MANILA MANDARIN EMPLOYEES UNION v. NLRC and MELBA C.

BELONCIO
G.R. No. 76989, 1987 Sep 29
GUTIERREZ, JR., J.

FACTS: Private respondent, Melba C. Beloncio, assistant head waitress at the hotel's
coffee shop, was expelled from the Manila Mandarin Employees Union for acts
allegedly inimical to the interests of the union. The charge of disloyalty against Beloncio
arose from her emotional remark to a waitress who happened to be a union steward,
"Wala akong tiwala sa Union ninyo." The remark was made in the course of a heated
discussion regarding Beloncio's efforts to make a lazy and recalcitrant waiter adopt a
better attitude towards his work. The union demanded the dismissal from employment
of Beloncio on the basis of the union security clause of their collective bargaining
agreement and the Hotel acceded by placing Beloncio on forced leave. the Labor Arbiter
held that the union was guilty of unfair labor practice when it demanded the separation
of Beloncio and the employer was ordered to reinstate her.

ISSUES: Is petitioner union is guilty of ULP by reason of the arbitrary use of the union
security clause in the CBA?

HELD: Yes. The Hotel would not have compelled Beloncio to go on forced leave were it
not for the union's insistence and demand to the extent that because of the failure of the
hotel to dismiss Beloncio as requested, the union filed a notice of strike with the
Ministry of Labor and Employment on the issue of unfair labor practice. Although the
CBA contained a union security clause or closed-shop agreement, it is, however,
stressed that such are also governed by law and by principles of justice, fair play, and
legality. Union security clauses cannot be used by union officials against an employer,
much less their own members, except with a high sense of responsibility, fairness,
prudence, and judiciousness.

A union member may not be expelled from her union, and consequently from her job,
for personal or impetuous reasons or for causes foreign to the closed-shop agreement
and in a manner characterized by arbitrariness and whimsicality. Beloncio was merely
trying her best to make a hotel bus boy do his work promptly and courteously so as to
serve hotel customers in the coffee shop expeditiously and cheerfully. Union
membership does not entitle waiters, janitors, and other workers to be sloppy in their
work, inattentive to customers, and disrespectful to supervisors. The Union should
have disciplined its erring and troublesome members instead of causing so much
hardship to a member who was only doing her work for the best interests of the
employer, all its employees, and the general public whom they serve.