and the NLRC set aside the questioned decision and remanded the case to the labor arbiter .00 each to all the complainants. however. Company dismissed complainant. Disposition WHEREFORE. with a prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order against Sheriff Ventura. . Therefore. Where should appeals from the NLRC be initially filed. Ratio This is a matter of responsibility and of answerability.

218 and 224 of the Labor Code can only be interpreted as vesting in them jurisdiction over incidents arising from. power as may be prescribed by law to alleviate the same. Precedent abound confirming the rule that said courts have no jurisdiction to act on labor cases or various incidents arising therefrom. and a living wage. assessments and fines and other contributions for labor education and research. However. a matter beyond the jurisdiction of regional trial courts. it is then logical to conclude that the subject matter of the third party claim is but an incident of the labor case. . 211.5 INDUSTRIAL PEACE ART. workers shall have the right.6 WORKER PARTICIPATION 1987 CONSTI. ART XIII. duties and welfare. with the agreement of labor organizations and employers. Declaration of Policy. The complaint was in effect a motion to quash the writ of execution of a decision rendered on a case properly within the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter. 255. Jurisdiction to try and adjudicate such cases pertains exclusively to the proper labor official concerned under the Department of Labor and Employment. (b) the growth of associations of employees and the effect of such associations upon employer-employee relations. collective bargaining and negotiations. strike fund and credit and cooperative undertakings. Republic Act No. including the right to strike in accordance with law. but in essence it was an action challenging the legality or propriety of the levy vis-a-vis the alias writ of execution.A. local and overseas. The broad powers granted to the Labor Arbiter and to the National Labor Relations Commission by Articles 217. mutual death and hospitalization benefits. March 21. subject to such rules and regulations as the Secretary of Labor and Employment may promulgate. 6715. 211. labor-management cooperation programs at appropriate levels of the enterprise based on the shared responsibility and mutual respect in order to ensure industrial peace and 1. recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the right of enterprises to reasonable returns to investments. union dues. March 21.The labor organization designated or selected by the majority of the employees in an appropriate collective bargaining unit shall be the exclusive representative of the employees in such unit for the purpose of collective bargaining. and shall from time to time recommend the enactment of such remedial legislation as in his judgment may be desirable for the maintenance and promotion of industrial peace. in connection with or relating to labor disputes. workers and employers may form labor-management councils: Provided. ART. to participate in policy and decision-making processes of the establishment where they are employed insofar as said processes will directly affect their rights. benefits and welfare. Republic Act No. (d) the methods which have been tried by employers and associations of employees for maintaining mutually satisfactory relations. (c) the extent and results of the methods of collective bargaining in the determination of terms and conditions of employment. To hold otherwise is to sanction split jurisdiction which is obnoxious to the orderly administration of justice. Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding. 277. (h) any other aspects of employer-employee relations concerning the promotion of harmony and understanding between the parties.A. It is the policy of the State: (f) To ensure a stable but dynamic and just industrial peace. The Secretary of Labor shall also inquire into the causes of industrial unrest and take all the necessary steps within his . (g) The Ministry shall help promote and gradually develop. Ostensibly the complaint before the trial court was for the recovery of possession and injunction. Miscellaneous provisions. (As amended by Section 22. including conciliation. 1989). It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to selforganization.Labor Law 2 A2010 . (i) the relevance of labor laws and labor relations to national development. The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers. (As amended by Section 33. 6715. Considering the factual setting. including the execution of decisions. and to expansion and growth. 1989). (g) the possibilities for the adoption of practical and effective methods of labor-management cooperation. . . That the representatives of the workers in such labormanagement councils shall be elected by at least the majority of all employees in said establishment. 1. including the acts performed by the Labor Arbiter and the Deputy Sheriff implementing the writ. . to the exclusion of the regular courts. They shall also participate in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided by law. to wit: Illegal Dismissal and Unfair Labor Practice. Sec 3. and shall enforce their mutual compliance therewith to foster industrial peace. humane conditions of work. (e) desirable industrial practices which have been developed through collective bargaining and other voluntary arrangements. Study of labor-management relations. awards or orders. 273. . (f) the possible ways of increasing the usefulness and efficiency of collective bargaining for settling differences. ART. and promote full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all. Exclusive bargaining representation and workers’ participation in policy and decision-making. ART.The Secretary of Labor shall have the power and it shall be his duty to inquire into: (a) the existing relations between employers and employees in the Philippines. They shall be entitled to security of tenure. The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between workers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in settling disputes. and peaceful concerted activities. The State shall afford full protection to labor. welfare fund. an individual employee or group of employees shall have the right at any time to present grievances to their employer. Declaration of Policy. It is the policy of the State: (g) To ensure the participation of workers in decision and policy-making processes affecting their rights.3. For this purpose. as the controversy under consideration.3.(a) All unions are authorized to collect reasonable membership fees. organized and unorganized.11 - Disini determined by the allegations in the complaint which comprise a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the petitioner's cause of action. ART. Having established that jurisdiction over the case rests with the Commission. we find no grave abuse of discretion on the part of respondent Judge Cabato in denying petitioner's motion for the issuance of an injunction against the execution of the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission.

It prayed that implementation of the Code be held in abeyance.PAL filed a MTD. . discipline. and that the Code was arbitrary. we upheld the company's right to implement a new system of distributing its products. or the general principles of fair play and justice. which finding. 1989. by its unilateral implementation of the Code. to introduce new or improved methods or facilities or to change existing methods or facilities and the right to make and enforce Company rules and regulations to carry out the functions of management. MANILA ELECTRIC CO.Verily. assign employees to work. oppressive. Ratio Employees have a right to participate in the deliberation of matters which may affect their rights and the formulation of policies relative thereto and one such matter is the formulation of a code of discipline. demote. . PAL completely revised its 1966 Code of Discipline. . that employees dismissed under the Code reinstated and their cases subjected to further hearing. under special laws or under valid agreements. August 21. WON the formulation of a Code of Discipline among employees is a shared responsibility of the employer and the employees HELD 1. . 1993 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . was guilty of unfair labor practice. but gave the following caveat: So long as a company's management prerogatives are exercised in good faith for the advancement the employer's interest and not for the purpose of defeating or circumventing the rights of the employee. Moreover. that the law explicitly considered it a State policy "to ensure the participation of workers in decision and policy-making processes affecting their rights. that being penal in nature the Code must conform with the requirements of sufficient publication. transfer employees from one department to another. The Code was circulated among the employees and was immediately implemented. suspend or discharge employees for just cause. amending Art 211 of the Labor Code. it must be duly established that the prerogative being invoked is clearly a managerial one. is entitled to great respect.12 - Disini improvement in productivity. and some employees were subjected to the disciplinary measures. 326 SCRA 172 YNARES-SANTIAGO. and that PAL be declared guilty of unfair labor practice and be ordered to pay damages.. working conditions and the quality of working life.All this points to the conclusion that the exercise of managerial prerogatives is not unlimited. Thus. YES Ratio (On the requirement of consultation imposed by the Secretary in cases of contracting out for 6 months or more) A line must be drawn between management prerogatives regarding business operations per se and those which affect the rights of employees. it was held that management's prerogatives must be without abuse of discretion. humane and/or lawful manner. in Cruz vs. Hiring of workers is within the employer's inherent freedom to regulate and is a valid exercise of its management prerogative subject only to special laws and agreements on the matter and the fair standards of justice. August 13. and in treating the latter. the employer should see to it that its employees are at least properly informed of its decision or modes of action in order to attain a harmonious labor-management relationship and enlighten the workers concerning their rights. February 22. the exercise of management prerogatives was never considered boundless. that PAL should discuss the substance of the Code with PALEA. YES.On March 15. duties and welfare. Absent proof that management acted in a malicious or arbitrary manner.In San Miguel Brewery Sales Force Union vs. WON the decision should be modified HELD 1. It is circumscribed by limitations found in law.Such provision in the CBA may not be interpreted as cession of employees' rights to participate in the deliberation of matters which may affect their rights and the formulation of policies relative thereto.Members of the Meralco Employees and Workers Association (MEWA) filed a motion for reconsideration of an earlier decision of this Court directing the parties to execute a CBA incorporating the terms and conditions contained in the unaffected portions of the Secretary of Labor's orders. . to promote.The Philippine Airlines Employees Association (PALEA) filed a complaint before the NLRC contending that PAL. and alleging that it had not violated the CBA or any provision of the Labor Code. And one such matter is the formulation of a code of discipline. this Court will uphold them. 1985. the Court will not interfere with the exercise of . ISSUE 1. the LA and the NLRC found to the contrary. Disposition Petition is DISMISSED.PALEA recognizes the right of the Company to determine matters of management policy and Company operations and to direct its manpower. to lay-off employees for valid and legal causes. plan. Medina. a CBA.Labor Law 2 A2010 . a line must be drawn between management prerogatives regarding business operations per se and those which affect the rights of the employees. Reasoning The management cannot be denied the faculty of promoting efficiency and attaining economy by a study of what units are essential for its operation. In treating the latter. PALEA alleged that copies of the Code had been circulated in limited numbers. 2000 NATURE Motion for Reconsideration FACTS . with the approval of RA 6715. Reasoning It was only on March 2. PHIL. specifically Paragraphs E and G of Art 249 and Art 253 of the Labor Code. even in the absence of said clear provision of law. (Incorporated by Batas Pambansa Bilang 130. asserting its prerogative as an employer to prescribe rules and regulations regarding employees' conduct in carrying out their duties and functions. The exercise by management of its prerogative shall be done in a just. 1981). PAL asserts that all its employees have been furnished copies of the Code. direct and control operations." However. and prejudicial to the rights of the employees. Ople. Industrial peace cannot be achieved if the employees are denied their just participation in the discussion of matters affecting their rights. and prayed for certain modifications. ISSUE/S 1. V QUISUMBING (MEWA). AIRLINES V NLRC (PALEA) 225 SCRA 301 MELO. reasonable. to hire. . management should see to it that its employees are at least properly informed of its decisions or modes of action. It has the ultimate determination of whether services should be performed by its personnel or contracted to outside agencies. Management of the Company includes the right to organize. .

(g) When. 211.On the grant of a housing loan but not a cooperative loan: The award of loans for housing is justified because it pertains to a basic necessity of life. It is hereby declared the policy of the State to rationalize the fixing of minimum wages and to promote productivity-improvement and gain-sharing measures to ensure a decent standard of living for the workers and their families. picketing and lockouts. as are necessary to insure the proper and adequate protection of the life and health of its patients. Despite the silence of the law. Absent such an agreement as to retroactivity. no court or administrative agency or official shall have the power to set or fix wages.On increasing the wage awards: The Court does "not seek to enumerate in this decision the factors that should affect wage determination" because collective bargaining disputes particularly those affecting the national interest and public service "requires due consideration and proper balancing of the interests of the parties to the dispute and of those who might be affected by the dispute. most especially emergency cases. with opportunity for cross-examination. and from intervening at any time and assuming jurisdiction over any such labor dispute in order to settle or terminate the same RA 6727 “WAGE RATIONALIZATION ACT” Sec.” .Labor Law 2 A2010 . 6715. rates of pay. the Court rules herein that CBA arbitral awards granted after six months from the expiration of the last CBA shall retroact to such time agreed upon by both employer and the employees or their union. even criminal prosecution against either or both of them. The arbitral award was made to retroact and the award of wages was increased from P1. except as otherwise provided in Articles 218 and 264 of this Code. 1. If one has already taken place at the time of assumption or certification. prohibitions and/or injunctions as are issued by the Secretary of Labor and Employment or the Commission. hours of work or other terms and conditions of employment. 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. however legitimate. 1982). Injunction prohibited. it shall be the duty of the striking union or locking-out employer to provide and maintain an effective skeletal workforce of medical and other health personnel. 263. Republic Act No. Powers of the Commission. and all serious 1. in his opinion. For this purpose. Disposition Petition PARTIALLY GRANTED.A. 254. to every extent possible. to the effect: (1) That prohibited or unlawful acts have been threatened and will be committed and will be continued unless restrained. including dismissal or loss of employment status or payment by the locking-out employer of backwages. It is part of a privilege recognized by the employer and allowed by law. . Obiter . ART. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Bilang 227. and testimony in opposition thereto. clinics and similar medical institutions shall. in support of the allegations of a complaint made under oath. June 1. It is the policy of the State: B. In the absence of a CBA. therefore. by labor of its right to strike and by management to lockout. expansion and growth. providing seed money for the establishment of the employee's cooperative is a matter in which the employer has no business interest or legal obligation. if not restrained or performed forthwith. but no injunction or temporary restraining order shall be issued on .7 WAGE FIXING ART. be avoided.No temporary or permanent injunction or restraining order in any case involving or growing out of labor disputes shall be issued by any court or other entity.3.On the retroactivity of the arbitral awards: The law is silent as to the retroactivity of a CBA arbitral award or that granted not by virtue of the mutual agreement of the parties but by intervention of the government. in his opinion. the award shall retroact to the first day after the six-month period following the expiration of the last day of the CBA should there be one. for the duration of the strike or lockout. . jurisdiction over the same or certify it to the Commission for compulsory arbitration. clinics or medical institutions.13 - Disini judgment by an employer. Declaration of Policy. to enhance employment generation in the countryside through industry dispersal.000 for the years 1995 and 1996.900 to P2. In line with the national concern for and the highest respect accorded to the right of patients to life and health. (As amended by Section 3. .The Commission shall have the power and authority: (e) To enjoin or restrain any actual or threatened commission of any or all prohibited or unlawful acts or to require the performance of a particular act in any labor dispute which. under pain of immediate disciplinary action. the President of the Philippines shall not be precluded from determining the industries that. damages and other affirmative relief. to guarantee the rights of labor to its just share in the fruits of production.3. whose movement and services shall be unhampered and unrestricted. 218. and only after a finding of fact by the Commission. Strikes. 2. are indispensable to the national interest. To encourage a truly democratic method of regulating the relations between the employers and employees by means of agreements freely entered into through collective bargaining. March 21. through the exercise. the Secretary of Labor and Employment may immediately assume. strikes and lockouts in hospitals. and to allow business and industry reasonable returns on investment. 1989). the Secretary's determination of the date of retroactivity as part of his discretionary powers over arbitral awards shall control . . if offered. within twenty four (24) hours from knowledge of the occurrence of such a strike or lockout. 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 with such orders as he may issue to enforce the same. may cause grave or irreparable damage to any party or render ineffectual any decision in favor of such party: Provided. except as otherwise provided under this Code. ART. In labor disputes adversely affecting the continued operation of such hospitals. That no temporary or permanent injunction in any case involving or growing out of a labor dispute as defined in this Code shall be issued except after hearing the testimony of witnesses. there exists a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest. the contending parties are strictly enjoined to comply with such orders. their adverse effects on such life and health.8 LABOR INJUNCTION ART.(a) It is the policy of the State to encourage free trade unionism and free collective bargaining. In contrast. all striking or locked out employees shall immediately return-towork and the employer shall immediately resume operations and readmit all workers under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout. In such cases. The foregoing notwithstanding. not only by labor and management but government as well. be exhausted to substantially minimize. Such assumption or certification shall have the effect of automatically enjoining the intended or impending strike or lockout as specified in the assumption or certification order. subject to the monetary advances granted by petitioner to its rank-and-file employees during the pendency of this case assuming such advances had efforts. if not prevent.

to form unions. (4) That complainant has no adequate remedy at law. if sustained. — The banking industry is hereby declared as indispensable to the national interest and. and also to the Chief Executive and other public officials of the province or city within which the unlawful acts have been threatened or committed. Sec 3. association or organization making the threat or committing the prohibited or unlawful act or actually authorizing or ratifying the same after actual knowledge thereof. 1935 . 1989). March 21. workers and employers shall. if unsettled after seven (7) calendar days shall be reported by the Bangko Sentral to the Secretary of Labor who may assume jurisdiction over the dispute or decide it or certify the same to the National Labor Relations Commission for compulsory arbitration. be represented in decision and policy-making bodies of the government. greater injury will be inflicted upon complainant by the denial of relief than will be inflicted upon defendants by the granting of relief. Section 22. that if a complainant shall also allege that. including all reasonable costs. . together with a reasonable attorney’s fee. Strikes and Lockouts. . (As amended by Section 10. RA 8791 . 6715. (2) That substantial and irreparable injury to complainant’s property will follow. CONSTITUTION 1987. Such a temporary restraining order shall be effective for no longer than twenty (20) days and shall become void at the expiration of said twenty (20) days. and to expansion and growth. unless a temporary restraining order shall be issued without notice. Towards this end. 1973. Art IV. charged with the duty to protect complainant’s property: Provided.Labor Law 2 A2010 . any strike or lockout involving banks. and shall enforce their mutual compliance therewith to foster industrial peace. But nothing herein contained shall 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. and expense of defense against the order or against the granting of any injunctive relief sought in the same proceeding and subsequently denied by the Commission. a substantial and irreparable injury to complainant’s property will be unavoidable. the President of the Philippines may at any time intervene and assume jurisdiction over such labor dispute in order to settle or terminate the same. prohibited or unlawful act. regional. The right to form associations or societies for purposes not contrary to the law shall not be abridged. such a temporary restraining order may be issued upon testimony under oath. The undertaking herein mentioned shall be understood to constitute an agreement entered into by the complainant and the surety upon which an order may be rendered in the same suit or proceeding against said complainant and surety. to justify the Commission in issuing a temporary injunction upon hearing after notice. 1987 CONSTI. . Republic Act No.9 TRIPARTISM ART. and a living wage. workers and employers for the consideration and adoption of voluntary codes of principles designed to promote industrial peace based on social justice or to align labor movement relations with established priorities in economic and social development. No such temporary restraining order or temporary injunction shall be issued except on condition that complainant shall first file an undertaking with adequate security in an amount to be fixed by the Commission sufficient to recompense those enjoined for any loss. sufficient. to all known persons against whom relief is sought. and peaceful concerted activities. 243.The right to form associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.Section 7. including conciliation. however. 275. RIGHT TO SELF-ORGANIZATION BASIS OF RIGHT 1. further.3. and (5) That the public officers charged with the duty to protect complainant’s property are unable or unwilling to furnish adequate protection. (6-E) 1. STATUTORY ART. upon a hearing to assess damages. However. recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the right of enterprises to reasonable returns to investments. or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged. (3) That as to each item of relief to be granted. The State shall afford full protection to labor. Art III Sec 8. That the reception of evidence for the application of a writ of injunction 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 Commission. March 21. II. 1989). ART XIII. including those employed in the public and private sectors. Tripartism and tripartite conferences. not withstanding the provisions of any law to the contrary. the Secretary of Labor and Employment may consult with accredited representatives of workers and employers. and promote full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all. They shall also participate in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided by law.The right of the people. or industrial tripartite conference of representatives of government. associations. call a national. Such hearing shall be held after due and personal notice thereof has been served. 2. the said complainant and surety submitting themselves to the jurisdiction of the Commission for that purpose. in such manner as the Commission shall direct. of which hearing. They shall be entitled to security of tenure. collective bargaining and negotiations. industrial and agricultural enterprises and in religious. (b) The Secretary of Labor and Employment or his duly authorized representatives may.(a) Tripartism in labor relations is hereby declared a State policy. as far as practicable.. It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to selforganization. complainant and surety shall have reasonable notice. expense or damage caused by the improvident or erroneous issuance of such order or injunction. The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between workers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in settling disputes. Art III Sec 6. The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers. organized and unorganized. 6715. Coverage and employees’ right to selforganization. local and overseas. In calling such conference. humane conditions of work. from time to time.14 - Disini account of any threat.All persons employed in commercial. (As amended by Section 32. including the right to strike in accordance with law. Sec 7. Republic Act No. except against the person or persons.

(As amended by Batas Pambansa Bilang 70.: . even if said certificate had already been secured.15 - Disini charitable.. ISSUE: WON a certification election should be held despite the pending petition to cancel the Union’s certificate of Registration HELD: YES. The whole democratic process is geared towards the determination of representation. a prime manifestation of industrial democracy at work. not only in government but in other sectors as well.Arbiter issued an order for the holding of a certification election. labor and management.The Med. assist or form any labor organization. however. Reasoning: -The pendency of the petition for cancellation of the registration certificate of petitioner union founded on the alleged illegal strikes staged by the leaders and members of the intervenor union and petitioner union should not suspend the holding of a certification election. 1999 NATURE Special civil action in the Supreme Court. Bureau of Labor Relations: 'Petitioner thus appears to be woefully lacking in awareness of the significance of a UST FACULTY UNION V. December 14. employee shall be considered as such. to recall Cox. December 24. . Right of employees in the public service. Electronics & Electricity Workers' Federation (PCWF) v. Ineligibility of managerial employees to join any labor organization. . Ambulant. or educational institutions. assist or form separate labor organizations of their own. November 16. So our decisions from the earliest case of PLDT Employees Union v. : "[T]he Court resolves to grant the petition (for mandamus) in line with the liberal approach consistently adhered to by this Court in matters of certification election. is composed of a number of individuals. mutual aid and protection. PRODUCERS BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES 110 SCRA 275 MAKASIAR. medical. The pendency of the petition for cancellation of the registration certificate of herein petitioner union is not a bar to the holding of a certification election. attended by both union members and non-members.UST held a general faculty assembly. 244. rural workers and those without any definite employers may form labor organizations for their mutual aid and protection. there is another fact that militates against the stand of the Bank. Luna. et al. May 1. for it gives substance to the principle of majority rule as one ' of the basic concepts of a democratic policy" (National Mines and Allied Workers Union vs. . Hon. NATURE: MANDAMUS FACTS: -The Union filed this action to compel the public respondents to hold a certification election among the rank and file employees of Producers Bank. The two parties to the relationship. (As amended by Section 18. Noriel.Atlas Free Workers Union (AFWU)-PSSLU Local vs. right of supervisory employees. He rejected contention that it was a legitimate exercise of right to self organization ISSUE/S Basis of right to self-organization (p5 of outline) / Workers with right of self-organization HELD Ratio Self-organization is a fundamental right to form. shall have the right to selforganization and to form. ART. Free Telephone Workers Union to the latest. .Managerial employees are not eligible to join. -The Bank agreed to recognize and negotiate with the Union as soon as the latter obtained its registration certificate as local union. appellants were elected as new union officers by acclamation and clapping of hands. Reasoning The election can’t be considered as exercise of right to self-organization because the petitioners’ frustration over the performance of the respondents could not justify the method they chose to impose their will on the union. . Thus. Philippine Communications. . -However. join or assist labor organizations for collective bargaining. Thus may be discerned how crucial is a certification election. et al. it is indispensable that they be represented by a labor organization of their choice. That is to govern themselves in matters that really count.Appellees filed instant petition to seek injunctive relief and to nullify results of election. Here. whether operating for profit or not. by election. had made clear. for purposes of membership in a labor union. . the liberal approach observed by this Court as to matters of certification election. 111. 1980).Bitonio upheld med-arbiter and said election was void. beginning on 1st day of service. self-employed people. 1989). March 21. ) . the Court has declared its commitment to the view that a certification election is crucial to the institution of collective bargaining. PLDT Co.Scout Ramon V. FACTS . Republic Act No. The institution of collective bargaining is. Albano Memorial College vs.TRO was issued by med-arbiter enjoining them from conducting election.Employees of government corporations established under the Corporation Code shall have the right to organize and to bargain collectively with their respective employers. JR. 1986). Court of Industrial Relations. Carmelo C. because there is no order directing such cancellation. The same principle was again given expression in language equally emphatic in the subsequent case of Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions v. (As amended by Executive Order No. 1981 . NATIONAL UNION OF BANK EMPLOYEES v MINISTER OF LABOR. Certiorari. intermittent and itinerant workers. . join.Labor Law 2 A2010 . BITONIO. a proceeding which was sought to be suspended by the Bank on the grounds that a prejudicial question was pending re: cancellation of the Union’s registration for allegedly engaging in prohibited and unlawful activities.Union announced a general assembly to elect next union officers. or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for purposes of collective bargaining. ART. Supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rank-and-file employees but may join. Whether employed for a definite period or not. 6715. make their own rules by coming to terms. Noriel. . the Bank failed to submit its payroll of employees (which was required previously at the hearing for direct certification. 245.. 83 SCRA 610). 318 SCRA 185 PANGANIBAN. All other employees in the civil service shall have the right to form associations for purposes not contrary to law.Aside from the fact that the petition for cancellation of the registration certificate of petitioner union has not yet been finally resolved. As labor. Corollary to this right is the prerogative not to join.

Cancellation of the registration certificate is not the only resultant penalty in case of any violation of the Labor Code. Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind. 3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure: (a) The right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice. language. establishing a regime of self-rule. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race. management and labor. for the promotion and protection of his economic and social interests. with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant by all appropriate means.1. without distinction of any kind. INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC. to the maximum of its available resources. 8 Rule II Book V of Labor Code. is controlling. keeping this Declaration constantly in mind. No better device can assure the institution of industrial democracy with the two parties to a business enterprise. religion. UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS PREAMBLE Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. . in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom. in co-operation with the United Nations. Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve. It is the fairest and most effective way of determining which labor organization can truly represent the working force. to rebellion against tyranny and oppression. Article 2. non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. property. that human rights should be protected by the rule of law. collective bargaining. if man is not to be compelled to have recourse. both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. colour. political or other opinion. in relation to A273) . (b) The right of trade unions to establish national federations or confederations and the right of the latter to form or join international trade-union organizations. birth or other status. especially economic and technical. Article 23. (c) The right of trade unions to function freely subject to no limitations other than those prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This right is more pronounced in the case of labor. . Such constitutional guarantees should not be lightly taken much less easily nullified. security of tenure and just and humane conditions of work.16 - Disini certification election for the collective bargaining process. the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Article 8 1. including particularly the adoption of legislative measures. to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance. shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures.Labor Law 2 A2010 . Section 7. such as race. national or social origin. trust. sex. SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS Article 2 . justice and peace in the world. 2. Whereas it is essential. may determine to what extent they would guarantee the economic rights recognized in the present Covenant to non-nationals.' That is to accord respect to the policy of the Labor Code. Now. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps. Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge. individually and through international assistance and co-operation. political or other opinion. Article II (ibid) specifically declares that the State shall assure the rights of workers to self-organization. Furthermore. (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests. Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights. jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs. Article IV of the Philippine Constitution provides that the right to form associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged. no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political. Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations. whether it be independent. sex. subject only to the rules of the organization concerned. colour. language. 3. It is a fundamental postulate that the will of the majority. A healthy respect for the freedom of association demands that acts imputable to officers or members be not easily visited with capital punishments against the association itself" Dispositive: THE WRIT OF mandamus IS GRANTED. and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people. birth or other status. to the end that every individual and every organ of society.As aptly ruled by respondent Bureau of Labor Relations Director Noriel: "The rights of workers to self-organization finds general and specific constitutional guarantees. (See Sec. with due regard to human rights and their national economy. religion. property. Section 9. BLR DIR ORDERED TO CALL AND DIRECT THE IMMEDIATE HOLDING OF A CERTIFICATION ELECTION. national and international. as a last resort. national or social origin. Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations. Developing countries. if given expression in an honest election with freedom on the part of the voters to make their choice. indisputably partial to the holding of a certification election so as to arrive in a manner definitive and certain concerning the choice of the labor organization to represent the workers in a collective bargaining unit (emphasis supplied). Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration.

after indicating the economic provisions it had rejected. including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of his interests. rural workers and those without any definite employers may form labor organizations for their mutual aid and protection. charitable. FACTS The Union alleged that the Bank violated its duty to bargain. public order (ordre public). However. as evident in the Bank’s counter-proposals. 25) 3. emphasizing its mandate to afford protection to labor. aside from making it a policy to “protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare. JUNE 16. making bad faith non-economic proposals. or to apply the law in such a manner as to prejudice. retained or were open for discussion. 44 the State had already expressly bestowed protection to labor as part of the general provisions. or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for purposes of collective bargaining. and highlights “the principle of shared responsibility” between workers and employers to promote industrial peace. 2. 2004 NATURE Special civil action in the SC.” devotes an entire section.17 - Disini (d) The right to strike. intermittent and itinerant workers. join. declared it as a policy of the state to afford protection to labor. the guarantees provided for in that Convention. Ambulant. the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Further. if an employer interferes in the selection of its negotiators or coerces the Union to exclude from its panel of negotiators a representative of the Union. collective bargaining. even as early as the 1935 Constitution. WON the petitioner is estopped from filing the instant action (P. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on members of the armed forces and of the police in their exercise of this right. In particular. provided that it is exercised in conformity with the laws of the particular country. Under the International Labor Organization Convention (ILO) No. Nothing in this article shall authorize States Parties to the International Labour Organisation Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize to take legislative measures which would prejudice. 98 pertaining to the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining. 1953. the Bank. 243. medical or educational institutions whether operating for profit or not. WON the Union was able to substantiate its claim of unfair labor practice against the Bank arising from the latter’s alleged “interference” with its choice of negotiator (P. 3. 3. Nothing in this article shall authorize States Parties to the International Labour Organisation Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize to take legislative measures which would prejudice. The aforecited ILO Conventions are incorporated in our Labor Code. the Bank made only 6 economic counterproposals. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others. shall have the right to establish and. self-employed people. hence. security of tenure.Labor Law 2 A2010 . The said ILO Conventions were ratified on December 29. 1. “workers and employers. 2. 2. committed ULP under Article 248 (g) when it engaged in surface bargaining without any intent of reaching an agreement. SR. and just and humane conditions of work would be assured. without distinction whatsoever. considers it an unfair labor practice when an employer interferes. specifying that the workers’ rights to self-organization. The right to selforganization necessarily includes the right to collective bargaining. refused to make a list of items it agreed to include in the economic package. which provides: ART. Article 248(a) of the Labor Code. Parenthetically. The 1973 Constitution. the 1987 Constitution. Article 2 of ILO Convention No. 48 STANDARD CHARTERED BANK EMPLOYEES UNION (NUBE) V CONFESOR 432 SCRA 371 CALLEJO. shall have the right to self-organization and to form. Workers’ and employers’ organizations shall enjoy adequate protection against any acts or interference by each other or each other’s agents or members in their establishment. subject only to the rules of the organization concerned. Certiorari. particularly in Article 243 thereof. industrial and agricultural enterprises and in religious. as borne by the minutes of the meetings. and refusal to furnish the Union with copies of the relevant data (P. to job organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization. acts which are designed to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers or employers’ organizations or to support workers’ organizations by financial or other means. and if it can be inferred that the employer adopted the said act to yield adverse effects on the free exercise to right to self- 4. to elect their representatives in full freedom to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programs. No. — All persons employed in commercial. COVERAGE AND EMPLOYEES’ RIGHT TO SELF-ORGANIZATION. ILO CONVENTION NO. the guarantees provided for in that Convention. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces or of the police or of the administration of the State. ISSUES 1. 87 FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION AND PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO ORGANIZE to which the Philippines is a signatory. INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS Article 22 1. restrains or coerces employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization or the right to form association. WON the Union was able to substantiate its claim of unfair labor practice against the Bank arising from the latter’s surface bargaining. It explained that of the 34 economic provisions it presented. or apply the law in such a manner as would prejudice. 28) HELD . 6) 2. 45 on the other hand. with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations within the meaning of this Article. and Articles 248 and 249 respecting ULP of employers and labor organizations.” Workers’ and employers’ organizations shall have the right to draw up their constitutions and rules. accepted. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety. For its part. functioning or administration. provides: Article 2 1.

the latter replied with a list of its counter-proposals on February 24. Records show that after the Union sent its proposal to the Bank on February 17. all employed in the same company. the negotiations pushed through. While the refusal to furnish requested information is in itself an unfair labor practice. likewise. as alleged by the Union. or within sixty (60) calendar days before the expiration of the existing collective bargaining agreement. the Union twice filed a motion for reconsideration respecting its ULP charges against the Bank before the SOLE. Rights of Legitimate Labor Organization . both at and away from the bargaining table. The Union has not been able to show that the Bank had done acts. especially considering that such was undertaken previous to the commencement of the negotiation and simultaneously with Divinagracia’s suggestion that the bank lawyers be excluded from its negotiating panel. A person. The complaint was made only on August 16. at bottom. 1993 do not show that the Bank had any intention of violating its duty to bargain with the Union. 1992 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS -The officer-in-charge of the Bureau of Labor Relations (Hon. Admittedly. as the Labor Code requires. the conclusion of the CBA was included in the order of the SOLE. attitude or course of conduct that thereby causes loss or injury to another. amounts to a validation of the data it had used in its presentation. which tend to show that it did not want to reach an agreement with the Union or to settle the differences between it and the Union. EXTENT AND SCOPE OF RIGHT REYES V TRAJANO 209 SCRA 484 NARVASA. -The certification election was authorized to be conducted by the Bureau of Labor Relations among the employees of . Dispositive Assailed order and resolutions affirmed. 50 The resolution of surface bargaining allegations never presents an easy issue. (c) To be furnished by the employer. Substantial evidence has been defined as such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. the approval of the CBA and the release of signing bonus do not necessarily mean that the Union waived its ULP claim against the Bank during the past negotiations. 1993. upon written request. 1993. in the case at bar. However. hence. is barred from adopting an inconsistent position. Surface bargaining is defined as “going through the motions of negotiating” without any legal intent to reach an agreement. The determination of whether a party has engaged in unlawful surface bargaining is usually a difficult one because it involves. 1993. or during the collective negotiation. requested the Bank to validate its guestimates on the data of the rank and file. Thereafter. the fact that the Bank made use of the aforesaid guestimates. with the inclusion of Umali in the Union’s negotiating panel. The respondent Bank argues that the petitioner is estopped from raising the issue of ULP when it signed the new CBA. who by his deed or conduct has induced another to act in a particular manner. and also supports the inference of surface bargaining. . The minutes of the meetings show that both the Bank and the Union exchanged economic and non-economic proposals and counter-proposals. including the balance sheet and the profit and loss statement. 51 It involves the question of whether an employer’s conduct demonstrates an unwillingness to bargain in good faith or is merely hard bargaining. Cresenciano Trajano) sustained the denial by the Med Arbiter of the right to vote of one hundred forty-one (141) members of the "Iglesia ni Kristo" (INK). however. In the case. the parties were not able to agree and reached a deadlock. after the union has been duly recognized by the employer or certified as the sole and exclusive bargaining representatives of the employees in the bargaining unit. 1993 after a deadlock was declared by the Union on June 15. Article 1431 of the Civil Code provides: Through estoppel an admission or representation is rendered conclusive upon the person making it. meetings were set for the settlement of their differences. substantial evidence is required to support the claim. send a written request for the issuance of a copy of the data about the Bank’s rank and file employees. find that the Union failed to substantiate its claim that the Bank refused to furnish the information it needed. Moreover. the parties’ failure to agree did not amount to ULP under Article 248(g) for violation of the duty to bargain. did not. Moreover. In the case at bar. 1993 to June 15. a question of the intent of the party in question.18 - Disini organization or on the right to collective bargaining of the employees. it is herein emphasized that the duty to bargain “does not compel either party to agree to a proposal or require the making of a concession.Labor Law 2 A2010 . After all. while the signing bonus was included in the CBA itself. The Union alleges that the Bank violated its duty to bargain. The minutes of meetings from March 12. committed ULP under Article 248(g) when it engaged in surface bargaining. and usually such intent can only be inferred from the totality of the challenged party’s conduct both at and away from the bargaining table. 2. June 2. The Union. and cannot be denied or disproved as against the person relying thereon. In order to show that the employer committed ULP under the Labor Code. Umali. 1993. We. with the annual audited financial statements. The records show that after the initiation of the collective bargaining process. 3. The circumstances that occurred during the negotiation do not show that the suggestion made by Diokno to Divinagracia is an anti-union conduct from which it can be inferred that the Bank consciously adopted such act to yield adverse effects on the free exercise of the right to self-organization and collective bargaining of the employees. within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt of the request. ULP under Article 248(a) in connection with Article 243 of the Labor Code is committed. . No. [the federation president] in a meeting dated May 18.” Hence. at a certification election at which two (2) labor organizations were contesting the right to be the exclusive representative of the employees in the bargaining unit. However. the Union bases its claim of interference on the alleged suggestions of Diokno to exclude Umali from the Union’s negotiating panel. Umali failed to put his request in writing as provided for in Article 242(c) of the Labor Code: Article 242. No.

with all the management appointed trustees voting for it. and sought clearance from the Sec.159. the two other management-appointed trustees sided with de Vera. INC. Reasoning The moment management displays what in this case appears to be a grave but unwarranted distrust in the union officials discharging their functions just because a strike was resorted to. and to maintain membership therein. if there were a rational basis for such fears. 1969 NATURE Special civil action for certiorari FACTS -CIR could not agree to exclude from a return-to-work order five union officials of respondent Pan American Employees Association on the ground of having led an illegal strike. or assist any union. Of the 348 workers initially deemed to be qualified voters. 1987. In answer. the result. 1974. Logically. PAN-AMERICAN EMPLOYEES ASSN. 27 SCRA 1202 FERNANDO. It would have been different . a meeting of the PF Board of Trustees was held. -The remaining 3 trustees unanimously elected Galicia as the new administrator -The bank moved for the dismissal of Luna. Ratio EXTENT AND SCOPE OF RIGHT TO SELFORGANIZATION. The ballots provided for three (3) choices. or assist any union. WON CIR committed grave abuse of discretion in ordering the return to work of the union officials HELD 1.B)-NATU V SECRETARY OF LABOR (REPUBLIC BANK) 109 SCRA 139 MAKASIAR. The fact that a person has opted to acquire membership in a labor union does not preclude his subsequently opting to renounce such membership. UNION OF SUPERVISORS (R. much less one clear and present. because the Provident Fund PF is an entity of the Republic Bank considering that the main bulk of contributions is put up by the RB into the PF. conformably with established rule and practice. the resources of the fund grew from P278. If petitioner were to succeed in their unprecedented demand. president of the petitioner union and exofficio member of the fund's Board of Trustees. 1981 NATURE Petition for review on certiorari of the order of the Secretary of Labor FACTS -The Republic Bank Provident Fund was established for the benefit of the officers and employees of the Republic Bank. (a) TUPAS and (b) TUEU-OLALIA. What is worse. in itself. the right NOT to join. the erstwhile administrator and Secretary of the Fund. no one should be compelled to exercise such a conferred right. attended by Mr.Labor Law 2 A2010 . possibly even constituting a menace to the operations of the enterprise. V." The final tally of the votes showed the following results: TUPAS 1 TUEU-OLALIA 95 NO UNION 1 SPOILED 1 CHALLENGED 141 ISSUE/S WON the right to self-organization includes the right NOT to join. -Mr. of Labor for his termination -Labor Sec issued an order granting the same. to add to the infamy that would thus attach. That is an indictment of the gravest character. only 240 actually took part in the election. Abad. They provided for votes to be cast. a sufficient cause for dismissal thus resulting in their losing their incentive and motivation for doing their jobs properly with the consequent fear that they could cause grave injury to it ISSUE 1. devoid of any factual basis. affiliate with. and who opened the meeting stating that they would like to have control of the funds of the PF and for that matter the administration of the Fund. and Trade Union of the Philippines and Allied Services (TUPAS). so also. and the two labor representatives voting against -Mr. NO. affiliate with. is subsumed in the right to join. affiliate with. but to respondent union equally. or assist any union. November 12. is to be expected from their return to work. and to disaffiliate or resign from a labor organization HELD: YES. including the chairman. It is self-evident that just as no one should be denied the exercise of a right granted by law.445. to repeat. 1 for (c) a third choice: "NO UNION. of which 3. Among the 240 employees who cast their votes were 141 members of the INK. The competing unions were the Tri-Union Employees UnionOrganized Labor Association in Line Industries and Agriculture (TUEU-OLALIA). even if not intended. and the other 2 are the presidents of the Republic Bank Union of Supervisors and of the Republic Bank Employees' Union -Mr. are to be designated by the bank president. Armando Abad (chairman) and Mario Galicia. and.85 -On February 12. Disposition PETITION DENIED. became the fund's administrator and secretary. and this is PAN-AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS. the laborers in this particular union would thus be confronted with the sad spectacle of the leaders of their choice condemned as irresponsible. de Vera and Galicia counter argued against the proposal. Restituto de Vera who had then just been designated to sit on the board. Ratio There is both a constitutional and statutory recognition that laborers have the right to form unions to take care of their interests vis-a-vis their employers. Norberto Luna. and to disaffiliate or resign from a labor organization.27 to P1. who must be treated as such with all the respect to which they are legitimately entitled. Luna made the allegedly derogatory statements . Reasoning The right to form or join a labor organization necessarily includes the right to refuse or refrain from exercising said right. -The fund is supposed to be managed by a Board of Trustees composed of 5 members. The fact that they would be paid but not be allowed to work is.Luna and Antonio Canizares the other labor representative walked out of the meeting. then the integrity of the collective bargaining process itself is called into question. -Messrs. and forced the issue of reorganization.779. purely speculative in character. for either of the two (2) contending labor organizations. would be to call into question their undeniable right to choose their leaders. vigorously objected. During the three (3) years of his incumbency as administrator. -The same was carried by a vote of 3 to 2. -De Vera questioned Luna's apprehensions. The record is bereft of the slightest indication that any danger. of course. Luna. April 29.19 - Disini Tri-Union Industries Corporation on October 20. according to Pan-American World Airways. conducted under the supervision of the Bureau of Labor Relations. to them necessarily. Luna moved that all the trustees execute a trust agreement and a bond in favor of the PF members to protect the interests of the PF Messrs.

Besides. NO . -His protests could even be treated as union activity by the Industrial Peace Act. YES Ratio Membership in the cooperative is on a voluntary basis.However. EXTENT AND SCOPE OF RIGHT TO SELFORGANIZATION . CENECO filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of legal restraints. for certainly an owner cannot bargain with himself or his co-owners.By virtue of EO 111. which assures the employees' right "to self-organization and to form. Luna was therefore acting out his role as protector of his constituents when he voiced out his apprehension and protests over the plan of management. .Some employees of CENECO then filed for withdrawal of membership in the cooperative but CENECO contended that this cannot be allowed. 1987. . withdrawal therefrom cannot be restricted unnecessarily. His remarks were in defense of the interest of the Provident Fund.Labor Law 2 the subject of this petition A2010 . the 390 employees of CENECO. employees who at the same time are members of an electric cooperative are not entitled to form or join a union. CENTRAL NEGROS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC V DOLE SECRETARY 201 SCRA 584 REGALADO.CURE filed a petition for direct recognition or for certification election. The avowed policy of the State to afford fall protection to labor and to promote the primacy of free collective bargaining mandates that the employees' right to form and join unions for purposes of collective bargaining be accorded the highest consideration. What is important is that he had been selected by the supervisors of respondent bank to be their president and representative in the PF Board of Trustees. It is inconceivable how the withdrawal of a negligible number of members could adversely affect the business concerns and operations of CENECO. He addressed his remarks to the body that has jurisdiction over the question of management of the assets of the Provident Fund.The right of the employees to self-organization is a compelling reason why their withdrawal from the cooperative must be allowed. represent a very small percentage of the cooperative's total membership of 44. It matters not that he acted singly or individually. Disposition The questioned order is hereby ANNULLED and SET ASIDE.file employees of CENECO with CURE and No Union as the choices therein. 2. CURE then wrote CENECO proposing that negotiations be conducted for a new agreement. WON the employees were allowed to withdraw membership from the cooperative so as to entitle them to form or join CURE for purposes of the negotiations for a collective bargaining agreement HELD 1.employees is an expression of their preference for union membership over that of membership in the cooperative.000. September 13.Membership in an electric cooperative which merely vests in the member a right to vote during the annual meeting becomes too trivial and insubstantial vis-a-vis the primordial and more important constitutional right of an employee to join a union of his choice. Romeo A. " (Sec. . Young that "employees who at the same time are members of an electric cooperative are not entitled to form or join unions for purposes of collective bargaining agreement. 1991 NATURE Special civil action for certiorari FACTS . Rep." . the direct certification originally allowed under Article 257 of the Labor Code has apparently been discontinued as a method of selecting the exclusive bargaining agent of the workers. .20 - Disini ISSUE WON Mr.Petitioner Central Negros Electric Cooperative.Previous events: Their CBA was valid for a term of 3 years. As pointed out by CURE. Disposition Petition is granted. -This is so because Luna's membership in the PF Board of Trustees was by virtue of his being president of the RB Union of Supervisors. WORKERS WITH ORGANIZATION RIGHT OF SELF- . which became effective on March 4. His actuations as such should therefore be considered as legitimate exercise of the employees' right to self-organization and as an activity for their mutual aid and protection.. No Right of Self-Organization: WORKER/MEMBER OF COOPERATIVE .It was held in Batangas I Electric Cooperative Labor Union vs. Act 875). The med-arbiter is hereby ordered to conduct a certification election among the rank-and. Luna's remarks were intended to protect the interests of the members of the Provident Fund from what he honestly believed was a risky venture on the part of the management. Luna's utterances and alleged acts of insubordination constitute just cause for his dismissal HELD NO. 3. The Provident Fund was itself created as a result of the union's collective bargaining agreement with the bank. Luna's remarks at the meeting of an official board are privileged in nature as a valid exercise of his constitutional freedom of expression. Hence. nowhere in said case is it stated that memberemployees are prohibited from withdrawing their membership in the cooperative in order to join a labor union. The right to join an organization necessarily includes the equivalent right not to join the same. under applicable decisions of the Supreme Court. part of which comes from the contribution of the rank and file employees. ISSUE/S 1. Inc. aside from being privileged communication protected by the constitutional guarantee on free speech. join or assist labor organizations of their own choosing and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining and other mutual aid and protection .. The mere fact that no opposition is made does not warrant a direct certification. some of whom have never been members of the cooperative. The most effective way of determining which labor organization can truly represent the working force is by certification election. (CENECO) seeks to annul the order issued by then Acting Secretary of Labor Laguesma declaring the projected certification election unnecessary and directing petitioner CENECO to continue recognizing private respondent CENECO Union of Rational Employees (CURE) as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of all the rank-and-file employees of petitioner's electric cooperative. the resignation of the member. CENECO denied CURE's request on the ground that.

appellants were elected as new union officers by acclamation and clapping of hands. Republic Act No. (As amended by Section 33. The Union had with the Company a CBA containing a closed shop agreement. charitable. and (3) the identity on the two preceding particulars should be such that any judgment which may be rendered on the other action will. 1974 FACTS . ISSUES 1. non-profit institutions could now form. employee shall be considered as such. in the latter. Ambulant. the respondent union filed again for certification election and was granted by the Med Arbiter. Certiorari. Article 244 of the Labor Code was already amended by BP7 which provides that rank and file employees of nonprofit medical institutions were now permitted to form. he must become a member of the collective bargaining union. 277. shall. All Employees ART. wishes to be employed or to keep his employment. In order that the pendency of another action between the same parties for the same cause may be availed of as a ground to dismiss a case. if any person. intermittent and itinerant workers. FACTS . for purposes of membership in a labor union. between the action under consideration and the other action: (1) identity of parties. . Corollary to this right is the prerogative not to join.(c) Any employee. Disposition. 318 SCRA 185 PANGANIBAN.Victoriano was an employee of the Elizalde Rope Factory. this petition is DISMISSED. 1999 NATURE Special civil action in the Supreme Court. Whether employed for a definite period or not.Appellees filed instant petition to seek injunctive relief and to nullify results of election.Bitonio upheld med-arbiter and said election was void. NO Ratio. shall have the right to self-organization and to form. nonprofit institutions the right to form. Miscellaneous provisions. WON workers of non-stock. beginning on his first day of service. medical.Labor Law 2 1. YES Ratio. or at least such as representing the same interest in both actions. 1987 Members of Religious Group VICTORIANO vs ELIZALDE ROPE WORKERS' UNION 59 SCRA 54 ZALDIVAR. JR. 1. He rejected contention that it was a legitimate exercise of right to self organization ISSUE/S Basis of right to self-organization (p5 of outline) / Workers with right of self-organization (p6 of outline) HELD Ratio Self-organization is a fundamental right to form.21 - Disini ART. whether operating for profit or not. But with BP70 which amended the said provision by granting even employees of non-stock.UST held a general faculty assembly. join or assist labor organizations for collective bargaining. be considered as an employee for purposes of membership in any labor union. 2. BITONIO. by virtue of which. Inc. or educational institutions. WHEREFORE. and was a member of the Elizalde Rope Workers' Union.Union announced a general assembly to elect next union officers. . private respondent invokes the same article as already amended.TRO was issued by med-arbiter enjoining them from conducting election. July 31. . 243. join or organize labor unions under Article 244 of the LC. join. Reasoning The election can’t be considered as exercise of right to self-organization because the petitioners’ frustration over the performance of the respondents could not justify the method they chose to impose their will on the union. and was affirmed by the respondent director Trajano. Non-Profit Organization FEU v TRAJANO(FEU-AFW) 152 SCRA 725 PARAS. (2) identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for. it was incumbent upon respondent Director to conduct such certification election to ascertain the bargaining representative of petitioner's employees. FEU now assails the validity of the order by Director Trajano. Coverage and employees’ right to self-organization. industrial and agricultural enterprises and in religious. mutual aid and protection. and the decision appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED. whether employed for a definite period or not. regardless of his religious beliefs. they assailed the constitutionality of Article 244 with the SC. selfemployed people. UST FACULTY UNION V. 1980). or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for purposes of collective bargaining. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Bilang 70. for while in the former. organize or join labor unions of their choice for purposes of collective bargaining. join and organize labor unions of their choice. Any judgment which may be rendered in the petition for certiorari pending before the SC will not constitute res judicata in the petition for certification election under consideration. Since private respondent had complied with the requisites provided by law for calling a certification election. May 1. NATURE petition for certiorari seeking to annul and set aside the decision affirming the Order of the Med-Arbiter for the holding of a certification election among the rank and file employees of FEU FACTS . beginning on 1st day of service. non-profit medical institution and before 1980. rural workers and those without any definite employers may form labor organizations for their mutual aid and protection. . regardless of which party is successful. the relief being founded on the same facts. 6715). All persons employed in commercial. So when the FEU Alliance of Filipino Workers (FEUAFW) filed a petition for consent and/or certification election and was denied. FEU was a non-stock. . WON Director Trajano gravely abused his discretion in granting the petition for certification election despite the pendency of a similar petition HELD 1. workers of these institutions were not allowed to form. November 16.Worker Qualifications A2010 . Reasoning. Here. amount to res judicata in the action under consideration. join and organize labor unions of their choice (focus in the outline) 2. attended by both union members and non-members. private respondent questioned the constitutionality of Article 244 of the Labor Code before its amendment. September 12. there must be.

Republic Act No.22 - Disini . the benefit upon the religious sects is merely incidental and indirect. or be dispossessed of their right to work and of being impeded to pursue a modest means of livelihood. It does not prohibit the members of said religious sects from affiliating with labor unions. The "establishment clause" (of religion) does not ban regulation on conduct whose reason or effect merely happens to coincide or harmonize with the tenets of some or all religions. Right of employees in the public service. or be dismissed from work. with labor unions. 244. Aug 18. and relieving certain citizens of a burden on their religious beliefs. Although the exemption may benefit those who are members of religious sects that prohibit their members from joining labor unions. 111. labor unions. It still leaves to said members the liberty and the power to affiliate. Republic Act No.In 1961. The free exercise clause of the Constitution has been interpreted to require that religious exercise be preferentially aided. that the assailed Act. neither does the law prohibit them from joining. The recognition of the tenets of the sect should not infringe on the basic right of self-organization granted by the Constitution to workers. and temporal. notwithstanding their religious beliefs. 3350 infringes on the freedom of association and discriminates in favor of members of the INC (hence. . KAPATIRAN SA MEAT AND CANNING V. the refusal of the members of the INC sect not to join a labor union for being contrary to their religious beliefs does not bar the members of the sect from forming their own union. If. December 24. ISSUE WON RA No. they can do so. 3350 was enacted (amending the industrial peace act). 3. statutory and constitutional right to work. (As amended by Executive Order No. Supervisors ART. right of supervisory employees. The purpose sought to be achieved by RA 3350 was to insure freedom of belief and religion. It excluded ipso jure from the application and coverage of the closed shop agreement the employees belonging to any religious sects which prohibit affiliation of their members with any labor organization. RA No. does not violate the constitutional provision on freedom of association. that in spite of any closed shop agreement.Being a member of a member of the religious sect "Iglesia ni Cristo" that prohibits the affiliation of its members with any labor organization. Managerial employees are not eligible to join. Thereupon. confirming thereby their natural. A desirable end cannot be promoted by prohibited means. and neither may the employer or labor union compel them to join. CALLEJA 162 SCRA 367 HELD: In Victoriano v Elizalde Rope Workers Union. 245. What the exception provides is that members of said religious sects cannot be compelled or coerced to join labor unions even when said unions have closed shop agreements with the employers. far from infringing the constitutional provision on freedom of association. It is our view that the exemption from the effects of closed shop agreement does not directly advance. Right FILOIL REFINERY CORPORATION vs. Supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rankand-file employees but may join. It is clear. 1989). therefore. Government Corporation Employees ART. which is a serious menace to the health. assist or form any labor organization. the members of said religious sects prefer to sign up with the labor union. the fruits of which work are usually the only means whereby they can maintain their own life and the life of their dependents. All other employees in the civil service shall have the right to form associations for purposes not contrary to law. providing that a closed shop agreement shall not cover members of any religious sects which prohibit affiliation of their members in any such labor organization.Labor Law 2 A2010 . worldly. members of said religious sects cannot be refused employment or dismissed from their jobs on the sole ground that they are not members of the collective bargaining union. rather than help. upholds and reinforces it. morals. they refuse to sign up. the law does not coerce them to join. regardless of religious affiliation. or not to affiliate. RA No. and to promote the general welfare by preventing discrimination against those members of religious sects which prohibit their members from joining labor unions. It cannot be gainsaid that said purpose is legitimate. It was intended to serve the secular purpose of advancing the constitutional right to the free exercise of religion. 3350 introduced an exception to the closed shop agreement under the Industrial Peace Act. The purpose of RA 3350 is secular. or diminish. the Act also promotes the well-being of society. Congress has seen it fit to exempt religious objectors lest their resistance spread to other workers. 3350. To help its citizens to find gainful employment whereby they can make a living to support themselves and their families is a valid objective of the state. by reason of union security agreements. the interests of any particular religion. would hurt. a labor association composed of the . by averting that certain persons be refused work. and a fortiori to a labor union assuming that such unity and loyalty can be attained through coercion is not a goal that is constitutionally obtainable at the expense of religious liberty. Furthermore. FILOIL SUPERVISORY & CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION 46 SCRA 512 TEEHANKEE. is the protection of said employees against the aggregate force of the collective bargaining agreement. therefore. Ineligibility of managerial employees to join any labor organization. March 21. 2. Victoriano resigned from the union. and by eliminating to a certain extent economic insecurity due to unemployment. Employees of government corporations established under the Corporation Code shall have the right to organize and to bargain collectively with their respective employers. for religious objections have contagious potentialities more than political and philosophic objections. To compel persons to join and remain members of a union to keep their jobs in violation of their religious scrupples. If in deference and fealty to their religious faith. not spiritual or religious or holy and eternal. and welfare of the people of the State. 1972 NATURE Appeal from the orders of the Court of Industrial Relations FACTS Filoil Refinery Corporation executed a collective bargaining agreement with the Filoil Employees & Workers Association (FEWA). the Union asked the Company to separate Victoriano from the service. assist or form separate labor organizations of their own. let it be noted that coerced unity and loyalty even to the country. (As amended by Section 18. 1986). 6715. unconstitutional) HELD NO. they can do so. The primary effects of the exemption from closed shop agreements in favor of members of religious sects that prohibit their members from affiliating with a labor organization.

2006 NATURE Petition for review under rule 45 of the ROC FACTS Charlito Peñaranda was hired as a foreman/boiler/shift engineer of Baganga Plywood Corporation (BPC) to take charge of the operations and maintenance of its steam plant boiler. premium pay for working during holidays/rest days. supervisors are entitled to engage in union activities and any discrimination against them by reason thereof constitutes an unfair labor practice. and to form. he was not terminated from employment much less illegally. the grounds were ammended to unfair labor practice for the company's refusal to bargain in good faith and interference Article 212(o) of the Labor Code defines strike as a temporary stoppage of work by the concerted action of employees as a result of an industrial or labor dispute. . who in turn organized their own labor association. attempts to damage. That there was a labor dispute between the parties is not an issue. 2007 NATURE This is a petition for review on certiorari of the Decision of the CA.The union and the company entered into a 3 year CBA. individual petitioners are union officers.' a foreman or supervisor 'is an employee within the meaning of the Act' . SR. DISPOSITION Petition DISMISSED. being a managerial employee he is not entitled to overtime pay and if ever he rendered services 2 STA ROSA COCA-COLA PLANT EMPLOYEES UNION (union). . Their reason being. night shift differentials and finally claims for payment of damages and attorney’s fees having been forced to litigate the present complaint. the company refused to allow alyansa to observe and an impasse ensued. and to form.the LA found the strike to be illegal such that the participants lost their employment status. He claims that he was not paid his overtime pay. Reasoning The term strike2 encompasses not only concerted work stoppages. to declare the officers of union and individual respondents to have lost their employment status. Indeed. which affirmed the ruling of the NLRC and the Labor Arbiter FACTS . Cavite. sit-downs. Hence. . ." Supervisors and confidential employees. the company which is owned by the stockholders and bondholders (capital) and should therefore be entitled under the law to bargain collectively with the top management with respect to their terms and conditions of employment. Furthermore. CA decision is affirmed. . since they are part of the management. are conclusive on the SC. PENARADA VS BANGANGA PLYWOOD CORP. May 3.I. . Disposition Petition is denied for lack of merit. directors and stewards filed a notice of strrice with NCMB based on deadlock on CBA and unfair labor practice arising from the company's refusal to bargain. with the exercise if their right to self-organization. it is well settled that 'in relation to his employer. and not merely to picket. the union insisted that representatives from Alyansa ng mga Unyon ng Coca Cola be allowed to observe the CBA meetings. the company filed to declare strike illegal. . January 24. as long as based on substantial evidence.directors and shop stewards.The union is the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of the regular paid workers and the manthly paid nonccommission earning employees of the comopany. usually accompanied by the display of placards and other signs making known the facts involved in a labor dispute. of Manila. ISSUE WON supervisors 'shall have the right to self-organization. vs.Labor Law 2 A2010 . its officers and members guilty of unfair labor practice to violation of the CBA. WON the mass action wit Alyansa is actually a strike HELD 1.The Corporation filed a motion to dismiss the petition for certification of the respondent association as the sole and exclusive collective bargaining agent of all petitioner’s supervisory and confidential employees working at its refinery in Rosario. . to declare the union.R. YES Ratio The factual findings and conclusions of tribunals. they do not have the right to bargain collectively although they may organize an organization of their own. C. the union told the company that they wanted to negotiate the terms. union officers. even though they may exercise the prerogatives of management as regards the rank and file employees are indeed employees in relation to their employer. He opted to severe employment when he insisted payment of his separation benefits. the CA affirmed the decision. When BPC partially reopened. destroy or sabotage plant equipment and facilities. and similar activities. . Reasoning As stated for the Court by the now Chief Justice in AG & P Co. Peñaranda failed to reapply. This collective bargaining agreement expressly excluded from its coverage petitioner's supervisory and confidential employees.pending the notice to strike. Petitioners notified the respondent of their intention to stage a strike. mass leaves. join or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of collective bargaining through representations of their own choosing and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining and other mutual aid or protection' and that 'individuals employed as supervisors . Picketing involves merely the marching to and fro at the premises of the employer. upon the expiration. but also slowdowns. the union decided to participate in a mass action by alyansa in front of the company's premises. Inc. BPC on the other hand claims that Penaranda’s the separation from service was due to the temporary closure due to repair and general maintenance of the company. operations would come to complete stops for insufficiency of contractual employees who would take over. For this reason. ISSUE/S 1. and to award them damages. after the mass strike (separate and distinct from the mass action). 8 section 3 of the Industrial Peace Act "explicitly provides that 'employees' and this term includes supervisors 'shall have the right to self-organization.. join or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of collective bargaining HELD YES. may form separate organizations of their own'. He filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with money claims. AND HUDSON CHUA 489 SCRA 95 PANGANIBAN.23 - Disini corporation's rank-and-file employees . ET AL V COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILS INC (company) 312 SCRA 437 CALLEJO. respondent herein.

. Another Order set the holding of a certification election among PICOP's supervisory and technical staff employees in Tabon. On the basis of the foregoing. However. (3) To evaluate performance of machinery and manpower.Which authority should not be merely routinary or clerical in nature . His work involved overseeing the operation of the machines and the performance of the workers in the engineering section. Disposition Petition is denied. III.PICOP appealed the Order which set the holding of the certification election contending that the Med-Arbiter committed grave abuse of discretion in deciding the case without giving PICOP the opportunity to file its comments/answer.24 - Disini beyond the normal hours of work. DECEMBER 11. office and technical employees of the petitioner company before the DOLE. . Like managerial employees. Under this provision. WON Penaranda is a regular. Article 82 of the Labor Code exempts managerial employees from the coverage of labor standards. Drilon upheld the Med-Arbiter's Order with modification allowing the supervising and staff employees in TEST DUNLOP SLAZENGER V SEC. V LAGUESMA 330 SCRA 295 DE LEON. Managerial employees and members of the managerial staff are exempted from the provisions of the Labor Code on labor standards. and (4) no union.It is not decisive that these employees are monthly paid employees. Their mode of compensation is usually a matter of convenience and does not necessarily determine the nature and character of their job. among the supervisory. (5) To train new employees for effective and safety while working) illustrates that petitioner was a member of the managerial staff. April 12. which also takes him out of the coverage of labor standards. It can be remedied thru the exclusion-inclusion proceedings wherein those employees who are occupying rank and file positions will be excluded from the list of eligible voters.PICOP-Bislig Supervisory and Technical Staff Employees Union (PBSTSEU) instituted a Petition for Certification Election to determine the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of the supervisory and technical staff employees of PICOP for CBA purposes. The Court disagrees with the NLRC’s finding that the petitioner was a managerial employee. NLRc.Labor Law 2 - A2010 . Since petitioner belongs to this class of employees." (1) Their primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or subdivision thereof.Federation of Free Workers (FFW) and Associated Labor Union (ALU) filed their respective petitions for intervention. he was a member of the managerial staff. It said that the contention of the respondent that the petitioning union is composed of both supervisory and rank and file employees is not sufficient to dismiss the petition. (2) To supervise. . OF THE PHILS. PAPER INDUSTRIES CORP. or their suggestions and recommendations as to the hiring and firing and as to the promotion or any other change of status of other employees are given particular weight.The mediator arbiter granted the petition of the union. Penaranda’s duty as a shift engineer. As supervisor.Petitioner company filed a motion to dismiss based on 1) that the respondent union is comprised of supervisory and rank-and-file employees and cannot act as bargaining agent for the proposed unit. ((1)To supply the required and continuous steam to all consuming units at minimum cost.Respondent alleges that it is composed only of supervisory employees and that it has no obligation to attach its books of accounts since it is a legitimate labor organization. (3) They have the authority to hire or fire other employees of lower rank. check and monitor manpower workmanship as well as operation of boiler and accessories. (2) that a single certification election cannot be conducted jointly among supervisory and rankand-file employees. deleted the award because he was a managerial employee. Surigao del Sur. including entitlement to overtime pay and premium pay for working on rest days.Respondent union filed a Petition for Certification Election . what determines the nature of employment is not the employee's title.But requires the use of independent judgment. namely: (1) PBSTSEU. . . Bislig. (as regards the TEST) The TEST of supervisory status as we have repeatedly ruled is: -Whether an employee possesses authority to act in the interest of his employer. and (3) that the respondent union lacks legal standing since it failed to submit its books of accounts. ISSUE 1. The secretary of labor affirmed. the Court finds no justification to award overtime pay and premium pay for rest days to petitioner. he is not entitled to overtime pay and premium pay for working on rest days. (2) They customarily and regularly direct the work of two or more employees therein. Regional Office No. This work necessarily required the use of discretion and independent judgment to ensure the proper functioning of the steam plant boiler. (3) ALU. petitioner is deemed a member of the managerial staff. now the Secretary. His duties and responsibilities conform to the definition of a member of a managerial staff under the Implementing Rules. and that PBSTSEU had no personality to file the petition for certification election. . . 1998 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . 2000 NATURE Petition for certiorari seeking to annul the Resolution and the Order Laguesma. (2) FFW.DOLE Sec. common employee entitled to overtime pay and other monetary benefits.Med-Arbiter granted the petitions for interventions of the FFW and ALU. HELD NO. OF LABOR (RUIZ) 300 SCRA 120 PUNO. CA dismissed Penaranda’s petition for certiorari. of the DOLE FACTS . LA found Penaranda to be entitled of the overtime pay and premium pay. managerial employees are "those whose primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or subdivision.Corollary. with four (4) choices. [there] was no office order/or authorization for him to do so. but his job description. He supervised the engineering section of the steam plant boiler. officers and members of the managerial staff are not entitled to the provisions of law on labor standards. acting then as Undersecretary. particularly. Labor standards provide the working conditions of employees. . . .

. transfer. As a ground for dismissal. discharge. ISSUE/S WON the dismissal on the ground of loss of confidence is valid HELD No. April 12. pursuant to Article 257 of the Labor Code and Section 11. Theirs is not a final determination of the company policies inasmuch as any action taken by them on matters relative to hiring. petitioner cannot be considered a managerial employee despite his designation as District Sales Manager.The Labor Arbiter found that Samson was illegally dismissed but the decision was reversed by NLRC. THEU asserted that it complied with all the requirements for valid affiliation and inclusion in the roster of legitimate labor organizations pursuant to DOLE Department Order No.PICOP questioned and objected to the inclusion of some section heads and supervisors in the list of voters whose positions it averred were reclassified as managerial employees in the light of the reorganization effected by it. and for as long as there is no final order of cancellation. who have been designated as Section Managers and Unit Managers who were converted to managerial employees are ineligible for union membership HELD . transfer. Therefore. three conditions must be met: a. suspend. filed a petition for certification election before the DOLE Mediation-Arbitration Unit. . Designation should be reconciled with the actual job description of the employee. a corporation distinct and separate from THIGCI. respectively. suspension and termination of employees is still subject to confirmation and approval by their respective superior. 1997 > Tagaytay Highlands Employees Union (THEU). They have the authority to hire or fire other employees of lower rank. lay off. Davao and Iligan City to participate in the certification election. NLRC decision is reversed and set aside. -In this case the job description of Samson does not mention that petitioner possesses the power “to lay down policies nor to hire.A thorough dissection of the job description of the concerned supervisory employees and section heads indisputably show that they are not actually managerial but only supervisory employees since they do not lay down company policies. assign or discipline employees”.NO. ISSUE WON the positions Section Heads and Supervisors. Rule V of said Department Order provides that the legitimacy of its registration cannot be subject to collateral attack. 1991. Philippine Transport and General Workers Organization (PTGWO). 2003 NATURE Petition for Certiorari under Rule 45 THIGCI assailing CA decision denying its petition to annul the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Resolutions of November 12. The mere fact that an employee is designated “manager” does not ipso facto make him one.October 16. and that Section 5. And before one may be properly considered a managerial employee.. 9. 1998 FACTS . Disposition Petition is granted. 2000 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS .Managerial employees are ranked as Top Managers. resigned. or their suggestions and recommendations as to hiring an firing and as to the promotion or any other change of status of other employees are given particular weight. IV . promotion. terminated and absent without leave (AWOL) employees.file employees of an organization. finding the subject supervisors and section heads as supervisory employees eligible to vote in the certification election are AFFIRMED. Inc. Absent this crucial element. Laguesma dated April 17. . for it is the job description that determines the nature of employment. They customarily and regularly direct the work of two or more employees therein.Rufino Norberto F. implement and control strategic and operational policies while the task of First-Line Managers is simply to ensure that such policies are carried out by the rankand. Samson was dismissed from the Company for uttering what was considered by the company as obscene. and that out of the 192 signatories to the petition. series of 1997. . Rule XI of DOLE Department Order No. and submitted copies of the handwritten denial and withdrawal of some of its employees from participating in the petition.25 - Disini Cebu. the petition is hereby DISMISSED. January 22. c. Top and Middle Managers have the authority to devise. the term “trust and confidence” is restricted to managerial employees. TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS INTERNATIONAL GOLF CLUB INC V TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS EMPLOYEES UNIONPGTWO 395 SCRA 699 CARPIO-MORALES. 1998 > DOLE Med-Arbiter Anastacio Bactin ordered the holding of a certification election Samson vs NLRC (Schering-Plough Corp) 330 SCRA 460 Kapunan. Local Chapter No. Regional Branch No. some of the signatures in the list of union members were secured through fraudulent and deceitful means. 1991 and August 17. and offensive words and for making malicious and lewd gestures directed at the President and General Manager of the company during an informal Sales and Marketing gathering in relation to the decision of the Management Committee on a dispute with another employee. and the Resolution and Order of public respondent Bienvenido E.Labor Law 2 A2010 . 1997. . recall. it continues to enjoy the rights accorded to a legitimate organization. Samson is reinstated to his position without loss of seniority rights and is awarded payment of his full backwages. Any authority they exercise is not supreme but merely advisory in character. Middle Managers and First Line Managers. 1997 > opposed petition for certification election because the list of union members submitted by it was defective and fatally flawed as it included the names and signatures of supervisors. 09. Also. J. 1998 and December 29. as well as employees of The Country Club. only 71 were actual rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. the Med-Arbiter should. Disposition WHEREFORE. 776. He was also accused of threatening to disrupt or create violence in a forthcoming National Sales Conference. department or subdivision thereof: b.. a legitimate labor organization said to represent majority of the rankand-file employees of THIGCI.November 27. insulting. on account of which it was duly granted a Certification of Affiliation by DOLE on October 10. Their primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a .January 28. automatically order the conduct of a certification election.

v. 1998 Resolution dismissing the petition for certification election. NO Reasoning Article 245 of the Labor Code Article 245. The school retired Llagas and Javier. The school then filed this petition.appeal of the union to the CA was granted. ISSUE/S WON Llagas and Javier were managerial EES. or to effectively recommend such managerial actions. night shift differentials and finally claims for payment of damages and attorney’s fees having been forced to litigate the present complaint. both having rendered more than 20 years of continuous service. . effectively recommend such managerial actions if the exercise of such authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. In the case of National Steel Corporation vs. were their leaders. Finding both union officers to be employees not belonging to the rank-and-file. declaring that the management prerogative on retirement of EEs was validly exercised. . 2006 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS . recall. He claims that he was not paid his overtime pay. their membership in the Union has become questionable. suspend. the strike called in their behalf is illegal. it was stressed that: What is essential is the nature of the employee’s function and not the nomenclature or title given to the job which determines whether the employee has rank-and-file or managerial status or whether he is a supervisory employee. When it became active again. They allowed their loyalties be divided between the union and the school.As this Court put it in Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines. Secretary of Labor: Designation should be reconciled with the actual job description of subject employees x x x The mere fact that an employee is designated manager does not necessarily make him one. WON the inclusion of the supervisors should affect the result of the certification election HELD 1. In the case of Javier. May 4. . .court reviewed the functions of the positions of the retired EEs found in the Faculty Manual in order to determine their classification. alleging unfair labor practice and unlawful termination. in the interest of the ER. R. hence. more so being elected as union officer. Supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rank-and-file employees but may join. Managerial employees are not eligible to join. When BPC partially reopened. right of supervisory employees. assign or discipline employees. Also.212(m) defines a managerial employee as: one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire. when they joined and became officers of the union. rendering the Union inutile to represent their cause. for the immediate conduct of a certification election subject to the usual pre-election conference.Charlito Peñaranda was hired as a foreman/boiler/shift engineer of Baganga Plywood Corporation (BPC) to take charge of the operations and maintenance of its steam plant boiler. Thus. led by Llagas (Pres) and Javier (VP). IV. As the Dean of Student Affairs. The school countered with a petition to declare the strike illegal. assist or form separate labor organizations of their own. as another justification for the retirement. lay-off. Javier falls under supervisory EEs . As a Subject Area Coordinator. Disposition Petition is granted. Supervisory EEs are those who. . the last 3 years continuous).the school and union entered into a CBA.DOLE Resolution of November 12. .school claims that it could validly retire Llagas and Javier. . a supervisory EE. It held that while a petition for certification election is an exception to the innocent bystander rule. the employer may pray for the dismissal of such petition on the basis of lack of mutuality of interests of the members of the union as well as lack of employer-employee relationship and petitioner failed to adduce substantial evidence to support its allegations.NLRC ruled in favor of the school. she may join a labor union composed only of supervisory employees. 2006 NATURE Petition for review under rule 45 of the ROC FACTS . Let the records of the case be remanded to the office of origin. AND HUDSON CHUA 489 SCRA 95 PANGANIBAN. the Mediation-Arbitration Unit. Reasoning Art.26 - Disini . 1998. Laguesma (G. ISSUES 1.CA . May 3. the reason that as managerial employees (LLagas was the Dean of Student Affairs while Javier was the Subject Area Coordinator). No. Then the union in the school became inactive for several years. . there would be an absurd situation where one can be given the title just to be deprived of the right to be a member of a union.denied THIGCI’s Petition for Certiorari and affirmed the DOLE Resolution dated November 12. Otherwise. NLRC resolution reinstated. thus disqualified from joining a union. Llagas is proscribed from joining a labor union. CAINTA CATHOLIC SCHOOL V CAINTA CATHOLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEES’ UNION 489 SCRA 468 TINGA. the school decided to enforce the provision on the CBA re: retirement (that management can retire an employee if s/he has reached age of 60 or rendered at least 20 years of service.BPC on the other hand claims that Penaranda’s the separation from service was due to the temporary closure due to repair and general maintenance of the company. saying that the retirement of the 2 union officers was a mere subterfuge to bust the union. it gave.Labor Law 2 1 A2010 . Llagas was clearly a managerial employee. On the other hand.thus. 103743. Disposition Petition is DENIED. discharge. 1998 > setting aside the June 4. as the dismissed EEs PENARADA VS BANGANGA PLYWOOD CORP. transfer. premium pay for working during holidays/rest days. The union struck. assist or form any labor organization. January 29.He filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with money claims. 1996). MFR denied . Ineligibility of managerial employees to join any labor organization. Inc. They lost the trust and confidence of the school. Peñaranda failed to reapply. Regional Branch No. Union claims that retirement was equivalent to union busting. thus making the strike called by the union on their behalf (as unqualified union members) illegal HELD YES Ratio The 2 employees are not rank and file employees. at its prerogative granted to it by law and the CBA.

for being not germane to the object and purposes of EO 111 and RA 6715 upon which such rules purportedly derive statutory moorings.The implementing rules of RA 6715. (b) non-managerial employees in the Patrol Division. he is not entitled to overtime pay and premium pay for working on rest days. May 20. he was not terminated from employment much less illegally. ISSUE WON Penaranda is a regular. 111 which eliminated the disqualification of security guards. he was a member of the managerial staff. While therefore under the old rules. labor centers: Provided. depending on their rank.On the basis of the foregoing. (3) They have the authority to hire or fire other employees of lower rank. ((1)To supply the required and continuous steam to all consuming units at minimum cost. . (2) To supervise.Managerial employees and members of the managerial staff are exempted from the provisions of the Labor Code on labor standards. Corazon C. deleted the award because he was a managerial employee. .Labor Law 2 A2010 . CA dismissed Penaranda’s petition for certiorari. Article 82 of the Labor Code exempts managerial employees from the coverage of labor standards. . Ineligibility of Managerial Employees to Join any Labor Organization. particularly. or their suggestions and recommendations as to the hiring and firing and as to the promotion or any other change of status of other employees are given particular weight. as well as foreign organizations are strictly prohibited from engaging directly or indirectly in all forms of trade union activities without prejudice to normal contacts between Philippine labor unions and recognized international . He supervised the engineering section of the steam plant boiler. petitioner is deemed a member of the managerial staff. WORKERS WITH NO RIGHT OF SELFORGANIZATION 1. further. in recognition of their constitutional right to self-organization. however. Right of Supervisory Employees. 197 SCRA 275 MEDIALDEA. March 21. common employee entitled to overtime pay and other monetary benefits. the Court finds no justification to award overtime pay and premium pay for rest days to petitioner. Since petitioner belongs to this class of employees. insofar as they disqualify security guards from joining a rank and file organization are null and void. That aliens working in the country with valid permits issued by the Department of Labor and Employment.Penaranda’s duty as a shift engineer. 5. His duties and responsibilities conform to the definition of a member of a managerial staff under the Implementing Rules.O. He opted to severe employment when he insisted payment of his separation benefits.The Staff and Technical Employees Association of MERALCO filed a petition for certification election to represent regular employees of MERALC0 who are: (a) non managerial employees with Pay Grades VII and above. (As amended by Section 29. check and monitor manpower workmanship as well as operation of boiler and accessories. His work involved overseeing the operation of the machines and the performance of the workers in the engineering section. natural or juridical. Aquino issued E. Republic Act No.LA found Penaranda to be entitled of the overtime pay and premium pay. 1989). No.Managerial employees are not eligible to join. assist or form separate collective bargaining units 4. Like managerial employees. 269. . However. MERALCO moved for dismissal of the petition on ground that some of the employees they sought to represent are security services personnel who are prohibited from joining or assisting the rank-and-file union ISSUE:WON Security Guards may join a rank and file organization HELD: -Pres. NLRc. HELD NO. (3) To evaluate performance of machinery and manpower. including entitlement to overtime pay and premium pay for working on rest days. exceptions. Article 245 of the Labor Code is hereby amended to read as follows: “ART. 8. assist or form any labor organization." (1) Their primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or subdivision thereof. Treasury Security Services Section. being a managerial employee he is not entitled to overtime pay and if ever he rendered services beyond the normal hours of work. This work necessarily required the use of discretion and independent judgment to ensure the proper functioning of the steam plant boiler. By accommodating supervisory employees. Prohibition against aliens. . may exercise the right to selforganization and join or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for purposes of collective bargaining: Provided. under RA 6715. Security Guards MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY V SECRETARY OF LABOR. and (c) employees within the rank and file unit who are automatically disqualified from becoming union members of any organization within the same bargaining unit. [there] was no office order/or authorization for him to do so. That said aliens are nationals of a country which grants the same or similar rights to Filipino workers. Supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in the collective bargaining unit of the rank-and-file employees but may join. Under this provision.All aliens. officers and members of the managerial staff are not entitled to the provisions of law on labor standards. 1991 NATURE: Petition for review FACTS: . 245. (2) They customarily and regularly direct the work of two or more employees therein. which also takes him out of the coverage of labor standards. whether rank and file or supervisory. they may now freely join a labor organization of the rank and file or that of the supervisory union.27 - Disini Hence. . As supervisor. the Secretary of Labor must likewise apply the provisions of RA 6715 to security guards by favorably allowing them free access to a labor organization. Labor standards provide the working conditions of employees. security guards were barred from joining a labor organization of the rank and file. - - The Court disagrees with the NLRC’s finding that the petitioner was a managerial employee. therefore. . Aliens ART. (5) To train new employees for effective and safety while working) illustrates that petitioner was a member of the managerial staff. Secretaries who are automatically removed from the bargaining unit. managerial employees are "those whose primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or subdivision. Furthermore. MANAGERIAL AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES SEC. 6715.

REASONING .: NATURE Petition for Certiorari FACTS -On October 5." THE BROAD RATIONALE BEHIND THIS RULE IS THAT EMPLOYEES SHOULD NOT BE PLACED IN A POSITION INVOLVING A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTERESTS. among others. 1991 and directed the conduct of separate certification elections among the supervisors ranked as supervisory levels 1 to 4 (S1 to S4) and the exempt employees in each of the three plants at Cabuyao. indicate to be best suited to serve the reciprocal rights and duties of the parties under the collective bargaining provisions of the law. HOURS. Whether Supervisory employees 3 and 4 and the exempt employees of the company are considered confidential employees. has no relevance to negotiations and settlement of grievances wherein the interests of a union and the management are invariably adversarial. Med-Arbiter Danilo L. in the normal course of their duties. in determining the confidentiality of certain employees. will not cause an employee to be excluded from the bargaining unit representing employees of the union or association.28 - Disini and/or legitimate labor organizations of their own. RATIO . -The exclusion from bargaining units of employees who. Hence. hence ineligible from joining a union. NO. J." REASONING -Confidential employees are those who (1) assist or act in a confidential capacity. LAGUESMA 277 SCRA 370 (1997) ROMERO. VS. or the association. The information they handle are properly classifiable as technical and internal business operations data which. (2) to persons who formulate. San Fernando and Otis. and effectuate management policies in the field of labor relations. Undersecretary Laguesma granted the reconsideration prayed for on September 3. supervisors 3 and above may not be considered confidential employees merely because they handle "confidential data" as such must first be strictly classified as pertaining to labor relations for them to fall under said restrictions.Access to information which is regarded by the employer to be confidential from the business standpoint. NO RATIO . such as financial information or technical trade secrets. will not render an employee a confidential employee. San Fernando and Otis. 1991. Otis. petitioner union filed before the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) a Petition for Direct Certification or Certification Election among the supervisors and exempt employees of the SMC Magnolia Poultry Products Plants of Cabuyao. -Granting arguendo that an employee has access to confidential labor relations information but such is merely incidental to his duties and knowledge thereof is not necessary in the performance of such duties. and both must be met if an employee is to be considered a confidential employee that is. -On January 18. HELD 1. MUTUAL INTERESTS IN WAGES. "Management should not be required to handle labor relations matters through employees who are represented by the union with which the company is required to deal and who in the normal performance of their duties may obtain advance information of the company's position with regard to contract negotiations." . the disposition of grievances. the Med-Arbiter's error in grouping together all three (3) separate plants.An employee of a labor union. It is undisputed that they all belong to the Magnolia Poultry Division of San Miguel . 1990. to be regarded a confidential employee. -Upon petitioner-union's motion dated August 7. to our mind. which the collective interest of all the employees. ISSUES 1. must have access to confidential labor relations information with respect to his employer." which is the standard in determining the proper constituency of a collective bargaining unit. 1990. San Fernando and Otis as ONE BARGAINING UNIT. a key question frequently considered is the employee's necessary access to confidential labor relations information. said access does not render the employee a confidential employee.Labor Law 2 A2010 . or of a management association." -AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF THE "CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEE RULE" IS THE EMPLOYEE'S NEED TO USE LABOR RELATIONS INFORMATION. Reynante issued an Order ordering the conduct of certification election among the supervisors and exempt employees of the SMC Magnolia Poultry Products Plants of Cabuyao.A unit to be appropriate must effect a grouping of employees who have SUBSTANTIAL. 1991.An appropriate bargaining unit may be defined as "a group of employees of a given employer. -On December 19. . Thus. or other labor relations matters. become aware of management policies relating to labor relations is a principal objective sought to be accomplished by the ''confidential employee rule. the union. -In the case at bar. respondent San Miguel Corporation appealed pointing out. The two criteria are cumulative.” TEST SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION SUPERVISORS AND EXEMPT UNION. Cabuyao and San Fernando. The rank and file union and the supervisors’ union operating within the same establishment may join the same federation or national union. WORKING CONDITIONS AND OTHER SUBJECTS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. determine. the confidential relationship must exist between the employee and his supervisor. consistent with equity to the employer.It must be borne in mind that Section 3 of Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution mandates the State to guarantee to "all" workers the right to self-organization. confidential employees who may be excluded from bargaining unit must be strictly defined so as not to needlessly deprive many employees of their right to bargain collectively through representatives of their choosing. . or which the association represents.It is readily seen that the employees in the instant case have "community or mutuality of interests. comprised of all or less than all of the entire body of employees. 2. into one bargaining unit. and knowledge of labor relations information pertaining to the companies with which the union deals. and the supervisor must handle the prescribed responsibilities relating to labor relations. Whether or not it was proper for Usec Laguesma to consider that the employees of the three plants constitute an appropriate single bargaining unit. 2. and in including SUPERVISORY LEVELS 3 AND ABOVE WHOSE POSITIONS ARE CONFIDENTIAL IN NATURE.

In the present case. hereafter referred to as the union. suspend. that: (1) APSOTEU-TUCP was a labor organization duly-registered with the Labor Department. SRBI appealed the Med-Arbiter's decision to the Secretary of Labor and Employment. in the interest of the employer. (3) a majority of these employees supported the petition: (4) there was no existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between any union and SRBI. It argued that its members were not managerial employees but merely supervisory employees. On October 26. (2) SRBI employed 5 or more supervisory employees. and most importantly. that the members of APSOTEU-TUCP were in fact managerial or confidential employees. receive the same wages and compensation.Labor Law 2 A2010 . Having complied with the requirements of Art. The job description forms submitted by petitioner clearly show that the union members in question may not transfer. and Acting Chiefs of the Loans Department formulate and execute management policies which are normally expected of management officers. 234. Definitions (m) "Managerial employee" is one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or hire. It sought to prevent the holding of a certification election on two grounds. lay-off. 1994. 1993. 1993. On June 17. although they belong to three different plants. effectively recommend such managerial actions if the exercise of such authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. NO Reasoning . The appeal was denied for lack of merit. 1994. assign or discipline employees. it is our view that respondent union is a legitimate labor union. The Med-Arbiter denied the same. YES Reasoning - - - - - - - One of the rights of a legitimate labor organization under Article 242(b) of the Labor Code is the right to be certified as the exclusive representative of all employees in an appropriate bargaining unit for purposes of collective bargaining. SRBI filed a motion to dismiss the union's petition. On November 12. assign. the Med-Arbiter denied petitioner's motion to dismiss. (SRBI.Petitioner submitted detailed job descriptions to support its contention that the union members are managerial employees and/or confidential employees proscribed from engaging in labor activities. recall. Article 257 of the Labor Code mandates that a certification election shall automatically be conducted by the Med-Arbiter upon the filing of a petition by a legitimate labor organization. the Med-Arbiter scheduled the holding of the certification election for June 29. among others. Private respondent SRBI Association of Professional. 2000 NATURE: - Special civil action for certiorari and prohibition - FACTS: Petitioner Sugbuanon Rural Bank. 1994. SRBI then filed a motion for reconsideration. . Office. This means that. Moreover. The union filed its opposition to the motion to dismiss on December 1. Supervisory employees are those who. On June 16. the Association of Labor Unions-Trade Unions Congress of the Philippines or ALU-TUCP was representing the union. the forms also do not show that the Cashiers. and Technical Employees Union (APSOTEU) is a legitimate labor organization affiliated with the Trade Unions Congress of the Philippines (TUCP). - SUGBUANON RURAL BANK. He ruled that APSOTEU-TUCP was a legitimate labor organization. Inc. petitioner failed to show that the employees in question were vested with managerial powers. First. and (5) no certification election had been held in SRBI during the past 12 months prior to the petition. the Med-Arbiter cancelled the certification election scheduled for June 29. 1994 in order to address the motion for reconsideration. however. On October 8. it had the legal right to represent its members for collective bargaining purposes. Two days later. Accountants. they perform work of the same nature. He also held that until and unless a final order is issued cancelling APSOTEU-TUCP's registration certificate. recall. DOLE Undersecretary denied SRBI's appeal for lack of merit.Article 212 (m) of the Labor Code defines the terms "managerial employee" and "supervisory employees" as follows: Art. including the right to file a petition for certification election. All employees not falling within any of the above definitions are considered rank-and-file employees for purposes of . the DOLE Regional Office in Cebu City granted Certificate of Registration to APSOTEUTUCP. or discipline employees. Second. lay-off. Supervisory. review. VS LAGUESMA 325 SCRA 425 QUISUMBING: February 2. and final decision by the bank's management. 2. SRBI moved for reconsideration of the Undersecretary's decision Corporation. discharge. It alleged. At best they only had recommendatory powers subject to evaluation. The certification election was ordered. On December 9. INC. The Med-Arbiter later denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration SRBI appealed the order of denial to the DOLE Secretary Petitioner proceeded to file a petition with the DOLE Regional Office seeking the cancellation of the respondent union's registration. It averred that the ISSUE/S: (1) WON the members of the respondent union are managerial employees and/or highly-placed confidential employees. hence prohibited by law from joining labor organizations and engaging in union activities (2) WON the Med-Arbiter may validly order the holding of a certification election HELD: 1. 1993. the union filed a petition for certification election of the supervisory employees of SRBI. share a common stake in concerted activities.. suspend.29 - Disini APSOTEU-TUCP members were actually managerial employees who were prohibited by law from joining or organizing unions. 1993. for brevity) is a duly-registered banking institution with principal office in Cebu City and a branch in Mandaue City. 212. transfer. 1993. It was fully entitled to all the rights and privileges granted by law to a legitimate labor organization. discharge. SRBI filed with the Med-Arbiter an urgent motion to suspend proceedings.

. Disposition Petition is granted. OF THE PHILS. . for it is the job description that determines the nature of employment. Surigao del Sur. Theirs is not a final determination of the company policies inasmuch as any action taken by them on matters relative to hiring. SAMSON VS NLRC (SCHERING-PLOUGH CORP) 330 SCRA 460 Kapunan. and the Resolution and Order of public respondent Bienvenido E. ISSUE WON the positions Section Heads and Supervisors. with four (4) choices. implement and control strategic and operational policies while the task of First-Line Managers is simply to ensure that such policies are carried out by the rankand. lay off.30 - Disini PAPER INDUSTRIES CORP. OF THE PHILS. 1991 and August 17. And before one may be properly considered a managerial employee. Laguesma dated April 17. April 12. or their suggestions and recommendations as to hiring an firing and as to the promotion or any other change of status of other employees are given particular weight.file employees of an organization. the term “trust and confidence” is restricted to managerial employees.NO.A thorough dissection of the job description of the concerned supervisory employees and section heads indisputably show that they are not actually managerial but only supervisory employees since they do not lay down company policies. petitioner cannot be considered a managerial employee despite his designation as District Sales Manager. transfer. they customarily and regularly direct the work of two or more employees therein. Another Order set the holding of a certification election among PICOP's supervisory and technical staff employees in Tabon. 2000 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS . ISSUE/S WON the dismissal on the ground of loss of confidence is valid HELD No.The Labor Arbiter found that Samson was illegally dismissed but the decision was reversed by NLRC. assign or discipline employees”. and that PBSTSEU had no personality to file the petition for certification election. three conditions must be met: a. J.Federation of Free Workers (FFW) and Associated Labor Union (ALU) filed their respective petitions for intervention. insulting. Their primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or subdivision thereof: b. 2000 NATURE Petition for certiorari seeking to annul the Resolution and the Order Laguesma. transfer.PICOP-Bislig Supervisory and Technical Staff Employees Union (PBSTSEU) instituted a Petition for Certification Election to determine the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of the supervisory and technical staff employees of PICOP for CBA purposes. Samson was dismissed from the Company for uttering what was considered by the company as obscene. Middle Managers and First Line Managers. respectively. .PICOP appealed the Order which set the holding of the certification election contending that the Med-Arbiter committed grave abuse of discretion in deciding the case without giving PICOP the opportunity to file its comments/answer. suspend. Bislig. acting then as Undersecretary. V LAGUESMA 330 SCRA 295 DE LEON. promotion. 2000 NATURE . c. discharge. . and offensive words and for making malicious and lewd gestures directed at the President and General Manager of the company during an informal Sales and Marketing gathering in relation to the decision of the Management Committee on a dispute with another employee. 1991. (2) FFW. . Absent this crucial element. April 12. (3) ALU. A2010 . . The mere fact that an employee is designated “manager” does not ipso facto make him one. Designation should be reconciled with the actual job description of the employee. They have the authority to hire or fire other employees of lower rank. As a ground for dismissal. V LAGUESMA 330 SCRA 295 DE LEON. Any authority they exercise is not supreme but merely advisory in character. April 12. .Med-Arbiter granted the petitions for interventions of the FFW and ALU. and (4) no union. recall. Drilon upheld the Med-Arbiter's Order with modification allowing the supervising and staff employees in Cebu.Labor Law 2 DISPOSITIVE: Petition dismissed.Managerial employees are ranked as Top Managers. He was also accused of threatening to disrupt or create violence in a forthcoming National Sales Conference. now the Secretary. Samson is reinstated to his position without loss of seniority rights and is awarded payment of his full backwages PAPER INDUSTRIES CORP. Davao and Iligan City to participate in the certification election. .. finding the subject supervisors and section heads as supervisory employees eligible to vote in the certification election are AFFIRMED.Rufino Norberto F. suspension and termination of employees is still subject to confirmation and approval by their respective superior. who have been designated as Section Managers and Unit Managers who were converted to managerial employees are ineligible for union membership HELD . In this case the job description of Samson does not mention that petitioner possesses the power “to lay down policies nor to hire. Top and Middle Managers have the authority to devise. NLRC decision is reversed and set aside. of the DOLE FACTS . namely: (1) PBSTSEU.DOLE Sec.PICOP questioned and objected to the inclusion of some section heads and supervisors in the list of voters whose positions it averred were reclassified as managerial employees in the light of the reorganization effected by it. Disposition WHEREFORE. the petition is hereby DISMISSED.

suspension and termination of employees is still subject to confirmation and approval by their respective superior.Med-Arbiter granted the petitions for interventions of the FFW and ALU. Middle Managers and First Line Managers. As the Dean of Student Affairs. acting then as Undersecretary. ISSUE/S WON Llagas and Javier were managerial EES. for it is the job description that determines the nature of employment. . . as another justification for the retirement. a supervisory EE. the petition is hereby DISMISSED. alleging unfair labor practice and unlawful termination. May 4. Laguesma dated April 17. The school then filed this petition. of the DOLE FACTS . Javier falls under supervisory EEs . respectively. both having rendered more than 20 years of continuous service. rendering the Union inutile to represent their cause. (3) ALU. The school retired Llagas and Javier. the last 3 years continuous). . . it gave. with four (4) choices. and (4) no union. Union claims that retirement was equivalent to union busting. and the Resolution and Order of public respondent Bienvenido E. as the dismissed EEs were their leaders. which is in effect RECOMMENDATORY in character. REVIEW. . is SUBJECT TO EVALUATION. The school countered with a petition to declare the strike illegal.school claims that it could validly retire Llagas and Javier. 2006 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS . or to effectively recommend such managerial actions.the school and union entered into a CBA. . They lost the trust and confidence of the school. suspend.Federation of Free Workers (FFW) and Associated Labor Union (ALU) filed their respective petitions for intervention. lay-off. when they joined and became officers of the union. Thus. Drilon upheld the Med-Arbiter's Order with modification allowing the supervising and staff employees in Cebu. the reason that as managerial employees (LLagas was the Dean of Student Affairs while Javier was the Subject Area Coordinator). thus disqualified from joining a union. Top and Middle Managers have the authority to devise. promotion.Labor Law 2 A2010 . The same.court reviewed the functions of the positions of the retired EEs found in the Faculty Manual in order to determine their classification. Any authority they exercise is not supreme but merely advisory in character. Davao and Iligan City to participate in the certification election. 1991. Then the union in the school became inactive for several years.PICOP questioned and objected to the inclusion of some section heads and supervisors in the list of voters whose positions it averred were reclassified as managerial employees in the light of the reorganization effected by it. now the Secretary. saying that the retirement of the 2 union officers was a mere subterfuge to bust the union. assign or discipline employees. namely: (1) PBSTSEU. Llagas was clearly a managerial employee. in the interest of the ER. who have been designated as Section Managers and Unit Managers who were converted to managerial employees are ineligible for union membership HELD . . .Managerial employees are ranked as Top Managers.Thus. The mere fact that an employee is designated “manager” does not ipso facto make him one. is not effective and not an exercise of INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT as required by law. their membership in the Union has become questionable. .appeal of the union to the CA was granted. finding the subject supervisors and section heads as supervisory employees eligible to vote in the certification election are AFFIRMED. Llagas is proscribed from joining a labor union. and FINAL ACTION by department heads and other higher executives of the company. where such power. at its prerogative granted to it by law and the CBA. and that PBSTSEU had no personality to file the petition for certification election. . Bislig.thus. Designation should be reconciled with the actual job description of the employee. The union struck. . Also. Disposition Petition is granted. In the case of Javier.PICOP appealed the Order which set the holding of the certification election contending that the Med-Arbiter committed grave abuse of discretion in deciding the case without giving PICOP the opportunity to file its comments/answer.PICOP-Bislig Supervisory and Technical Staff Employees Union (PBSTSEU) instituted a Petition for Certification Election to determine the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of the supervisory and technical staff employees of PICOP for CBA purposes. . effectively recommend such managerial actions if the exercise of such authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment.NLRC ruled in favor of the school. discharge. Reasoning Art. implement and control strategic and operational policies while the task of First-Line Managers is simply to ensure that such policies are carried out by the rankand. thus making the strike called by the union on their behalf (as unqualified union members) illegal HELD YES Ratio The 2 employees are not rank and file employees. They allowed their loyalties be divided between the union and the school. NLRC resolution reinstated. Finding both union officers to be employees not belonging to the rank-and-file. she may join a labor union composed only of supervisory employees.31 - Disini Petition for certiorari seeking to annul the Resolution and the Order Laguesma. the strike called in their behalf is illegal. transfer. Theirs is not a final determination of the company policies inasmuch as any action taken by them on matters relative to hiring. As a Subject Area Coordinator. declaring that the management prerogative on retirement of EEs was validly exercised.A thorough dissection of the job description of the concerned supervisory employees and section heads indisputably show that they are not actually managerial but only supervisory employees since they do not lay down company policies. CAINTA CATHOLIC SCHOOL V CAINTA CATHOLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEES’ UNION 489 SCRA 468 TINGA.DOLE Sec. Supervisory EEs are those who.NO. although present. Another Order set the holding of a certification election among PICOP's supervisory and technical staff employees in Tabon. Disposition WHEREFORE. the school decided to enforce the provision on the CBA re: retirement (that management can retire an employee if s/he has reached age of 60 or rendered at least 20 years of service. led by Llagas (Pres) and Javier (VP). more so being elected as union officer.file employees of an organization. ISSUE WON the positions Section Heads and Supervisors. recall. When it became active again.212(m) defines a managerial employee as: one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire. On the other hand. . Surigao del Sur. 1991 and August 17. (2) FFW. transfer.

. Acting Labor Secretary Nieves Confesor issued a resolution declaring the layoff of Metrolab's 94 rank and file workers illegal and ordered their reinstatement with full backwages. . OF LABOR (PEPSI-COLA SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES ORGANIZATION-UOEF) . any strike or lockout is hereby strictly enjoined. is hereby denied. management prerogatives must always be exercise consistently with the statutory objective. . The employer is not assured of such protection if these employees themselves are union members. The Omnibus Resolution contains the following orders: 1. are likewise privy to sensitive and highly confidential records Reasoning In the case at bench. Metrolab laid off 94 of its rank and file employees. It maintained that the company would suffer a yearly gross revenue loss of approximately sixty-six (66) million pesos due to the withdrawal of its principals in the Toll and Contract Manufacturing Department. the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between Metrolab and the Private respondent Metro Drug Corporation Employees Association-Federation of Free Workers (hereinafter referred to as the Union) expired. 1996 NATURE Petition for certiorari seeking the annulment of the Resolution and Omnibus Resolution of the Secretary of Labor and Employment FACTS . The Union filed a notice of strike against Metrolab and Metro Drug Inc. February 28. issued an assumption order. and to see to it that its interest are well protected. Disposition Petition is partly granted. 2. are not being unjustly curtailed but duly balanced with and tempered by the limitations set by law. Metrolab recalled some of the laid off workers on a temporary basis due to availability of work in the production lines. the then Secretary of Labor and Employment. PEPSI COLA PRODUCTS VS SEC. MII is hereby ordered to pay such employees their full backwages computed from the time of actual layoff to the time of actual recall. (I)n the collective bargaining process. MII's motion for partial reconsideration of our 14 April 1992 resolution specifically that portion thereof assailing our ruling that the layoff of the 94 employees is illegal. NO Ratio Although Article 245 of the Labor Code 20 limits the ineligibility to join. to act as its representatives. The parties failed to settle their dispute despite the conciliation efforts of the National Conciliation and Mediation Board. Ruben D. they might jeopardize that interest which they are duty-bound to protect. Metrolab is one of the leading manufacturers and suppliers of medical and pharmaceutical products to the country.On 31 December 1990. On the same date. It is not farfetched that in the course of collective bargaining. the Union does not disagree with petitioner that the executive secretaries are confidential employees. on various dates.As aptly declared by public respondent Secretary of Labor in its assailed resolution: one of the substantive evils which Article 263 (g) of the Labor Code seeks to curb is the exacerbation of a labor dispute to the further detriment of the national interest. unionization of confidential employees for the purpose of collective bargaining would mean the extension of the law to persons or individuals who are supposed to act "in the interest of the employers. Metrolab moved for a reconsiderations. ISSUE/S 1. Moreover. the Union filed a motion for a cease and desist order to enjoin Metrolab from implementing the mass layoff. during the pendency of the abovementioned motion for reconsideration. among others: Accordingly. Metrolab laid off 73 of its employees on grounds of redundancy due to lack of work which the union again promptly opposed on.On the other hand. The resolutions of the Sec of Labor are hereby MODIFIED to the extent that executive secretaries of petitioner Metrolab's General Manager and the executive secretaries of the members of its Management Committee are excluded from the bargaining unit of petitioner's rank and file employees. When a labor dispute has in fact occurred and a general injunction has been issued restraining the commission of disruptive acts. the union filed a motion for reconsideration.On 14 April 1992. 245 as if the disqualification of confidential employees were written in the provision. WON the Sec of Labor erred in declaring the temporary layoff illegal. WON the Sec of Labor erred in excluding executive secretaries as part of the bargaining unit of rank and file employees HELD 1. taking into account its special character and the particular circumstances in the case at bench. ended in a deadlock. form and assist any labor organization to managerial employees. Labor Secretary Confesor again issued a cease and desist order. However. It is the same reason that impelled this Court to consider the position of confidential employees as included in the disqualification found in Art.Thereafter. and ordering the reinstatement and payment of backwages to the affected employees 2. If confidential employees could unionize in order to bargain for advantages for themselves. .Labor Secretary Confesor issued the assailed Pending the resolution of the aforestated motions.32 - Disini METROLAB INDUSTRIES. alleging that such act violated the prohibition against committing acts that would exacerbate the dispute as specifically directed in the assumption order. jurisprudence has extended this prohibition to confidential employees or those who by reason of their positions or nature of work are required to assist or act in a fiduciary manner to managerial employees and hence. managerial employees are supposed to be on the side of the employer. Reasoning -That Metrolab's business is of national interest is not disputed. Collective bargaining in such a situation can become one-sided. however.Thereafter. Torres. NO Ratio This Court recognizes the exercise of management prerogatives and often declines to interfere with the legitimate business decisions of the employer. INC VS ROLDANCONFESSOR 254 SCRA 182 KAPUNAN. 2 . not from the bargaining unit.Labor Law 2 PROHIBITION AND RATIONALE A2010 . Metrolab contended that the layoff was temporary and in the exercise of its management prerogative. the dispositive portion of which states. therefore. this privilege is not absolute but subject to limitations imposed by law. then they could be governed by their own motives rather than the interest of the employers. -To contain the escalating dispute.Metrolab's management prerogatives. The negotiations for a new CBA. The Companies and the Metro Drug Corp. Labor Secretary Confesor also ruled that executive secretaries are excluded from the closed-shop provision of the CBA. Employees Association ? FFW are likewise directed to cease and desist from committing any and all acts that might exacerbate the situation.

245 as if the disqualification of confidential employees were written in the provision. 245. or with the custody. 2." ISSUES 1. Cancel. in its Reply." . the affiliation of the supervisory employee's union with the same federation with which the rank and file employees union is affiliated did not make the supervisory employees members of the rank and file employee's union and vice versa. it still had the legal personality to perform such act absent an order directing the cancellation. . . The prohibition extends to a supervisors' local union applying for membership in a national federation the members of which include local unions of rank and file employees. . or care and protection of the employer's property.PEPSI filed with the Bureau of Labor Relations a petition to Set Aside. -the Med-Arbiter granted the Petition. WON confidential employees can join the labor union of the rank and file. The rationale for this is that at the time the respondent union filed its petition. then they could be governed by their own motives rather than the interest of the employers. FACTS . assist or form separate labor organizations of their own. handling.Petitioner again filed a Supplemental Reply stressing: The respondent supervisory union could do indirectly what it could not do directly as the simple expedient of affiliating with UOEF would negate the manifest intent and letter of the law that supervisory employees can only "join. While Art. 3. Hence. In other words.2 .245 but only becomes entitled to all the rights enjoyed by the labor organization (at the company level) when it has complied with the registration requirements found in Art. .Labor Law 2 312 SCRA 104 PURISIMA. that: …Art. under the doctrine of necessary implication. NO Ratio The Court applies the established rule correctly followed by the public respondent that an order to hold a certification election is proper despite the pendency of the petition for cancellation of the registration certificate of the respondent union. NO Ratio A confidential employee is one entrusted with confidence on delicate matters. The intent of the law is clear especially where. . It is the same reason that impelled this Court to consider the position of confidential employees as included in the disqualification found in Art. . NO Ratio If the intent of the law is to avoid a situation where supervisors would merge with the rank-and-file or where the supervisors' labor organization would represent conflicting interests.the Secretary of Labor and Employment. Ineligibility of managerial employees to join any labor organization. WON the Petition to cancel/revoke registration is a prejudicial question to the petition for certification election.if these managerial employees would belong to or be affiliated with a Union. The employer is not assured of such protection if these employees themselves are union members.234 and 237. 3. DISPOSITION Petitions DISMISSED but Decision of the Secretary of Labor is MODIFIED in that Credit and Collection Managers and Accounting Managers are highly confidential employees not eligible for membership in a supervisors' union. alleging inter alia. If confidential employees could unionize in order to bargain for advantages for themselves. what is prohibited by Art. WON a supervisors' union can affiliate with the same Federation of which 2 rank and file unions are likewise members. 245 of the New Labor Code does not preclude the supervisor's union and the rank-and-file union from being affiliated with the same federation. . the latter might not be assured of their loyalty to the Union in view of evident conflict of interests. confidential employees are similarly disqualified. 245 of the Labor Code3 3 Art. right of supervisory employees. as in this case at bar. . they might jeopardize that interest which they are duty bound to protect. Managerial employees are not eligible to join. 1999 NATURE Petitions for certiorari A2010 . the supervisors will be co-mingling with those employees whom they directly supervise in their own bargaining unit. . assist or form separate labor organization of their own. August 10. A federation of local union is not the labor organization referred to in Art. assist or form any labor organization. Supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rank-and-file employees but may join.245 of the Labor Code states that.33 - Disini 2. Reasoning The Court emphasizes that the limitation is not confined to a case of supervisors' wanting to join a rankand-file union. unionization of confidential employees for the purpose of collective bargaining would mean the extension of the law to persons or individuals who are supposed to act "in the interest of" the employers. Inc. Moreover.in the collective bargaining process. sent in a Comment.the Pepsi-Cola Employees Organization-UOEF (Union) filed a petition for certification election with the Med-Arbiter seeking to be the exclusive bargaining agent of supervisors of Pepsi-Cola Philippines. (PEPSI).PEPSI. The Union can also become company dominated with the presence of managerial employees in Union membership. to act as its representatives. assist or form separate labor organizations of their own" and cannot "be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rank and file employees. . "Supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rank and file employees but may join. . 245 of the Labor Code singles out managerial employee as ineligible to join. This provision of law does not prohibit a local union composed of supervisory employees from being affiliated to a federation which has local unions with rank-and-file members as affiliates. Pepsi-Cola Labor Unity (PCLU) and Pepsi-Cola Employees Union of the Philippines (PEUP). assist or form any labor organization. managerial employees are supposed to be on the side of the employer. It is not farfetched that in the course of collective bargaining. then a local supervisors' union should not be allowed to affiliate with the national federation of union of rank-and-file employees where that federation actively participates in union activity in the company. asserted: It is our humble contention that a final determination of the Petition to Set-Aside. . Revoke Charter Union Affiliation should first be disposed of before granting the Petition for the Conduct of Certification Election. . HELD 1. Cancel and/or Revoke Charter Affiliation of the Union on the grounds that (a) the members of the Union were managers and (b) a supervisors' union can not affiliate with a federation whose members include the rank and file union of the same company. with the explicit statement that it was an affiliate of Union de Obreros Estivadores de Filipinas (federation) together with two (2) rank and file unions. . and to see to it that its interest are well protected.245 is membership of supervisory employees in a labor union (at the company level) of the rank and file. Collective bargaining in such a situation can become one-sided. Reasoning .the Federation argued that: The pertinent portion of Art. without violating Art.

29. Inc. But employees who are neither members nor co-owners of the cooperative are entitled to exercise the rights to self-organization. 1989 NATURE Petition for certiorari to review the resolution of the Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations FACTS ." . As such.After BELU won.A certification election was held to determine which of 2 BENECO (Benguet Electric Cooperative) labor unions would be the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of all rank and file employees of BENECO. Ferrer-Calleja. BWLU-ADLO (Benguet electric cooperative Workers’ Labor UnionAssociation of Democratic Labor Organizations) and 2. NON-EMPLOYEES REPUBLIC PLANTERS BANK GENERAL SERVICES EMPLOYEES UNION . BENECO filed a protest claiming that some employees who are members and co-owners of the cooperative had voted in the election when they are ineligible to do so. BELU (BENECO Employees Labor Union) . CENECO filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of legal restraints. which disqualifies a member from joining any labor organization within the cooperative. . for certainly an owner cannot bargain with himself or his co-owners. It is the fact of ownership of the cooperative. . et al. WON employees of a cooperative are qualified to form or join a labor organization for purposes of collective bargaining HELD 1. WON the employees were allowed to withdraw membership from the cooperative so as to entitle them to form or join CURE for purposes of the negotiations for a collective bargaining agreement HELD 1. . employees who at the same time are members of an electric cooperative are not entitled to form or join a union. Inc. ISSUE/S 1. 1991 NATURE Special civil action for certiorari . YES Ratio Membership in the cooperative is on a voluntary basis. Reasoning As members of the cooperative they are co-owners thereof.However.It was held in Batangas I Electric Cooperative Labor Union vs.” (Cooperative Rural Bank of Davao City. and not involvement in the management thereof. Thus. ISSUE 1. irrespective of the degree of their participation in the actual management of the cooperative. Young that "employees who at the same time are members of an electric cooperative are not entitled to form or join unions for purposes of collective bargaining agreement. withdrawal therefrom cannot be restricted unnecessarily.Previous events: Their CBA was valid for a term of 3 years. Hence.NATU v LAGUESMA 264 SCRA 637 PUNO. join or assist labor orgs. assist or join a labor organization for the purpose of collective bargaining. Romeo A.34 - Disini 2. The 2 disputing labor unions were: 1. BENECO’s protest was dismissed by the med-arbiter. Disposition Petition is granted. No Right of Self-Organization: WORKER/MEMBER OF COOPERATIVE . of their own choosing because they are members and joint owners of the cooperative. Nov 21. 3. all members thereof cannot form.Some employees of CENECO then filed for withdrawal of membership in the cooperative but CENECO contended that this cannot be allowed. 1991. Disposition The questioned order is hereby ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. BENECO claimed that these employees are not eligible to form. FACTS . September 13. (CENECO) seeks to annul the order issued by then Acting Secretary of Labor Laguesma declaring the projected certification election unnecessary and directing petitioner CENECO to continue recognizing private respondent CENECO Union of Rational Employees (CURE) as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of all the rankand-file employees of petitioner's electric cooperative. assist or join a labor organization for the purpose of collective bargaining with petitioner. CURE then wrote CENECO proposing that negotiations be conducted for a new agreement. NO Ratio The right to collective bargaining is not available to an employee of a cooperative who at the same time is a member and co-owner thereof. Resolution of respondent director of BLR is annulled. Certification election is set aside.Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) director Calleja affirmed the med-arbiter’s order and certified BELU as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of all the rank and file employees of BENECO.) . collective bargaining and negotiation as mandated by the 1987 Constitution and applicable statutes. WORKER/MEMBER OF COOPERATIVE BENGUET ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE v CALLEJA 180 SCRA 740 Cortes. nowhere in said case is it stated that memberemployees are prohibited from withdrawing their membership in the cooperative in order to join a labor union.The fact that the members-employees of petitioner do not participate in the actual management of the cooperative does not make them eligible to form. v. . 1996 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS -on January 21.CURE filed a petition for direct recognition or for certification election. The med-arbiter is hereby ordered to conduct a certification election among the rank-and.Labor Law 2 A2010 . Republic Planters Bank General Services Employees Union-National Association of Trade Unions (petitioner) filed a petition for certification election to determine the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of all regular employees outside the bargaining unit of CENTRAL NEGROS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE V DOLE SECRETARY 201 SCRA 584 REGALADO. under applicable decisions of the Supreme Court. CENECO denied CURE's request on the ground that. Dec.file employees of CENECO with CURE and No Union as the choices therein. The right to join an organization necessarily includes the equivalent right not to join the same. they cannot invoke the right to collective bargaining for “certainly an owner cannot bargain with himself or his co-owners.Petitioner Central Negros Electric Cooperative.

HELD NO. . It represents all the employees in such a bargaining unit. not labor organizations. discriminate against or unduly interfere with employees and workers in their exercise of the right to self-organization. In the event that an obligation therein imposed is not fulfilled. deposited the said amount with the Labor Administrator. (d) To initiate. nor to be certified as bargaining agent can be recognized. 248. Those who are entitled to its benefits can invoke its provisions. Drilon.The benefits of a collective bargaining agreement extend to the laborers and employees in the collective bargaining unit. 1980). (c) To contract out services or functions being performed by union members when such will interfere with. Allegedly. finding 6 employees as regular and included in the existing rank and file unit. 1972 NATURE Appeal from CFI Cebu by intervenor Associated Labor Union FACTS . including the giving of financial or other support to it or its organizers or supporters. restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization. it was rules that if the union members are not employees. 2. et al. plumbers. . assist or otherwise interfere with the formation or administration of any labor organization. 1992. Usec Laguesma issued another Order reinstating the Resolution dated December 21. dominate. May 1. hours of work and other terms and conditions of employment in order to encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization.05 PARTY PROTECTED MACTAN WORKERS UNION vs.35 - Disini Republic Planters Bank. -The 72 members of Mactan Workers Union failed to get their money (bec they did not like to go to ALU’s office). .Associated Labor Union (ALU). Nothing in this Code or in any other law shall stop the parties from requiring membership in a recognized collective bargaining agent as a condition for employment. President. Such right shall include the right to form. entered into a CBA with Cebu Shipyard where they agreed on a profit-sharing bonus scheme. join. Usec Laguesma modified the December 21. -The proposed bargaining unit is composed of clerks. Undersecretary Bienvenido Laguesma reversed the Order of the Med-arbiter.The employees and laborers of Cebu Shipyard and Eng’g Works belong to two rival unions: the Mactan Workers Union and Associated Labor Union.06 NON-ABRIDGMENT OF RIGHT ART. Non-abridgment of right to self-organization. that there was already an existing bargaining unit. including those who do not belong to the chosen bargaining labor organization.It shall be unlawful for an employer to commit any of the following unfair labor practice: (a) To interfere with. -The lower court declared the Cebu Shipyard to deliver the . . On Feb 24. of jurisdiction of the City Court of Lapulapu and of personality of the Mactan Workers Union to represent its members. drivers. . Unfair labor practices of employers. On Dec 21. For the recovery of their money. ART. (b) To require as a condition of employment that a person or an employee shall not join a labor organization or shall withdraw from one to which he belongs. and for ALU to distribute it immediately to Mactan Workers members. but instead. Disposition CFI Decision affirmed 2.ALU appealed. Their money was returned to the company and ALU advised the company not to deliver the amount to the members of the Mactan Workers Union unless ordered by the Court. the aggrieved party has the right to go to court for redress. That is the raison d'etre of labor unions. 246.Labor Law 2 A2010 . coerce. Any unclaimed money will be returned to the company after 60 days. restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their rights to selforganization. Cebu Shipyard & Engineering Works. and thus be allowed to file a petition for certification election. messengers. ISSUE WON petitioners have the right to self-organization. otherwise the ALU will take steps to protect the interest of its members. 45 SCRA 577 FERNANDO. Mactan Workers filed money claims against Cebu Shipyard. -So Cebu Shipyard did not pay to the plaintiffs. . The latter are merely the instrumentalities through which their welfare may be promoted and fostered. subject to the provisions of Article 264 of this Code.Both parties moved for reconsideration. telex operators. June 30. Disposition Petition is dismissed money to ALU. or more specifically the working men and women. 1992. … The labor union that gets the majority vote as the exclusive bargaining representative does not act for its members alone. and that the petition failed to state the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit. or assist labor organizations for the purpose of collective bargaining through representatives of their own choosing and to engage in lawful concerted activities for the same purpose for their mutual aid and protection. mechanics and computer personnel.It shall be unlawful for any person to restrain. Inc.. Petitioner sought a ruling that the other workers in the proposed bargaining unit should also be considered regular employees. no right to organize for purposes of bargaining. 1992 Resolution. It was agreed that Cebu Shipyard will release the money to ALU then ALU will deliver it to the members. . (As amended by Batas Pambansa Bilang 70. Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration. -The bank filed moved to dismiss the petition for certification election on the contentions that they are employed on contractual basis.In the case of Singer Sewing Machine Company vs. these employees are regular employees but are considered as contractual employees by the bank and are excluded from the existing collective bargaining agreement. they are not entitled to the constitutional right to join or form a labor organization for purposes of collective bargaining. alleging lack of a cause of action.The raison d’etre of labor unions: it is not to be forgotten that what is entitled to constitutional protection is labor. DON RAMON ABOITIZ. ISSUES WON CFI Cebu was correct in ordering ALU to deliver Mactan Workers Union’s share HELD YES -The lower court just required literal compliance with the terms of a collective bargaining contract -The terms and conditions of a collective bargaining contract constitute the law between the parties. 1995. mailing and printing personnel. as exclusive bargaining representative of the workers. . Since the persons involved are not employees of the company.The petition was dismissed by the Med-Arbiter. (e) To discriminate in regard to wages. janitors. .

in whole or in part.The mediator arbiter granted the petition of the union. that the individual authorization required under Article 242. August 21.A 875 "representative" is define as including "a legitimate labor organization or any officer or agent of such organization. It is the policy of the State: (b) To promote free trade unionism as an instrument for the enhancement of democracy and the promotion of social justice and development. 1998 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . It can be remedied thru the exclusion-inclusion proceedings wherein those employees who are occupying rank and file positions will be excluded from the list of eligible voters. and (3) that the respondent union lacks legal standing since it failed to submit its books of accounts. Employees of an appropriate bargaining unit who are not members of the recognized collective bargaining agent may be assessed a reasonable fee equivalent to the dues and other fees paid by members of the recognized collective bargaining agent. 211. paragraph (o) of this Code shall not apply to the non-members of the recognized collective bargaining agent. The provisions of the preceding paragraph notwithstanding. including discrimination against an employee with respect to whom membership in such organization has been denied or to terminate an employee on any ground other than the usual terms and conditions under which membership or continuation of membership is made available to other members. or refuse to bargain collectively with the employer. agents or representatives: (a) To restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization. or (f) To violate a collective bargaining agreement. Regional Office No. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Bilang 130. ART. . provided it is the representative of the employees. The secretary of labor affirmed. CIR 76 SCRA 274 CASTRO. representatives or agents or members of labor associations or organizations who have actually participated in. 249. (e) To ask for or accept negotiation or attorney’s fees from employers as part of the settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute. Under Section 2(h) of R. (c) To foster the free and voluntary organization of a strong and united labor movement. only the officers.Respondent alleges that it is composed only of supervisory employees and that it has no obligation to attach its books of accounts since it is a legitimate labor organization. for services which are not performed or not to be performed.Respondent union filed a Petition for Certification Election among the supervisory. 1977 Definition of Legitimate Labor Organization: Section 2(e) of R.A. . DECEMBER 11. in the nature of an exaction. 875 defines "labor organization" as any union or association of employees which exist. whether or not employed by the employer or employee whom he represents. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Bilang 130. April 15. Ratio Article 245 of the Labor Code clearly provides that "supervisory employees shall not be eligible for membership in a labor organization of the rank-and-file employees.Labor Law 2 A2010 except those employees who are already members of another union at the time of the signing of the collective bargaining agreement. 1981). its officers. if such non-union members accept the benefits under the collective bargaining agreement: Provided. III. (c) To violate the duty.” DUNLOP SLAZENGER V SEC. Unfair labor practices of labor organizations. ISSUE/S WON the union can be composed of supervisory and rank and file employees HELD NO. . authorized or ratified unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable.36 Disini LABOR ORGANIZATION –UNIONS DEFINITION AIRLINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES V. (h) To pay negotiation or attorney’s fees to the union or its officers or agents as part of the settlement of any issue in collective bargaining or any other dispute." It cannot be overemphasized likewise that labor dispute can exist "regardless of whether the disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee. associations or partnerships who have actually participated in. (f) To dismiss.It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization. (g) To violate the duty to bargain collectively as prescribed by this Code. OF LABOR (RUIZ) 300 SCRA 120 PUNO. 1981). including the demand for fee for union negotiations. . .Petitioner company filed a motion to dismiss based on 1) that the respondent union is comprised of supervisory and rank-and-file employees and cannot act as bargaining agent for the proposed unit. (b) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against an employee. However.A. or (i) To violate a collective bargaining agreement. for the purpose of the collective bargaining or dealing with employers concerning terms and conditions of employment. authorized or ratified unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable. (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. The provisions of the preceding paragraph notwithstanding." The emphasis of Industrial Peace Act is clearly on the purposes for which a union or association of employees established rather than that membership therein should be limited only to the employees of a particular employer. members of governing boards. . a labor organization shall have the right to prescribe its own rules with respect to the acquisition or retention of membership. LABOR ORGANIZATION POLICY ART. only the officers and agents of corporations. .” Reasoning Public respondent gravely misappreciates the basic antipathy between the interest of supervisors and the III. August 21. office and technical employees of the petitioner company before the DOLE. discharge or otherwise prejudice or discriminate against an employee for having given or being about to give testimony under this Code. Declaration of Policy. (2) that a single certification election cannot be conducted jointly among supervisory and rankand-file employees. It said that the contention of the respondent that the petitioning union is composed of both supervisory and rank and file employees is not sufficient to dismiss the petition.

This was affirmed by the CA. and for as long as there is no final order of cancellation.) LAGUNA AUTOPARTS V OFFICE OF THE DOLE SECRETARY 457 SCRA 730 CALLEJO. including the right to file a petition for certification election for the purpose of collective bargaining. some of the signatures in the list of union members were secured through fraudulent and deceitful means. 1998 Resolution dismissing the petition for certification election. . based on this provision [Article 245].Laguna Autoparts Manufacturing Corporation Obrero Pilipino-LAMCOR Chapter filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE. There is a irreconcilability of their interests which cannot be cured even in the exclusioninclusion proceedings. Secretary of Labor. 1998 FACTS .The CA stressed that a local or chapter need not be registered to become a legitimate labor organization. viz: "Clearly. Due to the irreconcilability of their interest we held in Toyota Motor Philippines v.October 16. .May 3. filed a petition for certification election before the DOLE Mediation-Arbitration Unit. WON DOLE registration can be the basis for legitimacy HELD NO . 300 SCRA 120 [1998]. Philippine Transport and General Workers Organization (PTGWO). It becomes necessary. Local Chapter No. on account of which it was duly granted a Certification of Affiliation by DOLE on October 10. anterior to the granting of an order allowing a certification election. Underscoring and emphasis supplied by petitioner. It opined that this must not be so for the choice of a collective bargaining agent was the sole concern of the . a labor organization composed of both rank-and-file and supervisory employees is no labor organization at all. terminated and absent without leave (AWOL) employees. an organization which carries a mixture of rank-and-file and supervisory employees cannot posses any of the rights of a legitimate labor organization. as well as employees of The Country Club. Tomas reversed Bactin’s order.Med-Arbiter Bactin dismissed the certification election petition because of the union’s lack of personality.). It held that while a petition for certification election is an exception to the innocent bystander rule. resigned.DOLE Resolution of November 12. Inc. Toyota Motors Philippines Corporation Labor Union. April 29.37 - Disini interest of rank-and-file employees. 1998. only 71 were actual rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. ISSUE. Rule XI of DOLE Department Order No. that the bargaining unit is unorganized and that there had been no certification election for the past 12 months prior to the filing of the petition. automatically order the conduct of a certification election. The petition alleged that the union was composed of all rank-and-file employees. DOLE REGISTRATION AS BASIS LEGITIMACY TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS INTERNATIONAL GOLF CLUB INC V TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS EMPLOYEES UNIONPGTWO 395 SCRA 699 CARPIO-MORALES.CA . It cannot. the employer may pray for the dismissal of such petition on the basis of lack of mutuality of interests of the members of the union as well as lack of employer-employee relationship and petitioner failed to adduce substantial evidence to support its allegations.denied THIGCI’s Petition for Certiorari and affirmed the DOLE Resolution dated November 12." (Emphasis by petitioner) (Dunlop Slazenger (Phils. 1997 > Tagaytay Highlands Employees Union (THEU).Laguna Autoparts moved to cancel the certification election because the union was not considered a legitimate labor organization for failure to show that it had complied with registration requirements such as submission of required documents to the Bureau of Labor Relations.November 27. to inquire into the composition of any labor organization whenever the status of the labor organization is challenged on the basis of Article 245 of the Labor Code. Rule V of said Department Order provides that the legitimacy of its registration cannot be subject to collateral attack.Continuing. DOLE Secretary Sto. the Med-Arbiter should. the DOLE Undersecretary "conveniently deferred the resolution on the serious infirmity in the membership of [THEU] and ordered the holding of the certification election" which is frowned upon as the following ruling of this Court shows: We also do not agree with the ruling of the respondent Secretary of Labor that the infirmity in the membership of the respondent union can be remedied in "the pre-election conference thru the exclusion-inclusion proceedings wherein those employees who are occupying rank-and-file positions will be excluded from the list of eligible voters. Therefore." Public respondent gravely misappreciated the basic antipathy between the interest of supervisors and the interest of rank-and-file employees. 2005 NATURE Petition to review the decision of the Court of Appeals FACTS . 776. 1999 . pursuant to Article 257 of the Labor Code and Section 11. 2003 NATURE Petition for Certiorari under Rule 45 THIGCI assailing CA decision denying its petition to annul the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Resolutions of November 12. 9. be a legitimate labor organization. January 22. 09. v. and that out of the 192 signatories to the petition. a legitimate labor organization said to represent majority of the rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. a corporation distinct and separate from THIGCI. In its petition. 1997 > opposed petition for certification election because the list of union members submitted by it was defective and fatally flawed as it included the names and signatures of supervisors. hence. therefore.Labor Law 2 A2010 .. Not being one. for any guise or purpose.January 28. MFR denied . and submitted copies of the handwritten denial and withdrawal of some of its employees from participating in the petition. series of 1997. 1997. it continues to enjoy the rights accorded to a legitimate organization. . IV . Disposition Petition is granted.The CA noted that it was the employer which offered the most tenacious resistance to the holding of a certification election among its regular rank-and-file employees. THEU asserted that it complied with all the requirements for valid affiliation and inclusion in the roster of legitimate labor organizations pursuant to DOLE Department Order No. Regional Branch No. . and that Section 5. Also. . It pointed out that a local or chapter acquires legal personality as a labor organization from the date of filing of the complete documents. petitioner argues that without resolving the status of THEU. 19981 > setting aside the June 4. it noted its registration certificate number along with the registration certificate number of chapter affiliate. 1998 and December 29. 1998 > DOLE Med-Arbiter Anastacio Bactin ordered the holding of a certification election .

The Implementing Rules specifically Section 1. 2006 NATURE For review on certiorari FACTS . considering further that APSOTEU’s principal office is located in Diliman.The rank-and-file union insists that it is a legitimate labor organization having been issued a charter certificate by the Associated Labor Union (ALU). Rule III of Book V.The DOLE issued Department Order No.Both parties appealed to the Secretary of Labor and Employment.On appeal. the Bureau or the Regional Office shall issue the registration certificate within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt of the application.The application for registration of any federation. 1997. Rule II.Petitioner insists that APSOTEU lacks legal personality. national or industry union or trade union center shall be filed with the Bureau. . a supervisory union one and the same because of the commonalities between them. 2003. NO. the application would be acted upon by the BLR. Accordingly. Ratio Once a labor union attains the status of a legitimate labor organization. The amendments to the implementing rules merely specified that when the application was filed with the Regional Office. WON the CA erred in relying on the “1989 Revised Rules and Regulations implementing RA 6715” as basis to recognize private respondent APSOTEU’s registration by the DOLE Regional Director.Petitioner argues that APSOTEU improperly secured its registration from the DOLE Regional Director and not from the BLR . Inc. . Rule II. In case of approval. Hence. Reasoning The task of determining whether the local or chapter has submitted the complete documentary requirements is lodged with the Regional Office or the BLR. . A local/chapter constituted in accordance with Section 1 of Rule 6 shall acquire legal personality from the date of filing of the complete documents enumerated. (CSBTI) opposed both petitions for certification election alleging that the rank-and-file union and supervisory union were not legitimate labor organizations . procedure . Where to file applications. The Bureau or the Regional Office shall immediately process and approve or deny the application. and the supervisory union by the Associated Professional. Rule 5 of the implementing rules of Book 5 which states: “The labor organization or workers’ association shall be deemed registered and vested with legal personality on the date of issuance of its certificate of registration. The records of the case show that the respondent union submitted the said documents to the regional office and was issued a certification. The Secretary held that . Quezon City. Reasoning The records in this case showed that APSOTEU was registered on March 1. the certificate of registration is valid.Labor Law 2 ISSUE/S A2010 . 40-03.Without ruling on the legitimacy of the respondent unions. as prescribed in Section 5. cannot be challenged in a petition for certification election. 2. a rank-and-file union and APSOTEU. The new implementing rules explicitly provide that applications for registration of labor organizations shall be filed either with the Regional Office or with the BLR. V DOLE 507 SCRA 300 QUISUMBING. YES Ratio A local or chapter need not be independently registered to acquire legal personality. . Ratio Article 235 of LC provides that applications for registration shall be acted upon by the Bureau. NO Ratio Reasoning . Inc. WON the union is a legitimate labor organization 2. and its registration was filed with the NCR Regional Office. Where to file application. No costs. the rule applicable at the time of its registration. Book V of the 1989 Revised Implementing Rules of the Labor Code (Implementing Rules) provides that: Section 2. as the case may be. . The Secretary ruled that CSBTISU and CSBTI-RFU have separate legal personalities to file their separate petitions for certification election. 2. it continues as such until its certificate of registration is COASTAL SUBIC BAY TERMINAL. Inc. 6715. . the same shall be immediately forwarded to the Bureau within forty-eight (48) hours from filing thereof. together with all the requirements for registration as hereinafter provided.Any national labor organization or labor federation or local union may file an application for registration with the Bureau or the Regional Office where the applicant’s principal offices is located.Even after the amendments. APSOTEU is a legitimate labor organization because it was properly registered pursuant to the 1989 Revised Rules and Regulations implementing Republic Act No. INC. both petitions . the MedArbiter dismissed. WON the supervisory and rank-and-file unions could separately petition for certification elections.The pronouncement of the Labor Relations Division Chief. the rules did not divest the Regional Office and the BLR of their jurisdiction over applications for registration by labor organizations. further amending Book V of the above implementing rules. HELD 1.[” . the law applicable at that time was Section 2.Petitioner Coastal Subic Bay Terminal. They also have different sets of locals. WON the chapter’s legal personality can be attacked collaterally in an election action HELD 1. Supervisory. that the respondent union acquired a legal personality with the submission of the complete documentary requirement. “Bureau” as defined under the Labor Code means the BLR and/or the Labor Relations Division in the Regional Offices of the Department of Labor. and the employer should be a mere bystander. It further ruled that ALU and APSOTEU are separate and distinct labor unions having separate certificates of registration from the DOLE. Disposition Petition is denied. Thus. which took effect on March 15.It may not be subject to a collateral attack but only through a separate action instituted particularly for the purpose of assailing the chapter. thus: SECTION 1. NO. Rank-and-File Union (CSBTI-RFU) and Coastal Subic Bay Terminal. WON ALU. and not Department Order No. . the instant petition by the company anchored on the following grounds: ISSUES 1. .Section 2. Where the application is filed with the Regional Office. Such legal personality cannot thereafter be subject to collateral attack but may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with these Rules. 1991.The motion for reconsideration was also denied. The applications for registration of an independent union shall be filed with and acted upon by the Regional Office where the applicant’s principal office is located ….The motion for reconsideration was likewise denied. Office and Technical Employees Union (APSOTEU). Supervisory Union (CSBTI-SU) filed separate petitions for certification election . . November 20.38 - Disini employees. together with all the documents supporting the registration. 2. 9.Respondents Coastal Subic Bay Terminal. 9 which took effect only on June 21. 1. Book V of the Implementing Rules. who reversed the decision of the Med-Arbiter. 3. the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Secretary. and its chartered affiliate CSBTI-SU cannot attain the status of a legitimate labor organization to file a petition for certification election. as amended by Department Order No.

The purpose of affiliation of the local unions into a common enterprise is to increase the collective bargaining power in respect of the terms and conditions of labor. Mere affiliation does not divest the local union of its own personality. -CSAI filed its Answer alleging that the complainant union and CSAI are one and the same union.Labor Law 2 A2010 . a local supervisors’ union should not be allowed to affiliate with the national federation of unions of rank-and-file employees where that federation actively participates in the union activity within the company. and unless and until their registrations are cancelled. actively participates in the CSBTISU while ALU. Disposition The petition was GRANTED. -26 May 1987: another group headed by Dominica C. local unions are considered principals while the federation is deemed to be merely their agent. claiming as the duly elected set of union officers. et al introducing themselves to be the new set of officers. not the Med-Arbiter. said company has been remitting checked-off union dues to said union until February.Under the rules implementing the Labor Code. Hence.. where the former acts in representation of the latter. The Med-Arbiter also set further hearing of the complaint on July 1. Labor organizations should ensure the freedom of employees to organize themselves for the purpose of leveling the bargaining process but also to ensure the freedom of workingmen and to keep open the corridor of opportunity to enable them to do it for themselves. It only gives rise to a contract of agency. with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). among others. actively participates in the CSBTI-RFU. . as an order restraining the respondent from acting on behalf of the union and directing the Aboitiz Shipping Corp. Reasoning In the absence of any independent action for cancellation of registration against either APSOTEU or ALU. and that Mrs. the unions are entitled to exercise the rights and privileges of a legitimate labor organization. It is a separate and distinct voluntary association owing its creation to the will of its members. August 4. APSOTEU. As such principals. NATURE Petition seeking the reversal of the resolution of the Bureau of Labor Relations which affirmed the decision of the Med-Arbiter holding that the set of officers of Seamen's Association of the Philippines headed by Dominica C. The controversy between the aforesaid two sets of officers CEBU SEAMEN'S ASSO. Prospero Paradilla have no personality to represent the union as they had already been expelled as members/officers thereof in two resolutions of the Board of Directors dated November 1984 and January 17. -19 June 1987: the Med-Arbiter issued an Order denying said motion but directing the Aboitiz Shipping Corporation to remit the already checked-off union dues to the complainant union through its officers and to continue remitting any checked-off union dues until further notice. Nacua and Atty. The CSBTI-RFU and CSBTI-SU are therefore affiliated with distinct and separate federations. that its set of officers headed by Manuel Gabayoyo has the lawful right to the remittance and custody of the corporate funds (otherwise known as union dues) in question pursuant to the resolution of the SEC dated 22 April 1987. the constitutional policy on labor is circumvented. Later. Nacua and Atty. (CSAI). and reported to the Regional Office in accordance with the rules implementing the Labor Code. supervisory employees are not eligible for membership in a labor union of rank-and-file employees. CSAI filed MTD on the grounds. but this was also denied for lack of merit. the same group registered its association with this Bureau as a labor union known as the Seamen's Association of the Philippines. In addition. giving occasion to possible conflicts of interest among the common officers of the federation of rank-and-file and the federation of supervisory unions. INC. to avoid a situation where supervisors would merge with the rank-and-file or where the supervisors’ labor union would represent conflicting interests. When there is commingling of officers of a rank-andfile union with a supervisory union. CSAI headed by Gabayoyo filed an appeal with the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). 902-A. WON the med-arbiter of Region VII has jurisdiction over the case 2. -SAPI has an existing CBA with the Aboitiz Shipping Corporation due to expire on 31 Dec 1988. In consonance with the CBA. the rank-and-file federation. including the right to seek certification as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent in the appropriate employer unit. filed a complaint.D. among others. Nacua. that there can neither be a complainant nor respondent in the instant case as the parties involved are one and the same labor union. for and in behalf of the union. the supervisory and rank-and-file unions both do not meet the criteria to attain the status of legitimate labor organizations. For as long as they are affiliated with the APSOTEU and ALU. Thus. The following day. and. was the lawful set of officers entitled to the release and custody of the union dues as well as agency fees of said association. The Gabayoyo group also appealed to the Office of the SOLE. -The Med-Arbiter eventually held that SAPI. on 23 June 1969. the limitation is not confined to a case of supervisors wanting to join a rank-and-file union. ISSUES 1. that the SEC. this petition.39 - Disini cancelled or revoked in an independent action for cancellation. Ratio Under Article 245 of the Labor Code. went to the company and claimed that they are entitled to the remittance and custody of such union dues. The supervisory employees are allowed to form their own union but they are not allowed to join the rank-and-file union because of potential conflicts of interest. to remit the checked-off union dues for the months of March and April 1987. the legal personality of a labor organization cannot be collaterally attacked. Incorporated (SAPI). NO. that Dominica C. 1987 when Banayoyo. as president. has jurisdiction over the dispute as provided under P. despite the commonalities of APSOTEU and ALU. WON Nacua and Paradilla have the personality to represent the union HELD 1. In addition. 1992 . a chartered local union acquires legal personality through the charter certificate issued by a duly registered federation or national union. against the CSAI as represented by Manuel Gabayoyo for the security of the aforementioned CBA. 1987. The prohibition extends to a supervisors’ local union applying for membership in a national federation the members of which include local unions of rank-and-file employees. 3. No. Dominica C. WON SAPI was registered as a labor federation with the BLR 3. the national federations that exist as separate entities to which the rank-and-file and supervisory unions are separately affiliated with. Nacua. Further. do have a common set of officers.. V FERRER-CALLEJA 212 SCRA 50 MEDIALDEA. But the latter affirmed the Med-Arbiter’s decision. A local union does not owe its existence to the federation with which it is affiliated.Article 226 of the Labor Code vests upon the Bureau of Labor Relations and Labor Relations Division the original and exclusive authority and jurisdiction to act on all inter-union and intra-union disputes. seeking such relief. neither does it give the mother federation the license to act independently of the local union. Reasoning In the instant case. Inc. Hence. FACTS -23Oct 1950: a group of deck officers and marine engineers on board vessels plying Cebu and other ports of the Philippines organized themselves into an association and registered the same as a non-stock corporation known as Cebu Seamen's Association. YES . was the lawful set of officers entitled to the release and custody of the union dues as well as agency fees of said association. and thus could not separately petition for certification elections. 1987. the supervisory federation. headed by Nacua. Prospero Paradilla who represented the union had been expelled as members/officers as of November 1984 for lawful causes. each continues to possess a separate legal personality.

such as the constitution and by-laws of the local union. local or affiliate of a federation become a legitimate labor organization. Nacua is the lawful set of officers of SAPI and therefore. This break-away group revived the moribund corporation and issued an undated resolution expelling Nacua from association. the corporation was already inoperational before the controversy in this case arose. Petition for certiorari to set aside the resolution of Med-arbiter and two orders the of the Sec. It had an existing CBA with Aboitiz Shipping Corporation. 1950. affect the union and its members. Inc. Petitioner PDC filed its motion to dismiss contending that the local union failed to comply with Rule II. was issued charter certificate No. the principal address of the labor organization.Bureau of Labor Relations correctly ruled on the basis of the evidence presented by the parties that SAPI. YES. and the list of officers/members with their addresses. 1984 the SEC ordered the CSAI to show cause why its certificate of registration should not be revoked for continuous inoperation. Section 3. That being the case. There is nothing in the records which would show that CSAI answered said show-cause order. Before the end of the Nacua’s term. (b) names. a group of deck officers organized the Cebu Seamen's Association. -As stated in the findings of fact in the questioned resolution of Director Pura Ferrer-Calleja. 3. as amended. there be. Moreover.Labor Law 2 A2010 . on August 24. she was reelected as the president of the labor union. the aforementioned set of officers is of the respondent corporation and not of the complainant union. and actions taken by said set of officers can not. The same group registered the organization with the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) as Seamen's Association of the Philippines (SAPI). Under Article 234 (Requirements of Registration): Any applicant labor organization. the minutes of its adoption or ratification and the list of the members who participated in it. the former and not the latter association is entitled to the release and custody of union fees with Aboitiz Shipping and other shipping companies with whom it had an existing CBA.40 - Disini (Cebu Seamen's Association headed by Gabayoyo & Seamen's Association of the Philippines headed by Nacua) is an intra-union dispute. We cannot agree with the contention of Gabayoyo that Nacua was already expelled from the union. It follows. the corporation. In fact. it found that the alleged minutes of the organizational meeting was unauthenticated.1992 NATURE . Kilusan claimed that it had submitted the necessary documentary requirements for registration. is entitled to the release and custody of the union dues as well as the agency fees. Hence. as the case may PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT CORP. (b) The names of its officers. That had been so precisely on the honest belief of the participants therein that they were acting in their capacity as members of the said corporation. Med-Arbiter held that there was substantial compliance with the requirements for the formation of a chapter. Gabayoyo cannot claim leadership of the labor group by virtue of his having been elected as a president of the dormant corporation CSAI. Nacua was elected president of the labor union. Petitioner insisted that upon verification with the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). 4. this petition. It is the registration of the organization with the BLR are not with the SEC which made it a legitimate labor organization with rights and privileges granted under the Labor Code. YES. Hence. It later held its own election of officers supervised by the SEC and filed a case of estafa against Nacua. presumably in accordance with its constitution and by-laws as well as the articles of incorporation of respondent CSAI. V." And under Article 235 (Action on Application): "The Bureau shall act on all applications for registration within thirty (30) days from filing. in the elections of officers for 1987-1989. (c) The names of all its members comprising at least twenty 20% percent of all the employees in the bargaining unit where it seeks to operate. registered with its office. and (c) books of accounts. and the constitution and by-laws did not bear the signatures of the members and was not duly subscribed. some union members including Gabayoyo showed signs of discontentment with the leadership of Nacua. the list of members did not bear the corresponding signatures of the purported members. It argued that the private respondent therefore failed to substantially comply with the registration requirements provided by the rules. has however. SAPI. Both sets of officers claim to be entitled to the release of the union dues collected by the company with whom it had an existing CBA. of which she denied being a member. 90-6-1-153. -The other set of officers headed by Dominica C. -CSAI. -It is undisputed from the records that the election of the so-called set of officers headed by Gabayoyo was conducted under the supervision of the SEC. addresses and list of officers and/or members. in any manner. insofar as their rights under the Labor Code are concerned. Kilusan claimed that there was no existing collective bargaining agreement and that no other legitimate labor organization existed in the bargaining unit. -Also. then.. not affected her membership with the labor union. of Labor. association or group of unions or workers shall acquire legal personality and shall be entitled to the rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations upon issuance of the certificate of registration based on the following requirements: (a) Fifty-pesos (P50. HELD Ordinarily. a non-stock corporation and registered it with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). the minutes of the organizational meetings and the list of the workers who participated in such meetings. their addresses. Undersecretary Laguesma denied PDC's motion for reconsideration. ISSUE When does a branch. copies of its annual financial reports. which requires the submission of: (a) the constitution and by-laws. FEB. if any. before the controversy. (CSAI). FACTS Respondent Kilusan filed with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) a petition for certification election among the rank-and-file employees of the petitioner alleging that it is a legitimate labor federation and its local chapter. In fact. and the Corporation Code. All requisite documents and papers shall be certified under oath by the secretary or the treasurer of the organization. LAGUESMA 244 SCRA 173 GUTIERREZ. Whatever acts their group had done in the corporation do not bind the labor union. Book V of the Rules Implementing the Labor Code. 2. Disposition Petition dismissed. . that any proceedings. a labor organization acquires legitimacy only upon registration with the BLR. and (e) Four copies of the constitution and by-laws of the applicant union. (d) If the applicant has been in existence for one or more years. Kilusan further averred that no books of accounts could be submitted as the local union was only recently organized. on October 23. -The expulsion of Nacua from the corporation. is not the same association as CSAI. the legitimate labor union.00) registration fee. -In this connection. Progressive Development Employees Union.

the failure of the secretary of PDEU-Kilusan to certify the required documents under oath is fatal to its acquisition of a legitimate status. It is the instrumentality through which an individual laborer who is helpless as against a powerful employer may. NO Ratio A closed-shop provision in a collective bargaining agreement is not to be given a retroactive effect so as to preclude its being applied to employees already in the service Reasoning In order that an employer may be deemed bound.. An undertaking of this nature is so harsh that it must be strictly construed. under a collective bargaining agreement. as well as oftentimes collects.Petitioners were employed by the company long before the collective bargaining contract. RATIONALE: The intent of the law in imposing lesser requirements in the case of a branch or local of a registered federation or national union is to encourage the affiliation of a local union with a federation or national union in order to increase the local union's bargaining powers respecting terms and conditions of labor. the local or chapter does not become a legitimate labor organization. ISSUE/S 1. WON petitioners were validly dismissed HELD 1. Absent compliance with these mandatory requirements. alleged that the only reason for the dismissal of the complainants herein is because their said dismissal was asked by the USWU-ILO of which union respondent company has a valid and existing collective bargaining contract with a closed-shop provision to the effect that those laborers who are no longer members of good standing in the union may be dismissed by the respondent company if their dismissal is sought by the union. Such requirement is a valid exercise of the police power. or as a means to subvert valid commitments. Book V of the Implementing Rules. . Furthermore. RATIONALE: The registration prescribed in is not a limitation to the right of assembly or association. which are mere statutory creations. In the case at bar. and attested to by its president. through concerted effort and activity. it defeats its own purpose. achieve the goal of economic well-being Disposition Petition is granted. which should be protected. GUIJARNO V CIR 52 SCRA 307 FERNANDO.The respondent company. The assailed resolution and orders of respondents Med-Arbiter and Secretary of Labor and Employment.. for the possession and exercise of which registration is required to protect both labor and the public against abuses. and attested to by its president. as the case may be. some of the aforementioned requirements for registration are no longer required. to dismiss employees for non-union membership. or impostors who pose as organizers. and respondent United Sugar Workers Union-ILO . Book V of the Implementing Rules requires that the application should be signed by at least twenty percent (20%) of the employees in the appropriate bargaining unit and be accompanied by a sworn statement of the applicant union that there is no certified bargaining agent or. DISPOSITION Petition is GRANTED." A2010 . and the books of accounts all of which are certified under oath by the secretary or treasurer. 1973 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS . Section 3. fraud. because the activities in which labor organizations. are hereby SET ASIDE. August 31. as a condition for the non-cancellation of a certificate of registration. It is the instrumentality through which an individual laborer who is helpless as against a powerful employer may. huge amounts of money due to them or to the organization. within 30 days from its issuance by the labor federation or national union. . the stipulation to this effect must be so clear and unequivocal as to leave no room for doubt thereon. which may be exercised with or without said registration. is a reasonable regulation for the benefit of the members of the organization. August 27. for it tends to undermine the harmonious relations between management and labor.Labor Law 2 be. Inc. on behalf of its members. section 4 of Rule II. considering that the same generally solicits funds or membership. much less said personality. associations or unions and the possession of the "rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations.The function of a labor union is to assure that Constitution’s fundamental objectives for labor would be achieved.41 - Disini UNITED SEAMEN’S UNION V DAVAO SHIPOWNERS ASSOCIATION MAKALINTAL. and doubts must be resolved against the existence of "closed shop". But when an unregistered union becomes a branch. J. the obligation to submit financial statements.Three unfair labor practice cases for unlawful dismissal allegedly based on legitimate union activity were filed against respondent Central Santos Lopez Co. A local or chapter therefore becomes a legitimate labor organization only upon submission of the following to the BLR: 1) A charter certificate. in its answer." The Constitution does not guarantee these rights and privileges. it is nothing but the means of assuring that such fundamental objectives would be achieved. RATIONALE: Where does that leave a labor union? Correctly understood. associations and unions of workers are engaged affect public interest. But if it is made use of as a subterfuge. where there is an existing collective agreement duly submitted to the DOLE. That is why it is given personality and recognition in concluding collective bargaining agreements. and 2) The constitution and by-laws. of such local or chapter. The provisions governing union affiliation are found in Rule II. a statement on the set of officers. respectively. 1967 Moreover. although not truly accredited agents of the union the purport to represent. that respondent company has never committed acts of unfair labor practice against its employees or workers much less against the complainants herein but that it has a solemn obligation to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract. A labor organization is wholesome if it serves its legitimate purpose of promoting the interests of labor without unnecessary labor disputes. that the application is filed during the last sixty (60) days of the agreement. The latter is merely a condition sine qua non for the acquisition of legal personality by labor organizations. through concerted effort and activity achieve UNION FUNCTION AND RATIONALE . local or chapter of a federation.

Noel T. ITD. Issues 1. Article X enumerates with particularity the rules for union dues. 9. . Gabor. such is evidenced by the Charter Certificate dated 9 June 1998. misrepresentation. An examination of respondent’s constitution reveals it sufficiently comprehensive in establishing the necessary rules for its operation. Jesus B. issued by FFW. signed by respondent’s president Sagun. or the date respondent filed its petition for certification election. The procedure for election of these officers. Under the law. Article VII establishes the standing committees of the local/chapter and how their members are appointed. Certainly. It sought to be certified and to represent the permanent rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the petitioner. we only need to determine on what date the Regional Office or Bureau received the complete documentary requirements enumerated under Section 1. 16. V MANDAUE 467 SCRA 107 Tinga . and not respondent. Rule VI of Department Order No. effectively recommends managerial actions if the exercise of such recommendatory authority . Requirements SAN MIGUEL CORP.Labor Law 2 A2010 . the manner by which respondent was deemed to have acquired legal personality by the DOLE and the Court of Appeals was not in strict conformity with the provisions of Department Order No. What about the lack of documents containing the by-laws? Not needed so long as it is part of the union’s constitution. ordering the immediate conduct of a certification election among the petitioner’s rank-and-file employees. 9.42 - Disini the goal of economic well-being. assign or discipline employees. including the notice and quorum requirements thereof. Unions are merely instrumentalities through which their welfare may be protected and fostered. it should have been FFW. Article XII provides the general rule for quorum in meetings of the Board of Directors and of the members of the local/chapter. No. When did the union acquire legal personality? 2. Bathan and attested by its President. Article XVI governs and institutes the requisites for the amendment of the constitution. Regional Director of the DOLE Regional Office No. 9. (3) a list of respondent’s officers and their respective addresses. in order to ascertain when respondent acquired legal personality. the date the complete documents were submitted. LABOR UNION REGULATION AND GOVERNMENT 1. may. The accompanying letter. The evident rationale why the rule states that it is the federation or national union that submits said documents to the Bureau or Regional Office is that the creation of the local/chapter is the sole prerogative of the federation or national union. The Court likewise sees no impediment in deeming respondent as having acquired legal personality as of 15 June 1998. Rule VI of Department Order No. the names and addresses of its officers. The first two of these documents were duly certified under oath by respondent’s secretary Bathan and attested to by president Sagun. a managerial employee is “one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire. Article IV establishes the requisites for membership in the local/chapter. Rodriguez and attested by Sagun. and other payments. Articles V and VI name the various officers and what their respective functions are. It is the instrumentality by which the weak laborer up against the strong employer. Aug. certifying that from 30 July 1998. IARFBT-058/98. In the ordinary course. The Charter Certificate expressly acknowledges FFW’s intent to establish respondent as of 9 June 1998. The issuance of the certificate of registration by the Bureau or Regional Office is not the operative act that vests legal personality upon a local/chapter under Department Order No. and not of any other entity. layoff. Thus. That is the raison d’être of labor unions. Such legal personality is acquired from the filing of the complete documentary requirements enumerated in Section 1. Rule VI. 2005 Facts -CA affirmes DOLE Undersecretary for Labor Relations. Atty. VII issued a Certificate of Creation of Local/Chapter No. transfer.The Chief of Labor Relations Division of DOLE Regional Office No. respondent has acquired legal personality as a labor organization/worker’s association. which should have submitted the subject documents to the Regional Office. including the necessary vote requirements. or false statement within the meaning of Article 239(a) and (c) of the Labor Code. 9. The Charter Certificate expressly states that respondent has been issued the said certificate “to operate as a local or chapter of the [FFW]”. workers organized are strong. suspend. and attached to the petition for certification election. and (5) a list of all the rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the Mandaue Packaging Products Plants and Mandaue Glass Plant prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. In this case. while Article XV delineates the procedure for the impeachment of these officers. and not the FFW. Whether or not the inclusion of the two alleged supervisory employees in appellee union’s membership amounts to fraud. claim affiliation with the larger unit or source its legal personality therefrom. (4) a certification signifying that respondent had just been organized and no amount had yet been collected from its members. 2. Admittedly. -Respondent submitted to the Bureau of Labor Relations the same documents earlier attached to its petition for certification. it does not. achieve economic wellbeing. and cites the applicability of the Robert’s Rules of Order[43] in its meetings. This being the case. Nonetheless.Federation of Free Workers (FFW/ respondent) filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE Regional Office No. VII. 15 June 1998. There is no doubt that on 15 June 1998. Workers unorganized are weak. which submitted the documents required under Section 1. and it was hoped that the submissions would facilitate the listing of respondent under the roster of legitimate labor organizations. The following documents were attached to the petition: (1) a Charter Certificate certifying that respondent as of that date was duly certified as a local or chapter of FFW. stated that such documents were submitted in compliance with the requirements for the creation of a local/chapter pursuant to the Labor Code and its Implementing Rules. recall. a putative local/chapter cannot. and proper that respondent’s legal personality be deemed existent as of 15 June 1998. it having submitted all the required documents. 3. discharge. Sagun. Whether or not subsequent developments change the disposition of the case Held 1. Rosalinda Dimapilis-Baldoz. by concerted effort.” A supervisory employee is “one who. Wilfred V. (2) a copy of the constitution of respondent prepared by its Secretary. VII. the fact that it was the local/chapter itself. -SMC (Petitioner) filed a motion to dismiss the petition for certification election on the sole ground that herein respondent is not listed or included in the roster of legitimate labor organizations based on the certification issued by the Officer-In-Charge. And finally. again prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. is provided for in Article IX. Union Registration and Procedure A. attached thereto were respondent’s constitution. fines. without the imprimatur of the federation or national union. special assessments. the date the complete documents were submitted. in the interest of the employer. signed by respondent’s treasurer Chita D. there is no good reason to deny legal personality or defer its conferral to the local/chapter if it is evident at the onset that the federation or national union itself has already through its own means established the local/chapter. we consider it permissible for respondent to have submitted the required documents itself to the Regional Office. and the charter certificate issued by the national union FFW. Article VIII lays down the rules for meetings of the union.

supervisory and rank and file employees. The Secretary ruled that CSBTI-SU and CSBTI-RFU have separate legal personalities to file their separate petitions for certification election. 2. these can be threshed out during the preelection conferences. . 3. It is also well-settled that the actual functions of an employee.43 - Disini is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. Inc. the rules did not divest the Regional Office and the BLR of their jurisdiction over applications for registration by labor organizations. . the Bureau or the Regional Office shall issue the registration certificate within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt of the application. a rank-and-file union and APSOTEU.The DOLE issued Department Order No. No. Petitioner’s bare manifestations adduce no reason why the certification election should not be conducted forthwith. DISPOSITION The Petition is DENIED. . the charge of fraud. that remedy should be preferred. a supervisory union one and the same because of the commonalities between them. We take administrative notice of the realities in union organizing. . together with all the documents supporting the registration. Inc. INC.Any national labor organization or labor federation or local union may file an application for registration with the Bureau or the Regional Office where the applicant’s principal offices is located.’” Finally. The grounds for cancellation of union registration are not meant to be applied automatically. The new implementing rules explicitly provide that applications for registration of labor organizations shall be filed either with the Regional Office or with the BLR. Where a remedy short of cancellation is available. Reasoning The records in this case showed that APSOTEU was COASTAL SUBIC BAY TERMINAL. Good faith is presumed in all representations. together with all the requirements for registration as hereinafter provided. In case of approval. national or industry union or trade union center shall be filed with the Bureau.Petitioner Coastal Subic Bay Terminal. oftentimes unaware of the fine distinctions between managerial. who reversed the decision of the Med-Arbiter. or appellee union for that matter. thus: SECTION 1. Inc. HELD 1. We cannot impose rigorous restraints on such right if we are to give meaning to the protection to labor and social justice clauses of the Constitution. 3. as amended by Department Order No. WON the CA erred in relying on the “1989 Revised Rules and Regulations implementing RA 6715” as basis to recognize private respondent APSOTEU’s registration by the DOLE Regional Director. intended to mislead anyone. . both petitions . no action can be done that emasculates the right to self-organization and the promotion of free trade unionism. . and that four of respondent’s officers are no longer connected with petitioner have no effect on the Court’s ruling that a certification election should be immediately conducted with respondent as one of the available choices. Rule II. “all employees not falling within the definition of managerial or supervisory employee are considered rankand-file employees”.The motion for reconsideration was likewise denied. and its chartered affiliate CSBTI-SU cannot attain the status of a legitimate labor organization to file a petition for certification election.Petitioner argues that APSOTEU improperly secured its registration from . the same shall be immediately forwarded to the Bureau within forty-eight (48) hours from filing thereof. further amending Book V of the above implementing rules. 40-03. the DOLE Regional Director and not from the BLR . The Secretary held that APSOTEU is a legitimate labor organization because it was properly registered pursuant to the 1989 Revised Rules and Regulations implementing Republic Act No. 2003. V DOLE 507 SCRA 300 QUISUMBING. NO. Where the application is filed with the Regional Office. If there are matters that have arisen since the filing of the petition that serve to delay or cancel the election.Petitioner insists that APSOTEU lacks legal personality.The motion for reconsideration was also denied. 2006 NATURE For review on certiorari FACTS .The rank-and-file union insists that it is a legitimate labor organization having been issued a charter certificate by the Associated Labor Union (ALU). The allegation that the bargaining unit that respondent sought to represent is no longer the same because of the dynamic nature of petitioner’s business.Respondents Coastal Subic Bay Terminal. there is no proof to show that Bathan. The Implementing Rules specifically Section 1. . Supervisory Union (CSBTI-SU) filed separate petitions for certification election . The amendments to the implementing rules merely specified that when the application was filed with the Regional Office. They also have different sets of locals. November 20. the instant petition by the company anchored on the following grounds: ISSUES 1.Both parties appealed to the Secretary of Labor and Employment. If this was appellee union’s intention. Hence. It further ruled that ALU and APSOTEU are separate and distinct labor unions having separate certificates of registration from the DOLE.Even after the amendments. the MedArbiter dismissed. In this case. Costs against petitioner.Section 2. Rule III of Book V. an essential element of fraud.Without ruling on the legitimacy of the respondent unions. Supervisory. during which the organizers must take their chances. . but indeed with utmost discretion. it does not affect the case. Book V of the 1989 Revised Implementing Rules of the Labor Code (Implementing Rules) provides that: Section 2. The Bureau or the Regional Office shall immediately process and approve or deny the application. the application would be acted upon by the BLR. Where to file applications. false statement or misrepresentation cannot be sustained.Labor Law 2 A2010 . The local/chapter retains a separate legal personality from that of its officers or members that remains viable notwithstanding any turnover in its officers or members. Neither is the fact that some of respondent’s officers have since resigned from petitioner of any moment. procedure . the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Secretary. Even if they are supervisory employees. (CSBTI) opposed both petitions for certification election alleging that the rank-and-file union and supervisory union were not legitimate labor organizations . “Bureau” as defined under the Labor Code means the BLR and/or the Labor Relations Division in the Regional Offices of the Department of Labor. 6715. 9. The vacancy he will thus create can then be easily filled up through the succession provision of appellee union’s constitution and by-laws.The application for registration of any federation. the rule applicable at the time of its registration. What is important is that there is an unmistakeable intent of the members of appellee union to exercise their right to organize. it would have refrained from using a more precise description of the organization instead of declaring that the organization is composed of ‘rank and file monthlies’. Rank-and-File Union (CSBTI-RFU) and Coastal Subic Bay Terminal. In this case. WON the supervisory and rank-and-file unions could separately petition for certification elections. which took effect on March 15. . Where to file application. Hence. supervisory or rank and file. Office and Technical Employees Union (APSOTEU). false statement and misrepresentation in order for these to be actionable is intent to mislead by the party making the representation. no party will be prejudiced if Bathan were to be excluded from membership in the union. WON ALU. a lot of changes having occurred in the work environment. The applications for registration of an independent union shall be filed with and acted upon by the Regional Office where the applicant’s principal office is located …. Ratio Article 235 of LC provides that applications for registration shall be acted upon by the Bureau. not merely his job title. are determinative in classifying such employee as managerial. and the supervisory union by the Associated Professional.On appeal.

local or affiliate of a federation become a legitimate labor organization. and not Department Order No. 1991. the supervisory and rank-and-file unions both do not meet the criteria to attain the status of legitimate labor organizations. the list of members did not bear the corresponding signatures of the purported members. Rule II. FEB. Kilusan further averred that no books of accounts could be submitted as the local union was only recently organized. 1997. (b) names. supervisory employees are not eligible for membership in a labor union of rank-and-file employees. . a local supervisors’ union should not be allowed to affiliate with the national federation of unions of rank-and-file employees where that federation actively participates in the union activity within the company. 9 which took effect only on June 21. Petitioner insisted that upon verification with the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). Kilusan claimed that it had submitted the necessary documentary requirements for registration. It only gives rise to a contract of agency. Med-Arbiter held that there was substantial compliance with the requirements for the formation of a chapter. it continues as such until its certificate of registration is cancelled or revoked in an independent action for cancellation. of Labor. FACTS Respondent Kilusan filed with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) a petition for certification election among the rank-and-file employees of the petitioner alleging that it is a legitimate labor federation and its local chapter. and thus could not separately petition for certification elections. the certificate of registration is valid. PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT CORP. this petition. In addition. and (c) books of accounts. As such principals. Thus. the legal personality of a labor organization cannot be collaterally attacked. Under Article 234 (Requirements of Registration): . Further. and the list of officers/members with their addresses. giving occasion to possible conflicts of interest among the common officers of the federation of rank-and-file and the federation of supervisory unions. actively participates in the CSBTISU while ALU. the constitutional policy on labor is circumvented. 2. and the constitution and by-laws did not bear the signatures of the members and was not duly subscribed. Requirements Rationale and registered on March 1. including the right to seek certification as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent in the appropriate employer unit. In addition. NO. and its registration was filed with the NCR Regional Office. despite the commonalities of APSOTEU and ALU. each continues to possess a separate legal personality. NO. and reported to the Regional Office in accordance with the rules implementing the Labor Code. to avoid a situation where supervisors would merge with the rank-and-file or where the supervisors’ labor union would represent conflicting interests. 3.1992 NATURE Petition for certiorari to set aside the resolution of Med-arbiter and two orders the of the Sec. Ratio Under Article 245 of the Labor Code. Book V of the Rules Implementing the Labor Code. neither does it give the mother federation the license to act independently of the local union. It is a separate and distinct voluntary association owing its creation to the will of its members. which requires the submission of: (a) the constitution and bylaws. do have a common set of officers. ISSUE When does a branch. For as long as they are affiliated with the APSOTEU and ALU. The prohibition extends to a supervisors’ local union applying for membership in a national federation the members of which include local unions of rank-and-file employees. 90-6-1-153. The CSBTI-RFU and CSBTI-SU are therefore affiliated with distinct and separate federations. Reasoning In the instant case. actively participates in the CSBTI-RFU. and unless and until their registrations are cancelled. it found that the alleged minutes of the organizational meeting was unauthenticated. 4. Labor organizations should ensure the freedom of employees to organize themselves for the purpose of leveling the bargaining process but also to ensure the freedom of workingmen and to keep open the corridor of opportunity to enable them to do it for themselves. It argued that the private respondent therefore failed to substantially comply with the registration requirements provided by the rules. Undersecretary Laguesma denied PDC's motion for reconsideration. Accordingly. When there is commingling of officers of a rank-andfile union with a supervisory union. Mere affiliation does not divest the local union of its own personality. Quezon City. A local union does not owe its existence to the federation with which it is affiliated. Hence. Section 3. Hence. considering further that APSOTEU’s principal office is located in Diliman. the limitation is not confined to a case of supervisors wanting to join a rank-and-file union. APSOTEU. Kilusan claimed that there was no existing collective bargaining agreement and that no other legitimate labor organization existed in the bargaining unit. V LAGUESMA 205 SCRA 802 GUTIERREZ. the rank-and-file federation. a chartered local union acquires legal personality through the charter certificate issued by a duly registered federation or national union. a labor organization acquires legitimacy only upon registration with the BLR. Petitioner PDC filed its motion to dismiss contending that the local union failed to comply with Rule II. such as the constitution and by-laws of the local union. HELD Ordinarily. Ratio Once a labor union attains the status of a legitimate labor organization. Reasoning In the absence of any independent action for cancellation of registration against either APSOTEU or ALU. Disposition The petition was GRANTED.44 - Disini B. was issued charter certificate No. the law applicable at that time was Section 2. The purpose of affiliation of the local unions into a common enterprise is to increase the collective bargaining power in respect of the terms and conditions of labor.Labor Law 2 A2010 . Thus. the supervisory federation. The supervisory employees are allowed to form their own union but they are not allowed to join the rank-and-file union because of potential conflicts of interest. where the former acts in representation of the latter. Progressive Development Employees Union. addresses and list of officers and/or members. the unions are entitled to exercise the rights and privileges of a legitimate labor organization. local unions are considered principals while the federation is deemed to be merely their agent.Under the rules implementing the Labor Code. Book V of the Implementing Rules. the national federations that exist as separate entities to which the rank-and-file and supervisory unions are separately affiliated with. as amended.

and (e) Four copies of the constitution and by-laws of the applicant union. DISPOSITION Petition is GRANTED. considering that the same generally solicits funds or membership. RATIONALE: The registration prescribed in is not a limitation to the right of assembly or association. 1995 NATURE Petition for review FACTS ." A local or chapter therefore becomes a legitimate labor organization only upon submission of the following to the BLR: 1) A charter certificate. . All requisite documents and papers shall be certified under oath by the secretary or the treasurer of the organization. the minutes of the organizational meetings and the list of the workers who participated in such meetings. The assailed resolution and orders of respondents Med-Arbiter and Secretary of Labor and Employment. which should be protected." The Constitution does not guarantee these rights and privileges. (c) The names of all its members comprising at least twenty 20% percent of all the employees in the bargaining unit where it seeks to operate. where there is an existing collective agreement duly submitted to the DOLE. is a reasonable regulation for the benefit of the members of the organization. Petitioner Phoenix Iron and Steel Corporation (Phoenix) sought clarification of the legal personality of PISCORANGLO. a statement on the set of officers. Thus. In the case at bar. as the case may be." Moreover. the authority to file petition for certification election is without force and effect. Section 3. (d) If the applicant has been in existence for one or more years.Labor Law 2 A2010 . because the activities in which labor organizations.Med-Arbiter’s ruling: Dismissed petition. although not truly accredited agents of the union the purport to represent. the failure of the secretary of PDEUKilusan to certify the required documents under oath is fatal to its acquisition of a legitimate status. as well as oftentimes collects. ruled that PISCOR has complied with the requirements of the law on organization of a local after it was shown that it has submitted duly certified copies of its constitution and by-laws.45 - Disini Any applicant labor organization. as the case may be. as a condition for the non-cancellation of a certificate of registration. And under Article 235 (Action on Application): "The Bureau shall act on all applications for registration within thirty (30) days from filing.Sec. The constitution and by-laws was not likewise verified under oath. huge amounts of money due to them or to the organization. RATIONALE: The intent of the law in imposing lesser requirements in the case of a branch or local of a registered federation or national union is to encourage the affiliation of a local union with a federation or national union in order to increase the local union's bargaining powers respecting terms and conditions of labor. the obligation to submit financial statements. on behalf of its members. association or group of unions or workers shall acquire legal personality and shall be entitled to the rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations upon issuance of the certificate of registration based on the following requirements: (a) Fifty-pesos (P50. or impostors who pose as organizers. and the books of accounts all of which are certified under oath by the secretary or treasurer. So. Book V of the Implementing Rules requires that the application should be signed by at least twenty percent (20%) of the employees in the appropriate bargaining unit and be accompanied by a sworn statement of the applicant union that there is no certified bargaining agent or. holding that PISCORANGLO is not a duly registered labor organization. much less said personality. in the absence of legal personality Piscor Workers Union may not validly authorize ANGLO to file the present petition. some of the aforementioned requirements for registration are no longer required. and 2) The constitution and by-laws. that the application is filed during the last sixty (60) days of the agreement. The constitution and by-laws and the list of members who ratified the same were not attested to by the union president. Furthermore. the principal address of the labor organization. and attested to by its president. associations and unions of workers are engaged affect public interest. acting by authority of the Sec. which are mere statutory creations. which may be exercised with or without said registration. . local or chapter of a federation.00) registration fee. PHOENIX IRON & STEEL CORP V SEC. copies of its annual financial reports. of Labor. of such local or chapter. Book V of the Implementing Rules. respectively. of Labor reversed Med-Arbiter’s ruling: On appeal. are hereby SET ASIDE. OF LABOR 244 SCRA 173 BELLOSILLO. their addresses. The latter is merely a condition sine qua non for the acquisition of legal personality by labor organizations. within 30 days from its issuance by the labor federation or national union. section 4 of Rule II. Such requirement is a valid exercise of the police power. (b) The names of its officers. May 16. Laguesma. associations or unions and the possession of the "rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations. the local or chapter does not become a legitimate labor organization.Private respondent PISCOR-ANGLO (Union)asserting to be legitimate labor organization filed a petition for certification election with the Med-Arbiter. The provisions governing union affiliation are found in Rule II. for the possession and exercise of which registration is required to protect both labor and the public against abuses. and attested to by its president. But when an unregistered union becomes a branch. USec. the minutes of its adoption or ratification and the list of the members who participated in it. Absent compliance with these mandatory requirements. fraud. list of officers and charter certificate and called for the immediate conduct of a certification election ISSUE WON PISCOR-ANGLO has complied with the requirements to be legitimate labor organization . Record shows that for purposes of registering Piscor Workers Union as an affiliate of ANGLO no books of account was filed before the Burueau of Labor Relations (BLR).

ILO-PHILS dismissed Pagpalain’s claims. The requirement that books of account be submitted as a requisite for a registration can be found only in Book V of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code. however. alleging that ILO-PHILS was not a legitimate labor organization due to its failure to comply with the requirements for registration under the Labor Code. within 30 days from its issuance by the labor federation or national union. For reporting purposes. and attested to by its president. form a part of the legal system of the Philippines. Specifically. 09 is null and void. and the documents needed to be submitted by a local or chapter have been reduced to the following: (a) A charter certificate issued by the federation or national union indicating the creation or establishment of the local/chapter.Furthermore. the Secretary amended the above-mentioned omnibus rules by issuing Department Order No. which is the province of the legislative and executive branches of government.Cases cited by Pagpalain are not to be deemed as laws on the registration of unions. Specifically. as the case may be. Pagpalain cannot insist that ILO-PHILS comply with the requirements prescribed in said rulings.By virtue of Department Order No. 16. saying that Department Order No. Disposition Petition is GRANTED. Inc. are already passe and therefore. Pagpalain maintains that Department Order No. (b) The names of the local/chapter’s officers. 1999 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . of Labor) Reasoning The rationale for the requirements enunciated above: The certification and attestation requirements are preventive measures against the commission of fraud. . 9 is violative of public policy.Pagpalain cannot also allege that Department Order No. filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor and Employment. . this petition. Pagpalain appealed.Federation of Free Workers (FFW/ respondent) filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE Regional Office No. Series of 1997.Labor Law 2 A2010 . VII. 9 has been issued on authority of law. They merely interpret and apply the implementing rules of the Labor Code as to registration of unions. Under the law. HELD NO Ratio Article 234 of the Labor Code does not require the submission of books of account in order for a labor organization to be registered as a legitimate labor organization. Aug. Secretary of Labor dismissed appeal. ordering the immediate conduct of a certification election among the petitioner’s rank-and-file employees. in a bid to represent the rank-and-file drivers and helpers of petitioner Pagpalain Haulers. V TRAJANO 310 SCRA 354 ROMERO. and that dispensing with the books of accounts contravenes public policy. and the books of accounts all of which are certified under oath by the secretary or treasurer. It sought to be certified and to represent the permanent rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the petitioner. 9. and a list of its officers and their addresses.” C. . . the Secretary of Labor and Employment promulgated the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code. 9. of Book V provided that ‘[t]he local or chapter of a labor federation or national union shall have and maintain a constitution and by-laws. with respect to books of account.Med-Arbiter decided in favor of ILO-PHILS. Failure of a labor union to submit and certify under oath the required documents submitted with the BLR is fatal to the attainment of a legitimate status. They likewise afford a measure of protection to unsuspecting employees who may be lured into joining unscrupulous or fly-by-night unions whose sole purpose is to control union funds or to use the union for dubious ends. Article 5 of the Labor Code provides that “[t]he Department of Labor and other government agencies charged with the administration and enforcement of this Code or any of its parts shall promulgate the necessary implementing rules and regulations. Rule II. (Article 241 and 274) Disposition Petition is dismissed. INC. It does not formulate public policy. 9. Sec. Hence. and the principal office of the local/chapter. this intention can still be realized through other provisions of the Labor Code. MANDAUE Tinga . as amended by Department Order No. (Progressive Dev’t Corp v.Pagpalain filed a motion to dismiss the petition. provided that where the local/chapter’s constitution and by-laws is the same as that of the federation or national union. federations or national unions shall be observed. a statement on the set of officers. Rosalinda Dimapilis-Baldoz. its constitution and by-laws. a required by Rule II. Since Book V of the Omnibus Rules. . It is this interpretation that forms part of the legal system of the Philippines. the old Section 3(e). applied and interpreted the then existing Book V of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code. the submission of books of account as a requisite for registration has been done away with. 9 is null and void because it is illegal for contravening rulings of this Court which. ISSUE WON Department Order No. PAGAPALAIN HAULERS. however. By virtue of this selfsame authority. Constitution—by law SAN MIGUEL CORP. no longer applicable. ILOPHILS attached to the petition copies of its charter certificate. the controlling intention in requiring the submission of books of account is the protection of labor through the minimization of the risk of fraud and diversion in the handling of union funds.46 - Disini HELD NO Ratio A local or chapter becomes a legitimate labor organization only upon submission of the following to the BLR: 1) A charter certificate. 9. Hence. As adverted to earlier.Integrated Labor Organization-Pagpalain Haulers Worker’s Union (ILOPHILS). . July 15. set of officers and books of accounts. As correctly pointed out by the Solicitor General. for the current implementing rules have deleted the same. . Reasoning Department Order No.” Consonant with this article. Series of 1997 had dispensed with the requirement that a local or chapter of a national union submit books of account in order to be registered with the Department of Labor and Employment. according to Article 8 of the Civil Code. it claimed that the books of account submitted by ILO-PHILS were not verified under oath by its treasurer and attested to by its president. . its books of account. the sole function of our courts is to apply or interpret the laws. Specifically. the doctrines enunciated in the cases. and 2) The constitution and by-laws. (Pagpalain). The cited cases. (2) a copy of the constitution of respondent prepared by its . the procedure governing the reporting of independently registered unions. 2005 467 SCRA 107 Facts -CA affirmes DOLE Undersecretary for Labor Relations. Book V of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code. V. the Secretary is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations to implement the Labor Code. their addresses. this fact shall be indicated accordingly. (c) The local/chapter’s constitution and by-laws. of such local or chapter. no longer requires a local or chapter to submit books of accounts as a prerequisite for registration. Series of 1997. The following documents were attached to the petition: (1) a Charter Certificate certifying that respondent as of that date was duly certified as a local or chapter of FFW. for the interpretation placed upon the written law by a competent court has the force of law.

Admittedly. there is no good reason to deny legal personality or defer its conferral to the local/chapter if it is evident at the onset that the federation or national union itself has already through its own means established the local/chapter. and (5) a list of all the rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the Mandaue Packaging Products Plants and Mandaue Glass Plant prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. In the ordinary course. supervisory and rank and file employees. -SMC (Petitioner) filed a motion to dismiss the petition for certification election on the sole ground that herein respondent is not listed or included in the roster of legitimate labor organizations based on the certification issued by the Officer-In-Charge. supervisory or rank and file. while Article XV delineates the procedure for the impeachment of these officers. 3. (3) a list of respondent’s officers and their respective addresses. again prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. a managerial employee is “one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire.” A supervisory employee is “one who. Jesus B. the fact that it was the local/chapter itself. we only need to determine on what date the Regional Office or Bureau received the complete documentary requirements enumerated under Section 1. VII issued a Certificate of Creation of Local/Chapter No. that remedy should be preferred. Whether or not the inclusion of the two alleged supervisory employees in appellee union’s membership amounts to fraud. -Respondent submitted to the Bureau of Labor Relations the same documents earlier attached to its petition for certification. Article VII establishes the standing committees of the local/chapter and how their members are appointed. and the charter certificate issued by the national union FFW. a putative local/chapter cannot. . The Charter Certificate expressly states that respondent has been issued the said certificate “to operate as a local or chapter of the [FFW]”. false statement and misrepresentation in order for these to be actionable is intent to mislead by the party making the representation. Article XVI governs and institutes the requisites for the amendment of the constitution. Noel T. The procedure for election of these officers. It is also well-settled that the actual functions of an employee. 9. transfer. there is no proof to show that Bathan. What is important is that there is an unmistakeable intent of the members of appellee union to exercise their right to organize. and not respondent. no action can be done that emasculates the right to self-organization and the promotion of free trade unionism. not merely his job title. oftentimes unaware of the fine distinctions between managerial. or false statement within the meaning of Article 239(a) and (c) of the Labor Code. Under the law. is provided for in Article IX. and not the FFW. No. The issuance of the certificate of registration by the Bureau or Regional Office is not the operative act that vests legal personality upon a local/chapter under Department Order No. In this case. Even if they are supervisory employees. misrepresentation. Article VIII lays down the rules for meetings of the union. during which the organizers must take their chances. an essential element of fraud.The Chief of Labor Relations Division of DOLE Regional Office No. effectively recommends managerial actions if the exercise of such recommendatory authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. This being the case. it does not.Labor Law 2 A2010 . or the date respondent filed its petition for certification election. in order to ascertain when respondent acquired legal personality. it would have refrained from using a more precise description of the organization instead of declaring that the organization is composed of ‘rank and file monthlies’.47 - Disini Secretary. and it was hoped that the submissions would facilitate the listing of respondent under the roster of legitimate labor organizations. Rule VI of Department Order No. 2. Thus. certifying that from 30 July 1998. Bathan and attested by its President. (4) a certification signifying that respondent had just been organized and no amount had yet been collected from its members. The Charter Certificate expressly acknowledges FFW’s intent to establish respondent as of 9 June 1998. without the imprimatur of the federation or national union. The accompanying letter. layoff. false statement or misrepresentation cannot be sustained. intended to mislead anyone. the manner by which respondent was deemed to have acquired legal personality by the DOLE and the Court of Appeals was not in strict conformity with the provisions of Department Order No. and proper that respondent’s legal personality be deemed existent as of 15 June 1998. special assessments. assign or discipline employees. “all employees not falling within the definition of managerial or supervisory employee are considered rank-and-file employees”. Hence.’” Finally. which submitted the documents required under Section 1. including the necessary vote requirements. Good faith is presumed in all representations. What about the lack of documents containing the by-laws? Not needed so long as it is part of the union’s constitution. we consider it permissible for respondent to have submitted the required documents itself to the Regional Office. and attached to the petition for certification election. signed by respondent’s president Sagun. An examination of respondent’s constitution reveals it sufficiently comprehensive in establishing the necessary rules for its operation. are determinative in classifying such employee as managerial. Whether or not subsequent developments change the disposition of the case Held 1. Such legal personality is acquired from the filing of the complete documentary requirements enumerated in Section 1. the names and addresses of its officers. The Court likewise sees no impediment in deeming respondent as having acquired legal personality as of 15 June 1998. IARFBT-058/98. There is no doubt that on 15 June 1998. or appellee union for that matter. ITD. fines. 3. recall. Articles V and VI name the various officers and what their respective functions are. The grounds for cancellation of union registration are not meant to be applied automatically. and cites the applicability of the Robert’s Rules of Order[43] in its meetings. 9. Article IV establishes the requisites for membership in the local/chapter. And finally. including the notice and quorum requirements thereof. the date the complete documents were submitted. in the interest of the employer. In this case. Certainly. the charge of fraud. and other payments. Article X enumerates with particularity the rules for union dues. no party will be prejudiced if Bathan were to be excluded from membership in the union. the date the complete documents were submitted. Atty. such is evidenced by the Charter Certificate dated 9 June 1998. Article XII provides the general rule for quorum in meetings of the Board of Directors and of the members of the local/chapter. Wilfred V. it does not affect the case. Regional Director of the DOLE Regional Office No. The vacancy he will thus create can then be easily filled up through the succession provision of appellee union’s constitution and by-laws. issued by FFW. it should have been FFW. Gabor. If this was appellee union’s intention. claim affiliation with the larger unit or source its legal personality therefrom. and not of any other entity. 9. suspend. Where a remedy short of cancellation is available. The first two of these documents were duly certified under oath by respondent’s secretary Bathan and attested to by president Sagun. We cannot impose rigorous restraints on such right if we are to give meaning to the protection to labor and social justice clauses of the Constitution. Issues 1. 15 June 1998. In this case. but indeed with utmost discretion. The evident rationale why the rule states that it is the federation or national union that submits said documents to the Bureau or Regional Office is that the creation of the local/chapter is the sole prerogative of the federation or national union. it having submitted all the required documents. which should have submitted the subject documents to the Regional Office. stated that such documents were submitted in compliance with the requirements for the creation of a local/chapter pursuant to the Labor Code and its Implementing Rules. Rule VI of Department Order No. signed by respondent’s treasurer Chita D. attached thereto were respondent’s constitution. When did the union acquire legal personality? 2. We take administrative notice of the realities in union organizing. Sagun. Nonetheless. VII. Rodriguez and attested by Sagun. discharge. No. Rule VI. 9. respondent has acquired legal personality as a labor organization/worker’s association.

If there are matters that have arisen since the filing of the petition that serve to delay or cancel the election. more particularly. intimidation. E. x x x It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to selforganization. The local/chapter retains a separate legal personality from that of its officers or members that remains viable notwithstanding any turnover in its officers or members. thus defeating the very essence and reason of collective bargaining. “the facts and the evidence did not establish events [sic] least a rational basis why the union would [wield] a strike based on alleged unfair labor practices it did not even bother to substantiate”. June 30. Case was referred to the CA. hence. employees who are non-union members will be economically impaired and will not be able to negotiate their terms and conditions of work. Thus. -The Union’s petition for certificate election was denied by the DOLE. much less legal personality. Hotel refused to accept the employees return.Petitioner’s refusal to bargain then with respondent can not be considered a ULP to justify the staging of the strike. the Petition is DENIED. This was rejected by the Hotel stating that the Union was not the employee’s bargaining agent as their petition for certification election was denied. which is an effective safeguard against the evil schemes of employers in terms and conditions of work” . ISSUE 1) WON the Union can bargain only in behalf of its members and not for all the employees of the Hotel. it could not demand from petitioner the right to bargain collectively in their behalf -Respondent insists. Said freedoms may still be exercised with or without registration. The constitution does not guarantee these rights and privileges. SO ORDERED. because if the same shall be allowed. the burden of proof is on the union to prove its allegations by substantial evidence.the Hotel’s refusal to bargain. NCMB summoned both parties and held series of dialogues. This petition was dismissed by DOLE for lack of legal requirements. The order was modified (by a different Secretary) such that reinstatement was to be done only in the payroll. -Union filed a Notice of Strike with the NCMB alleging the Hotel’ refusal to bargain and for acts of unfair labor practices. during or after the strike – was correctly discredited by the appellate court. -the CA ruled that “what [respondent] will be achieving is to divide the employees. Union sent a letter to Hotel informing it of its desire to negotiate for a collective bargaining agreement. however. including the right to strike in accordance with law…” -Even if the purpose of a strike is valid.was not a valid ground to stage the strike. . TOPICS: Union registration and procedure. 3) WON those employees who participated in the strike should be given back wages HELD 1) No. Effect on Constitution – Statutory Guarantee Freedom of Association PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF FREE LABOR UNIONS V SEC.48 - Disini The allegation that the bargaining unit that respondent sought to represent is no longer the same because of the dynamic nature of petitioner’s business. Neither is the fact that some of respondent’s officers have since resigned from petitioner of any moment. it modified NLRC decision ordering reinstatement with back wages of union members. -It is doctrinal that the exercise of the right of private sector employees to strike is not absolute. factors.. that it could validly bargain in behalf of "its members. the strike may still be held illegal where the means employed are illegal. OF LABOR 27 SCRA 40 The requirement of registration does NOT curtail the freedoms of assembly and association. collective bargaining and negotiations and peaceful concerted activities. Costs against petitioner. -as was mentioned. 2) WON the strike conducted by the Union was illegal. Thus Section 3 of Article XIII of the Constitution. -Union filed for certiorari alleging grave abuse of discretion. and that four of respondent’s officers are no longer connected with petitioner have no effect on the Court’s ruling that a certification election should be immediately conducted with respondent as one of the available choices. the other workers who are not members are at a serious disadvantage. Petitioner’s bare manifestations adduce no reason why the certification election should not be conducted forthwith. 263 (g) of LC. The union thus is admittedly not the exclusive representative of the majority of the employees of petitioner. -The second ground – that petitioner prevented or intimidated some workers from joining the union before. On appeal. And Union members were directed to return to work and for Hotel to accept them back. Since it is the union who alleges that unfair labor practices were committed by the Hotel. a lot of changes having occurred in the work environment. these can be threshed out during the preelection conferences. restraint or coercion in carrying out concerted activities which are injurious to the rights to property renders a strike illegal. -As provided by art 255 of the LC only the labor organization designated or selected by the majority of the employees in an appropriate collective bargaining unit is the exclusive representative of the employees in such unit for the purpose of collective bargaining. which are mere statutory creations. CA affirmed that the “payroll reinstatement” was not a grave abuse of discretion. Union however suddenly went on strike -Secretary of DOLE assumed jurisdiction and ordered compulsory arbitration pursuant to art. the first ground mentioned by the Union. -after a few months. the rank-and-file employees of [petitioner] . Question of Legitimacy PHILIPPINE DIAMOND HOTEL V MANILA DIAMOND HOTEL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION 494 SCRA 195 PHILIPPINE DIAMOND HOTEL AND RESORT INC (MANILA DIAMOND HOTEL V MANILA DIAMOND HOTEL EMPLOYEES UNION 494 SCRA 195 CARPIO MORALES." relying on Article 242 of the Labor Code. the employment of violence. . The latter is merely a condition sine qua non for the acquisition of legal personality by labor unions and the possessions of rights and privileges granted by law. DISPOSITION WHEREFORE.Labor Law 2 A2010 . provides: SECTION 3. majority union 2) yes. 2006 FACTS -Union filed a petition for certification election to be declared the exclusive bargaining representative of the Hotel’s employees. Evidence show s that some of the workers-strikers who joined the strike indeed committed illegal acts – blocking the D. .

VII issued a Certificate of Creation of Local/Chapter No.Labor Law 2 A2010 . recall. -The general rule is that backwages shall not be awarded in an economic strike on the principle that "a fair day’s wage" accrues only for a "fair day’s labor. Under the law. dismissed or suspended. even if in protest against unfair labor practices. Sagun. Article VII establishes the standing committees of the local/chapter and how their members are appointed. suspend. or false statement within the meaning of Article 239(a) and (c) of the Labor Code. and the charter certificate issued by the national union FFW. (2) a copy of the constitution of respondent prepared by its Secretary. willing and ready to work but was illegally locked out. V MANDAUE 467 SCRA 107 Tinga . Article XVI governs and institutes the requisites for the amendment of the constitution. there is no good reason to deny legal personality or defer its conferral to the local/chapter if it is evident at the onset that the federation or national union itself has already through its own means established the local/chapter. the fact that it was the local/chapter itself. threatening guests. 9. . The evident rationale why the rule states that it is the federation or national union that submits said documents to the Bureau or Regional Office is that the creation of the local/chapter is the sole prerogative of the federation or national union.Federation of Free Workers (FFW/ respondent) filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE Regional Office No. 3. The Charter Certificate expressly states that respondent has been issued the said certificate “to operate as a local or chapter of the [FFW]”. which submitted the documents required under Section 1. stated that such documents were submitted in compliance with the requirements for the creation of a local/chapter pursuant to the Labor Code and its Implementing Rules. An examination of respondent’s constitution reveals it sufficiently comprehensive in establishing the necessary rules for its operation. again prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. Whether or not subsequent developments change the disposition of the case Held 1.burden of economic loss SAN MIGUEL CORP. transfer. ordering the immediate conduct of a certification election among the petitioner’s rank-and-file employees. Article VIII lays down the rules for meetings of the union. ITD. Rosalinda Dimapilis-Baldoz. 15 June 1998. VII. Such legal personality is acquired from the filing of the complete documentary requirements enumerated in Section 1. layoff. In the ordinary course. "when employees voluntarily go on strike. 2. VII. it having submitted all the required documents. such is evidenced by the Charter Certificate dated 9 June 1998. Rodriguez and attested by Sagun. (3) a list of respondent’s officers and their respective addresses. 9. we consider it permissible for respondent to have submitted the required documents itself to the Regional Office. When did the union acquire legal personality? 2. The Court likewise sees no impediment in deeming respondent as having acquired legal personality as of 15 June 1998. including the necessary vote requirements. and the like. Noel T. Articles V and VI name the various officers and what their respective functions are. is provided for in Article IX. and not of any other entity. and other payments. No.” -The Court ruled that “only those members of the union who did not commit illegal acts during the course of the illegal strike should be reinstated but without back wages” TOPIC: illegal strikes. The following documents were attached to the petition: (1) a Charter Certificate certifying that respondent as of that date was duly certified as a local or chapter of FFW. Rule VI of Department Order No. we only need to determine on what date the Regional Office or Bureau received the complete documentary requirements enumerated under Section 1. TOPICS: right to engage in concerted activities-limitations 3) No. fines. which should have submitted the subject documents to the Regional Office. misrepresentation. The procedure for election of these officers. Article XII provides the general rule for quorum in meetings of the Board of Directors and of the members of the local/chapter. the date the complete documents were submitted." no back wages during the strike is awarded. and cites the applicability of the Robert’s Rules of Order[43] in its meetings. The accompanying letter. Atty. or the date respondent filed its petition for certification election.The Chief of Labor Relations Division of DOLE Regional Office No. Whether or not the inclusion of the two alleged supervisory employees in appellee union’s membership amounts to fraud. a putative local/chapter cannot. the laborer was able. Thus. Rule VI of Department Order No. respondent has acquired legal personality as a labor organization/worker’s association. And finally. In this case. Issues 1. and attached to the petition for certification election. The issuance of the certificate of registration by the Bureau or Regional Office is not the operative act that vests legal personality upon a local/chapter under Department Order No. Regional Director of the DOLE Regional Office No. Wilfred V. 9. 9. Jesus B. The first two of these documents were duly certified under oath by respondent’s secretary Bathan and attested to by president Sagun. claim affiliation with the larger unit or source its legal personality therefrom. attached thereto were respondent’s constitution. in order to ascertain when respondent acquired legal personality. Rule VI. discharge. Gabor. Aug.49 - Disini free ingress to and egress from the Hotel. and (5) a list of all the rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the Mandaue Packaging Products Plants and Mandaue Glass Plant prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. Certainly. assign or discipline employees. certifying that from 30 July 1998. (4) a certification signifying that respondent had just been organized and no amount had yet been collected from its members. and not respondent. If there is no work performed by the employee there can be no wage or pay.” A supervisory employee is “one . holding noise barrage. 16. including the notice and quorum requirements thereof. Admittedly. unless of course. it should have been FFW. issued by FFW. -Respondent submitted to the Bureau of Labor Relations the same documents earlier attached to its petition for certification. a managerial employee is “one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire. signed by respondent’s treasurer Chita D. Bathan and attested by its President. special assessments. Article IV establishes the requisites for membership in the local/chapter. signed by respondent’s president Sagun. This being the case. and not the FFW. What about the lack of documents containing the by-laws? Not needed so long as it is part of the union’s constitution. -SMC (Petitioner) filed a motion to dismiss the petition for certification election on the sole ground that herein respondent is not listed or included in the roster of legitimate labor organizations based on the certification issued by the Officer-In-Charge. it does not. the manner by which respondent was deemed to have acquired legal personality by the DOLE and the Court of Appeals was not in strict conformity with the provisions of Department Order No. while Article XV delineates the procedure for the impeachment of these officers. and it was hoped that the submissions would facilitate the listing of respondent under the roster of legitimate labor organizations. 2005 Facts -CA affirmes DOLE Undersecretary for Labor Relations. The Charter Certificate expressly acknowledges FFW’s intent to establish respondent as of 9 June 1998. and proper that respondent’s legal personality be deemed existent as of 15 June 1998. It sought to be certified and to represent the permanent rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the petitioner. There is no doubt that on 15 June 1998. IARFBT-058/98. the date the complete documents were submitted. the names and addresses of its officers. without the imprimatur of the federation or national union. Nonetheless. Article X enumerates with particularity the rules for union dues.

supervisory and rank and file employees. Rule 5 of the implementing rules of Book 5 which states: “The labor organization or workers’ association shall be deemed registered and vested with legal personality on the date of issuance of its certificate of registration. but indeed with utmost discretion. it would have refrained from using a more precise description of the organization instead of declaring that the organization is composed of ‘rank and file monthlies’. Costs against petitioner. and that four of respondent’s officers are no longer connected with petitioner have no effect on the Court’s ruling that a certification election should be immediately conducted with respondent as one of the available choices. Neither is the fact that some of respondent’s officers have since resigned from petitioner of any moment. an essential element of fraud. . DISPOSITION WHEREFORE. No. The petition alleged that the union was composed of all rank-and-file employees. Petitioner’s bare manifestations adduce no reason why the certification election should not be conducted forthwith. that the bargaining unit is TAGAYTARY HIGHLANDS INTERNATIONAL GOLF CLUB. it noted its registration certificate number along with the registration certificate number of chapter affiliate. YES Ratio A local or chapter need not be independently registered to acquire legal personality. false statement or misrepresentation cannot be sustained. What is important is that there is an unmistakeable intent of the members of appellee union to exercise their right to organize. in the interest of the employer.It may not be subject to a collateral attack but only through a separate action instituted particularly for the purpose of assailing the chapter. Tomas reversed Bactin’s order. It is also well-settled that the actual functions of an employee. A local/chapter constituted in accordance with Section 1 of Rule 6 shall acquire legal personality from the date of filing of the complete documents enumerated. and the employer should be a mere bystander. 1998 and December 29. .[” . intended to mislead anyone.The pronouncement of the Labor Relations Division Chief.Laguna Autoparts Manufacturing Corporation Obrero Pilipino-LAMCOR Chapter filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE. no party will be prejudiced if Bathan were to be excluded from membership in the union. INC. . Good faith is presumed in all representations. “all employees not falling within the definition of managerial or supervisory employee are considered rank-and-file employees”. Hence.’” Finally. If there are matters that have arisen since the filing of the petition that serve to delay or cancel the election. We cannot impose rigorous restraints on such right if we are to give meaning to the protection to labor and social justice clauses of the Constitution. as prescribed in Section 5. LAGUNA V OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 457 SCRA 730 CALLEJO. 1998 .Med-Arbiter Bactin dismissed the certification election petition because of the union’s lack of personality. a lot of changes having occurred in the work environment. it does not affect the case. unorganized and that there had been no certification election for the past 12 months prior to the filing of the petition. during which the organizers must take their chances. there is no proof to show that Bathan. WON the union is a legitimate labor organization 2. The allegation that the bargaining unit that respondent sought to represent is no longer the same because of the dynamic nature of petitioner’s business. 2005 NATURE Petition to review the decision of the Court of Appeals FACTS . as the case may be. Where a remedy short of cancellation is available. If this was appellee union’s intention. April 29. cannot be challenged in a petition for certification election. This was affirmed by the CA. not merely his job title. or appellee union for that matter.50 - Disini who. Reasoning The task of determining whether the local or chapter has submitted the complete documentary requirements is lodged with the Regional Office or the BLR. The grounds for cancellation of union registration are not meant to be applied automatically. 3. It pointed out that a local or chapter acquires legal personality as a labor organization from the date of filing of the complete documents.Labor Law 2 A2010 . the charge of fraud. The local/chapter retains a separate legal personality from that of its officers or members that remains viable notwithstanding any turnover in its officers or members. supervisory or rank and file. Such legal personality cannot thereafter be subject to collateral attack but may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with these Rules. the Petition is DENIED. ISSUE/S 1. 1999 . 2. are determinative in classifying such employee as managerial. The records of the case show that the respondent union submitted the said documents to the regional office and was issued a certification. effectively recommends managerial actions if the exercise of such recommendatory authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. WON the chapter’s legal personality can be attacked collaterally in an election action HELD 1.The CA stressed that a local or chapter need not be registered to become a legitimate labor organization. these can be threshed out during the preelection conferences. Disposition Petition is denied. that remedy should be preferred. In its petition. no action can be done that emasculates the right to self-organization and the promotion of free trade unionism. In this case. The vacancy he will thus create can then be easily filled up through the succession provision of appellee union’s constitution and by-laws. DOLE Secretary Sto. V TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS EMPLOYEES UNION 395 SCRA 699 CARPIO-MORALES. We take administrative notice of the realities in union organizing.Laguna Autoparts moved to cancel the certification election because the union was not considered a legitimate labor organization for failure to show that it had complied with registration requirements such as submission of required documents to the Bureau of Labor Relations. No costs. It opined that this must not be so for the choice of a collective bargaining agent was the sole concern of the employees. In this case. NO Ratio Reasoning . 2003 NATURE Petition for Certiorari under Rule 45 THIGCI assailing CA decision denying its petition to annul the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Resolutions of November 12. Even if they are supervisory employees. . oftentimes unaware of the fine distinctions between managerial. SO ORDERED. false statement and misrepresentation in order for these to be actionable is intent to mislead by the party making the representation. that the respondent union acquired a legal personality with the submission of the complete documentary requirement. January 22.The CA noted that it was the employer which offered the most tenacious resistance to the holding of a certification election among its regular rank-andfile employees.May 3.

1997 > Tagaytay Highlands Employees Union (THEU). Regional Director of the DOLE Regional Office No. It sought to be certified and to represent the permanent rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the petitioner. Rodriguez and attested by Sagun.denied THIGCI’s Petition for Certiorari and affirmed the DOLE Resolution dated November 12. filed a petition for certification election before the DOLE Mediation-Arbitration Unit. Sagun. There is no doubt that on 15 June 1998. Atty. 9. the Med-Arbiter summarily disregarded the petitioner’s prayer that the former look into the legitimacy of the respondent Union by a sweeping declaration that the union was in the possession of a charter certificate so that for all intents and purposes. only 71 were actual rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. VII. Facts -CA affirmes DOLE Undersecretary for Labor Relations. certifying that from 30 July 1998. and for as long as there is no final order of cancellation. 09. it having submitted all the required documents. it continues to enjoy the rights accorded to a legitimate organization. series of 1997. we only need to determine on what date the Regional Office or Bureau received the complete documentary requirements enumerated under Section 1.DOLE Resolution of November 12. signed by respondent’s president Sagun. 9. I-ARFBT-058/98. Inc. Ledesma which held that: "The Labor Code requires that in organized and unorganized establishments. Bathan and attested by its President. and that Section 5. 1997 > opposed petition for certification election because the list of union members submitted by it was defective and fatally flawed as it included the names and signatures of supervisors. particularly the right to file a petition for certification election. Thus. pursuant to Article 257 of the Labor Code and Section 11. terminated and absent without leave (AWOL) employees. (2) a copy of the constitution of respondent prepared by its Secretary. the date the complete documents were submitted. VII issued a Certificate of Creation of Local/Chapter No. stated that such documents were submitted in compliance with the requirements for the creation of a local/chapter pursuant to the Labor Code and its Implementing Rules. 9. Such legal personality is acquired from the filing of the complete documentary requirements enumerated in Section 1.Federation of Free Workers (FFW/ respondent) filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE Regional Office No. The acquisition of rights by any union or labor organization. 776. 1998. Whether or not the inclusion of the two alleged supervisory employees in appellee union’s membership amounts to fraud. Also. in order to ascertain when respondent acquired legal personality. MFR denied . or the date respondent filed its petition for certification election. Philippine Transport and General Workers Organization (PTGWO). some of the signatures in the list of union members were secured through fraudulent and deceitful means. 1998 > DOLE Med-Arbiter Anastacio Bactin ordered the holding of a certification election . the names and addresses of its officers. Sumasaklaw sa Manggagawa sa Pizza Hut (was) a legitimate organization" 2. . VII. The first two of these documents were duly certified under oath by respondent’s secretary Bathan and attested to by president Sagun.51 - Disini 467 SCRA 107 FACTS . as well as employees of The Country Club. Admittedly. the manner by which respondent was deemed to have acquired legal personality by the DOLE and the Court of Appeals was not in strict conformity with the provisions of Department Order No. -Respondent submitted to the Bureau of Labor Relations the same documents earlier attached to its petition for certification. Rule XI of DOLE Department Order No.Pizza Hut v. Gabor. 15 June 1998. again prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. a corporation distinct and separate from THIGCI. a legitimate labor organization said to represent majority of the rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. hence. resigned. -SMC (Petitioner) filed a motion to dismiss the petition for certification election on the sole ground that herein respondent is not listed or included in the roster of legitimate labor organizations based on the certification issued by the Officer-In-Charge. and it was hoped that the submissions would facilitate the listing of respondent under the roster of legitimate labor organizations. Noel T. Rule VI. The accompanying letter. THEU asserted that it complied with all the requirements for valid affiliation and inclusion in the roster of legitimate labor organizations pursuant to DOLE Department Order No. the employer may pray for the dismissal of such petition on the basis of lack of mutuality of interests of the members of the union as well as lack of employer-employee relationship and petitioner failed to adduce substantial evidence to support its allegations. Regional Branch No. V.The Chief of Labor Relations Division of DOLE Regional Office No. and the charter certificate issued by the national union FFW. Whether or not subsequent developments change the disposition of the case Held 1. Therefore. Rosalinda Dimapilis-Baldoz. Jesus B. 1998 Resolution dismissing the petition for certification election. on account of which it was duly granted a Certification of Affiliation by DOLE on October 10. It held that while a petition for certification election is an exception to the innocent bystander rule. Rule VI of Department Order No. Local Chapter No.October 16. ITD.November 27. ordering the immediate conduct of a certification election among the petitioner’s rank-and-file employees. signed by respondent’s treasurer Chita D. Issues 1. In the case before us. The following documents were attached to the petition: (1) a Charter Certificate certifying that respondent as of that date was duly certified as a local or chapter of FFW.Labor Law 2 A2010 . automatically order the conduct of a certification election. a petition for certification election must be filed by a legitimate labor organization. Wilfred V. or false statement within the meaning of Article 239(a) and (c) of the Labor Code. When did the union acquire legal personality? 2. (4) a certification signifying that respondent had just been organized and no amount had yet been collected from its members. the Med-Arbiter should. 9. The issuance of the certificate of registration by the Bureau or Regional Office is not the operative act that vests legal personality upon a local/chapter under Department Order No. attached thereto were respondent’s constitution. IV .. January 28. 16. 3. 1997.CA . misrepresentation. MANDAUE Tinga . first and foremost. and that out of the 192 signatories to the petition. Aug. and submitted copies of the handwritten denial and withdrawal of some of its employees from participating in the petition. 19981 > setting aside the June 4. Rule V of said Department Order provides that the legitimacy of its registration cannot be subject to collateral attack. What about the lack of documents containing the by-laws? Not Issue: WON question of legitimacy would affect the certification election Held: YES . depends on whether or not the labor organization has attained the status of a legitimate labor organization. and (5) a list of all the rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the Mandaue Packaging Products Plants and Mandaue Glass Plant prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. respondent has acquired legal personality as a labor organization/worker’s association. 2005 . Action or Denial of Application and Remedy SAN MIGUEL CORP. (3) a list of respondent’s officers and their respective addresses.

he would register the Independent Employees Union the following day. and that four of respondent’s officers are no longer connected with petitioner have no effect on the Court’s ruling that a certification election should be immediately conducted with respondent as one of the available choices. special assessments. it would have refrained from using a more precise description of the organization instead of declaring that the organization is composed of ‘rank and file monthlies’. Neither is the fact that some of respondent’s officers have since resigned from petitioner of any moment. Rule VI of Department Order No. UMALI V LOVINA 86 Phil 313 PADILLA. suspend.52 - Disini needed so long as it is part of the union’s constitution. What is important is that there is an unmistakeable intent of the members of appellee union to exercise their right to organize. April 29. no action can be done that emasculates the right to self-organization and the promotion of free trade unionism. the date the complete documents were submitted. and not respondent. issued by FFW. it does not affect the case. Good faith is presumed in all representations. claim affiliation with the larger unit or source its legal personality therefrom. are determinative in classifying such employee as managerial. The allegation that the bargaining unit that respondent sought to represent is no longer the same because of the dynamic nature of petitioner’s business. without the imprimatur of the federation or national union. false statement or misrepresentation cannot be sustained. And finally. 2. no party will be prejudiced if Bathan were to be excluded from membership in the union. In this case. a putative local/chapter cannot. They filed with the Department of Labor a copy of its constitution and by-laws. the fact that it was the local/chapter itself. We cannot impose rigorous restraints on such right if we are to give meaning to the protection to labor and social justice clauses of the Constitution. Where a remedy short of cancellation is available. The local/chapter retains a separate legal personality from that of its officers or members that remains viable notwithstanding any turnover in its officers or members. assign or discipline employees. false statement and misrepresentation in order for these to be actionable is intent to mislead by the party making the representation. the charge of fraud. not merely his job title. is provided for in Article IX. transfer. and cites the applicability of the Robert’s Rules of Order[43] in its meetings. and not the FFW. -Despite the failure of the Jai Alaistas Union of Employees to hold a general election and the promise of the Secretary of Labor that should such an election be not held.respondent justifies his failure to register and to issue permit applied for upon the following grounds: (1) that he has not investigated the activities. Even if they are supervisory employees. there is no good reason to deny legal personality or defer its conferral to the local/chapter if it is evident at the onset that the federation or national union itself has already through its own means established the local/chapter. Article VII establishes the standing committees of the local/chapter and how their members are appointed. Article XII provides the general rule for quorum in meetings of the Board of Directors and of the members of the local/chapter. it does not. supervisory or rank and file. and other payments. On the same date. it should have been FFW. which submitted the documents required under Section 1.” A supervisory employee is “one who. Hence. effectively recommends managerial actions if the exercise of such recommendatory authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. granting it an extension of time to hold an election under the supervision of the Department of Labor. The grounds for cancellation of union registration are not meant to be applied automatically. he would be compelled to register and issue a permit to the Independent Employees Union. Nonetheless. fines. If this was appellee union’s intention. This being the case. The procedure for election of these officers. as required of him by section 3 of Commonwealth Act 213. Article VIII lays down the rules for meetings of the union. The Charter Certificate expressly acknowledges FFW’s intent to establish respondent as of 9 June 1998.Its President wrote a letter to the Secretary of Labor requesting immediate and favorable action on the pending application for registration of their labor organization. layoff. An examination of respondent’s constitution reveals it sufficiently comprehensive in establishing the necessary rules for its operation.Labor Law 2 A2010 . the Secretary of Labor wrote a letter to the President of the Jai Alaistas Union of Employees. No. “all employees not falling within the definition of managerial or supervisory employee are considered rank-and-file employees”. a lot of changes having occurred in the work environment. . We take administrative notice of the realities in union organizing. and purposes of the Independent Employees Union. In this case. during which the organizers must take their chances. while Article XV delineates the procedure for the impeachment of these officers. If there are matters that have arisen since the filing of the petition that serve to delay or cancel the election. 1950 NATURE Petition for writ of mandamus FACTS . Certainly.201 employees of the Jai Alai Corporation of the Philippines organized themselves into an association as the "Independent Employees Union". or appellee union for that matter. The vacancy he will thus create can then be easily filled up through the succession provision of appellee union’s constitution and by-laws. intended to mislead anyone. Petitioner’s bare manifestations adduce no reason why the certification election should not be conducted forthwith. we consider it permissible for respondent to have submitted the required documents itself to the Regional Office. the Petition is DENIED. a registered and licensed union. recall. In this case. oftentimes unaware of the fine distinctions between managerial. an essential element of fraud. within which he as Secretary of Labor must complete his . real aims. but indeed with utmost discretion. and warning the President of the union that should the election be not held within the time granted. (2) that there is no fixed period provided for in Commonwealth Act 213. The Charter Certificate expressly states that respondent has been issued the said certificate “to operate as a local or chapter of the [FFW]”. these can be threshed out during the pre-election conferences. due to the failure of the petitioner's union or its officials to accomplish and submit to him the mimeographed questionnaire required to be filled out by the labor union applicant. in the interest of the employer. supervisory and rank and file employees. including the necessary vote requirements. there is no proof to show that Bathan. discharge. and proper that respondent’s legal personality be deemed existent as of 15 June 1998. Article XVI governs and institutes the requisites for the amendment of the constitution. which should have submitted the subject documents to the Regional Office.’” Finally. SO ORDERED. and not of any other entity. including the notice and quorum requirements thereof. Articles V and VI name the various officers and what their respective functions are. In the ordinary course. The evident rationale why the rule states that it is the federation or national union that submits said documents to the Bureau or Regional Office is that the creation of the local/chapter is the sole prerogative of the federation or national union. 9. that remedy should be preferred. Costs against petitioner. and attached to the petition for certification election. The Court likewise sees no impediment in deeming respondent as having acquired legal personality as of 15 June 1998. Article X enumerates with particularity the rules for union dues. Article IV establishes the requisites for membership in the local/chapter. the said secretary has refused and still refuses to register the application and to issue a permit to the Independent Employees Union to operate as a legitimate labor organization. such is evidenced by the Charter Certificate dated 9 June 1998. a managerial employee is “one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire. DISPOSITION WHEREFORE. . Under the law. No. It is also well-settled that the actual functions of an employee. 3.

recognition by the Bureau of Labor Relations merely becomes a ministerial function. 1993 or one (1) day prior to the formation of the chapter.Any action taken by the Bureau of Labor Relations is made in consonance with the mandate of the Labor Code. V LAGUESMA (Nagkakaisang-Lakas ng Manggagawa) 271 SCRA 593 . because the activities in which labor organizations. then Acting Director of Bureau of Labor Relations.there was a CBA between ALU and Vassar Industries which expired. names of members. No." .53 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari Disini KAPUNAN. Therefore the petitioner Union should be registered in this case. Such requirements are a valid exercise of the police power. the conclusion is inescapable that he has neglected the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins him to perform as a duty resulting from his office. Disposition There being no lawful reason for the respondent to refuse the registration of the application for the petitioner's union and permission to operate as a legitimate labor organization. April 18. 1993. March 31. which. They filed an application for registration of their union. Immediately executory. it becomes mandatory for the Bureau of Labor Relations to check if the requirements under Article 234 have been sedulously complied with. (Philippine Labor Alliance Council v BLR: Once the fact of disaffiliation has been demonstrated beyond doubt. Then it can be part of a certification election to decide who would be the exclusive bargaining representative of the workers. refused to register petitioner Vassar Industries Employees Union “on the ground that there is already a registered collective bargaining agent in the company. Med-Arbiter Rasidali C.Any applicant labor organization. as is hereby. the charter certification issued by the federation KATIPUNAN was dated June 26. . 1993: Progressive (petitioner) filed a verified Motion to Dismiss the petition alleging fraud. names of officers.) Until the appropriate bargaining representative is chosen and a new CBA is concluded. Among the bases of fraud was the fact that while the application for registration of the charter was supposed to have been approved in the organizational meeting held on June 27. P50. the investigation to be conducted by him. 1993: Nagkakaisang Lakas ng Manggagawa (NLM)Katipunan (respondent Union) filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor in behalf of the rank and file employees of the Progressive Development Corporation (Pizza Hut). 111 of the 150 employees of the firm disaffiliated from the labor org and formed their own union. 1993. a certification election is the most expeditious way of determining which labor organization is to be the exclusive bargaining representative. and that the Constitution and by Laws submitted in support of its petition were not properly acknowledged and notarized. WON the Secretary’s refusal is justified A2010 . participating therein to determine the exclusive bargaining representative of the workers employed in Vassar Industries.The requirements embodied in Art 234 are intended as preventive measures against the commission of fraud. 1978 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . NO Ratio Registration requirements specifically afford a measure of protection to unsuspecting employees who may be lured into joining unscrupulous or fly-by-night unions whose sole purpose is to control union funds or use the labor organization for illegitimate ends.” ISSUES 1. and private respondent labor union ALU. What is the appropriate remedy for the applicant union? HELD 1.The Med-Arbiter summarily disregarded the petitioner's prayer that the former look into the legitimacy of the respondent Union by a sweeping declaration that the union was in the possession of a charter certificate so that "for all intents and purposes. Before it expired. it becomes the BLR’s ministerial duty to register the union.On appeal to the office of the Secretary of Labor. and that such neglect unlawfully excludes the petitioner's union from the use and enjoyment of a right to which it is entitled. (financial reports. . specifically requires that the basis for the issuance of a certificate of registration should be compliance with the requirements PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT CORP. Requirements of registration. without costs. Labor Undersecretary Bienvenido E. the writ prayed for should be. 234. . Abdullah directed the holding of a certification election among petitioner's rank and file employees. 1993 denied the same. association or group of unions or workers shall acquire legal personality and shall be entitled to the rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations upon issuance of the certificate of registration based on the following requirements xxx. associations and unions of workers are engaged directly affect the public interest and should be protected. HELD 1. speedy. as may be inferred from his official statements in connection therewith. as provided for in section 3 of Commonwealth Act No. granted. it bears emphasis. as required by law.respondent Estrella. Disposition writ of certiorari is granted. (Action and Denial of Application and Remedy) HELD 1. it being the duty of the respondent to register the application and issue the permit upon payment of the required fee.Labor Law 2 ISSUE/S 1. Motion was likewise filed by petitioner with the MedArbiter requesting suspension of proceedings in the certification election case until after the prejudicial question of the Union's legal personality is determined in the proceedings for cancellation of registration. FACTS .August 30.In an Order dated September 29. Sumasaklaw sa Manggagawa sa Pizza Hut (was) a legitimate labor organization. After a labor organization has filed the necessary papers and documents for registration. . The union should be registered. 1997 investigation and act upon the application. WON after the necessary papers and documents have been filed by a labor organization. . the interim CBA which was entered into earlier and has favorable terms for the workers of Vassar Industries shall continue in full force and effect. having been conducted and completed. Reasoning As long as the applicant union complies with all the legal requirements for registration.00 filing fee) . the conclusion in connection therewith. . It appearing further that there is no other plain. falsification and misrepresentation in the respondent Union's registration making it void and invalid.July 9. ISSUE/S 1. 1993: Progressive filed a Petition seeking the cancellation of the Union's registration on the grounds of fraud and falsificatio. and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. VASSAR INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES UNION V ESTRELLA 82 SCRA 280 FERNANDO. Bureau of Labor Relations is ordered to conduct a certification election with petitioner labor union. Reasoning Art. and (3) that he is clothed the discretion to issue or not the permit applied for.August 20. This is to assure that both social justice and the protection to labor provisions would be effectively implemented without sanctioning an attempt to frustrate the exercise of this court’s jurisdiction in a pending case. 213. . Vassar Industries Labor Union. Laguesma in a Resolution dated December 29.

Issue: WON the composition of the union can be subject to collateral attack Held: NO . Failure of the Med-Arbiter and public respondent to heed the request constituted a grave abuse of discretion. . only 71 were actual rank-and-file employees of THIGCI.On appeal to the office of the Secretary of Labor. Such legal personality cannot thereafter be subject to collateral attack. The Court is merely saying that the local union must first comply with the statutory requirements in order to exercise this right. a legitimate labor organization said to represent majority of the rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. . Regional Branch No. and submitted copies of the handwritten denial and withdrawal of some of its employees from participating in the petition. Effect of registration. some of the signatures in the list of union members were secured through fraudulent and deceitful means.In an Order dated September 29. 1997 > Tagaytay Highlands Employees Union (THEU). 1998 FACTS . resigned. 1993. . Inc. Under such circumstances. not being a legitimate labor organization. 1998 > DOLE Med-Arbiter Anastacio Bactin ordered the holding of a certification election . Philippine Transport and General Workers Organization (PTGWO). The invalidity of respondent Union's registration would negate its legal personality to participate in certification election. 776. . and for as long as there is no final order of cancellation. the labor organization. a corporation distinct and separate from THIGCI. 5. Med-Arbiter Rasidali C. Collateral Attack TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS V TAGAYTAY GOLF CLUB EMPLOYEES UNION 395 SCRA 699 CARPIO-MORALES.54 - Disini for recognition under Article 234. the Med-Arbiter should. enjoy the rights accorded to a legitimate organization. Laguesma in a Resolution dated . automatically order the conduct of a certification election. PENDING PETITION. particularly the right to ask for certification election in a bargaining unit. The labor organization or workers’ association shall be deemed registered and vested with legal personality on the date of issuance of its certificate of registration.October 16. 1993. and that out of the 192 signatories to the petition. MFR denied . 1997 > opposed petition for certification election because the list of union members submitted by it was defective and fatally flawed as it included the names and signatures of supervisors. 1998 and December 29. pursuant to Article 257 of the Labor Code and Section 11. the employer may pray for the dismissal of such petition on the basis of lack of mutuality of interests of the members of the union as well as lack of employer-employee relationship and petitioner failed to adduce substantial evidence to support its allegations. the charter certification issued by the federation KATIPUNAN was dated June 26. 1997 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS .The grounds ventilated in cancellation proceedings in accordance with Article 239 of the Labor Code constitute a grave challenge to the right of respondent Union to ask for certification election. Abdullah directed the holding of a certification election among petitioner's rank and file employees.After a certificate of registration is issued to a union.Once a labor organization attains the status of a legitimate labor organization it begins to possess all of the rights and privileges granted by law to such organizations.November 27.CA .Registration based on false and fraudulent statements and documents confer no legitimacy upon a labor organization irregularly recognized. and that Section 5. Local Chapter No. 2003 NATURE Petition for Certiorari under Rule 45 THIGCI assailing CA decision denying its petition to annul the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Resolutions of November 12. filed a petition for certification election before the DOLE Mediation-Arbitration Unit.24) .August 30. it continues to PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT CORP. January 22. Labor Undersecretary Bienvenido E. but may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with these Rules. THEU asserted that it complied with all the requirements for valid affiliation and inclusion in the roster of legitimate labor organizations pursuant to DOLE Department Order No.Labor Law 2 A2010 .denied THIGCI’s Petition for Certiorari and affirmed the DOLE Resolution dated November 12. . . series of 1997. hence. 3.The Court's conclusion should not be misconstrued as impairing the local union's right to be certified as the employees' bargaining agent in the petitioner's establishment. 1993 or one (1) day prior to the formation of the chapter. and that the Constitution and by Laws submitted in support of its petition were not properly acknowledged and notarized. 1997. It held that while a petition for certification election is an exception to the innocent bystander rule. The Med-Arbiter should have looked into the merits of the petition for cancellation before issuing an order calling for certification election EFFECT. REMEDY: It would have been more prudent for the Med-Arbiter and public respondent to have granted petitioner's request for the suspension of proceedings in the certification election case. Therefore. 1998. . Among the bases of fraud was the fact that while the application for registration of the charter was supposed to have been approved in the organizational meeting held on June 27.DOLE Resolution of November 12. V LAGUESMA (Nagkakaisang-Lakas ng Manggagawa) 271 SCRA 593 KAPUNAN. acquires no rights. 9. Motion was likewise filed by petitioner with the MedArbiter requesting suspension of proceedings in the certification election case until after the prejudicial question of the Union's legal personality is determined in the proceedings for cancellation of registration. IV . until the issue of the legality of the Union's registration shall have been resolved. Disposition Petition is granted and remanded to Med-Arbiter. . 09. 1993: Progressive (petitioner) filed a verified Motion to Dismiss the petition alleging fraud. 1998 Resolution dismissing the petition for certification election. Rule V of said Department Order provides that the legitimacy of its registration cannot be subject to collateral attack. as well as employees of The Country Club. 1993: Nagkakaisang Lakas ng Manggagawa (NLM)Katipunan (respondent Union) filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor in behalf of the rank and file employees of the Progressive Development Corporation (Pizza Hut).August 20. CANCELLATION TRADE UNION REGISTRATION (P.. on account of which it was duly granted a Certification of Affiliation by DOLE on October 10.July 9.January 28. April 18. its legal personality cannot be subject to collateral attack. 19981 > setting aside the June 4. It may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with Section 5 of Rule V. Book IV of the "Rules to Implement the Labor Code" (Implementing Rules) which section reads: Sec. terminated and absent without leave (AWOL) employees. Also. falsification and misrepresentation in the respondent Union's registration making it void and invalid. Rule XI of DOLE Department Order No. 1993: Progressive filed a Petition seeking the cancellation of the Union's registration on the grounds of fraud and falsificatio.

. Local Chapter (APCWU-ICTSI). specifically requires that the basis for the issuance of a certificate of registration should be compliance with the requirements for recognition under Article 234.24) . not being a legitimate labor organization. After a labor organization has filed the necessary papers and documents for registration. a guardian. the beneficiary shall be included in the title of the case and shall be deemed to be the real party in interest. . Disposition Petition is granted and remanded to Med-Arbiter. The dispute respecting the retrenchment was resolved by a compromise settlement while another issue with regard to the computation of wages was referred to the LA. (Action and Denial of Application and Remedy) HELD 1. CA dismissed their petition for certiorari. and whether or not the intervenor’s right may be fully protected in a separate proceeding. .. . (financial reports.Labor Law 2 December 29. The invalidity of respondent Union's registration would negate its legal personality to participate in certification election. P50. .While a party acting in a representative capacity. however. CONTAINER TERMINAL SERVICES 395 SCRA 103 CARPIO-MORALES. the labor organization. or an interest against both.A labor union is one such party authorized to represent its members under Art 242(a) of the Labor Code which provides that a union may act as the representative of its members for the purpose of collective bargaining. . Failure of the Med-Arbiter and public respondent to heed the request constituted a grave abuse of discretion. Reasoning Art. This authority includes the power to represent its members for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the CBA. Requirements of registration. . The court shall consider whether or not the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties.. Representatives as parties. because the activities in which labor organizations. or a party authorized by law or these Rules. NO Ratio Registration requirements specifically afford a measure of protection to unsuspecting employees who may be lured into joining unscrupulous or fly-by-night unions whose sole purpose is to control union funds or use the labor organization for illegitimate ends. 2003 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS .The grounds ventilated in cancellation proceedings in accordance with Article 239 of the Labor Code constitute a grave challenge to the right of respondent Union to ask for certification election. Under such circumstances. The LA denied their Complaint-in-Intervention with Motion for Intervention upon a finding that they are already well represented by APCWU. names of members. thusly: Sec. et al. Section 1 of which reads: Section 1. REMEDY: It would have been more prudent for the Med-Arbiter and public respondent to have granted petitioner's request for the suspension of proceedings in the certification election case. it becomes mandatory for the Bureau of Labor Relations to check if the requirements under Article 234 have been sedulously complied with. WON the CA erred in ruling that the petitioners have no legal right to intervene and that their intervention is a superfluity. acquires no rights. fraud or collusion or lack of good faith on the part of the representative must be proven. The Court is merely saying that the local union must first comply with the statutory requirements in order to exercise this right. until the issue of the legality of the Union's registration shall have been resolved. are employees of International Container Terminal Services. Who may intervene. the rule on representation.The requirements embodied in Art 234 are intended as preventive measures against the commission of fraud. an executor or administrator. in addition to the rule on intervention. ICTSI went on a retrenchment program and laid off its on-call employees. Inc.55 - Disini 4. ACEDERA V INTL. Reasoning Petitioners-appellants anchor their right to intervene on Rule 19 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.A person who has legal interest in the matter in litigation. NLRC affirmed.00 filing fee) . 1993 denied the same. such as a union. A2010 . 234. WON after the necessary papers and documents have been filed by a labor organization. associations and unions of workers are engaged directly affect the public interest and should be protected. . . recognition by the Bureau of Labor Relations merely becomes a ministerial function.” the title of the case filed by it at the LA’s Office so expressly states. CANCELLATION TRADE UNION REGISTRATION (P.Once a labor organization attains the status of a legitimate labor organization it begins to possess all of the rights and privileges granted by law to such organizations. Such requirements are a valid exercise of the police power.The Court's conclusion should not be misconstrued as impairing the local union's right to be certified as the employees' bargaining agent in the petitioner's establishment. ISSUE 1. names of officers. . . a labor organization duly registered as a local affiliate of the Associated Port Checkers & Workers Union (APCWU).They. NO Ratio For a member of a class to be permitted to intervene in a representative action.In early 1997. 3. Rights of Legitimate Organization Labor ISSUE/S 1. it bears emphasis. with leave of court. Inc. particularly the right to ask for certification election in a bargaining unit.Where the action is allowed to be prosecuted or defended by a representative or someone acting in a fiduciary capacity. January 13.The Med-Arbiter summarily disregarded the petitioner's prayer that the former look into the legitimacy of the respondent Union by a sweeping declaration that the union was in the possession of a charter certificate so that "for all intents and purposes. A representative may be a trustee of an express trust. be allowed to intervene in the action.Any applicant labor organization.Registration based on false and fraudulent statements and documents confer no legitimacy upon a labor organization irregularly recognized. . PENDING PETITION. filed with the LA a Complaint-in-Intervention with Motion to Intervene. or in the success of either of the parties. or is so situated to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof may.Any action taken by the Bureau of Labor Relations is made in consonance with the mandate of the Labor Code. Mere assertions do not suffice. This prompted the APCWU-ICTSI to file a notice of strike. which. Sumasaklaw sa Manggagawa sa Pizza Hut (was) a legitimate labor organization. (ICTSI) and are officers/members of Associated Port Checkers & Workers Union-International Container Terminal Services.Acedera. It must be based on facts borne on record.Petitioners Jerry Acedera. . association or group of unions or workers shall acquire legal personality and shall be entitled to the rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations upon issuance of the certificate of registration based on the following requirements xxx. et al. failed to consider. HELD 1." . The Med-Arbiter should have looked into the merits of the petition for cancellation before issuing an order calling for certification election EFFECT. That APCWU acted in a representative capacity “for and in behalf of its Union members and other employees similarly situated.

. NO Ratio A compromise agreement. the Philippine Veterans Bank was placed under receivership. by itself show the existence of fraud or collusion or a lack of good faith on the part of APCWU. 2006 FACTS -Union filed a petition for certification election to be declared the exclusive bargaining representative of the Hotel’s employees. Reasoning . the first ground mentioned by the Union. WON the employees have the right to be reinstated to their former employment with the Bank upon its rehabilitation 2.Petitioners cite the dismissal of the case first by the LA. Thus Section 3 of Article XIII of the Constitution. The order was modified (by a different Secretary) such that reinstatement was to be done only in the payroll. No. -It is doctrinal that the exercise of the right of private sector employees to strike is not absolute. WON the Compromise Agreement was validly entered into by the Bank and the Union HELD 1. intimidation. holiday pay. As other employees opposed motion to dismiss.the Hotel’s refusal to bargain. NLRC reversed and ordered the immediate reinstatement of all Union members. the burden of proof is on the union to prove its allegations by substantial evidence. NO . transact. Union however suddenly went on strike -Secretary of DOLE assumed jurisdiction and ordered compulsory arbitration pursuant to art.56 - Disini CORNISTA V NLRC (CARPIO).The submission of the Compromise Agreement on joint motion of the parties for approval by the Labor Arbiter cured whatever defect the signing of the agreement in the absence of the Labor Arbiter PHILIPPINE DIAMOND HOTEL AND RESORT.Union is a closed shop union. by any test of reason. . ISSUE WON the strike conducted by the Union was illegal.Giving in to petitioners' demand of wholesale reinstatement with back wages. 7169 to rehabilitate the Bank. and enter into any agreement with the Bank. On appeal. -Union filed a Notice of Strike with the NCMB alleging the Hotel’ refusal to bargain and for acts of unfair labor practices. 504 SCRA 659 GARCIA. entered into a compromise agreement. "revive" what was already a dead relationship between the petitioners and the Bank. June 30. Case was referred to the CA. none of which exists in this case. through its officers. This petition was dismissed by DOLE for lack of legal requirements. The payment of such substantial amounts would definitely further dissipate the remaining assets of the Bank and cripple its finances even as. a person whose interests are already represented will not be permitted to do the same except when there is a suggestion of fraud or collusion or that the representative will not act in good faith for the protection of all interests represented by him. The fact that it did not only shows its clear legislative intent to give the new bank a free hand in the selection and hiring of its new staff. The Bank's subsequent rehabilitation did not.The forcible closure of the Bank by operation of law permanently severed the employer-employee relationship between it and its employees.Bank appealed to the SC. 7169 2. has the effect of res judicata between the parties and should not be disturbed except for vices of consent. TOPICS: right to engage in concerted activities-limitations .Had Congress intended that separated employees be rehired and given priority in the hiring of new employees. -Union filed for certiorari alleging grave abuse of discretion. The liquidator terminated all the employees and commenced payment of separation pay and other benefits to the terminated employees. fraud. Since it is the union who alleges that unfair labor practices were committed by the Hotel.A. The ratification of the Compromise Agreement by the majority of the Union members necessarily binds the minority. .Petitioners likewise express their fear that APCWU would not prosecute the case diligently because of its “sweetheart relationship” with ICTSI.In 1992. and the like. x x x It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization. .A labor union's function is to represent its members. forgery. provides: SECTION 3. ISSUES 1. the employment of violence. October 17. -after a few months. Congress authorized the reopening of the Bank. the Bank is barely making a profit under the weight of its present liabilities. Evidence show s that some of the workers-strikers who joined the strike indeed committed illegal acts – blocking the free ingress to and egress from the Hotel. Parties moved to dismiss cases pending in SC. “the facts and the evidence did not establish events [sic] least a rational basis why the union would [wield] a strike based on alleged unfair labor practices it did not even bother to substantiate”. For this reason. While appeal was pending. Hotel refused to accept the employees return. V MANILA DIAMOND HOTEL EMPLOYEES UNION 493 SCRA 195 CARPIO MORALES. vacation and sick leave benefits would be a fatal blow to the very intention of R.In 1983. It can file an action or enter into compromise agreements on behalf of its members . CA affirmed that the “payroll reinstatement” was not a grave abuse of discretion. 2006 may be permitted to intervene in a case. however. . SC denied said motion.Labor Law 2 A2010 . it was the only one with legal authority to negotiate. which was ratified by a substantial majority of the Union’s members. And Union members were directed to return to work and for Hotel to accept them back. This clearly contravenes the intent and spirit of R.A. -as was mentioned. -The second ground – that petitioner prevented or intimidated some workers from joining the union before. holding noise barrage. during or after the strike – was correctly discredited by the appellate court. the strike may still be held illegal where the means employed are illegal. ordinarily.was not a valid ground to stage the strike. it modified NLRC decision ordering reinstatement with back wages of union members. including the right to strike in accordance with law…” -Even if the purpose of a strike is valid. There is nothing on record. restraint or coercion in carrying out concerted activities which are injurious to the rights to property renders a strike illegal. 7169. A Rehabilitation Committee was created to select and organize manpower. however. Disposition Petition is hereby DENIED. NATURE Review on certiorari of the consolidated decisions of the CA FACTS . and ultimately make impossible its desired rehabilitation. 263 (g) of LC. to support this alleged relationship.. at this point. once approved. This was rejected by the Hotel stating that the Union was not the employee’s bargaining agent as their petition for certification election was denied. -Labor Arbiter Carpio dismissed the case. HELD Yes. The Union charged the Bank with unfair labor practices and prayed for the immediate reinstatement of the Bank's former employees. bonuses. Thus.A. Union sent a letter to Hotel informing it of its desire to negotiate for a collective bargaining agreement. No. misrepresentation and coercion. No. INC. the Bank and the Union. The Compromise Agreement was ratified by 282 Union members representing a majority of its entire 529 membership. it would have clearly stated this in R. and later by the CA. threatening guests. The dismissal of the case does not. . collective bargaining and negotiations and peaceful concerted activities. NCMB summoned both parties and held series of dialogues. Carpio approved the agreement. . There must be clear and convincing evidence of fraud or collusion or lack of good faith independently of the dismissal.

suspend. the Med-Arbiter cancelled the certification election scheduled for June 29. assign or discipline employees. . 1993. designed for the protection of workers against potential abuse by unions. Effect of Non-registration PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY INC. 212. Supervisory. First. SECRETARY. Office. (3) a majority of these employees supported the petition: (4) there was no existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between any union and SRBI. 2000 NATURE: On November 12. . Registration is a condition sine qua non for acquisition of legal personality by a labor organization and the exercise of rights and privileges granted by law. recall. hereafter referred to as the union. Definitions (m) "Managerial employee" is one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or hire. The certification election was ordered. would have caused. Petition is now before SC. Company said that the Union is not legitimate bec it failed to submit books of account w/ BLR at time it was registered. SRBI then filed a motion for reconsideration. It sought to prevent the holding of a certification election on two grounds.Med Arbiter dismissed Union’s petition. 1993.Article 212 (m) of the Labor Code defines the terms "managerial employee" and "supervisory employees" as follows: Art. V. 1994. certification election was conducted. They are now estopped from questioning the validity of the Compromise Agreement. ISSUE/S WON DOLE Undersecretary committed grave abuse of discretion HELD 1. 1994. Inc. that: (1) APSOTEU-TUCP was a labor organization duly-registered with the Labor Department. the DOLE Regional Office in Cebu City granted Certificate of Registration to APSOTEU-TUCP. YES Ratio The requirements of registration of legitimate labor organizations are an exercise of the police power of the State. 1994.Labor Law 2 A2010 . NO Reasoning . ordering the holding of a certification election. which is newly organized and affiliated w/ a federation. It averred that the APSOTEU-TUCP members were actually managerial employees who were prohibited by law from joining or organizing unions. INC V LAGUESMA 324 SCRA 425 QUISUMBING: February 2. Reasoning It is immaterial that the Union was organized for less than a year before its application for registration w/ BLR.. On June 17. On October 26. Certiorari. and (5) no certification election had been held in SRBI during the past 12 months prior to the petition. 1993. FACTS . It alleged. to the prejudice of the Bank. The Med-Arbiter later denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration SRBI appealed the order of denial to the DOLE Secretary Petitioner proceeded to file a petition with the DOLE Regional Office seeking the cancellation of the respondent union's registration. in the interest of the employer. 1995 NATURE Special civil action in the Supreme Court. He also held that until and unless a final order is issued cancelling APSOTEU-TUCP's registration certificate. SRBI appealed the Med-Arbiter's decision to the Secretary of Labor and Employment. March 1. 1994 in order to address the motion for reconsideration. 1993. DOLE Undersecretary set aside Med Arbiter’s order. (SRBI. - - - ISSUE/S: SUGBUANON RURAL BANK. Accounting books must be submitted even if they contain no detailed entries. Dispositive Petition DENIED.Union. effectively recommend such managerial - - Petitioner Sugbuanon Rural Bank. layoff. including the right to file a petition for certification election. Supervisory employees are those who. SRBI filed with the Med-Arbiter an urgent motion to suspend proceedings. On October 8. SRBI moved for reconsideration of the Undersecretary's decision FACTS: Special civil action for certiorari and prohibition (1) WON the members of the respondent union are managerial employees and/or highly-placed confidential employees. 1993.Furthermore. Private respondent SRBI Association of Professional. the Med-Arbiter scheduled the holding of the certification election for June 29. that the members of APSOTEU-TUCP were in fact managerial or confidential employees. SRBI filed a motion to dismiss the union's petition. the Association of Labor Unions-Trade Unions Congress of the Philippines or ALUTUCP was representing the union. . transfer. 5. On December 9. The Med-Arbiter denied the same.57 - Disini among others. Two days later. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT 242 SCRA 99 FELICIANO. (2) SRBI employed 5 or more supervisory employees. It was fully entitled to all the rights and privileges granted by law to a legitimate labor organization. the Med-Arbiter denied petitioner's motion to dismiss. discharge. On June 16. petitioners cannot belatedly reject or repudiate their acts of accepting the monetary consideration under the compromise agreement. The Union must submit its books of account before it may demand recognition by the Company as exclusive bargaining agent of members.SC issued TRO. He ruled that APSOTEU-TUCP was a legitimate labor organization. hence prohibited by law from joining labor organizations and engaging in union activities (2) WON the Med-Arbiter may validly order the holding of a certification election HELD: 2. and Technical Employees Union (APSOTEU) is a legitimate labor organization affiliated with the Trade Unions Congress of the Philippines (TUCP). but this notwithstanding. filed Petition for direct certification or for certification election. Disposition Petition is dismissed for being moot and academic. . DOLE Undersecretary denied SRBI's appeal for lack of merit. Second. It argued that its members were not managerial employees but merely supervisory employees. the union filed a petition for certification election of the supervisory employees of SRBI. The union filed its opposition to the motion to dismiss on December 1. for brevity) is a duly-registered banking institution with principal office in Cebu City and a branch in Mandaue City. The appeal was denied for lack of merit. it had the legal right to represent its members for collective bargaining purposes.

false statement or fraud in connection with the adoption or ratification of the constitution and by-laws or amendments thereto. 2005 NATURE Petition to review the decision of the Court of Appeals FACTS . that the bargaining unit is unorganized and that there had been no certification election for the past 12 months prior to the filing of the petition. APC alleged that flight attendants holding the position of “Lead Cabin Attendant. DISPOSITIVE: Petition dismissed. however. 2.Clearly then.Laguna Autoparts Manufacturing Corporation Obrero Pilipino-LAMCOR Chapter filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE. lay-off. or in connection with the election of officers. 1999 . After the Med-Arbiter rendered a ruling ordering the holding of a certification election. The petition alleged that the union was composed of all rank-and-file employees. were among those who comprised APFLAA. Pursuant to Article 239 (a) and (c) of the Labor Code. . Dispositive: Petition is DENIED. review. suspend. Having complied with the requirements of Art. . . Cancellation of Union Certificate Registration IN RE: PETITION FOR CANCELLATION OF THE UNION REGISTRATION OF AIR PHILIPPINES FLIGHT ATTENDANTS ASSOCIATION And AIR PHILIPPINES CORPORATION v. it is not enough to establish that the rank-and-file union includes ineligible employees in its membership. 2006 Nature: Certiorari under Rule 45 FACTS: . which step. the minutes of ratification. which states that supervisory employees are not eligible for membership in labor organizations of rank-and-file employees. . DOLE: the Court observed that A245 of the LC. Accountants. All employees not falling within any of the above definitions are considered rank-and-file employees for purposes of . 6. - One of the rights of a legitimate labor organization under Article 242(b) of the Labor Code is the right to be certified as the exclusive representative of all employees in an appropriate bargaining unit for purposes of collective bargaining. V SECRETARY. it must be shown that there was misrepresentation. the rule under A245 barring supervisory employees from joining the union of rank-and-file employees is not a ground for cancellation of union registration.58 - Disini actions if the exercise of such authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. as its composition consisted of “a mixture of supervisory and rank-and-file flight attendants. or discipline employees. 234.Petitioner submitted detailed job descriptions to support its contention that the union members are managerial employees and/or confidential employees proscribed from engaging in labor activities.[ . . it is our view that respondent union is a legitimate labor union. and final decision by the bank's management. April 29.APC merely argued that APFLAA was not qualified to become a legitimate labor organization by reason of its mixed composition of rank-and-file and supervisory employees. Article 257 of the Labor Code mandates that a certification election shall automatically be conducted by the Med-Arbiter upon the filing of a petition by a legitimate labor organization. the forms also do not show that the Cashiers. and Acting Chiefs of the Loans Department formulate and execute management policies which are normally expected of management officers.The DOLE-NCR dismissed said petition and held that A245 of the LC. petitioner failed to show that the employees in question were vested with managerial powers. and that APFLAA committed misrepresentation by making it appear that its composition was composed purely of rank-and-file employees. .” Particularly.The case initially centered on the union registration of respondent Air Philippines Flight Attendants Association (APFLAA). or failure to submit these documents together with the list of the newly elected-appointed officers and their postal addresses to the BLR. it noted its registration certificate number along with the registration certificate number of chapter affiliate. minutes of the election of officers. the legal basis for the petition for cancellation. with majority of the votes cast in favor of APFLAA. is a “condition sine qua non to the filing of a petition for certiorari. unless such inclusion is due to misrepresentation.” Denied the MR as well for being defective.” which according to it is supervisory in character. YES Reasoning ISSUE: WON the Union’ registration may be cancelled as it is composed of a mixture of supervisory and rank-and-file employees (and also. assign. APC did not impute on APFLAA such misrepresentation of the character necessitated under A239 (a) and (c) of the Labor Code.Laguna Autoparts moved to cancel the certification election because the union was not considered a legitimate labor organization for failure to show that it had complied with registration requirements such as submission of required documents to the Bureau of Labor Relations. Moreover. the list of voters. In the present case. which was issued a Certificate of Registration by the DOLE. recall. -Consistent with jurisprudence. does not provide a ground for cancellation of union registration. such election was held. At best they only had recommendatory powers subject to evaluation. June 22.Tagaytay Highlands International Golf Club v.CA also dismissed because APC had “failed to avail of the remedy of a prior MFR” before the filing of the certiorari petition. In its petition. it stressed. for the purpose of de-certifying a union. LAGUNA AUTO PARTS MANUFACTURING CORP. Reasoning: .Labor Law 2 A2010 . APC filed a Petition for De-Certification and Cancellation of Union Registration against APFLAA with the DOLE alleging that APFLAA could not be registered as a labor organization.BLR denied the appeal. BLR [AIR PHILS FLIGHT ATTENDANTS ASSOCIATION] TINGA. DOLE 457 SCRA 730 CALLEJO.” . which is instead governed by Article 239 of the Labor Code. affirming the rationale of the DOLE-NCR.May 3. WON Lead Cabin Attendants are indeed supervisory employees) HELD: NO.SPI Technologies Incorporated v. The job description forms submitted by petitioner clearly show that the union members in question may not transfer. discharge. Tagaytay Highlands Employees Union: “[t]he inclusion in a union of disqualified employees is not among the grounds for cancellation. false statement or fraud under the circumstances enumerated in Sec (a) and (c) of A239 LC. merely prescribed the requirements for eligibility in joining a union and did not prescribe the grounds for cancellation of union registration.

if the law intends to include illegally declared strike. Denial of Registration of local unions . rendered an order affirming the cancellation ISSUE 1. The records of the case show that the respondent union submitted the said documents to the regional office and was issued a certification. as prescribed in Section 5. Suppletory to the above provision is Section 6 (c) of Rule II. A local/chapter constituted in accordance with Section 1 of Rule 6 shall acquire legal personality from the date of filing of the complete documents enumerated. . ISSUE/S 1.The pronouncement of the Labor Relations Division Chief. cannot be challenged in a petition for certification election. in his Comment claimed that the argument proferred was false and misleading as the law should not be interpreted to include an illegal strike engaged into by any union. after two unsuccessful attempts to prevent collective bargaining with respondent union. which reads as follows: 'Section 6. Ground for cancellation of union registration. 2. (e) Acting as a labor contractor or engaging in the "cabo" system. Reasoning The task of determining whether the local or chapter has submitted the complete documentary requirements is lodged with the Regional Office or the BLR. as amended. that the respondent union acquired a legal personality with the submission of the complete documentary requirement. -The Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). 1996 NATURE Petition for certiorari and prohibition under Rule 65 FACTS -The Alliance of Democratic Free Labor Organization (ADFLO) filed an application for registration as a national federation alleging. 823 and Article 239 of the New Labor Code that cancellation of registration follows from "any activity prohibited by law. . as the case may be. (c) Engaging in the "cabo" system or other illegal practices. . Disposition Petition is denied." The Solicitor General. Such legal personality cannot thereafter be subject to collateral attack but may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with these Rules. LAGUESMA 254 SCRA 565 PANGANIBAN. This is so because the phrase 'or otherwise engaging in any activity prohibited by law' should be construed to mean such activity engaged into by a union that par takes of the nature of a labor contractor or 'cabo' system. It based its contention on P. the Bureau (of Labor Relations) issued a Certificate of Registration No. Rule 5 of the implementing rules of Book 5 which states: “The labor organization or workers’ association shall be deemed registered and vested with legal personality on the date of issuance of its certificate of registration. Also.The CA noted that it was the employer which offered the most tenacious resistance to the holding of a certification election among its regular rank-and-file employees. For expediency.It may not be subject to a collateral attack but only through a separate action instituted particularly for the purpose of assailing the chapter.Med-Arbiter Bactin dismissed the certification election petition because of the union’s lack of personality. without first ruling on the admissibility of the exhibits of CLASS and without any further hearing. Dispositive Petition dismissed ALLIANCE OF DEMOCRATIC LABOR ORGANIZATION V. No costs. No. -The Confederation of labor and Allied Social Services (CLASS) filed a petition for the cancellation of the Registration Certificate issued to ADFLO. It pointed out that a local or chapter acquires legal personality as a labor organization from the date of filing of the complete documents. -BLR Director Pura Ferrer-Calleja. through Director Pura FerrerCalleja. WON the chapter’s legal personality can be attacked collaterally in an election action HELD 1. WON decision cancelling the registration of petitioner was rendered in violation of the due process clause TABLANTE-TUNGOL V NORIEL FERNANDO. rendered a Decision cancelling the registration of ADFLO. Book V of the Rules and Regulations implementing the Labor Code of the Philippines. This was affirmed by the CA. or otherwise engaging in any activity prohibited by law. Tomas reversed Bactin’s order. Subsequently." Clearly.The CA stressed that a local or chapter need not be registered to become a legitimate labor organization. . YES Ratio A local or chapter need not be independently registered to acquire legal personality. The phrase 'or otherwise engaging in any activity prohibited by law' should be construed to mean such activity engaged into by a union that par takes of the nature of a labor contractor or 'cabo' system and respondent union is not .59 - Disini . 823. the same could have been expressly placed therein as had been previously done in Presidential Decree No. DOLE Secretary Sto.Labor Law 2 A2010 . ISSUE WON public respondents should have cancelled the registration and permit of private respondent labor organization as private respondent labor union had engaged in an illegal strike HELD NO. an awareness of the relevance of the maxims noscitur a sociis and ejusdem generis ought to have cautioned counsel for petitioner to shy away from this approach. AUG 23 1978 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS Petitioner. The following shall constitute grounds for cancellation of union registration: . and the employer should be a mere bystander. WON the union is a legitimate labor organization 2.D.The Regional Office may deny the application for registration on any of the following grounds: . engaged in any such activity. . March 11. filed this certiorari proceeding alleging that public respondents should have cancelled the registration and permit of respondent labor organization as it had engaged in an illegal strike. The above-quoted article should not be interpreted or construed to include an illegal strike engaged into by any union. NO Ratio Reasoning . . 11399-FED-LC to the federation. The law does not intend to include in the said phrase illegally declared strike simply because strike per se is legal.[” . we quote in entirety the aforesaid Article relied upon by the Petitioner for cancellation of the registration and permit of the union: 'Article 239. petitioner and private respondent filed a joint motion to dismiss alleging that they have threshed-out their respective disputes.' It is a fact that [Association of Democratic Labor Organization] is not a labor contractor or is it engaged in the 'cabo' system or is it otherwise engaged in any activity of such nature which is prohibited by law. among others that it has twelve (12) affiliates -After proper evaluation of its application and finding ADFLO to have complied with the requirements for registration pursuant to Articles 234 and 237 of the Labor Code. It opined that this must not be so for the choice of a collective bargaining agent was the sole concern of the employees.

ISSUE/S 1. The MedArbiter should have looked into the merits of the petition for cancellation before issuing an order calling for certification election EFFECT.July 9.24) . April 18. and that the Constitution and by Laws submitted in support of its petition were not properly acknowledged and notarized. In David vs. because the activities in which labor organizations. the charter certification issued by the federation KATIPUNAN was dated June 26. acquires no rights. P50.August 30. TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS V TAGAYTAY GOLF CLUB EMPLOYEES UNION 395 SCRA 699 CARPIO-MORALES. 1997 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS . Failure of the Med-Arbiter and public respondent to heed the request constituted a grave abuse of discretion. 1998 FACTS . Local Chapter No. 1997 > Tagaytay Highlands Employees Union (THEU).October 16. PENDING PETITION. . 1998 and December 29. names of members.The requirements embodied in Art 234 are intended as preventive measures against the commission of fraud. After a labor organization has filed the necessary papers and documents for registration. associations and unions of workers are engaged directly affect the public interest and should be protected.Any applicant labor organization. Reasoning Art. Motion was likewise filed by petitioner with the Med-Arbiter requesting suspension of proceedings in the certification election case until after the prejudicial question of the Union's legal personality is determined in the proceedings for cancellation of registration.In an Order dated September 29. until the issue of the legality of the Union's registration shall have been resolved. V LAGUESMA (Nagkakaisang-Lakas ng Manggagawa) 271 SCRA 593 KAPUNAN. 1993 or one (1) day prior to the formation of the chapter. January 22. Laguesma in a Resolution dated December 29. 234. shall be canceled by the Bureau if it has reason to believe. a legitimate labor organization said to represent majority of the rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. .60 - Disini HELD 1. whether national or local. . . .Labor Law 2 A2010 . . YES.Any action taken by the Bureau of Labor Relations is made in consonance with the mandate of the Labor Code. The invalidity of respondent Union's registration would negate its legal personality to participate in certification election." Reasoning The cancellation of a certificate of registration is the equivalent of snuffing out the life of a labor organization. REMEDY: It would have been more prudent for the Med-Arbiter and public respondent to have granted petitioner's request for the suspension of proceedings in the certification election case."(t)he certificate of registration of any legitimate labor organization. Sumasaklaw sa Manggagawa sa Pizza Hut (was) a legitimate labor organization. . after due hearing. it becomes mandatory for the Bureau of Labor Relations to check if the requirements under Article 234 have been sedulously complied with. Abdullah directed the holding of a certification election among petitioner's rank and file employees. liberty or property without due process of law . CANCELLATION TRADE UNION REGISTRATION (P. filed a . . Disposition Petition GRANTED PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT CORP. Article II of our Constitution. Among the bases of fraud was the fact that while the application for registration of the charter was supposed to have been approved in the organizational meeting held on June 27. particularly the right to ask for certification election in a bargaining unit. which.as a rule .The Med-Arbiter summarily disregarded the petitioner's prayer that the former look into the legitimacy of the respondent Union by a sweeping declaration that the union was in the possession of a charter certificate so that "for all intents and purposes. 1993. association or group of unions or workers shall acquire legal personality and shall be entitled to the rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations upon issuance of the certificate of registration based on the following requirements xxx. 1993: Progressive filed a Petition seeking the cancellation of the Union's registration on the grounds of fraud and falsificatio. Under such circumstances. "(n)o person shall be deprived of life.its rights under the Labor Code." and under Article 238 of the Labor Code. specifically requires that the basis for the issuance of a certificate of registration should be compliance with the requirements for recognition under Article 234. Labor Undersecretary Bienvenido E. it was held that a decision rendered without any hearing is null and void. recognition by the Bureau of Labor Relations merely becomes a ministerial function. names of officers. . 1993: Nagkakaisang Lakas ng Manggagawa (NLM)-Katipunan (respondent Union) filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor in behalf of the rank and file employees of the Progressive Development Corporation (Pizza Hut). it bears emphasis. that the said labor organization no longer meets one or more of the requirements herein prescribed. not being a legitimate labor organization. (Action and Denial of Application and Remedy) HELD 1. NO Ratio Registration requirements specifically afford a measure of protection to unsuspecting employees who may be lured into joining unscrupulous or fly-by-night unions whose sole purpose is to control union funds or use the labor organization for illegitimate ends.Registration based on false and fraudulent statements and documents confer no legitimacy upon a labor organization irregularly recognized.The grounds ventilated in cancellation proceedings in accordance with Article 239 of the Labor Code constitute a grave challenge to the right of respondent Union to ask for certification election. Requirements of registration. WON after the necessary papers and documents have been filed by a labor organization. . Disposition Petition is granted and remanded to Med-Arbiter. the labor organization. 2003 NATURE Petition for Certiorari under Rule 45 THIGCI assailing CA decision denying its petition to annul the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Resolutions of November 12. 1993 denied the same. Ratio Under Section 1. petitioner was indisputably entitled to be heard before a judgment could be rendered cancelling its certificate of registration. Med-Arbiter Rasidali C.August 20.On appeal to the office of the Secretary of Labor. The Court is merely saying that the local union must first comply with the statutory requirements in order to exercise this right.Once a labor organization attains the status of a legitimate labor organization it begins to possess all of the rights and privileges granted by law to such organizations. Aguilizan. Under the circumstances. 1993: Progressive (petitioner) filed a verified Motion to Dismiss the petition alleging fraud.00 filing fee) . . Philippine Transport and General Workers Organization (PTGWO). it loses ." .The Court's conclusion should not be misconstrued as impairing the local union's right to be certified as the employees' bargaining agent in the petitioner's establishment. 1993. 776. (financial reports. Such requirements are a valid exercise of the police power. falsification and misrepresentation in the respondent Union's registration making it void and invalid. For without such registration.

the individual union members are the real judgment creditors and are the real parties in interest. Noel T. The labor organization or workers’ association shall be deemed registered and vested with legal personality on the date of issuance of its certificate of registration. Reasoning The employer may rely on the authority of the union to bring the union members especially in collective bargaining where the matters to be discussed are still to be observed but this case is an exception. Dec. (2) a copy of the constitution of respondent prepared by its Secretary.. 1997 > opposed petition for certification election because the list of union members submitted by it was defective and fatally flawed as it included the names and signatures of supervisors.DOLE Resolution of November 12. 1969 NATURE Special civil action for certiorari FACTS SAN MIGUEL CORP. Issue: WON the composition of the union can be subject to collateral attack Held: .denied THIGCI’s Petition for Certiorari and affirmed the DOLE Resolution dated November 12. 27. and (5) a list of all the rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the . The following documents were attached to the petition: (1) a Charter Certificate certifying that respondent as of that date was duly certified as a local or chapter of FFW. Nature of Relationship HEIRS OF CRUZ V. and for as long as there is no final order of cancellation. deceit. YES. Bathan and attested by its President.61 - Disini petition for certification election before the DOLE Mediation-Arbitration Unit. Rule V of said Department Order provides that the legitimacy of its registration cannot be subject to collateral attack. Book IV of the "Rules to Implement the Labor Code" (Implementing Rules) which section reads: Sec. Sagun. misrepresentation and/or concealment. and submitted copies of the handwritten denial and withdrawal of some of its employees from participating in the petition. terminated and absent without leave (AWOL) employees. MFR denied . only 71 were actual rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. Ratio The union is but an agent of the individual workers and it has the duty to inform the members of the labor matters entrusted to it. Rosalinda Dimapilis-Baldoz. Authority for the union to waive this right to backwages must be express. Effect of registration. especially where a member of the Court has actively used his official and personal influence to effect the settlement which is manifestly unjust to laborers who by reason of their financial disadvantages in a conflict with their employers need all the aid of the Court for their protection. automatically order the conduct of a certification election. without their authority as the real parties in interest. V. and that Section 5. Wilfred V. Inc. and over the objection of a board member that the union board had no authority to compromise or quit-claim the judgment rights of the union members. its legal personality cannot be subject to collateral attack. without their knowledge and consent. again prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. Also. and who denounce the settlement as unconscionable and having been entered into by the majority of the union board "under circumstances of fraud. It held that while a petition for certification election is an exception to the innocent bystander rule. 9. -This is a case involving union officers who entered into a compromise concerning backwages of member-employees with the employer. IV . the employer may pray for the dismissal of such petition on the basis of lack of mutuality of interests of the members of the union as well as lack of employer-employee relationship and petitioner failed to adduce substantial evidence to support its allegations. 19981 > setting aside the June 4. Rodriguez and attested by Sagun. CIR (SANTIAGO RICE MILL) 30 SCRA 917 TEEHANKEE. signed by respondent’s treasurer Chita D. hence. pursuant to Article 257 of the Labor Code and Section 11. and that out of the 192 signatories to the petition. 5. notwithstanding their duly recorded attorneys' lien.January 28.CA . NO . justice and equity.. 2. . MANDAUE Tinga . as well as employees of The Country Club. Regional Branch No." ISSUE 2. Aug. .Federation of Free Workers (FFW/ respondent) filed a petition for certification election with the DOLE Regional Office No. 1998 Resolution dismissing the petition for certification election. 1997. ordering the immediate conduct of a certification election among the petitioner’s rank-and-file employees. In a compromise or settlement. consonant with law. VII. 1998. 09. What is sought here are backwages and other benefits already earned. 2005 467 SCRA 107 Facts -CA affirmes DOLE Undersecretary for Labor Relations. resigned. THEU asserted that it complied with all the requirements for valid affiliation and inclusion in the roster of legitimate labor organizations pursuant to DOLE Department Order No. It may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with Section 5 of Rule V. on account of which it was duly granted a Certification of Affiliation by DOLE on October 10. the Med-Arbiter should.Labor Law 2 A2010 . a corporation distinct and separate from THIGCI. but may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with these Rules. -Petitioners are forty-nine (49) claimants-members of the Santiago Labor Union who assail respondent Court's approval of the questioned settlement. it continues to enjoy the rights accorded to a legitimate organization. -Petitioners are the retained lawyers of the Santiago Labor Union who question respondent Court's approval of respondent firm's settlement of the union members' judgment claims with the union board of directors.November 27. Disposition CIR order SET ASIDE. Rule XI of DOLE Department Order No. WON the real parties in interest are the union members who have initiated and instituted this petition as against the limited and formal personality of the respondent labor union to represent them when so authorized by their collective will HELD 2.After a certificate of registration is issued to a union. Therefore. series of 1997. (3) a list of respondent’s officers and their respective addresses. (4) a certification signifying that respondent had just been organized and no amount had yet been collected from its members. Constitution and By-Laws INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES OF UNION— PROHIBITION AND REGUULATION – 269271 UNION-MEMBER RELATIONS 1. Such legal personality cannot thereafter be subject to collateral attack. It sought to be certified and to represent the permanent rank-and-file monthly paid employees of the petitioner. 1998 > DOLE Med-Arbiter Anastacio Bactin ordered the holding of a certification election . some of the signatures in the list of union members were secured through fraudulent and deceitful means. 16.

certifying that from 30 July 1998. The grounds for cancellation of union registration are not meant to be applied automatically. If this was appellee union’s intention. an essential element of fraud. a managerial employee is “one who is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire. What about the lack of documents containing the by-laws? Not needed so long as it is part of the union’s constitution. in the interest of the employer. The Court likewise sees no impediment in deeming respondent as having acquired legal personality as of 15 June 1998. This being the case. no action can be done that emasculates the right to self-organization and the promotion of free trade unionism. Nonetheless. When did the union acquire legal personality? 2. claim affiliation with the larger unit or source its legal personality therefrom. Even if they are supervisory employees. including the necessary vote requirements. 9. The vacancy he will thus create can then be easily filled up through the succession provision of appellee union’s constitution and by-laws. transfer. there is no proof to show that Bathan. Article VIII lays down the rules for meetings of the union. attached thereto were respondent’s constitution.” A supervisory employee is “one who. Article IV establishes the requisites for membership in the local/chapter. and not of any other entity.’” Finally. In this case. In the ordinary course. -SMC (Petitioner) filed a motion to dismiss the petition for certification election on the sole ground that herein respondent is not listed or included in the roster of legitimate labor organizations based on the certification issued by the Officer-In-Charge. but indeed with utmost discretion. Where a remedy short of cancellation is available. there is no good reason to deny legal personality or defer its conferral to the local/chapter if it is evident at the onset that the federation or national union itself has already through its own means established the local/chapter. fines. effectively recommends managerial actions if the exercise of such recommendatory authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. Rule VI of Department Order No. 9. suspend. while Article XV delineates the procedure for the impeachment of these officers. it does not. the date the complete documents were submitted. 2. it should have been FFW. and not respondent. The Charter Certificate expressly states that respondent has been issued the said certificate “to operate as a local or chapter of the [FFW]”. Under the law. in order to ascertain when respondent acquired legal personality. 9. during which the organizers must take their chances. No. is provided for in Article IX. Issues 1. and not the FFW. layoff. Whether or not the inclusion of the two alleged supervisory employees in appellee union’s membership amounts to fraud. Thus. Regional Director of the DOLE Regional Office No. not merely his job title. recall. it would have refrained from using a more precise description of the organization instead of declaring that the organization is composed of ‘rank and file monthlies’. Articles V and VI name the various officers and what their respective functions are. Admittedly. supervisory or rank and file. are determinative in classifying such employee as managerial. In this case. which submitted the documents required under Section 1. -Respondent submitted to the Bureau of Labor Relations the same documents earlier attached to its petition for certification. The Charter Certificate expressly acknowledges FFW’s intent to establish respondent as of 9 June 1998. Certainly. Article XII provides the general rule for quorum in meetings of the Board of Directors and of the members of the local/chapter. 9. The evident rationale why the rule states that it is the federation or national union that submits said documents to the Bureau or Regional Office is that the creation of the local/chapter is the sole prerogative of the federation or national union. or appellee union for that matter. issued by FFW. such is evidenced by the Charter Certificate dated 9 June 1998. There is no doubt that on 15 June 1998. Rule VI. or false statement within the meaning of Article 239(a) and (c) of the Labor Code. 3. intended to mislead anyone. In this case. And finally. assign or discipline employees. or the date respondent filed its petition for certification election. stated that such documents were submitted in compliance with the requirements for the creation of a local/chapter pursuant to the Labor Code and its Implementing Rules. The first two of these documents were duly certified under oath by respondent’s secretary Bathan and attested to by president Sagun. it having submitted all the required documents. that remedy should be preferred.The Chief of Labor Relations Division of DOLE Regional Office No. the charge of fraud. ITD. without the imprimatur of the federation or national union. respondent has acquired legal personality as a labor organization/worker’s association. What is important is that there is an unmistakeable intent of the members of appellee union to exercise their right to organize. the manner by which respondent was deemed to have acquired legal personality by the DOLE and the Court of Appeals was not in strict conformity with the provisions of Department Order No. It is also well-settled that the actual functions of an employee. and other payments. which should have submitted the subject documents to the Regional Office. discharge. VII issued a Certificate of Creation of Local/Chapter No. We take administrative notice of the realities in union organizing. and that four of respondent’s officers are no longer connected with petitioner have no effect on the Court’s ruling that a certification election should be immediately conducted with . The procedure for election of these officers. we only need to determine on what date the Regional Office or Bureau received the complete documentary requirements enumerated under Section 1. supervisory and rank and file employees. Jesus B. no party will be prejudiced if Bathan were to be excluded from membership in the union. 3. a putative local/chapter cannot. Article X enumerates with particularity the rules for union dues. misrepresentation. and cites the applicability of the Robert’s Rules of Order[43] in its meetings. “all employees not falling within the definition of managerial or supervisory employee are considered rank-and-file employees”. oftentimes unaware of the fine distinctions between managerial. the date the complete documents were submitted. Rule VI of Department Order No. we consider it permissible for respondent to have submitted the required documents itself to the Regional Office. The issuance of the certificate of registration by the Bureau or Regional Office is not the operative act that vests legal personality upon a local/chapter under Department Order No. VII. No. Atty. special assessments. the fact that it was the local/chapter itself. The allegation that the bargaining unit that respondent sought to represent is no longer the same because of the dynamic nature of petitioner’s business. and it was hoped that the submissions would facilitate the listing of respondent under the roster of legitimate labor organizations. including the notice and quorum requirements thereof. Whether or not subsequent developments change the disposition of the case Held 1. An examination of respondent’s constitution reveals it sufficiently comprehensive in establishing the necessary rules for its operation. Good faith is presumed in all representations.62 - Disini Mandaue Packaging Products Plants and Mandaue Glass Plant prepared by Bathan and attested by Sagun. Article VII establishes the standing committees of the local/chapter and how their members are appointed.Labor Law 2 A2010 . it does not affect the case. Gabor. Such legal personality is acquired from the filing of the complete documentary requirements enumerated in Section 1. and proper that respondent’s legal personality be deemed existent as of 15 June 1998. and attached to the petition for certification election. IARFBT-058/98. signed by respondent’s president Sagun. a lot of changes having occurred in the work environment. the names and addresses of its officers. and the charter certificate issued by the national union FFW. Article XVI governs and institutes the requisites for the amendment of the constitution. false statement or misrepresentation cannot be sustained. We cannot impose rigorous restraints on such right if we are to give meaning to the protection to labor and social justice clauses of the Constitution. Hence. The accompanying letter. 15 June 1998. false statement and misrepresentation in order for these to be actionable is intent to mislead by the party making the representation.

Ratio Self-organization is a fundamental right to form. for which reason. Costs against petitioner. by the petitioner to the Union. at the close of the business hours. Neither is the fact that some of respondent’s officers have since resigned from petitioner of any moment. SALUNGA V CIR (NATIONAL BREWERY & ALLIED INDUSTRIES LABOR UNION OF THE PHILIPPINES. on October 2. If there are matters that have arisen since the filing of the petition that serve to delay or cancel the election.. petitioner was discharged from the employment of the Company -Petitioner filed with the CIR a complaint for unfair labor practice -CIR found for petitioner but reversed itself upon MFR ISSUE WON petitioner was dismissed due to an unfair labor practice on the part of the Union HELD Yes. -The Company having informed him that his aforementioned resignation would result in the termination of his employment. Reasoning The election was tainted by irregularities. SO ORDERED. these can be threshed out during the pre-election conferences. generally. the rule is qualified in respect of labor unions 3. Ratio The union’s constitution and by-laws embody a covenant between a union and its members and constitute the fundamental law governing the members’ rights and obligations. the Company notified petitioner that. he asked the Company to maintain the status quo. Admission and discipline of members (p10 of outline) 3. a letter withdrawing or revoking his resignation -On September 8. DISPOSITION WHEREFORE. Also. the sole and executive bargaining agent of the employees and all voluntary because matter of holding a . employees belonging to the appropriate bargaining unit can vote. Furthermore. Basis of right to self-organization (p5 of outline) / Workers with right of self-organization (p6 of outline) 2. employee shall be considered as such.Labor Law 2 A2010 . with a request for the immediate implementation of said section 3. entered with the Union. The participation of non-union members in the election aggravated its irregularity. FACTS . 1999 NATURE Special civil action in the Supreme Court. Voters list (p11 of outline) HELD 1.TRO was issued by med-arbiter enjoining them from conducting election. 1967 NATURE Appeal from a resolution of the Court of Industrial Relations FACTS -Petitioner is an employee of San Miguel Brewery Inc. the PAFLU National Convention and requested that action on his case be deferred until such time as the Convention shall have acted on his appeal. Ratio The union election is pursuant to union’s constitution and by-laws and right to vote is enjoyed only by union members.63 - Disini respondent as one of the available choices. a certification election is the process of determining. Corollary to this right is the prerogative not to join. 3. appellants were elected as new union officers by acclamation and clapping of hands. that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require the company to enforce any sanction whatsoever against any employee or worker who fails to retain his membership in the UNION as hereinbefore stated. which accepted it and transmitted it to the Company.UST held a general faculty assembly. -Section 3 of the CBA reads: The company agrees to require as a condition of employment of those workers covered by this agreement who either are members of the UNION on the date of the signing of this agreement. in the meantime. -On August 18. . on September 22. petitioner notified the PAFLU that he was appealing to its supreme authority. 1961. 1961. 1961. 1961. 1961. on August 31. union affairs cannot be decided in a non-union activity. The general faculty assembly was not the proper forum for the election. in view of said letter and the aforementioned section. Certiorari. for purposes of membership in a labor union. the Union reiterated its request for implementation of said section 3. the Petition is DENIED. Petitioner’s bare manifestations adduce no reason why the certification election should not be conducted forthwith. September 27. but to no avail -On October 11. . on October 15. provided.Appellees filed instant petition to seek injunctive relief and to nullify results of election. Whether employed for a definite period or not. On the other hand. 1961. he had to be terminated -Petitioner sought help from the Union’s national president.Bitonio upheld med-arbiter and said election was void.Union announced a general assembly to elect next union officers. into a collective bargaining agreement. however. 2. petitioner wrote to the Union. It was also not a certification election because representation was not the issue. A letter of the same date and tenor was sent. 1959. mutual aid and protection. Verily. Reasoning The election can’t be considered as exercise of right to selforganization because the petitioners’ frustration over the performance of the respondents could not justify the method they chose to impose their will on the union. . Issues A. join or assist labor organizations for collective bargaining. This notwithstanding. -On September 20. Reasoning The election held was not a union election because the procedure in the CBL was not followed. . Although. November 16. ET AL) 21 SCRA 216 CONCEPCION. attended by both union members and non-members. beginning on 1st day of service. 1961. He rejected contention that it was a legitimate exercise of right to self organization ISSUE/S 1. the grievances of the petitioners could have been brought up and resolved in accordance with the procedure laid down by the union’s CBL and by the Labor Code. that they shall not voluntarily resign from the UNION earlier than thirty (30) days before the expiry date of this agreement as provided in Article XIII hereof. Admission and Discipline of Members UST FACULTY UNION V BITONIO 318 SCRA 185 PANGANIBAN. through secret ballot. membership therein may be accorded or withheld as a privilege. also. which. Here. The local/chapter retains a separate legal personality from that of its officers or members that remains viable notwithstanding any turnover in its officers or members. petitioner tendered his resignation from the Union. a state may not compel ordinary associations to admit thereto any given individual. for any cause other than voluntary resignation or nonpayment of regular union dues on the part of said employee or worker. conformably with the stipulation above-quoted. or may join the UNION during the effectivity of this agreement. the Union told the Company that petitioner's membership could not be reinstated and insisted on his separation from the service. in view of said section.

Petitioners contend that their acts do not constitute disloyalty as these are in the exercise of their constitutional right to self-organization. or shall in any manner cease to be a member of the UNION.64 - Disini monopoly in the supply of labor. no chance to defend himself). . at least. suffer the consequences of their separation from the union under the security clause of the CBA. or as regards a particular employer with which it has a closed-shop agreement. however. Local Union Disaffiliation: Rule . a Resolution was approved which called for the investigation of all the petitioners for "continuously maligning. therefore. lest by its folly and inaction. as well as the dictates of law and justice. The action of the majority must. for its preservation and continued existence. prevail over that of the minority members." They constituted a small minority for which reason they could not have successfully disaffiliated the local union from PAFLU. which he forthwith withdrew or revoked. He delivered documents to the management. Reasoning Disaffiliation from a labor union is not open to legal objection. it is well settled that such unions are not entitled to arbitrarily exclude qualified applicants for membership. WON the petitioners were entitled to disaffiliate from the Union HELD 1. they must. thereafter. Likewise. ISSUE/S 1. April 20.YES Ratio That PAFLU had the authority to investigate petitioners on the charges filed by their co-employees in the local union and after finding them guilty as charged. It can be inferred that the majority wanted the union to remain an affiliate of PAFLU. 1983 NATURE Petition for review by certiorari FACTS . libelling and slandering not only the incumbent officers but even the union itself and the federation" and for causing divisiveness. a closed shop. either in a given locality. to expel them from the roll of membership of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU is clear under the constitution of the PAFLU to which the local union was affiliated. WON Bugay had a cause of action (WON it can be shown that the . a duly registered labor organization which was the existing bargaining agent of the employees in private respondent Amigo Manufacturing. Bugay also filed claim for moral damages which the lower court dismissed based on lack of cause of action. -Having been denied readmission into the Union and having been dismissed from the service owing to an unfair labor practice on the part of the Union. -Consequently. be expelled.Labor Law 2 A2010 . an employee whom the union thus refuses to admit to membership. WON PAFLU had the authority to investigate the petitioners and. shall be dismissed from his employment upon written request of the UNION to the Company. Due Process Rules BUGAY V KAPISANAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA MRR 4 SCRA 487 BAUTISTA ANGELO. he may. they thereby forfeit their rights to remain as members of the union which they seek to destroy. Retention of Membership C. who. . and such provision in a collective bargaining agreement is not a restriction of the right of freedom of association guaranteed by the Constitution. therefore. and were not further authorizing PAFLU to represent them in any CBA. which the management used to charge the union president with falsification of documents. without any reasonable ground therefor.During a special meeting of the Union. and can not arbitrarily he denied readmission. therefore. YES Ratio Although they are entitled to disaffiliate from their union and form a new organization of their own. the labor union crumble and fall. is hereby AFFIRMED. is the right of self-preservation. with more reason may the law and the courts exercise the coercive power when the employee involved is a long standing union member. and with back pay. or a union in insisting upon the discharge of.Legality act . the union held investigations even without Bugay’s presence (thus. who have the requisite qualifications. Charges for disloyalty and conduct unbecoming a union member were filed against Bugay. invoke the rights of those who seek admission for the first time. when they seek the disintegration and destruction of the very union to which they belong. a union shop. and his expulsion was not submitted to the different chapters of the union as required by its constitution and by-laws. Disposition The appealed resolution of the CIR is reversed B. But this Court has laid down the ruling that a closed shop is a valid form of union security. reiterating the same clause in the old CBA.The PAFLU President then rendered a decision finding them guilty of the charges and expelling them from the Union and as a consequence the Management of the employer is hereby requested to terminate them from their employment in conformity with the security clause. February 23. which back pay shall be borne exclusively by the Union. sow the seeds of dissension and strife within the union. -The reason is that the closed shop and the union shop cause the admission requirements of trade union to become affected with the public interest. 2. It is implicit in the freedom of association ordained by the Constitution. was impelled to tender his resignation. Disposition The Order appealed from affirming the joint decision of the OIC granting clearance to terminate petitioners as well as dismissing their complaint with application for preliminary injunction.” . and a closed-shop provision would not justify the employer in discharging. as ordered by the union secretary without the approval of the union. -Bugay filed a charge for unfair labor practice against the union before the CIR which ordered his reinstatement as union member and restoration of all his rights and privileges. Needless to say. Discipline VILLAR V INCIONG 121 SCRA 44 GUERRERO. Prudence and equity. SC affirmed. D. . petitioner is entitled to reinstatement as member of the Union and to his former or substantially equivalent position in the Company. PAFLU was justified in applying said security clause. Inc. ISSUES 1.Disaffiliation There are two hundred thirty four (234) union members in the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU. without prejudice to his seniority and/or rights and privileges. expel them from the roll of membership of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU 2. compelling mandate the adoption by the labor union of such corrective and remedial measures in keeping with its laws and regulations. 1962 NATURE Appeal from decision of lower court FACTS -Bugay was the former auditor of the union.Petitioners were members of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU. or any organization for that matter. When members of a labor union. owing to provocations of union officers. UNION-MEMBER RELATIONS: Discipline Issues Inherent in every labor union. They then signed a joint resolution which stated that they were disaffiliating themselves as members of the PAFLU. And pursuant to the security clause of the new CBA. or maintenance of membership clauses cause the administration of discipline by unions to be affected with the public interest. Surely. if said unions may be compelled to admit new members.The union security clause was reincorporated in the new CBA: “any members who shall resign. and only 96 signed the "Sama-Samang Kapasiyahan.

Labor Law 2

A2010

- 65 -

Disini

union officers acted in bad faith in expelling him from the union to grant MD) 2. WON Bugay was afforded due process HELD 1. YES Reasoning. The main basis of appellant's action is his claim that because of the unfair labor practice committed by the officers of defendant union as found by the Court of Industrial Relations and the Supreme Court he has suffered moral damages because of the mental anguish, anxiety, social humiliation and besmirched reputation he has been subjected among the thousands of employees of the Manila Railroad Company. The CIR and the SC have found that his expulsion was illegal because of the irregularities committed in his investigation. 2. NO Reasoning. In the investigation held and in the board meeting where the committee’s report recommending Bugay’s expulsion was approved, Bugay was not present. The committee assigned to summon him failed to serve notice upon him because he was in Lucena. However, proceedings still continued anent the absence of Bugay. Also, the union by-laws provided that majority of the chapters should act on the expulsion within 10days but only 2 did so, therefore, his expulsion was irregular and he is still a member of the union. Disposition. WHEREFORE, the order appealed from is set aside. The case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings, With costs against defendant.

brought up and resolved in accordance with the procedure laid down by the union’s CBL and by the Labor Code.

2. Disqualification Candidate
MANALAD V TRAJANO 174 SCRA 322 Regalado, J.: June 28, 1989
FACTS -Petitioners were disqualified from running in the election of officers in their union; the order was set aside on appeal by Trajano, Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). Petitioners won over private respondents; the latter filed a petition assailing the decision on appeal. -The Court promulgated a resolution: (1) to dismiss the petition (2) vacate all offices, including acting president private respondent Babula and turn over union management to BLR (3) order the holding of a special election supervised by the NCR Labor Office, which private respondents later won. -A petition was filed asking to hold private respondents in contempt for failure to turn over management of the union, disqualify them and invalidate votes cast in their favor, electing those with the 2nd highest votes, or hold a new election. Meanwhile, the terms of the offices in question had expired. ISSUE (disqualification of candidate) WON private respondent candidates should be disqualified HELD NO. As observed by respondent Trajano, the submission that Babula failed to completely turn over management of the union to the undersigned is within the competence and authority of the Supreme Court to pass upon considering that the mandate for such a turn-over came from the Court. Before the alleged disobedient party may be cited for contempt, the allegations must be clearly established, which petitioners failed to do. On the contrary, respondents have satisfactorily answered the averments thereon. -In any case, it would be pointless to annul expired terms. Even if the disqualification is justified, petitioners cannot be declared the winners simply because they received the second highest number of votes. Absent overriding considerations to the contrary, the will of the majority in the latter elections should be respected; where people have elected a man to office, it must be assumed that they did this with knowledge of his life and character, and that they disregarded of forgave his faults or misconduct, if he had been guilty of any. This case is DISMISSED for being moot and academic

E.

Election Officers 1. Voters List

TANCINCO V CALLEJA 157 SCRA 203

UST FACULTY UNION V BITONIO 318 SCRA 185 PANGANIBAN; November 16, 1999
NATURE Special civil action in the Supreme Court. Certiorari. FACTS - Union announced a general assembly to elect next union officers. - TRO was issued by med-arbiter enjoining them from conducting election. - UST held a general faculty assembly, attended by both union members and non-members. Here, appellants were elected as new union officers by acclamation and clapping of hands. - Appellees filed instant petition to seek injunctive relief and to nullify results of election. - Bitonio upheld med-arbiter and said election was void. He rejected contention that it was a legitimate exercise of right to self organization ISSUE/S Admission and discipline of members (p10 of outline) HELD Ratio The union’s constitution and by-laws embody a covenant between a union and its members and constitute the fundamental law governing the members’ rights and obligations. Reasoning The election was tainted by irregularities. The general faculty assembly was not the proper forum for the election. Also, the grievances of the petitioners could have been

3. Expulsion Remedy
KAPISANAN NG MANGGAGAWANG PINAGYAKAP (KMP) vs. TRAJANO 134 SCRA 236
RELOVA; Jan 21 1985 NATURE Petition to review FACTS - A petition was filed for the expulsion of the union officers of KMP on the ground of alleged falsification and misrepresentation. - Public respondent Director Trajano of the Bureau of Labor Relations directed the said Union to hold and conduct, pursuant to its constitution and by-laws and under the supervision of the Bureau of Labor Relations, a general membership meeting, to vote for or against the expulsion or suspension of the herein petitioner union officers.

Labor Law 2

A2010

- 66 -

Disini

ISSUE WON the proper remedy against erring union officers is not referendum but union expulsion HELD YES. Ratio The remedy against erring union officers is not referendum but union expulsion. Reasoning If herein union officers (also petitioners) were guilty of the alleged acts imputed against them, said public respondent pursuant to Article 242 of the New Labor Code and in the light of Our ruling in Duyag vs. Inciong, should have meted out the appropriate penalty on them, i.e., to expel them from the Union, as prayed for, and not call for a referendum to decide the issue. However, the alleged falsification and misrepresentation of herein union officers were not supported by substantial evidence. The fact that they disbursed the amount of P1,278.00 from Union funds and later on was disallowed for failure to attach supporting papers thereon did not of itself constitute falsification and/or misrepresentation. The expenditures appeared to have been made in good faith and the amount spent for the purpose mentioned in the report, if concurred in or accepted by the members, are reasonable. DISPOSITION Resolution SET ASIDE and the petition for expulsion of herein union officers is DISMISSED for having been rendered moot and academic by the election of herein union officers in the general membership meeting/election.

Reasoning The decision is sustained for failure of the record to disclose any grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Director in finding that the elections was tainted with irregularities and therefore invalid. Undue haste, lack of adequate safeguards to ensure integrity of the voting and absence of the dates of balloting attended the elections. 2. NO Reasoning The resolutiion does not bear the signature of at leasT 2/3 of the members of the council, contrary to the requirements of the union constitution and by-laws. the resolution increasing union dues is they're struck down as illegal and void, arbitrary and oppressive. Disposition Petition is dimissed.

F.

Major Policy Matter

HALILI VS CIR 136 SCRA 112 MAKASIAR; April 30, 1985
NATURE Motion to cite Atty. Benjamin C. Pineda, Ricardo Capuno and Manila Bank in contempt FACTS 136 The original cases involve disputes about the claims for overtime of more than five hundred bus drivers and conductors of Halili Transit. The disputes were eventually settled when the contending parties reached an Agreement wherein the Union shall withdraw and dismiss with prejudice the case that they have filed before the CIR in exchange for some parcel of land and negotiable checks (P 25,000). 137 The parcel of land was eventually registered in the name of the Union and the cases filed were disposed.

4. Election Valid
RODRIGUEZ V DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS 165 SCRA 239 NARVASA; August 31, 1988
NATURE Special civil action of certiorari (consolidated). FACTS - The disputes concern the validity of the general elections for union officers and increase in union dues. - In PLDT, the fees to submit candidacy drastically increases. although some still paid the frees, complaints were filed with the Bureau of Labor Relations for its invalidation as excessive, prohibitive and arbitrary. - Elections for provinces of Visayas and Mindanao were held on dates different from those specified by the Legislative Council. The validity of the elections were challenged on the grounds of lack of due notice and adequate ground rules. - Med-Arbiter abdullah heard the cases and rendered judgment denying petitions to nullify the elections as well as the motion for contempt, but invalidated the increaseof filing fees for for certificates of candidacies. the OIC of Labor Relations overturned the judgment. The elections were nullifies for lack of notice to candidates and voters, failure to disseminate the election ground rules and disregard of the temporary restraining order of the Med-Arbiter. - Due to the proceedings assailing the validity of the elections pending before the Bureau of Labor Relations, the old officers continued to exercise the functions of their respective offices. the legislative council increased the union dues from P21-P50 a month. - Dir of Labor Relations rendered a decision revering that of the medarbiter by ordering te cessation of the collection of the P29 increase aned return the amounts already collected. ISSUE/S 1. WON the general elections for union officers is valid 2. WON the increase of the union dues is valid HELD 1. YES

138

The Union, through Atty. Benjamin C. Pineda, filed an urgent motion with the Ministry of Labor and Employment requesting for authority to sell and dispose of the property. The motion was granted. A prospective buyer, the Manila Memorial Park Cemetery, inc. expressed its misgivings on the authority of the Union to sell the property so Atty. Pineda filed a motion with the Supreme Court requesting for authority to sell the property. However, Atty. Pineda, without authority from the Supreme Court but relying on the earlier authority given him by the Ministry of Labor, filed another urgent motion with the latter, praying that the Union be authorized to sell the lot to the Manila Memorial Park Cemetery, Inc. and to make arrangements with it such that payment will be advanced for the real estate taxes inclusive of penalties, attorney's lien which is equivalent to a thirty-five percent (35%) of the total purchase price, and home developer's fee of P69,000.00. Apparently, the prospective purchaser had decided to withdraw its objection regarding the Union's authority to sell. So, the sale was finally consummated and Atty. Pineda got 35% as attorney’s fee.

139

When Atty. Jose C. Espinas (herein movant and alleged original counsel for the Union) learned of the sale and apportionment of the proceeds from past Union president Amado Lopez, he requested Labor Arbiter to allow him to look into the records of the case. He questions the legality of the orders which authorized the sale of the awarded property and the distribution of the proceeds from such purchase as well as the Attorney’s fee that Atty. Pineda received. 140 Atty. Espinas claims that he is the original counsel. while Atty. Pineda replied by saying that he handled the said case ALONE.

Labor Law 2
ISSUE: 1. HELD: YES

A2010

- 67 -

Disini

WON Atty. Pineda should be held in contempt of court.

When Atty. Pineda appeared for the Union in these cases, he was still an associate of the law firm of Atty. Espinas. Yet, his appearance carried the firm name “B.C. Pineda and Associates," giving the impression that he was the principal lawyer in these cases when in truth, he was merely an associate to the Espinas firm. When he left the law firm for a year, Atty. Pineda continued handling the case with the arrangement that he would report the developments to the Espinas firm. When Atty. Pineda rejoined the Espinas firm in 1968, he did not reveal to his partners (he was made the most senior partner) that he had a retainer's contract with the union. Only the officers of the Union knew of the contract. Atty. Pineda joined the law firm of Atty. Espinas in 1965 when these cases were pending resolution. He always held office in the firm's place at Puyat Building, Escolta until 1974, except in 1966 to 1967 when he transferred to the Lakas ng Manggagawa Offices. During this one-year stint at the latter office, When he rejoined the law firm in 1968, he continued working on these cases and using the Puyat Building office as his address in the pleadings. entered into on January 1, 1967 which allegedly took effect in 1966. He stayed with the law firm until 1974 and still did not divulge the 1967 retainer's contract. The alleged retainer's contract between Atty. Pineda and the Union appears anomalous and even illegal as well as unethical considering that- the contract was executed only between Atty. Pineda and the officers of the Union chosen by about 125 members only. It was not a contract with the general membership, only 14% of the total membership of 897 was represented. Thus, without notice to the other lawyers and parties, Atty. Pineda commenced the proceeds before the NLRC with the filing of a motion and manifestation wherein he asked for authority to sell the property. Atty. Pineda made the Union officers believe that he would be the one to pay the fees of Attys. Espinas and Lopez for which reason, the 35% increased fees was approved by the Union's board in good faith. The Union likewise confirms that Atty. Pineda came into the picture only when he was assigned by Atty. Espinas in, 1965 to execute the CIR decision which, thru Atty. Espinas handling, was upheld by this Court in L-24864 in 1968. The Union officers were aware that Atty. Espinas was the principal counsel even after Atty. Pineda's assignment. They also knew of the original contract for 20% attorney's fees which was increased to 35% by Atty. Pineda upon the arrangement that with the increase, he would answer for the payment of Attys. Espinas and Lopez' fees and for necessary representation expenses. Thus, based on these malicious actions and fraudulent misrepresentations, Atty. Pineda must be held liable. Dispositive WHEREFORE, ATTY. BENJAMIN PINEDA IS HEREBY FOUND GUILTY OF INDIRECT CONTEMPT OF COURT FOR WHICH HE IS HEREBY SENTENCED TO IMPRISONMENT IN THE MANILA CITY JAIL UNTIL THE ORDERS OF THIS COURT DATED SEPTEMBER 1 AND SEPTEMBER 13, 1983 ARE COMPLIED WITH. ATTY. BENJAMIN PINEDA IS ALSO DIRECTED TO SHOW CAUSE WHY HE SHOULD NOT BE DISBARRED UNDER RULE 138 OF THE REVISED RULES OF COURT.

FACTS - There had been negotiations between the Pacific Banking Corporation and the Pacific Banking Corporation Employees Organization (PABECO) for a CBA for 1979 to 1981. Because of a deadlock, the Minister of Labor assumed jurisdiction over the controversy and rendered a decision directing the parties to execute a CBA in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in his decision. - The union was represented in the negotiations by its president Paug, allegedly assisted as consultant by Umali, Jr., the president of the National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) with which it was formerly affiliated. Lawyer Saavedra's earliest recorded participation in the case was on July 15 and 27, 1979 when he filed a motion for reconsideration and a supplemental motion. No action was taken on said motions. - The parties appealed to the Office of the President. The CBA negotiations were resumed. The union president took part in the second phase of the negotiations. Saavedra filed a memorandum. The Office of the President issueddirected the parties to execute a CBA containing the terms and conditions of employment embodied in the resolution. - Even before the formalization of the CBA, Saavedra filed in the case his notice of attorney 's lien. - The union officials requested the bank to withhold around P345,000 out of the total benefits as ten percent attorney's fees of Saavedra. At first, the bank interposed no objection to the request in the interest of harmonious labor-management relations. - For nearly a year, the Office of the President in four resolutions wrestled with the propriety of Saavedra's ten percent attorney's fees. ISSUES WON the deduction from the monetary benefits awarded in a collective bargaining agreement the attorney's fees of the lawyer who assisted the union president in negotiating the agreement is legal. RULING - NO. The case is covered squarely by the mandatory and explicit prescription of article 222 which is another guarantee intended to protect the employee against unwarranted practices that would diminish his compensation without his knowledge and consent. - "ART. 242. Rights and conditions of membership in a labor organization. - The following are the rights and conditions of membership in a labor 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 majority of all the members at a general membership meeting duly called for the purpose. The secretary of the organization shall record the minutes of the meeting including the list of all members present, the votes cast, the purpose of the special assessment or fees and the recipient of such assessment or fees. The record shall be attested to by the president;. "(o) Other than for mandatory activities under the Code, no special assessment, attorney's fees, negotiation fees or any other extraordinary fees may be checked off from any amount due an employee without an individual written authorization duly signed by the employee. The authorization should specifically state the amount, purpose and beneficiary of the deduction - Saavedra is entitled to the payment of his fees but article 222 ordains that union funds should be used for that purpose. The amount of P345,000 does not constitute union funds. It is money of the employees. The union, not the employees, is obligated to Saavedra. Disposition WHEREFORE, the petition is granted. The resolutions dated August 12 and December 15, 1980 and April 13, 1981 are reversed and set aside. The questioned amount of about P345,000, with its increments, if any, should be paid by the bank directly to its employees.

G. Union Funds 1. Source-Payment-Attys Fees
PACIFIC BANKING CORP. V CLAVE 128 SCRA 112 AQUINO; March 7, 1984
NATURE Petition for Certiorari

2. Examination Books

The disputes concern the validity of the general elections for union officers and increase in union dues. whichever is appropriate. the tenure of union officers. in addition. It is necessary and desirable that the Bureau of Labor Relations and the Ministry of Labor should exercise close and constant supervision over labor unions. ISSUE/S WON the dismissal of the labor union officers is valid HELD Yes. failure to disseminate the election ground rules and disregard of the temporary restraining order of the Med-Arbiter. purchase vehicles and other items needed for the benefit of the officers and the general membership. a matter outside his Bureau's jurisdiction and should be passed upon by the union members themselves. NO Reasoning The resolutiion does not bear the signature of at leasT 2/3 of the members of the council. prohibitive and arbitrary.00 every payday or P20. although some still paid the frees. erring union officials may be removed by the Director of Labor Relations as clearly provided in article 242.00 every month and. is affirmed. Laxity. but invalidated the increaseof filing fees for for certificates of candidacies. WON the increase of the union dues is valid HELD 1. .The Medarbiter ordered the expulsion of the union officers for violations of the constitution of the Union and the refund of the dues illegally exacted from union members. arbitrary and oppressive. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS 165 SCRA 239 NARVASA. the resolution increasing union dues is they're struck down as illegal and void.) FACTS . so as to forestall abuses and venalities. Leano and Puerto as union officers. (Respondent Amparo is no longer an officer of the union. Disposition Petition is dimissed. permissiveness. from the CBA lumpsum pay granted to the union members for putting up a cooperative and credit union. The validity of the elections were challenged on the grounds of lack of due notice and adequate ground rules. and relief helpers of the Manila Plant and Metro Manila Sales Office of Coca-Cola Bottlers (Philippines). the legislative council increased the union dues from P21-P50 a month. Undue haste. as enumerated in paragraphs (a) to (p) of Article 242. February 26. YES Reasoning The decision is sustained for failure of the record to disclose any grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Director in finding that the elections was tainted with irregularities and therefore invalid. regular helpers. reversed the ruling of the medarbiter in so far as the expulsion is concerned taking the position that it is only the membership of the Union which can removed its officers and claiming that the issue is a political question. 1987 > The president of Manila CCBPI Sales Force Union as the collective bargaining agent of all regular salesmen. as a matter of policy.Med-Arbiter abdullah heard the cases and rendered judgment denying petitions to nullify the elections as well as the motion for contempt. 2. complaints were filed with the Bureau of Labor Relations for its invalidation as excessive. Source—Payment— Special Assessment PALACOLV FERRER-CALLEJA 182 SCRA 710 GANCAYCO. 1990 FACTS . 10% by way of special assessment.This case is about the removal of private respondents as union officers due to alleged irregularities and anomalies in the administration of the affairs of the union. 1988 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari (consolidated). H. neglect and apathy in supervising and regulating the activities of union officials would result in corruption and oppression.October 12.Dir of Labor Relations rendered a decision revering that of the med-arbiter by ordering te cessation of the collection of the P29 increase aned return the amounts already collected. .Labor Law 2 DUYAG V INCIONG 98 SCRA 522 Aquino.68 - Disini FACTS . lack of adequate safeguards to ensure integrity of the voting and absence of the dates of balloting attended the elections. ISSUE/S 1. J. Union Dues RODRIGUEZ V DIRECTOR.In PLDT. generally. arrogant and unscrupulous union officials to the prejudice of the members. and for the payment for services rendered by union officers. The Bureau shall have the power to hear and decide any reported violation to mete the appropriate penalty". contrary to the requirements of the union constitution and by-laws. however. being a "political question" is. the fees to submit candidacy drastically increases. The Director of Labor Relations. "shall be a ground for cancellation of union registration or expulsion of officer from office. WON the general elections for union officers is valid 2. After hearing and even without submitting the matter to the union members. That paragraph provides that any violation of the rights and conditions of union membership. the old officers continued to exercise the functions of their respective offices. August 31. Inc. 1980 NATURE Appeal from the decision of the Director of Labor Relation A2010 . particularly the handling of their funds. submitted to the Company the ratification by the union members of the new CBA and authorization for the Company to deduct union dues equivalent to P10. removing respondents Manalad. . (1) that portion of the decision of the medarbiter. At least thirty percent (30%) of all the members of a union or any member or members specially concerned may report such violation to the Bureau (of Labor Relations). consultants and 3. Ratio: The Director of Labor Relations erred in holding that. the OIC of Labor Relations overturned the judgment. Disposition: WHEREFORE. For the protection of union members and in order that the affairs of the union may be administered honestly. July 5. Internal safeguards within the union can easily be ignored or swept aside by abusive. The elections were nullifies for lack of notice to candidates and voters. . . .Due to the proceedings assailing the validity of the elections pending before the Bureau of Labor Relations.Elections for provinces of Visayas and Mindanao were held on dates different from those specified by the Legislative Council. labor officials should be vigilant and watchful in monitoring and checking the administration of union affairs. . Reasoning: The labor officials should not hesitate to enforce strictly the law and regulations governing trade unions even if that course of action would curtail the so-called union autonomy and freedom from government interference..

and beneficiary of the deduction (Galvadores v. Any contract. agreement or arrangement of any sort to the contrary shall be null and void. granted under a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). attorney's fees. . Article 241(o) mandates that: ART. This is in accord with the constitutional principle of the State affording full protection to labor. Disposition Petition is hereby GRANTED. It also contained an authorization for Solidbank Corp to check-off the atty’s fees from the payment of benefits to the EEs and turn over the amount to the atty. . . ABS . There were no individual written check off authorizations by the EEs concerned and so the assessment cannot be legally deducted by the ER. . 2000 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari FACTS . The arbiter ordered the board to refund the complainants for the illegally deducted anount. The total membership of the Union was about 800. So categorical is this intent that the law makes it clear that any agreement to the contrary shall be null and void ab initio Disposition Petition is denied." . which must be followed to the letter..Labor Law 2 A2010 . numbering 355 in all (170 + 185). atty’s fees. which must be followed to the letter. and this consent must be obtained in accordance with the steps outlined by law. Reasoning Art.the union decided to retain the services of an atty Lacsina as union counsel in connection with the negotiations for a new CBA. and (3) individual written authorization for check off duly signed by the EEs concerned. Thus. and representation expenses: (1) authorization by a written resolution of the majority of all members at the general membership meeting called for the purpose. 241. while 173 opposed the same. Later. The obligation to pay the atty’s fees belongs to the union and cannot be shunted to the workers as their direct responsibility. attorney's fees. No shortcuts are allowed.Petitioners assailed the 10% special assessment as a violation of Article 241(o) in relation to Article 222(b) of the Labor Code. the board called a general membership meeting for this purpose. NO Ratio The Art. Rights and conditions of membership in a labor organization. one hundred seventy (170) members of the Union submitted documents to the Company stating that although they have ratified the new CBA. and this consent must be obtained in accordance with the steps outlined by law. however. the Private Respondents are the members of the union. These members. The order was appealed to the Sec. GABRIEL V SECRETARY OF LABOR 328 SCRA 247 QUISUMBING.69 - Disini others with an additional proviso stating that the "matter of allocation . Inc.267. . No shortcuts are allowed. negotiation fees or any other extraordinary fees may be checked off from any amount due to an employee without an individual written authorization duly signed by the employee. The check-off. whereby majority of all union members approved and signed a resolution confirming the decision to engage the services of the atty. No deduction can be made from the salaries of the concerned employees other than those mandated by law.CBN SUPERVISORS EMPLOYEE UNION MEMBERS V. purpose. Neither the lawyer nor the union itself may require the individual worker to assume the obligation to pay atty’s fees from their own pockets. 672 members originally authorized the 10% special assessment.. March 16.241 has 3 requisites for the validity of special assessment for the union’s incidental expenses. shall be at the discretion of our incumbent Union President.222(b) prohibits payment of atty's fees only when it is effected through forced contributions from workers from their own funds as distinguished from the union funds. notwithstanding a subsequent disauthorization of the same by a majority of the union members HELD NO Doctine N o check-offs from any amount due employees may be effected without individual written authorizations duly signed by the employees specifically stating the amount. turned the tide in favor of disauthorization for the special assessment.Subsequently however. 185 other union members submitted similar documents expressing the same intent.the failure of the Union to comply strictly with the requirements set out by the law invalidates the questioned special assessment. no special assessments. Trajano). Their express consent is required. In an MFR.BPIEU-ALU vs. made without valid individual authorizations. 222. March 11. Coca-Cola Bottlers (Philippines).The General Membership Resolution of the SolidBank Union didn’t satisfy requirements laid down by law and jurisprudence. The authorization should specifically state the amount. Provided. this petition.This "Authorization and CBA Ratification" was obtained by the Union through a secret referendum held in separate local membership meetings on various dates. 1999 . . NLRC: Art. (2) secretary's record of the minutes of the meeting. is hereby ordered to immediately remit the amount of P1. On the other hand. 304 SCRA 489 PURISIMA. they are withdrawing or disauthorizing the deduction of any amount from their CBA lump sum. negotiation fees or any other extraordinary fees may be checked off from any amount due to an employee without an individual written authorization duly signed by the employee. xxx xxx xxx (o) Other than for mandatory activities under the Code. negotiation fees or similar charges of any kind arising from any collective bargaining negotiations or conclusion of the collective agreement shall be imposed on any individual member of the contracting union.private respondents then filed a complaint against the board for illegal deduction of atty’s fees.the resolution provided that 10% of the total economic benefits that may be secured through the nego will be given to the Atty Lacsina as atty’s fees. (b) No attorney's fees. Appearances and Fees. while ABS . .39 to the respective union members from whom the said amount was withheld. of labor. Article 222(b) provides as follows: ART. the secretary affirmed and modified that the reimbursement should be charged to the union’s general fund.863.CBN BROADCASTING CORP. The bank then complied with the check-off . purpose and beneficiary of the deduction.24(o) provides: Other than for mandatory activities under the Code. Thus. purpose and beneficiary of the deduction ISSUE WON a special assessment can be validly deducted by a labor union from the lump-sum pay of its members. with a total of 528 objectors and a remainder of 272 supporters. Of this number. . The purpose is to prevent imposition on the workers of the duty to individually contribute their respective shares in the fee to be paid the atty for his services on behalf of the union in its negotiations with mgt.Petitioners comprise the Executive Board of the Solidbank Union. WON the check-off was validly made HELD 1.Palacol v Ferrer-Calleja: express consent of EEs is required. who in turn ordered that the refund be limited to those union members who have not signified their conformity to the check-off. Substantial compliance is not enough in view of the fact that the special assessment will diminish the compensation of the union members. The authorization should specifically state the amount. ISSUE 1. no special assessment. added to the original oppositors of 173. that attorney's fees may be charged against union funds in an amount to be agreed upon by the parties. cannot be held valid.

After a thorough review of the records on hand. I. The purpose of the provision is to prevent imposition on the workers of the duty to individually contribute their respective shares in the fee to be paid the attorney for his services on behalf of the union in its negotiations with the management. the same must be shared by all the members until this is fully liquidated. as amended. other miscellaneous expenses and attorney's fees. impugned the Order of the NLRC. Mandatory Activity Definition AMBROCIO VENGCO ET. (Article 241. Pascual the amount of P500. The Court explained: "xxx And significantly. Rafael Wagas and 80 others (Vengco. Thus Vengco. the deduction of the stipulated five percent (5%) of the total economic benefits under the new collective bargaining agreement was applied only to workers who gave their individual signed authorizations. the ABS-CBN Supervisors Employee Union held its general meeting. HELD: Yes Article 241 provides for three (3) requisites for the validity of the special assessment for Union's incidental expenses. RATIO -Other than for mandatory activities under the Code. wherein majority of the members agreed that "in as much as the Union had already paid Atty. thus: "The Court reads the aforecited provision as prohibiting the payment of attorney's fees only when it is effected through forced contributions from the workers from their own funds a distinguished from the union funds. (FOI-TAF) entered into a compromise agreement whereby the company will pay to the union members the sum of P150. Petitioners further contend that Article 241 (n) of the Labor Code. NLRC that 1) the prohibition against attorney's fees in Article 222. the petitioners. and 3) individual written authorization for check-off duly signed by the employee concerned.: NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS -Sometime in the latter part of 1981.00 had been deducted to pay for attorney's fees without their written authorization in violation of Article 242(o) of the Labor Code. In the instant case. holding that the validity of the five percent (5%) special assessment for attorney's fees is contrary to Article 222. paragraph (b) of the Labor Code. ISSUE Whether or not Timbungco is guilty of illegally deducting 10% attorneys' fees from petitioners' backwages HELD YES. the authorized deduction affected only the workers who adopted and signed the resolution and who were the only ones from whose benefits the deductions were made by BPI.000. 1991.00. no special assessment.00 was distributed to the members. In this case. Timbungco did not give in to their demand. filed a complaint with the Ministry of Labor. Thereafter.70 - Disini ABS-CBN Supervisors Emloyees Union and ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation signed and a Collective Bargaining Agreement providing for a 10% special assessment for union incidental expenses." The inapplicability of Palacol lies in the fact that it has a different factual milieu from the present case. attorney's fees and representation expenses were met. and 2) that no deductions must be taken from the workers who did not sign the check-off authorization. attorneys fees and representation expenses. the public respondent overlooked the fact that in the said case.Labor Law 2 NATURE:Special civil action for Certiorari A2010 . so find.000. 2) secretary's record of the minutes of the meeting. for short) who are union members noted that Timbungco was not authorized by the union workers to get the money. On May 24. the Management of the AngloAmerican Tobacco Corporation and the Kapisanan ng Manggagawa sa Anglo-American Tobacco Corporation.000. Ramon Moises. said Union held its General Membership Meeting. for short) who is the union president received the money which was paid in installments. the check-off authorization was declared invalid because majority of the Union members had withdrawn their individual authorizations. whereat it was agreed that a ten percent (10%) special assessment from the total economic package due to every member would be checked-off to cover expenses for negotiation. attorney's fees.000. The court ratiocinated. paragraph (b) of the Labor Code applies only when the payment of attorney's fees is effected through forced contributions from the workers. he distributed the amount among the union members. LC) -A mandatory activity has been defined as a judicial process of settling dispute laid down by the law. we find that the three (3) requisites for the validity of the ten percent (10%) special assessment for Union's incidental expenses." Eighty-five (85) members of the same Union executed individual written authorizations for check-off.. It can be gleaned that on July 14. J. There is then.00 for their claims arising from the unpaid emergency cost of living allowance (ECOLA) and other benefits which were the subject of their compliant before the Ministry of Labor. The authorization should specifically state the amount. Premises studiedly considered. negotiation fees or any other extraordinary fees may be checked off from any amount due an employee without an individual written authorization duly signed by an employee. 1989. et al. xxx" However. -Respondent Emmanuel Timbungco (Timbungco. And they have never withdraw their individual written authorizations for check-off. Subject Article does not state that the general membership meeting should be called after the conclusion of a collective bargaining agreement. attorneys fees and representation expenses are valid. purpose and beneficiary of the deduction. demanded from Timbungco an accounting of how the P150. CRESENCIO B. ISSUE: WON the provisions for the check off regarding the 10% special assessment for union incidental expenses. The minutes of the said meeting were recorded by the Union's Secretary and noted by its President. that the ruling in BPIEU-ALU vs. et al. we are of the irresistable conclusion and. the majority of the Union members gave their individual written check-off authorizations for the ten percent (10%) special assessment. -Vengco et al. as amended. and that ten percent (10%) of the P150. In BPIEU-ALU. attorney's fees and representation expenses namely: 1) authorization by a written resolution of the majority of all the members at the general membership meeting duly called for the purpose. applies to the case under consideration. No similar deductions were taken from the other workers who did not sign the resolution and so were not bound by it. contemplates a general meeting after the conclusion of the collective bargaining agreement. on special assessments. the amicable settlement entered into by the management and the union . Petitioners Ambrocio Vengco. the presumption that such check-off authorizations were executed voluntarily by the signatories thereto. P. TRAJANO 170 SCRA 155 (1989) MEDIALDEA. AL vs. In Palacol. DIR.

Instead. Even assuming not engaged in a vital industry. K. Union had a remedy by applying for a writ of execution to enforce that award. reiterating the same clause in the old CBA. or shall in any manner cease to be a member of the UNION. It was not in connection with any unresolved economic issue in collective bargaining which is the only ground for which a lawful strike can be held as found in Section 7 of the Rules and Regulations implementing PD 823. Inc. 2. . Union Information Union Officer-Obligation CONTINENTAL CEMENT CORP. the petition is granted. Section II of the Implementing Rules cited by Timbungco which dispenses with the required written authorization from the employees concerned does not apply in this case. TO MAKE THE DEDUCTION OF ATTORNEY'S FEES VALID. ISSUE/S 1. libelling and slandering not only the incumbent officers but even the union itself and the federation" and for causing divisiveness. They repeatedly defied the orders of the Director of Labor Relations. therefore. shall be dismissed from his employment upon written request of the UNION to the Company. Book III. WON the petitioners were entitled to disaffiliate from the Union HELD 1. the strike was illegal. or any organization for that matter. PAFLU was justified in applying said security clause. When members of a labor union. The issue concerned merely the implementation of an arbitration award of the NLRC. the labor union crumble and fall. Their (the officers) dismissal from the service is a just penalty. WON PAFLU had the authority to investigate the petitioners and. Prudence and equity. they thereby forfeit their rights to remain as members of the union which they seek to destroy. 1983 CAN NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A MANDATORY ACTIVITY UNDER THE CODE. DISPOSITIVE: ACCORDINGLY. they urged them to violate the law and defy the duly constituted authorities. In the herein case. therefore. They then signed a joint resolution which stated that they were disaffiliating themselves as members of the PAFLU. it shall be the duty of any labor organization and its officers to inform its members on provisions of the constitution and by-laws. And pursuant to the security clause of the new CBA. be expelled. compelling mandate the adoption by the labor union of such corrective and remedial measures in keeping with its laws and regulations.Labor Law 2 REASONING A2010 . is the right of self-preservation. Upon termination of the proceedings.71 - Disini Jurisdiction-Exhaustion Internal Remedies Requirements: VILLAR V INCIONG 121 SCRA 44 GUERRERO. for its preservation and continued existence. . April 20. Rule VIII. the fringe benefits received by the union members consist of back payments of their unpaid emergency cost of living allowances which are totally distinct from their wages. Allowances are benefits over and above the basic salaries of the employees We have held that such allowances are excluded from the concept of salaries or wages. YES Ratio Although they are entitled to disaffiliate from their union and CBA Negotiation GALVADORES V TRAJANO 144 SCRA 138 (not yet available) J. the prevailing labor relations system and all their rights and obligations under existing labor laws. Officers had the duty to guide their members to respect the law. In Art. . collective bargaining agreement. -Moreover. as well as the dictates of law and justice. to expel them from the roll of membership of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU is clear under the constitution of the PAFLU to which the local union was affiliated. UNION-MEMBER RELATIONS: Discipline Issues Inherent in every labor union.Petitioners contend that their acts do not constitute disloyalty as these are in the exercise of their constitutional right to selforganization. LABOR UNION V CONTINENTAL CEMENT 189 SCRA 134 Company was engaged in the manufacture of cement which is a vital industry in which a strike or lockout is prohibited. Their responsibility is greater than that of the members.” . a duly registered labor organization which was the existing bargaining agent of the employees in private respondent Amigo Manufacturing. and were not further authorizing PAFLU to represent them in any CBA. Enforcement Remedies-Procedure Sanctions and and . sow the seeds of dissension and strife within the union. NATURE Petition for review by certiorari FACTS . The union members engaged in a lock-out and strike.The PAFLU President then rendered a decision finding them guilty of the charges and expelling them from the Union and as a consequence the Management of the employer is hereby requested to terminate them from their employment in conformity with the security clause.Petitioners were members of the Amigo Employees UnionPAFLU. when they seek the disintegration and destruction of the very union to which they belong.During a special meeting of the Union. It is within the power of the NLRC to order the removal of the officers.YES Ratio That PAFLU had the authority to investigate petitioners on the charges filed by their co-employees in the local union and after finding them guilty as charged. -The law is explicit. In addition. the law allows a deduction for attorney's fees of 10% from the total amount due to a winning party. lest by its folly and inaction. Any violation of the above rights and conditions shall be a ground for cancellation of union registration or expulsion of an officer from office. The officers misinformed the members and led them into staging an illegal strike. expel them from the roll of membership of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU 2. a Resolution was approved which called for the investigation of all the petitioners for "continuously maligning. IT REQUIRES THE INDIVIDUAL WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF EACH EMPLOYEE CONCERNED. The strikers did violate the nostrike policy. 242.The union security clause was reincorporated in the new CBA: “any members who shall resign. This provision envisions a situation where there is a judicial or administrative proceedings for recovery of wages. thereafter. the payment of the fringe benefits were effected through an amicable settlement and not in an administrative proceeding.

The elections were nullifies for lack of notice to candidates and voters. In this case.Legality act . Disposition Petition is dimissed.they denied the allegations. contrary to the requirements of the union constitution and by-laws. however. Reasoning Disaffiliation from a labor union is not open to legal objection..The disputes concern the validity of the general elections for union officers and increase in union dues. It is implicit in the freedom of association ordained by the Constitution. The essence of due process is simply an opportunity to be heard. Proceso Totto.Private respondents Rodel E. HELD 1. The validity of the elections were challenged on the grounds of lack of due notice and adequate ground rules. De Ocampo. Efren J. 4. NATURE Petition for review on certiorari FACTS . 15. . illegal holdover of terms and damages was filed by the respondents against herein before DOLE-NCR . lack of adequate safeguards to ensure integrity of the voting and absence of the dates of balloting attended the elections. . The appeal. however. 2. informed Rodel Dalupan. 3.Elections for provinces of Visayas and Mindanao were held on dates different from those specified by the Legislative Council. . They stated that any sanction that will be imposed by the committee would be violative of their right to due process. NO Ratio The Court of Appeals was justified in upholding the DOLENCR and BLR-DOLE decisions based on the complaint and answer. Local Union Disaffiliation: Rule . WON the CA committed an error in holding the election as invalid and a nullity. WON the CA committed an error in upholding the DOLE-NCR and BLR-DOLE decisions based only on the complaint and answer. Undue haste. and such provision in a collective bargaining agreement is not a restriction of the right of freedom of association guaranteed by the Constitution.Ernesto Verceles.The petitioners appealed to the Bureau of Labor Relations of the DOLE. ISSUE/S 1. August 31. and whether the decision to hold meetings and submit reports contradict and override the sovereign will of the majority. . willful and unlawful violation of UEEA constitution and by-laws. the legislative council increased the union dues from P21-P50 a month. ." They constituted a small minority for which reason they could not have successfully disaffiliated the local union from PAFLU.a complaint for illegal suspension. NO Reasoning The resolutiion does not bear the signature of at leasT 2/3 of the members of the council. the case shall be deemed submitted for resolution. . During the pendency of this appeal an election of officers was held by the UEEA. the OIC of Labor Relations overturned the judgment. 2005 form a new organization of their own..Med-Arbiter abdullah heard the cases and rendered judgment denying petitions to nullify the elections as well as the motion for contempt. therefore. Series of 1979 . complaints were filed with the Bureau of Labor Relations for its invalidation as excessive. and the delay in the proceedings before the DOLE-NCR was clearly attributable to them. et al. failure to disseminate the election ground rules and disregard of the temporary restraining order of the Med-Arbiter. Feb. Elizabeth Alarca. Thereafter. YES Reasoning The decision is sustained for failure of the record to disclose any grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Director in finding that the elections was tainted with irregularities and therefore invalid. prohibitive and arbitrary.a decision was rendered by Regional Director Lim. the fees to submit candidacy drastically increases. . Disposition The Order appealed from affirming the joint decision of the OIC granting clearance to terminate petitioners as well as dismissing their complaint with application for preliminary injunction. FACTS . adverse to petitioners . prevail over that of the minority members. 1988 NATURE Special civil action of certiorari (consolidated). Manalo are members of the University of the East Employees Association (UEEA). and Elvira S.Dir of Labor Relations rendered a decision revering that of the medarbiter by ordering te cessation of the collection of the P29 increase aned return the amounts already collected. Verceles said he was acting upon the disciplinary committee’s finding of a prima facie case against them. although some still paid the frees. the resolution increasing union dues is they're struck down as illegal and void. But this Court has laid down the ruling that a closed shop is a valid form of union security. Respondent Uy also received a similar memorandum.Due to the proceedings assailing the validity of the elections pending before the Bureau of Labor Relations.They each received a Memorandum from the UEEA charging them with spreading false rumors and creating disinformation among the members of the said association. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS 265 SCRA 239 NARVASA. WON the general elections for union officers is valid 2. is hereby AFFIRMED. ISSUES 1. WON the alleged non-holding of meetings and alleged nonsubmission of reports are moot and academic. . the complaint and the answer thereto were adopted as the parties’ position papers. arbitrary and oppressive. Jr. in his capacity as president of the association. The petitioners’ line of reasoning that since no position papers were submitted. . The action of the majority must.Labor Law 2 A2010 . no decision may be made by the adjudicating body cannot be accepted. 2. through a Memorandum. suffer the consequences of their separation from the union under the security clause of the CBA.72 - Disini VERCELES VS BLR 451 SCRA 338 CHICO-NAZARIO. Labor laws mandate the speedy disposition of cases. refusal to render financial and other reports. The argument that there was failure to exhaust administrative remedies cannot be sustained.In PLDT. . and only 96 signed the "Sama-Samang Kapasiyahan. was dismissed for lack of merit. WON it was erroneous to uphold the BLR-DOLE’s finding that the suspension was illegal 4. with the least attention to technicalities but without sacrificing the fundamental requisites of due process.Disaffiliation There are two hundred thirty four (234) union members in the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU.the petitioners filed a petition for review on certiorari before this Court. As ruled by Regional Director Lim in his decision. they must. WON the increase of the union dues is valid HELD 1. One of the instances when the rule of RODRIGUEZ V DIRECTOR. that their membership in the association has been suspended and shall take effect immediately upon receipt thereof. deliberate refusal to call general and special meetings. it cannot be said that there was a denial of due process on the part of the petitioners because they were given all the chances to refute the allegations of the private respondents. but invalidated the increaseof filing fees for for certificates of candidacies. the old officers continued to exercise the functions of their respective offices. The acts of the respondents allegedly fall under General Assembly Resolution No. It can be inferred that the majority wanted the union to remain an affiliate of PAFLU. Dalupan.

Prompt compliance in rendering financial reports together with the holding of regular meetings with the submission of the minutes thereon with the BLR-DOLE and DOLE-NCR shall negate any suspicion of dishonesty on the part of UEEA’s officers. pursuant to its constitution and by-laws and under the supervision of the Bureau of Labor Relations. abuse of authority. i. it was right in nullifying the election of officers. nothing was heard of petitioner’s complaint against private respondents on the latter’s alleged unauthorized and illegal disbursement of union funds. NO Ratio The election of UEEA officers cannot acquire a semblance of legality. to expel them from the Union. should have meted out the appropriate penalty on them. Reasoning Not only did petitioner fail to comply with Section 2. and not call for a referendum to decide the issue. he questioned the validity of his removal from office and in the second. March 7. as prayed for. Diamonon filed this case.Labor Law 2 A2010 . Reasoning If herein union officers (also petitioners) were guilty of the alleged acts imputed against them. Jan 21 1985 NATURE Petition to review FACTS . 10 and Resolution No. petitioners cannot be allowed to take an inconsistent position to later on claim that the election was held because it was already due while previously declaring that it was made in line with the order of the Regional Director. his removal was declared null and void. Remedy KAPISANAN NG MANGGAGAWANG PINAGYAKAP (KMP) vs. Third. but likewise with other unions/associations. while the BLR was wrong in affirming the order of the Regional Director for the immediate holding of election.Public respondent Director Trajano of the Bureau of Labor Relations directed the said Union to hold and conduct. if concurred in or accepted by the members. It was simply improper for the petitioners to implement the said order which was then one of the subjects of their appeal in the BLR. The obligation to hold meetings and render financial reports is mandated by UEEA’s constitution and by-laws. The 2nd complaint was dismissed for lack of personality in view of his removal from the offices he held. transparency in the official undertakings of union officers will bolster genuine trade unionism in the country.e. said public respondent pursuant to Article 242 of the New Labor Code and in the light of Our ruling in Duyag vs. The fact that they disbursed the amount of P1. Ratio The remedy against erring union officers is not referendum but union expulsion.278. 3. ISSUE WON respondent Laguesma acted with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the appeal for non-exhaustion of administrative remedies. he accused both the national treasurer and national president of NACUSIP and PACIWU (private respondents) for wanton violation of the Constitution and By-Laws of both orgs. are reasonable. . but also pursue it to its appropriate conclusion before seeking judicial intervention. DIAMONON v DOLE (LAGUESMA) 327 SCRA 282 De Leon. NO Ratio Petitioners have failed to show that the findings of facts and conclusions of law of both the DOLE-NCR and BLR-DOLE were arrived at with grave abuse of discretion or without substantial evidence. as undersecretary of DOLE. . Second. to vote for or against the expulsion or suspension of the herein petitioner union officers. 2000 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . was fatal.A party with an administrative remedy must not merely initiate the prescribed administrative procedure to obtain relief. the respondents have chronicled from the very beginning that they were indefinitely suspended without the benefit of a formal charge sufficient in form and substance. Disposition Petition DISMISSED. First. as this matter is imbued with public interest. NO Ratio The passage of General Assembly Resolution No. unauthorized and illegal disbursement of union funds and also.A petition was filed for the expulsion of the union officers of KMP on the ground of alleged falsification and misrepresentation.petitioner Diamonon filed 2 complaints before the DOLE after being removed from his capacity as vice president of the unions NACUSIP and PACIWU.. for this would go against the principle of fair play.73 - Disini exhaustion of administrative remedies may be disregarded is when there is a violation of due process. To hold otherwise would be to dispossess the BLR of its inherent power to control the conduct of the proceedings of cases pending before it for resolution. which supposedly cured the lapses committed by the association’s officers and reiterated the approval of the general membership of the acts and collateral actions of the association’s officers cannot redeem the petitioners from their predicament. TRAJANO 134 SCRA 236 RELOVA. that the administrative remedies provided for in the constitution and by-laws of both unions have been exhausted or . held that petitioner’s failure to show. Series of 2000. In the National Convention of PACIWU and NACUSIP. Diamonon appealed but public respondent Laguesma. This is not only true with UEEA. such remedies are not available. In his first complaint. In this case. 8. Rule VIII. DISPOSITION The Decision and Resolution of the CA affirmed. ISSUE WON the proper remedy against erring union officers is not referendum but union expulsion HELD YES. it was conducted pursuant to the aforesaid (erroneous) order of the Regional Director as manifested by the petitioners. the alleged falsification and misrepresentation of herein union officers were not supported by substantial evidence. a general membership meeting. Undeniably. they should be resorted to before recourse can be made to the appropriate administrative or judicial body. With his MFR denied. Ratio When the Constitution and By-Laws of Unions dictate the remedy for internal dispute. HELD No. Book V of the Implementing Rules of the Labor Code but also the record reveals that neither did he exhaust the remedies set forth by the Constitution and by-laws of both unions. A careful review of the pleadings reveals that the decision and resolutions of the concerned agencies were correctly anchored in law and on substantial evidence. the rule on exhaustion of administrative remedies cannot squarely apply to them. it was purposely done to pre-empt the resolution of the case by the BLR and to deprive private respondents their substantial right to participate in the election. The expenditures appeared to have been made in good faith and the amount spent for the purpose mentioned in the report. Therefore.00 from Union funds and later on was disallowed for failure to attach supporting papers thereon did not of itself constitute falsification and/or misrepresentation.the 1st complaint was decided in his favor. 4. Inciong. Thus. 2. However. in his complaint. His failure to seek recourse before the National convention on his complaint against private respondents taints his action with prematurity. .

Nature Relationship FILIPINO PIPE AND FOUNDRY CORP V NLRC. changed its name to Philippine Skylanders Employees Association . won in the certification election conducted among the rank and file employees of Philippine Skylanders. and allowed the former officers of PSEA-PAFLU to continue occupying their positions as elected officers PSEA-NCW. Lerum was absolved.National Congress of Workers (PSEA-NCW). a local union. -NLRC set aside decision for lack of merit in so far as NLU-TUCP and Lerum is concerned. -Filipino Pipe: NLRC erred in declaring that NLU-TUCP and Lerum are not primarily responsible. Reasoning In Liberty Cotton Mills Workers Union vs. 376 Several months later. a mother federation. instead. Art. in behalf of its local chapter. ISSUES 1. instead of protection. which is an independent and separate local union. the Philippine Skylanders Employees Association (PSEA). The pendency of an election protest involving both the mother federation and the local union did not constitute a bar to a valid disaffiliation. cannot act as the principal of respondent NLUTUCP. Fil Pipe moved to dismiss the complaint against FPWU-NLU. It will however be to err greatly against the Constitution if the desires of the federation would be favored over those of its members. local unions do not owe their creation and existence to the national federation to which they are affiliated but. WON the strike was illegal 2. to the will of their members. the Filipino Pipe Workers Union-National Labor Union (FPWU-NLU). and ordered NLU-TUCP to pay damages. Jan 31. 377 PSEA subsequently affiliated itself with the National Congress of Workers (NCW). pending settlement of the controversy. UNION AFFILIATION LOCAL AND PARENT UNION RELATIONS—ILO Convention No. NLU-TUCP. Liberty Cotton Mills. Parenthetically though. against Filipino Pipe and Foundry Corporation (Fil Pipe). join another national federation and subsequently enter into a collective bargaining agreement with its employer-company ISSUE/S WON PSEA. PSI through its personnel manager Francisco Dakila denied the request citing as reason PSEA's disaffiliation from PAFLU and its subsequent affiliation with NCW. If it were otherwise. and free also to renounce the affiliation upon the terms laid down in the agreement which brought such affiliation into existence. should be borne by NLU-TUCP and Lerum. there would be disregard and neglect of the lowly workingmen. those of the former must be preferred. PSEA could not validly separate from PAFLU. NOV 16. Policy considerations dictate that in weighing the claims of a local union as against those of a national federation. 381 Labor Arbiter declared PSEA's disaffiliation from PAFLU invalid and held PSI. . the FPWU-NLU staged a strike. Its rival union. alleging union busting and nonimplementation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. but before the conciliation was done. Yet the local unions remain the basic units of association. 380 PAFLU through Serafin Ayroso filed a complaint for unfair labor practice against PSI. because it is not a legitimate labor organization. -Fil Pipe filed petition to declare the strike illegal and for damages against FPWU-NLU. Philippine Skylanders Employees Association-WATU (PSEA-WATU) immediately protested the result of the election before the Secretary of Labor. Disposition Petition is granted. a local labor union affiliated with the Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions (PAFLU) September (PAFLU). its president Mariles Romulo and personnel manager Francisco Dakila. NLU-TUCP and Lerum. a notice of strike signed by its national president. PAFLU amended its complaint by including the elected officers of PSEA-PAFLU as additional party respondents. Also.74 - Disini DISPOSITION Resolution SET ASIDE and the petition for expulsion of herein union officers is DISMISSED for having been rendered moot and academic by the election of herein union officers in the general membership meeting/election. because FPWUNLU. Lerum. WON NLU-TUCP and Lerum are primarily responsible HELD . by collective action.Labor Law 2 A2010 . 87. PSEA sent PAFLU a notice of disaffiliation citing as reason PAFLU's supposed deliberate and habitual dereliction of duty toward its members. may validly disaffiliate from PAFLU pending the settlement of an election protest questioning its status as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of PSI's rank and file employees HELD YES. and that the company has lost its cause of action. the desires of the mother federation to protect its locals are not altogether to be shunned. Ayroso explained that with the dismissal of PSEA-WATU's election protest the time was ripe for the parties to enter into a collective bargaining agreement. PSEA-PAFLU and their respective officers guilty of unfair labor practice. 379 PAFLU Secretary General Serafin Ayroso wrote Mariles C. 5 1. Romulo requesting a copy of PSI's audited financial statement. They argued that the responsibility for the damages allegedly sustained by petitioner company on account of the illegal strike. the SC upheld the right of local unions to separate from their mother federation on the ground that as separate and voluntary associations. Atty. Later. The sole essence of affiliation is to increase. Inc. that FPWUNLU is a mere agent of respondent NLU-TUCP.A conciliation conference was set. (PSI).National Labor Union-Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (NLU-TUCP) filed w/ the Ministry of Labor and Employment. the common bargaining power of local unions for the effective enhancement and protection of their interests. 1999 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS . free to serve their own interests subject to the restraints imposed by the constitution and by-laws of the national federation. Affiliation: Purpose of Nature of Relations Purpose PHIL SKYLANDERS INC V NLRC (PAFLU) 375 SCRA 369 BELLOSILLO. -Labor Arbiter declared the strike illegal. 2002 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS 375 Nov 1993. Appeals were filed. 382 NLRC upheld the Decision of the Labor Arbiter and conjectured that since an election protest questioning PSEA-PAFLU's certification as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent was pending resolution before the Secretary of Labor. Inc. for having directly participated in aiding and abetting the illegal strike. LERUM 00 SCRA 00 PURISIMA. 378 On 17 March 1994 PSEA-NCW entered into a collective bargaining agreement with PSI which was immediately registered with DOLE.

The Adamson & Adamson Inc. 2) since respondent union and the unions of nonsupervisors in the same company are governed by the same constitution and by-laws of the national federation. YES Ratio The supervisory employees of an employer cannot join any labor organization of employees under their supervision but may validly form a separate organization of their own. Reasoning . . . the rank and file employees formed their own union. . Implementing Rules). the action for damages against its agent. Having thus dismissed the claim for damages against the principal. . the strike blatantly disregarded the prohibition on the doing of any act which may impede or disrupt the conciliation proceedings (see Sec 6) 2.The right of supervisors employees to organize under the Industrial Peace Act carries certain restrictions but the right itself may not be denied or unduly abridged. The same is true even if the local union is not a legitimate labor organization Reasoning The direct and primary responsibility for the damages fall on the local union FPWU. Nortel: notwithstanding affiliation. Inc. 1. Disposition Petition is dismissed. the salesmen's association and the Adamson and Adamson Independent Worker's Union with the same national federation (FFW) violates Section 3 of the Industrial Peace Act because: 1) it results in the indirect affiliation of supervisors and rank-and-file employees with one labor organization. Liberty Cotton Mills. free to serve the common interest of all its members subject only to the restraints imposed by the constitution and by-laws of the association. Effect-Legal Personality ADAMSON & ADAMSON V CIR (ADAMSON & ADAMSON SUPERVISORY UNION) 127 SCRA 268 GUTIERREZ.Notwithstanding affiliation. the strike staged by FPWU-NLU was baseless. FPWU-NLU. Supervisory Union (FFW) informed the petitioner Adamson & Adamson about its having organized on the same date that another union. Salesmen Association (FFW). WON a supervisor's union may affiliate with a federation with which unions of rank-and-file employees of the same employer are also affiliated) HELD 1.The inclusion of FFW in the registration is merely to stress that they are its affiliates at the time of registrations. Inc. Should affiliation be allowed. Disposition Petition is dismissed. the local union remained the basic unit free to serve the common interest of all its members. 1984 FACTS . a mere agent of FPWU-NLU which assisted the latter in filing the notice of strike. 2. January 31.The CIR held that the Adamson and Adamson. the Federation of Free Workers. Salesmen Association (FFW). WON Adamson and Adamson. Supervisor—Rank and File Union Affiliation Rule-Affiliation ADAMSON & ADAMSON V CIR (ADAMSON & ADAMSON SUPERVISORY UNION) 127 SCRA 268 GUTIERREZ. or its independence. acting for and in behalf of its affiliate. Reasoning . Supervisory Union (FFW) informed the petitioner Adamson & Adamson about its having organized on the same date that another union.Subsequently and during the pendency of the present petition. 2. Lerum. the union failed to serve the company a copy of the notice of strike (see Sec 3 Rule XXII. there is but one union. . . the local union remained the basic unit free to serve the common interest of all its members.The Adamson company argues that the affiliation of the respondent union of supervisors. 1984 FACTS . and not on respondent NLUTUCP. Being just an agent. YES -1st. Inc. this would violate the requirement of separateness of bargaining units under Section 12 of the Act because only one union will in fact represent both supervisors and rank-and-file employees of the petitioner. has no more leg to stand on and should also be dismissed. YES Ratio According to Elisco Elirol Labor Union vs. 3rd. also advised Adamson & Adamson that the rank and file salesmen had also formed their own union. the notice of strike filed by Lerum is deemed to have been filed by its principal. had the status of an agent while the local union remained the basic unit of the association. .The confusion seems to have stemmed from the prefix of FFW after the name of the local unions in the registration of both. the Adamson and Adamson Inc. naming it Adamson and Adamson Independent Workers (FFW). Supervisory Union (FFW) has the legal personality to supervisors of the petitioner corporation notwithstanding the affiliation of the rank and file union of the same company with the same labor federation 2. 2nd. Neither can it be construed that their personalities arc so merged with the mother federation that for one difference or another they cannot pursue their own ways ways. being the principal. Book V. and Atty. .Labor Law 2 A2010 . Supervisory Union (FFW) can legally represent supervisors of the petitioner corporation notwithstanding the affiliation of the rank and file union of the same company with the same labor federation.75 ISSUE Disini 1. It does not mean that said local unions cannot stand on their own. NO Ratio The mother union.In the case of Elisco Labot Union vs. the Adamson and Adamson Inc.There is nothing in the provisions of the Industrial Peace Act which provides that a duly registered local union affiliating with a national union or federation loses its legal personality. Nortel and Liberty Colton Mills Workers Union v. January 31. the local unions are separate and distinct units primarily designed to secure and maintain an equality of bargaining power between the employer and their employee-members in the economic struggle for the fruits of joint productive effort of labor and capital. in practical effect. also advised Adamson & Adamson that the rank and file salesmen had also formed their own union.The Adamson & Adamson Inc. .The respondents on the other hand argue that the supervisory employees of an employer may validly join an organization of the rank-and-file employees so long as the said rank and file employees are not under their supervision. and the association of the locals into the national union was in furtherance of the same end. 3) it would result in the respondent union's losing its independence because it becomes the alter ego of the federation. the FPWU-NLU. respondent NLU-TUCP.

The inclusion of FFW in the registration is merely to stress that they are its affiliates at the time of registrations. are more identified with the interests of the employer. the rank-and file employees are directly under the supervisors organized by one and the same federation. 1992 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS .The Adamson company argues that the affiliation of the respondent union of supervisors. Inc. Nortel and Liberty Colton Mills Workers Union v. The public respondent. WON a supervisor's union may affiliate with a federation with which unions of rank-and-file employees of the same employer are also affiliated) HELD 1. ATLAS LITHOGRAPHIC SERVICES.The Med-Arbiter issued an order in favor of the private respondent .The CIR held that the Adamson and Adamson. Accounting and Confidential Employees Association or ALSI-SAPPACEA-KAMPIL . Neither can it be construed that their personalities arc so merged with the mother federation that for one difference or another they cannot pursue their own ways ways. Production.The confusion seems to have stemmed from the prefix of FFW after the name of the local unions in the registration of both.The Court agreed with the petitioner's contention that a conflict of interest may arise in the areas of discipline.The petitioners. the rank and file employees formed their own union. . issued a resolution affirming the Med-Arbiter's order. Inc. . ISSUE 1. . . naming it Adamson and Adamson Independent Workers (FFW).Subsequently and during the pendency of the present petition.The petitioners appealed for the reversal of the order. 2) since respondent union and the unions of nonsupervisors in the same company are governed by the same constitution and by-laws of the national federation.The supervisory. Reasoning . a national labor organization. Supervisory. . there is but one union. production. when they recommend action implementing management policy or ask for the discipline or dismissal of subordinates.The respondents on the other hand argue that the supervisory employees of an employer may validly join an organization of the rank-and-file employees so long as the said rank and file employees are not under their supervision. 3) it would result in the respondent union's losing its independence because it becomes the alter ego of the federation.Notwithstanding affiliation. The performance of those functions may. . Should affiliation be allowed. run counter to the interests of the rank-and-file. the local unions are separate and distinct units primarily designed to secure and maintain an equality of bargaining power between the employer and their employeemembers in the economic struggle for the fruits of joint productive effort of labor and capital. . the rank-and-file employees in the Adamson case are not directly under the supervisors who comprise the supervisors' union. . Supervisory Union (FFW) can legally represent supervisors of the petitioner corporation notwithstanding the affiliation of the rank and file union of the same company with the same labor federation. The functions of supervisors. Second. or its independence. Inc. In the case at bar. in practical effect. . Liberty Cotton Mills.Respondent Kampil-Katipunan filed on behalf of the "supervisors" union a petition for certification election so that it could be the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of the supervisory employees. the Federation of Free Workers. In the area of bargaining. they identify with the interests of the employer and may act contrary to the interests of the rank-and-file. and the association of the locals into the national union was in furtherance of the same end. a local union of supervisory employees may be allowed to affiliate with a national federation of labor organizations of rank-and-file employees and which national federation actively represents its affiliates in collective bargaining negotiations with the same employer of the supervisors and in the implementation of resulting collective bargaining agreements. YES Ratio The supervisory employees of an employer cannot join any labor organization of employees under their supervision but may validly form a separate organization of their own. WON Adamson and Adamson. the salesmen's association and the Adamson and Adamson Independent Worker's Union with the same national federation (FFW) violates Section 3 of the Industrial Peace Act because: 1) it results in the indirect affiliation of supervisors and rank-and-file employees with one labor organization. V LAGUESMA 205 SCRA 12 GUTIERREZ. Disposition Petition is dismissed. Inc. . thus.The peculiar role of supervisors is such that while they are not managers. . Supervisory Union (FFW) has the legal personality to supervisors of the petitioner corporation notwithstanding the affiliation of the rank and file union of the same company with the same labor federation 2. ISSUE WON under Article 245 of the Labor Code. First. filed a motion for reconsideration but the same was denied.The petitioners opposed the private respondent's petition claiming that under Article 245 of the Labor Code the respondent cannot represent the supervisory employees for collective bargaining purposeless because the private respondent also represents the rank-and-file employees' union.In the case of Elisco Labot Union vs. the local union remained the basic unit free to serve the common interest of all its members. The needs of one are different from those of the other. in the event of a strike. the local union remained the basic unit free to serve the common interest of all its members. administrative personnel.The right of supervisors employees to organize under the Industrial Peace Act carries certain restrictions but the right itself may not be denied or unduly abridged. January 6. their interests cannot be considered identical. .Labor Law 2 A2010 . 2. the national federation might influence the supervisors' union to conduct a sympathy strike on the sole basis of affiliation. Nortel: notwithstanding affiliation. Administrative. Moreover. accounting and confidential employees of the petitioner Atlas Lithographic Services. are separate and distinct. Reasoning . .There is nothing in the provisions of the Industrial Peace Act which provides that a duly registered local union affiliating with a national union or federation loses its legal personality. collective bargaining and strikes. this would violate the requirement of separateness of bargaining units under Section 12 of the Act because only one union will in fact represent both supervisors and rank-and-file employees of the petitioner.The factual issues in the Adamson case are different from the present case. . YES Ratio According to Elisco Elirol Labor Union vs. . being recommendatory in nature. . the national union in the Adamson case did not . this petition for certiorari. (ALSI) affiliated with private respondent Kaisahan ng Manggagawang Pilipino. Inc. Personnel.The interests of supervisors on the one hand. and the rank-and-file employees on the other. however. . INC.The local union adopted the name Atlas Lithographic Services. in turn.Hence.Members of the supervisory union might refuse to carry out disciplinary measures against their co-member rank-and-file employees.76 - Disini . HELD NO. It does not mean that said local unions cannot stand on their own.

this petition for certiorari. on the other hand. the local union is actively represented by the national federation. . Their immediate professional relationship must be established. -Supervisory employees have the right to self-organization as do other classes of employees save only managerial ones. . The reason for the segregation of supervisory and rankand-file employees of a company with respect to the exercise of the right to self-organization is the difference in their interests. In fact. The intent of the law is clear especially where. -DOLE Regioin IV med-arbiter issued an order granting union's petition for certification election. as in the case at bar. v. HELD YES. -Private respondent Federation of Free Workers-DLSUMCCM Supervisory Union Chapter.If the intent of the law is to avoid a situation where supervisors would merge with the rank and-file or where the supervisors' labor organization would represent conflicting interests. Second. Although FFW-DLSUMCCMSUC and another union composed of rank-and-file employees of petitioner DLSUMCCM are indeed affiliated with the same national federation. Laguesma: To avoid a situation where supervisors would merge with the rank-and-file or where the supervisors' labor organization would represent conflicting interests. This conclusion is in accord with the policy that any limitation on the exercise by employees of the right to self-organization guaranteed in the Constitution must be construed strictly. Disposition Petition GRANTED. These consequences can obtain not only in cases where supervisory and rank-and-file employees in the same company belong to a single union but also where unions formed independently by supervisory and rank-and-file employees of a company are allowed to affiliate with the same national federation. The Court emphasizes that the limitation is not confined to a case of supervisors wanting to join a rankand-file local union.The prohibition against a supervisors' union joining a local union of rankand-file is replete with jurisprudence.77 - Disini actively represent its local chapters. just one union. it was the national federation. In the present case. the rank-and-file employees are directly under the authority of supervisory employees. is a labor organization composed of the supervisory employees of petitioner DLSUMCCM. -Adamson & Adamson.Labor Law 2 A2010 . petitioner DLSUMCCM has not presented any evidence showing that the rank-and-file employees composing the other union are directly under the authority of the supervisory employees. CIR: the fact that the two groups of workers are employed by the same company and the fact that they are affiliated with a common national federation are not sufficient to justify the conclusion that their organizations are actually just one. Supervisory employees are more closely identified with the employer than with the rank-and-file employees. the conflicting interests of these groups impair their relationship and adversely affect discipline. ISSUE WON unions formed independently by supervisory and rank-and-file employees of a company may validly affiliate with the same national federation. Disposition Petition dismissed COLLEGE OF MEDICINE V LAGUESMA 249 SCRA MENDOZA. Such a situation would obtain only where two conditions concur: First. . Thus: -Conformably with the constitutional mandate. -This petition was opposed by DLSUMCCM on the grounds that several employees who signed the petition for certification election were managerial employees and that the FFW-DLSUMCCMSUC was composed of both supervisory and rank-and-file employees in the company. the FFW. which initially filed a petition for certification in behalf of the respondent union. in reality. If supervisory and rank-and-file employees in a 3. then a local supervisors' union should not be allowed to affiliate with the national federation of union of rank-and-file employees where that federation actively participates in union activity in the company. What the law prohibits is their membership in a labor organization of rank-and-file employees or their joining a national federation of rank-and-file employees that includes the very local union which they are not allowed to directly join. company are allowed to form a single union. -The affiliation of two local unions in a company with the same national federation is not by itself a negation of their independence since in relation to the employer. then a local supervisors' union should not be allowed to affiliate with a national federation of unions of rank-and-file employees where that federation actively participates in union activities in the company. Hence. The prohibition extends to a supervisors' local union applying for membership in a national federation the members of which include local unions of rank-and-file employees. Local Union Disaffiliation Nature Right Disaffiliation VOLKSHCEL LABOR UNION V BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS 137 SCRA 42 PHIL. Art. 1998 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS -DLSUMCCM is a hospital and medical school at Dasmariñas. the supervisors will be comingling with those employees whom they directly supervise in their own bargaining unit. The latter filed on behalf of the former a petition for certification election among the supervisory employees of DLSUMCCM. -Atlas Lithographic Services Inc. LABOR ALLIANCE COUNCIL V BLR 75 SCRA 162 MALAYANG SAMAHAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA GREENFIELD V RAMOS 326 SCRA 428 Rule-Legality Act-Disaffiliation . Workers should be allowed the practice of this freedom to the extent recognized in the fundamental law. August 12. The framers of the Constitution intended to restore the right of supervisory employees to selforganization which had been withdrawn from them during the period of martial law. 245 of the Labor Code now provides for the right of supervisory employees to self-organization. Q: WON the rank-and-file employees of petitioner DLSUMCCM who compose a labor union are directly under the supervisory employees whose own union is affiliated with the same national federation (Federation of Free Workers) and whether such national federation is actively involved in union activities in the company so as to make the two unions in the same company. collective bargaining and strikes. subject to the limitation that they cannot join an organization of rank-andfile employees. the national federation is actively involved in union activities in the company. FFWDLSUMCCMSUC is a recognized local chapter of FFW. Cavite. the local unions are considered as the principals. the KAMPIL-KATIPUNAN. while the federation is deemed to be merely their agent.Supervisors are not prohibited from forming their own union. Inc. Ans: NO. v. DOLE USec Laguesma affirmed and denied MFR.

join another national federation and subsequently enter into a collective bargaining agreement with its employer-company ISSUE/S WON PSEA. the labor union crumble and fall. sow the seeds of dissension and strife within the union. be expelled. lest by its folly and inaction. or shall in any manner cease to be a member of the UNION. 389 Labor Arbiter declared PSEA's disaffiliation from PAFLU invalid and held PSI. Local Union Disaffiliation: Rule . Philippine Skylanders Employees Association-WATU (PSEA-WATU) immediately protested the result of the election before the Secretary of Labor. therefore. and allowed the former officers of PSEAPAFLU to continue occupying their positions as elected officers PSEA-NCW.YES Ratio That PAFLU had the authority to investigate petitioners on the charges filed by their co-employees in the local union and after finding them guilty as charged.Petitioners were members of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU.78 - Disini can be inferred that the majority wanted the union to remain an affiliate of PAFLU. . . INC 181 SCRA 173 ALEX FERRER V NLRC 224 SCRA 410 PHIL SKYLANDERS INC V NLRC (PAFLU) 375 SCRA 369 BELLOSILLO. expel them from the roll of membership of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU 2. pending settlement of the controversy. they thereby forfeit their rights to remain as members of the union which they seek to destroy. 1983 NATURE Petition for review by certiorari A2010 .Petitioners contend that their acts do not constitute disloyalty as these are in the exercise of their constitutional right to self-organization. 390 NLRC upheld the Decision of the Labor Arbiter and conjectured that since an election protest questioning PSEAPAFLU's certification as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent was pending resolution before the Secretary of Labor. Inc. and such provision in a collective bargaining agreement is not a restriction of the right of freedom of association guaranteed by the Constitution. April 20. It is implicit in the freedom of association ordained by the Constitution. It TROPICAL HUT EMPLOYEES UNION V TROPICAL HUT FOOD MARKET. and were not further authorizing PAFLU to represent them in any CBA. therefore. ISSUE/S 1. changed its name to Philippine Skylanders Employees Association . a duly registered labor organization which was the existing bargaining agent of the employees in private respondent Amigo Manufacturing. therefore. 2. suffer the consequences of their separation from the union under the security clause of the CBA.Legality act . The action of the majority must. PAFLU was justified in applying said security clause. When members of a labor union. reiterating the same clause in the old CBA.The PAFLU President then rendered a decision finding them guilty of the charges and expelling them from the Union and as a consequence the Management of the employer is hereby requested to terminate them from their employment in conformity with the security clause. is hereby AFFIRMED. a Resolution was approved which called for the investigation of all the petitioners for "continuously maligning. Inc.” ." They constituted a small minority for which reason they could not have successfully disaffiliated the local union from PAFLU. Prudence and equity. compelling mandate the adoption by the labor union of such corrective and remedial measures in keeping with its laws and regulations. the Philippine Skylanders Employees Association (PSEA). a local labor union affiliated with the Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions (PAFLU) September (PAFLU). thereafter. however. PAFLU amended its complaint by including the elected officers of PSEA-PAFLU as additional party respondents. libelling and slandering not only the incumbent officers but even the union itself and the federation" and for causing divisiveness.Labor Law 2 VILLAR V INCIONG 121 SCRA 44 GUERRERO. and only 96 signed the "Sama-Samang Kapasiyahan. for its preservation and continued existence.Disaffiliation There are two hundred thirty four (234) union members in the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU. is the right of self-preservation. FACTS . UNION-MEMBER RELATIONS: Discipline Issues Inherent in every labor union. 388 PAFLU through Serafin Ayroso filed a complaint for unfair labor practice against PSI. Disposition The Order appealed from affirming the joint decision of the OIC granting clearance to terminate petitioners as well as dismissing their complaint with application for preliminary injunction. shall be dismissed from his employment upon written request of the UNION to the Company. which is an independent and separate local union. to expel them from the roll of membership of the Amigo Employees Union-PAFLU is clear under the constitution of the PAFLU to which the local union was affiliated. . 387 PAFLU Secretary General Serafin Ayroso wrote Mariles C. 385 PSEA subsequently affiliated itself with the National Congress of Workers (NCW). YES Ratio Although they are entitled to disaffiliate from their union and form a new organization of their own.The union security clause was reincorporated in the new CBA: “any members who shall resign. WON PAFLU had the authority to investigate the petitioners and. may validly disaffiliate from PAFLU pending the settlement of an election . Reasoning Disaffiliation from a labor union is not open to legal objection.National Congress of Workers (PSEA-NCW). WON the petitioners were entitled to disaffiliate from the Union HELD 1. they must. 2002 NATURE Petition for certiorari FACTS 383 Nov 1993. when they seek the disintegration and destruction of the very union to which they belong. But this Court has laid down the ruling that a closed shop is a valid form of union security.During a special meeting of the Union. They then signed a joint resolution which stated that they were disaffiliating themselves as members of the PAFLU. Its rival union. its president Mariles Romulo and personnel manager Francisco Dakila. as well as the dictates of law and justice. 384 Several months later. PSEA sent PAFLU a notice of disaffiliation citing as reason PAFLU's supposed deliberate and habitual dereliction of duty toward its members. Romulo requesting a copy of PSI's audited financial statement. 386 On 17 March 1994 PSEA-NCW entered into a collective bargaining agreement with PSI which was immediately registered with DOLE. Jan 31. PSI through its personnel manager Francisco Dakila denied the request citing as reason PSEA's disaffiliation from PAFLU and its subsequent affiliation with NCW. won in the certification election conducted among the rank and file employees of Philippine Skylanders. or any organization for that matter. Ayroso explained that with the dismissal of PSEA-WATU's election protest the time was ripe for the parties to enter into a collective bargaining agreement. PSEA could not validly separate from PAFLU. And pursuant to the security clause of the new CBA. PSEA-PAFLU and their respective officers guilty of unfair labor practice. (PSI). prevail over that of the minority members.

there would be disregard and neglect of the lowly workingmen. instead of protection. The sole essence of affiliation is to increase. local unions do not owe their creation and existence to the national federation to which they are affiliated but. Yet the local unions remain the basic units of association. . Parenthetically though. Liberty Cotton Mills. Policy considerations dictate that in weighing the claims of a local union as against those of a national federation. by collective action. to the will of their members. those of the former must be preferred. the common bargaining power of local unions for the effective enhancement and protection of their interests. It will however be to err greatly against the Constitution if the desires of the federation would be favored over those of its members. the SC upheld the right of local unions to separate from their mother federation on the ground that as separate and voluntary associations. free to serve their own interests subject to the restraints imposed by the constitution and by-laws of the national federation.79 - Disini protest questioning its status as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent of PSI's rank and file employees HELD YES.Labor Law 2 A2010 . and free also to renounce the affiliation upon the terms laid down in the agreement which brought such affiliation into existence. Disposition Petition is granted. If it were otherwise. instead. Reasoning In Liberty Cotton Mills Workers Union vs. the desires of the mother federation to protect its locals are not altogether to be shunned. The pendency of an election protest involving both the mother federation and the local union did not constitute a bar to a valid disaffiliation. Inc.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful