Associated Labor Unions v. NLRC G.R. No.

78441 and 75667 | December 20, 1991 Facts:

Petitioners entered into a CBA with Mobil Oil Philippines for a period of 3 years. However, within the 3 years the president of Mobil Oil Philippines (MOPI), Bailiux sent letters to its employees notifying them of the termination of their services because of the sale of the firm to Caltex. The employees accepted their checks for separation pay and sign quit claims under protest and subject to the outcome of this case. Petitioners are charging Mobil Oil Philippines and its president with unfair labor practice alleging that they violate the CBA by not officially informing them of the assignment of the CBA to Caltex. Labor Arbiter: Dismissed the case. There was really a sale to Caltex however no violation of the CBA was committed because as the record shows and from the admission of the union, the employees had knowledge of the impending sale and closure of the firm in a series of negotiations and meetings. Moreover, the said provisions of the CBA bind Caltex. NLRC: Dismissed the appeal of the Union.

Issue:

1.

WON Mobil Oil Philippines is guilty of unfair labor practice

Held/Ratio: NO. 1. No. Under Art. 283 of the Labor Code: o ART. 283. Closure of establishment and reduction of personnel. - The employer may also terminate the employment of any employee due to the installation of labor-saving devices, redundancy, retrenchment to prevent losses or the closing or cessation of operation of the establishment or undertaking unless the closing is for the purpose of circumventing the provisions of this Title, by serving a written notice on the workers and the Ministry of Labor and Employment at least one (1) month before the intended date thereof. In case of termination due to the installation of labor-saving devices or redundancy, the worker affected thereby shall be entitled to a separation pay equivalent to at least his one (1) month pay or to at least one (1) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher. In case of retrenchment to prevent losses and in cases of closures or cessation of operations of establishment or undertaking not due to serious business losses or financial reverses, the separation pay shall be equivalent to one (1) month pay or at least one-half (1/2) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher. A fraction of at least six (6) months shall be considered one (1) whole year. Art. 283 identifies 3 requirements in respect of cessation of business operations of an employer company not due to business reverses: o Service of a written notice to the employees and to the Ministry of Labor and Employment (MOLE) at least 1 month before the intended date thereof o The cessation of or withdrawal from business operations must be bona fide in character o Payment to the employees of termination pay amounting to at least month pay for each year of service or 1 month pay, whichever is higher MOPIs employees and the MOLE were notified in writing on August 5, 1983 that the service of the employees would terminate on August 31, 1983, but they would be paid their salaries and benefits until or as of September 5, 1983. The Court believes that there was more than substantial compliance with the requirement of notice. As for the third requirement, the pay package given by MOPI to its employees far exceeded the minimum requirement of the month pay for every year of service laid down in Art. 284. The generosity of MOPI shows that the closure due to cessation of business was a bona fide one.

Dispositive: WHEREFORE, the petitions for certiorari are DISMISSED.