Ruling + Ratio

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
YES, the employees are entitled in accordance with the provision of the
Fulache v ABS CBN Broadcasting
CBA.
Digest Author: PALATTAO
LB:
Doctrine: CBA coverage is not only a question of fact, but of law and contract.
AP: The petitioners are members of the appropriate bargaining unit because
FACTS: they are regular rank-and-file employees and do not belong to any of the
excluded categories.
1. Petitioners filed two separate complaints against ABSCBN for
regularization, unfair labor practice, and several money claims. Petitioners
Specifically, nothing in the records shows that they are supervisory or
were drivers, cameraman, teleprompters, editors, personal assistants, and
confidential employees; neither are they casual nor probationary employees. Most
VTR editors.
importantly, the labor arbiter’s decision of January 17, 2002 – affirmed all the way up
2. The petitioners alleged that ABS-CBN and the ABS-CBN Rank-and- File
to the CA level – ruled against ABS-CBN’s submission that they are independent
Employees Union executed a CBA where they had been excluded from
contractors. Thus, as regular rank-and-file employees, they fall within CBA
its coverage as ABS-CBN considered them temporary and not regular
coverage under the CBA’s express terms and are entitled to its benefits.
employees, in violation of the Labor Code.
We see no merit in ABS-CBN’s arguments that the petitioners are not
3. They claimed they had already rendered more than a year of service in
entitled to CBA benefits because: (1) they did not claim these benefits in their position
the company and, therefore, should have been recognized as regular
paper; (2) the NLRC did not categorically rule that the petitioners were members of the
employees entitled to security of tenure and to the privileges and
bargaining unit; and (3) there was no evidence of this membership.
benefits enjoyed by regular employees.
CBA coverage is not only a question of fact, but of law and contract.
4. They asked that they be paid overtime, night shift differential, holiday,
The factual issue is whether the petitioners are regular rank-and-file employees
and rest day and service incentive leave pay. They also prayed for an
of ABS-CBN. The tribunals uniformly answered this question in the affirmative.
award of moral damages and attorney’s fees.
From this factual finding flows legal effects touching on the terms and
5. ABS-CBN alleged that the petitioners’ services were contracted on various
conditions of the petitioners’ regular employment. This was what the labor arbiter
dates by its Cebu station as independent contractors/off camera talents, and
meant when he stated in his decision that "henceforth they are entitled to the benefits
they were not entitled to regularization in these capacities.
and privileges attached to regular status of their employment."
6. Thus, they are not entitled to the benefits granted under their collective
bargaining agreement
DISPOSITION: Petition is GRANTED.

DECISIONS
1. Labor Arbiter- petitioners were regular employees entitled to the benefits of
CBA
2. CA affirmed the LA decision

ISSUES:

W/N the petitioners are entitled to the benefits under the CBA