Employees Union of Bayer Phils, Federation of Free Workers, and Juanito Facundo v.

Bayer
Philippines, Lonishen (President)

FACTS: Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (EUBP), an affiliate of the Federation of Free Workers
(FFW), is the exclusive bargaining agent of all rank-and-file employees of Bayer Philippines (Bayer). In
1997, thru EUPB’s President Juanito Facundo, EUPB negotiated with Bayer a CBA. Not finding Bayer’s
9.9% wage-increase agreeable, EUPB declared and staged a strike prompting the Secretary of Labor to
assume jurisdiction over the dispute. Pending the dispute, Avelina Remigio and 27 other union
members, without authority from their union leaders, accepted the wage-increase proposal. EUPB’s
grievance committee questioned the move and reprimanded Remigio. The Secretary issued an arbitral
award ordering EUPB and Bayer to register the CBA, which was registered with the Industrial Relations
Division of the DOLE-NCR. Meanwhile, the rift between Facundo’s leadership and Remigio’s group
broadened. During a company-sponsored seminar, Remigio solicited signatures which aimed to: (1)
disaffiliate from FFW, (2) rename the union as Reformed Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (REUBP),
(3) adopt a new constitution and by-laws for the union, (4) abolish all existing officer positions in the
union and elect a new set of interim officers, and (5) authorize REUBP to administer the CBA between
EUBP and Bayer. The resolution was signed by 147 of 257 local union members. This would be the start
of a power tug-of-war between the two groups, with EUBP demanding that union dues be remitted to
them, and REUBP demanding that remittances be made to it, and that management stop transacting
with EUBP. EUPB then filed a case for ULP against Bayer for non-remittance of union dues. EUPB then
sent two letters to Bayer asking for grievance conference. Facundo did not attend, but sent two EUBP
officers to inform REUBP and management that a preventive mediation conference between the two
groups have been scheduled. The two groups failed to settle their issues before the NCMB. Facundo sent
two more letters two the management and Lonishen (company President) to discuss the failure to settle
issues but both requests remained unheeded. It was at this point, during the pendency of the first ULP
case, that Bayer decided to remit the accumulated dues to REUBP. EUBP then filed a complaint against
Remigio et. al. before the Industrial Relations Division of the DOLE complaining that their actions
endanger the life of the union. The first ULP case was dismissed because, according to the Labor
Arbiter, the root cause of the conflict was an intra-union conflict over which it had no jurisdiction.
Despite requests to renegotiate what was the current CBA at that time (1997-2001 CBA), management
instead opted to negotiate with Remigio’s group, and that the two agreed to sign a new CBA. EUBP
immediately filed an injunction with the NLRC asserting their authority as exclusive bargaining agent,
and included later in an amended complaint the issue of the gross violation of the CBA particularly the
contract bar rule because of management’s decision to negotiate with REUBP. The Regional Director of
the case filed before the Industrial Relations Division dismissed the case for failure to exhaust the reliefs
within the union and ordered the conduct of a referendum to determine which of the two groups should
be recognized as union officers. The BLR reversed this decision, but the ruling came late as the CBA
between Bayer and REUBP had already been signed and ratified at this point.

A second ULP was filed before the NLRC.

LA RULING: Dismissed because of lack of jurisdiction due to the issue involving an intra-union dispute.
NLRC Ruling: Also dismissed, together with the injunction on the same grounds.
CA Ruling: Affirmed the dismissal, and held that the employees had the right to change their bargaining
unit after the 5 year term of their CBA, provided it was done within the 60-day freedom period. APPEAL
TO THE SC: Petitioner’s Contention: Las & NLRC have jurisdiction because the primary issue is the ULP of
Bayer in contracting with REUBP. Respondent’s Contention: There is NO jurisdiction as the issues should
first have been ventilated with voluntary arbitrators.

ISSUE: Whether there is jurisdiction.

RULING: YES. The petitioners do not seek a determination of whether it is the Facundo group (EUBP) or
the Remigio group (REUBP) which is the true set of union officers. Instead, the issue raised pertained
only to the validity of the acts of management in light of the fact that it still has an existing CBA with
EUBP. The dismissal of the second ULP complaint was therefore erroneous. It must be remembered that
a CBA is entered into in order to foster stability and mutual cooperation between labor and capital. An
employer should not be allowed to rescind unilaterally its CBA with the duly certified bargaining agent it
had previously contracted with, and decide to bargain anew with a different group if there is no
legitimate reason for doing so and without first following the proper procedure. If such behavior would
be tolerated, bargaining and negotiations between the employer and the union will never be truthful
and meaningful, and no CBA forged after arduous negotiations will ever be honored or be relied upon.
When an employer proceeds to negotiate with a splinter union despite the existence of its valid CBA
with the duly certied and exclusive bargaining agent, the former indubitably abandons its recognition of
the latter and terminates the entire CBA. Respondents cannot claim good faith to justify their acts. They
knew that Facundo's group represented the dulyelected officers of EUBP. Moreover, they were
cognizant of the fact that even the DOLE Secretary himself had recognized the legitimacy of EUBP's
mandate by rendering an arbitral award ordering the signing of the 19972001 CBA between Bayer and
EUBP. Respondents were likewise well-aware of the pendency of the intra-union dispute case, yet they
still proceeded to turn over the collected union dues to REUBP and to effusively deal with Remigio. The
totality of respondents' conduct, therefore, reeks with anti-EUBP animus.