Book
Five:
Labor
Relations,
Title
I:
Policy
and
Definition
 • Work
 stoppage,
 known
 as
 strike
 by
 employees
 or
 lockout
 by
 the


employer,
is
NOT
favored
by
law

Chapter
I:
Policy
 o BUT
it
is
recognized
as
a
legal
right
but
regulated
as
to
the

purpose
and
manner
of
doing
it

Article
211.
 o It
is
a
measure
of
last
resort

• Labor‐management
 relations
 in
 the
 private
 sector
 are
 inter‐party.

1. Overview
and
viewpoint
 This
 means
 that
 the
 employer
 and
 employees
 themselves
 must
 deal

• Labor
Standards
–
minimum
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
to
 with
their
problems
in
a
manner
most
comfortable
to
them

which
employees
are
legally
entitled
and
with
which
employers
must
 o “The
 principle
 behind
 labor
 unionism
 in
 private
 industry
 is

comply
 that
industrial
peace
cannot
be
secured
through
compulsion

• Labor
 Relations
 –
 interactions
 between
 employer
 and
 employees
 of
 by
law.
Relations
between
private
employers
and
employees

their
representatives
and
the
mechanism
by
which
the
standards
and
 rest
 on
 an
 essentially
 voluntary
 basis,
 subject
 to
 minimum

other
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 employment
 are
 negotiated,
 adjusted
 requirements.”
SSS
Employees
Assoc.
v.
CA

and
enforced
 • Grievance
 machinery
 or
 an
 in‐house
 problem‐solving
 structure
 is

o Distinction
 between
 standard
 and
 relation
 is
 academic;
 requirement
in
CBAs.

they
intertwine
and
are
not
mutually
exclusive
 o If
 this
 fails,
 parties
 are
 free
 to
 select
 any
 third
 party
 or
 a

• Government
 relations
 policy
 is
 declared
 in
 Article
 211
 which
 is
 a
 voluntary
arbitrator
to
resolve
their
differences

focused
 elaboration
 of
 the
 basic
 labor
 policy
 announced
 in
 Article
 3
 • Government
steps
in
only
when
parties
fail
to
reach
an
agreement
or

which,
in
turn,
echoes
the
constitutional
mandates
 when
one
disregards
the
defined
rights
of
the
other

• [In
 the
 private
 sector,]
 the
 crux
 of
 labor
 relations
 is
 the
 process
 and
 o Or
 dispute,
 whether
 it
 be
 a
 lockout,
 a
 strike,
 a
 picket,
 or

substance
 of
 employee
 participation
 
 how
 rights
 and
 duties
 are
 any
 form
 of
 “concerted
 activities,”
 violates
 the
 rights
 of

exercised,
 how
 agreements
 are
 reached,
 and
 how
 relationship
 is
 others
or
is
accompanied
by
violence
or
other
illegal
acts

enhanced
 o Injunctive
power
of
the
State
may
be
invoked

o The
 process
 starts
 when
 workers
 organize
 themselves
 • Laws,
 as
 a
 force
 that
 balances
 the
 parties’
 rights
 and
 obligations,
 are

into
a
union
or
association.
 necessary

 They
may
or
may
not
register
their
organization.
 o Civil
Code
in
Article
1700:
the
relations
between
capital
and

 Registration
 =
 certain
 rights
 that
 are
 legally
 labor
are
not
merely
contractual
and
they
are
so
impressed

demandable,
such
as
the
right
to
bargain
as
a
group
 with
 public
 interest
 that
 labor
 contracts
 must
 yield
 to
 the

• Labor
 organization
 must
 be
 democratically
 governed
 and
 free
 from
 common
good

employer’s
interference
 • Industrial
or
labor
relations
are
human
relations

• If
 the
 employer
 tries
 to
 interfere
 with
 the
 workers’
 organizational
 2. Workers’
Organization

rights,
 he
 commits
 “unfair
 labor
 practice”
 (ULP)
 which
 may
 trigger
 a
 • Labor
or
trade
union
is
a
combination
of
workmen
organized
for
the

strike
or
work
stoppage.
 ultimate
purpose
of
securing
through
united
action
the
most
favorable

o But
 a
 union
 cannot
 strike
 over
 intra
 or
 inter‐union
 conditions
 as
 regards
 wages,
 hours
 of
 labor,
 conditions
 of

disputes
 employment,
etc.,
for
its
members

• Main
objective
of
the
union
is
to
represent
to
the
employer
the
needs
 • In
 a
 popular
 sense,
 it
 is
 a
 completely
 organized
 body
 of
 dues‐paying

or
interest
of
the
employees,
the
employees
should
speak
as
one
voice,
 members,
 operating
 through
 elected
 officers
 and
 constituting
 a

and
hence
they
need
one
union
as
their
representative
 militant,
vital
and
functioning
organ.

o If
 there
 is
 union
 rivalry,
 rivalry
 is
 resolved
 through
 an
 • It
may
be
said
that
while
every
labor
union
is
a
labor
organization,
not

election
with
or
without
DOLE
intervention
 every
labor
organization
is
a
labor
union.

• Once
 there
 is
 a
 representative,
 the
 employer’s
 and
 employees’
 3. Why
workers
organize

representatives
meet
and
talk
over
proposals
and
counter‐proposals
 • Workers
 organize
 because
 of
 the
 human
 drive
 toward
 self‐
• The
agreement,
when
reached,
is
embodied
in
a
labor
contract
called
 advancement

the
collective
bargaining
agreement
(CBA)
 • One
of
the
basic
purposes
of
a
labor
union
is
to
eliminate
competition

o CBA
 must
 be
 ratified
 by
 the
 employees
 and
 registered
 among
employees
in
the
labor
market.
It
seeks
to
exercise
the
power

with
the
DOLE
 of
 a
 monopolist.
 The
 large
 corporation
 diminished
 the
 bargaining

o If
unregistered,
it
is
valid
and
binding
between
the
parties
 power
of
the
individual
worker
to
such
an
extent
that
talk
of
freedom

o Its
 economic
 provisions
 are
 renegotiated
 not
 later
 than
 3
 of
individual
contract
became
an
empty
slogan

years,
 while
 the
 union
 representation
 stays
 undisturbed
 • Three
other
human
desires
that
led
workers
to
organize:

for
5
years
 o Desire
for
job
security

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 1

 o Employees
 wished
 to
 substitute
 “the
 rule
 of
 law”
 for
 the
 report
 for
 work
 to
 the
 superintendent
 in
 charge
 who

arbitrary
 and
 often
 capricious
 exercise
 of
 power
 by
 the
 issued
 them
 gate
 passes.
 They
 were
 paid
 on
 a
 piece‐rate

boss
 basis.
 They
 organized
 themselves
 into
 a
 union
 and
 aired

o Unions
 helped
 to
 give
 employees
 a
 sense
 of
 participation
 grievances.
 SMC
 refused
 to
 bargain
 with
 them,
 claiming

in
 the
 business
 enterprises
 of
 which
 they
 are
 part
 –
 a
 that
they
were
not
its
employees

function
 of
 labor
 unions
 which
 became
 important
 as
 o Considering
the
length
of
time
the
petitioners
have
worked,

organizations
spread
into
mass
production
industries
 it
 may
 be
 concluded
 that
 they
 were
 engaged
 to
 perform

• Unlawful
for
workmen
to
combine
and
to
control
the
business
of
the
 activities
 necessary
 or
 desirable
 in
 the
 usual
 business
 or

employer
in
matters
not
affecting
the
terms
of
their
own
hiring
 trade
 of
 SMC
 and
 that
 petitioners
 are
 therefore
 regular

4. ILO
Convention
No.
87
 employees.
Continuity
and
habituality
of
their
work
bolster

• Article
 2
 –
 Workers
 and
 employers
 without
 distinction
 shall
 have
 the
 their
claim
of
employee
status.
No
labor­contracting
as
well,

right
 to
 establish
 and,
 subject
 only
 to
 the
 rules
 of
 the
 organization
 because
there
is
a
labor­only
contracting
scheme
only.

concerned,
to
join
organizations
of
their
own
choosing
without
previous
 2. Who
are
employees

authorization
 • The
term
employee:

• Article
 3
 –
 (1)
 Workers’
 and
 employers’
 organizations
 shall
 have
 the
 o Shall
include
any
employee

right
 to
 draw
 up
 their
 constitutions
 and
 rules,
 to
 elect
 their
 o And
shall
not
be
limited
to
the
employee
of
any
particular

representatives
 in
 full
 freedom,
 to
 organize
 their
 administration
 and
 employer,
unless
the
Act
explicitly
states
otherwise

activities
and
to
formulate
their
programmes.
(2)
The
public
authorities
 o And
shall
include
any
individual

shall
 refrain
 from
 an
 interference
 which
 would
 restrict
 this
 right
 or
  Whose
work
has
ceased
as
a
consequence
of,
or
in

impede
the
lawful
exercise
thereof.
 connection
with,
any
current
labor
dispute

• Article
8
–
(1)
In
exercising
the
rights
provided,
workers
and
employers
  And
 who
 has
 not
 obtained
 any
 substantially

and
 their
 respective
 organizations,
 like
 other
 persons
 or
 organized
 equivalent
and
regular
employment

collectivities,
 shall
 respect
 the
 law
 of
 the
 land.
 (2)
 The
 law
 of
 the
 land
 • The
term
employee
is
not
limited
to
those
of
a
particular
employer

shall
no
be
such
as
to
impair,
nor
shall
it
be
so
applied
as
to
impair,
the
 • “The
term
employer
 
one
who
employs
the
services
of
others;
one
for

guarantees
provided
for.
 whom
 employees
 work
 and
 who
 pays
 their
 wages
 or
 salaries.”
 Angat

5. Workers’
participation
in
policy­making
 River
Irrigation
System
v.
Angat
River
Worker’s
Union

• Participatory
or
consultative
management
is
no
longer
just
a
theory
or
 • Definitions
under
D.O.
No.
40­03

variety
of
management
style.
It
is
a
matter
of
law
because
the
right
of
 o Employee
 –
 any
 person
 working
 for
 an
 employer.
 It

employees
 to
 participate
 in
 policy‐
 or
 decision‐making
 on
 matters
 includes
 one
 whose
 work
 has
 ceased
 in
 connection
 with

affecting
 their
 rights,
 duties,
 benefits
 or
 welfare
 is
 guaranteed
 in
 the
 any
 current
 labor
 dispute
 or
 because
 of
 any
 unfair
 labor

Constitution
 and
 reinforced
 in
 the
 Labor
 Code
 and
 Supreme
 Court
 practice
 and
 one
 who
 has
 been
 dismissed
 from
 work
 but

rulings.
 the
legality
of
the
dismissal
is
being
contested
in
a
forum

of
appropriate
jurisdiction


 o Employer
–
any
person
or
entity
who
employs
the
services

of
 others,
 one
 for
 whom
 employees
 work
 and
 who
 pays

Chapter
II:
Definitions
 their
 wages
 or
 salaries.
 It
 includes
 any
 person
 directly
 or

indirectly
 acting
 in
 the
 interest
 of
 an
 employer.
 It
 shall

Article
212.
 also
 refer
 to
 the
 enterprise
 where
 a
 labor
 organization

operates
or
seeks
to
operate

1. Employer­employee
relationship
essential
 • The
 nature
 of
 a
 labor
 dispute
 does
 not
 require
 that
 the
 disputants

• No
 employer‐employee
 relationship,
 no
 basis
 for
 organizing
 for
 should
 stand
 in
 the
 proximate
 relation
 of
 employer
 and
 employee,

purposes
of
collective
bargaining
 with
 consequent
 protection
 of
 concerted
 activities
 carried
 out
 by

• Elements:
 many
persons
belonging
to
several
employers

o Selection
and
engagement
of
the
employee
 3. “One
Whose
Work
Has
Ceased…”

o Payment
of
wages
 • Rothenberg:
participation
of
an
employee
in
a
strike
does
not
remove

o Power
to
dismiss
 him
from
the
status
of
“employee”

o Power
to
control
the
employee’s
conduct
 • Cessation
 of
 work
 due
 to
 strike
 or
 lockout,
 or
 to
 dismissal
 or

• Brotherhood
Labor
Unity
Movement
of
the
Philippines
v.
Zamora
 suspension
 constituting
 unfair
 labor
 practices,
 does
 not
 itself
 affect

o Petitioners
were
workers
at
the
San
Miguel
plant,
working
 the
 “employee”
 status
 
 the
 rights
 and
 benefits
 of
 the
 employee
 are

as
cargadores
or
pahinantes,
seven
years
of
service.
They

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 2

 protected
 as
 though
 there
 had
 been
 no
 interruption
 of
 service,
 o Nature
 –
 arises
 from
 employer‐employee
 relationship,

effective
upon
actual
return
to
work.
 although
disputants
need
not
be
proximately
employee
or

• Generally,
 upon
 reinstatement
 of
 one
 whose
 dismissal
 constituted
 employer
of
the
other

unfair
labor
practice,
he
is
entitled
to
backwages,
seniority
and
other
 o Subject
matter
–
(1)
terms
or
conditions
of
employment
or

rights,
 in
 order
 to
 make
 whole
 his
 loss
 as
 a
 result
 of
 the
 employer’s
 (2)
 association
 or
 representation
 of
 persons
 in

unlawful
act.
 negotiating,
 fixing,
 maintaining,
 or
 changing
 terms
 or

4. Labor
organization
as
employer
 conditions
of
employment

• A
labor
organization
may
be
deemed
an
employer
when
it
is
acting
as
 • Kinds
of
labor
disputes

such
in
relation
to
persons
rendering
services
under
hire,
particularly
 o Labor
standards
disputes

in
connection
with
its
activities
for
profit
or
gain.
An
organization
may
  Compensation

be
ostensibly
a
labor
union,
but
it
may
attain
the
status
of
an
ordinary
  Benefits

business
concern
in
the
pursuit
of
a
particular
line
of
business.
  Working
conditions

5. Labor
dispute
 o Labor
relations
disputes

• The
test
of
whether
a
labor
controversy
comes
within
the
definition
of
  Organizational
Right
Dispute/ULP

a
 labor
 dispute
 depends
 on
 whether
 it
 involves
 or
 concerns
 terms,
  Representation
Disputes

conditions
of
employment
or
representation
  Bargaining
Disputes

• Any
 bona
 fide
 controversy
 concerning
 wage,
 hours
 or
 conditions
 of
  Contract
 Administration
 or
 Personnel
 Policy

work
or
representation
constitutes
a
labor
dispute
 Disputes

• Even
 the
 question
 of
 employer‐employee
 relationship
 can
 be
  Employment
Tenure
Disputes

considered
a
labor
dispute
 • Remedies
in
labor
disputes

• San
Miguel
Corporation
Employees
union
v.
Bersamina

 o Grievance
Procedure

o San
 Miguel
 entered
 into
 contracts
 with
 Lipercon
 and
 o Conciliation
(literally
means
to
draw
together)

D’Rite
 which
 are
 independent
 contractors.
 It
 was
 agreed
 o Mediation
(literally
means
to
be
in
the
middle)

that
 the
 workers
 would
 not
 be
 considered
 employees
 or
 o Enforcement
or
compliance
order

agents
 of
 SMC.
 The
 CBA
 with
 the
 Union
 provided
 that
 o Certification
of
bargaining
representatives

temporary
 or
 contractual
 employees
 are
 excluded
 from
 o Arbitration

the
 bargaining
 unit.
 Yet,
 some
 of
 the
 contractual
  Voluntary
–
award
is
final
and
unappealable
except

employees
 joined
 the
 Union
 and
 asked
 to
 be
 treated
 as
 through
certiorari

SMC
employees.
SMC
filed
with
the
RTC.
The
Union
argued
  Compulsory
 –
 appealable
 to
 the
 NLRC,
 then
 to
 the

that
the
controversy
involved
a
labor
dispute
and
was
thus
 CA,
thru
special
civil
action
of
certiorari

beyond
the
regular
court’s
jurisdiction
 o Assumption
of
jurisdiction

o A
 labor
 dispute
 exists.
 While
 it
 is
 SMC’s
 submission
 that
 o Certification
to
NLRC

there
 is
 no
 employer­employee
 relationship
 exists,
 a
 labor
 o Injunction

dispute
 can
 nevertheless
 exist
 “regardless
 of
 whether
 the
 o Judicial
Action

disputants
 stand
 in
 the
 proximate
 relationship
 of
 employer
 o Appeal

and
 employee”,
 provided
 the
 controversy
 concerns,
 among
 o Review
by
court

others,
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
or
a
change
 o Compromise
agreement

of
 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.
 Title
II:
National
Labor
Relations
Commission

o Terms,
 tenure
 and
 conditions
 of
 the
 employment
 and
 the

arrangement
of
those
terms
are
thus
involved,
bringing
the
 Chapter
I:
Creation
and
composition

matter
within
the
purview
of
a
labor
dispute.

6. Labor
Disputes
and
Remedies:
A
summary
 Article
213.

• Labor
 dispute
 –
 any
 controversy
 or
 matter
 concerning
 terms
 or

conditions
 of
 employment
 or
 the
 association
 or
 representation
 of
 Article
214.

persons
in
negotiating,
fixing,
maintaining,
changing
or
arranging
the

terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 employment,
 regardless
 of
 whether
 the
 NLRC:
Nature
and
Organization

disputants
stand
in
the
proximate
relation
of
employer
and
employee

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 3

 1. Creation
and
autonomy
 • Division
 is
 a
 legally
 entity,
 not
 the
 persons
 who
 sit
 in
 it;
 an
 individual

• Before
 the
 Labor
 Code
 
 labor
 court
 was
 the
 Court
 of
 Industrial
 commissioner
has
no
adjudicatory
power

Relations
(CIR)
 • Resolution
 on
 a
 motion
 for
 reconsideration
 is
 valid
 even
 if
 the

• When
martial
law
was
declared

CIR
abolished
and
replaced
with
an
 commissioners
 that
 passed
 the
 resolution
 are
 not
 the
 same

ad
hoc
National
Labor
Relations
Commission
 commissioners
who
made
the
decision
sought
to
be
reconsidered

o This
 NLRC
 was
 short‐lived
 and
 was
 replaced
 with
 the
 • Nothing
 irregular
 in
 temporary
 designation
 of
 a
 commissioner
 to
 a

NLRC
created
by
the
Labor
Code
 division

2. Administrative
Supervision
delegated
to
the
DOLE
Secretary
 • Territorial
 divisions
 do
 not
 confer
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 to
 each

• While
 Article
 213
 specifically
 states
 “for
 program
 coordination
 only”,
 division
and
are
merely
designated
for
administrative
efficiency

GMA
released
Executive
Order
No.
204
which
delegated
to
the
Secretary
 6. 2005
Revised
Rules
of
Procedure
of
the
NLRC

of
 Labor
 “administrative
 supervision
 over
 the
 NLRC,
 its
 regional
 • Govern
 proceedings
 before
 labor
 arbiters,
 NLRC
 divisions,
 NLRC
 en

branches
and
all
its
personnel”

 banc

o It
 cited
 two
 objectives:
 (1)
 to
 further
 improve
 the
 rate
 of

disposition
of
cases
and
(2)
to
enhance
existing
measures
 Article
215.

for
the
prevention
of
graft
and
corruption
in
the
NLRC

• The
Secretary
was
tasked
to:
 1. NLRC
 commissioner
 is
 “subject
 to
 confirmation
 by
 the
 COA”
 has
 NO

o Enhance
 existing
 measures
 within
 the
 agency,
 or
 initiate
 constitutional
bases
and
is
therefore
null
and
void.

new
 ones,
 to
 prevent
 graft
 and
 corruption,
 and
 including

such
 measures
 as
 management
 audit,
 performance
 Article
216.

evaluations
and
inspections
to
determine
compliance
with

policies,
standards,
and
guidelines
 

o To
 investigate,
 on
 its
 own
 or
 upon
 complaint,
 matters

invoking
 disciplinary
 action
 against
 any
 presidential
 Chapter
II:
Powers
and
Duties

appointees
 in
 the
 NLRC
 in
 accordance
 with
 existing
 law

and
regulations
 Part
1.
Jurisdiction

• RA
9347
is
incorporated
in
Articles
213‐216

o It
reiterates
that
NLRC
is
attached
to
DOLE
“solely”
 Article
217.
Jurisdiction
of
Labor
Arbiters
and
the
Commission

3. Essential
character

• The
 National
 Labor
 Relations
 Commission
 continues
 to
 act
 collegially,
 ‐
Unfair
labor
practice
cases

whether
 it
 performs
 administrative
 or
 rule‐making
 functions
 or
 ‐
Termination
disputes

exercises
appellate
jurisdiction
to
review
decisions
and
final
orders
of
 ‐
If
accompanied
with
a
claim
for
reinstatement,
cases
that
workers
may
file

involving
wages,
rates
of
pay,
hours
of
work
and
other
terms
and
conditions

the
Labor
Arbiters

of
employment

4. Tripartite
Composition

‐ Claims
 for
 actual,
 moral,
 exemplary
 and
 other
 forms
 of
 damages
 arising

• Chairman
and
23
members
composing
the
NLRC
shall
be
chosen
from

from
employer‐employee
relations

the
workers,
employers
and
the
public
sectors

‐ Cases
 arising
 from
 any
 violation
 of
 Article
 264
 of
 this
 Code,
 including

• Members
 nominated,
 once
 assume
 office,
 by
 the
 workers
 and

questions
involving
the
legality
of
strikes
and
lockouts

employers
 organization
 shall
 divest
 themselves
 of
 any
 affiliation
 with

‐ Except
 claims
 for
 Employees
 Compensation,
 Social
 Security,
 Medicare
 and

or
interest
in
the
federation
or
association
to
which
they
belong

maternity
 benefits,
 all
 other
 claims,
 arising
 from
 employee
 relations,

• Appointee
 to
 a
 vacancy
 should
 be
 a
 nominee
 of
 the
 sector
 that

including
 those
 of
 persons
 in
 domestic
 or
 household
 service,
 involving
 an

nominated
the
predecessor

amount
 exceeding
 5k
 regardless
 of
 whether
 accompanied
 with
 a
 claim
 for

5. Allocation
of
powers
between
NLRC
en
banc
and
its
divisions

reinstatement

• Commission
 shall
 sit
 en
 banc
 only
 for
 purposes
 of
 promulgating
 rules

and
 regulations
 governing
 the
 hearing
 and
 disposition
 of
 cases
 before
 1. Additional
cases

any
 of
 its
 divisions
 and
 regional
 branches
 and
 formulating
 policies
 • Money
 claims
 arising
 out
 of
 employer‐employee
 relationship
 or
 by

affecting
its
administration
and
operations
(RA
6517
and
RA
9347)
 virtue
 of
 any
 law
 or
 contract,
 involving
 Filipino
 workers
 for
 overseas

• RA
 7700
 requires
 an
 en
 banc
 decision
 so
 that
 a
 case
 within
 the
 deployment,
 including
 claims
 for
 actual,
 moral,
 exemplary
 and
 other

jurisdiction
 of
 one
 division
 may
 be
 heard
 and
 decided
 by
 another
 forms
of
damages,
as
well
as
employment
termination
of
OFWs

division
whose
docket
can
accommodate
the
additional
workload
 • Wage
 distortion
 disputes
 in
 unorganized
 establishments
 not

• Appointment
 of
 a
 labor
 arbiter
 by
 the
 President
 needs
 a
 voluntarily
settled
by
the
parties

recommendation
of
the
Commission
en
banc

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 4

 • Enforcement
of
compromise
agreements
when
there
is
non‐compliance
 the
 inevitable
 conclusion
 is
 that
 the
 NLRC
 is
 without

by
any
of
the
parties
 jurisdiction
to
hear
and
decide
the
case.

• Other
cases
as
may
be
provided
by
law
 • Supervisory
control,
crucial

2. Compulsory
arbitration
by
labor
arbiters
 o Control
 over
 the
 performance
 of
 the
 work
 is
 the
 crucial

• Arbitration
 is
 the
 reference
 of
 a
 dispute
 to
 an
 impartial
 third
 person,
 indicator
 of
 employment
 relationship,
 without
 which
 the

chosen
by
the
parties
or
appointed
by
statutory
authority
to
hear
and
 labor
arbiter
has
no
jurisdiction
over
the
dispute

decide
the
case
in
controversy
 o RTC
 that
 has
 jurisdiction
 if
 no
 employer‐employee

• Compulsory
 Arbitration
 
 when
 consent
 of
 one
 of
 the
 parties
 is
 relationship
 and
 no
 issue
 involved
 refers
 to
 the
 Labor

enforced
by
statutory
provisions
 Code
or
other
labor
statutes

o Process
 of
 settlement
 of
 labor
 disputes
 by
 a
 government
 4. Venue

agency
which
has
the
authority
to
investigate
and
to
make
 • Section
1,
NLRC
Rules
of
Procedure

an
award
which
is
binding
on
all
the
parties
 o Regional
 Arbitration
 Branch
 having
 jurisdiction
 over
 the

• NLRC
appellate
proceedings
not
part
of
arbitration
 workplace
of
the
complainant
or
petitioner


o Labor
 arbiters
 decisions
 are
 appealable
 to
 the
 NLRC
 o Workplace
 is
 place
 or
 locality
 where
 the
 employee
 is

sitting
as
any
of
its
8
divisions
 regularly
assigned
at
the
time
the
cause
of
action
arose

o It
is
the
labor
arbiter
who
is
clothed
with
the
authority
to
 o Field
 employees
 and
 ambulant
 or
 itinerant
 workers,

conduct
 compulsory
 arbitration
 on
 cases
 involving
 workplace
 is
 where
 they
 are
 regularly
 assigned
 or
 where

termination
disputes
and
others
mentioned
 they
 are
 supposed
 to
 be
 regularly
 receive
 their
 salaries

o Proceedings
 on
 appeal
 before
 the
 NLRC
 can’t
 be
 and
 wages
 or
 work
 instructions
 from
 and
 report
 the

considered
part
of
the
arbitration
proceedings
 results
of
their
assignments
to
their
employers

o When
the
Labor
Arbiter
renders
his
decision,
compulsory
 o If
 2
 or
 more
 Regional
 Arbitration
 Branches
 have

arbitration
is
deemed
terminated
 jurisdiction,
then
the
one
that
first
acquired
jurisdiction

o The
 NLRC
 en
 banc
 merely
 reviews
 the
 labor
 arbiter’s
 o When
venue
is
not
objected
to
before
the
filing
of
position

decision
for
errors
of
fact
or
law
and
no
longer
duplicates
 papers,
such
issue
shall
be
deemed
waived

the
proceedings
before
the
labor
arbiter
 o Venue
 of
 an
 action
 may
 be
 changed
 or
 transferred
 to
 a

• Nature
of
proceedings
 different
 Regional
 Arbitration
 Branch
 by
 written

o Proceedings
before
the
labor
arbiter
are
non‐litigious
 agreement
 of
 the
 parties
 or
 when
 the
 Commission
 or

o Procedure
 in
 regular
 courts
 do
 not
 apply
 in
 NLRC/labor
 Labor
Arbiter
orders

arbiter
proceedings
 o Cases
involving
OFWs,
filed
with
the
Regional
Arbitration

• Article
217
yields
to
Articles
261
and
262
 Branch
 having
 jurisdiction
 over
 the
 place
 where
 the

o Any
or
all
of
these
cases
can,
by
agreement
of
the
parties,
 complainant
resides
or
where
the
principal
office
of
any
of

be
 presented
 to
 and
 decided
 with
 finality
 by
 a
 voluntary
 the
 respondents
 is
 situated,
 at
 the
 option
 of
 the

arbitrator
or
panel
of
voluntary
arbitrators
 complainant

o In
 other
 words
 a
 case
 under
 Article
 217
 may
 be
 lodged
 • Worker’s
option

instead
with
a
voluntary
arbitrator
despite
the
seemingly
 o Dayag
v.
Canizares,
NLRC
and
Young
Construction

“exclusive”
jurisdiction
of
the
labor
arbiter
  Question
 of
 venue
 essentially
 pertains
 to
 the
 trial

3. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction,
in
general
 and
relates
more
to
the
convenience
of
the
parties

• Hawaiian­Philippine
Company
v.
Gulmatico
 rather
 than
 upon
 the
 substance
 and
 merits
 of
 the

o Union
 of
 sugar
 farm
 workers
 filed
 with
 the
 NLRC
 a
 case.
 The
 provisions
 on
 venue
 are
 intended
 to

complaint
 against
 Hawaiian‐Philippine
 for
 claims
 under
 assure
convenience
for
the
plaintiff
and
his
witness

the
Sugar
Act
of
1952
 and
to
promote
the
ends
of
justice

o Petitioner
contended
that
there
is
no
employer‐employee
  The
 worker,
 being
 the
 economically­disadvantaged

relationship
 between
 the
 company
 and
 farmworkers
 party
 –
 whether
 as
 complainant/petitioner
 or
 as

represented
by
the
union
 respondent,
 as
 the
 case
 may
 be
 –
 the
 nearest

o The
 dispute
 in
 controversy
 falls
 under
 one
 of
 the
 cases
 governmental
 machinery
 to
 settle
 the
 dispute
 must

enumerated
 under
 Article
 217
 
 arise
 out
 of
 or
 in
 be
 placed
 at
 his
 immediate
 disposal.
 Even
 in
 cases

connection
with
an
employer­employee
relationship
 where
 venue
 has
 been
 stipulated
 by
 the
 parties,
 the

o Absent
the
jurisdictional
requisite
of
an
employer­employee
 Court
 has
 not
 hesitated
 to
 set
 aside
 the
 same
 if
 it

relationship
 between
 the
 company
 and
 the
 farm
 workers,
 would
 lead
 to
 a
 situation
 so
 grossly
 inconvenient
 to

one
party
as
to
virtually
negate
his
claim

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 5

 o Workplace
if
the
complainant
works
in
a
vessel
plying
the
  The
Court
further
said
that
the
dismissal
of
the
ULP

Manila
and
Cotabato
route?
Sulpicio
Lines
v.
NLRC
 case
 would
 have
 been
 proper
 for
 voluntary

 For
 purposes
 of
 venue,
 workplace
 shall
 be
 arbitration
had
the
parties
explicitly
so
agreed.

understood
 as
 the
 place
 or
 locality
 where
 the
 • Does
 a
 labor
 arbiter
 have
 jurisdiction
 over
 an
 illegal
 dismissal

employee
 is
 regularly
 assigned
 when
 the
 cause
 of
 complaint
 filed
 by
 a
 church
 minister?
 Is
 the
 principle
 of
 separation
 of

action
 arose.
 Manila­Estancia­Iloilo­Zamboanga­ church
and
state
applicable?

Cotabato
route
 o Austria
v.
NLRC
&
Cebu
City
Central

• Waiver
  It
 does
 not
 matter
 that
 the
 employer
 here
 is
 a

o Rule
re:
complainant/petitioner’s
workplace,
it
is
intended
 religious
sect
and
that
it
was
organized
not
for
profit

for
 the
 exclusive
 benefit
 of
 the
 worker.
 As
 such,
 the
 because
the
Labor
Code
applies
to
all
establishments

worker
may
waive
said
benefit
 whether
for
profit
or
not.

5. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:
ULP
Cases
  The
 state
 is
 prohibited
 from
 interfering
 in
 purely

• ULP
 is
 any
 act
 intended
 or
 directed
 to
 weaken
 or
 defeat
 the
 workers’
 ecclesiastical
 affairs,
 and
 the
 church
 likewise
 is

right
to
self‐organize
or
to
engage
in
lawful
concerted
activities;
carries
 barred
from
meddling
in
purely
secular
matter.
The

the
effect
of
anti‐unionism
 case
at
bench
is
only
one
of
dismissal
of
an
employee

• ULP
cases
are
within
the
original
jurisdiction
of
the
labor
arbiter
 in
 the
 exercise
 by
 the
 employer­church
 of
 its

• National
Union
of
Bank
Employees
v.
Judge
Lazaro
 management
 prerogatives
 and
 therefore
 does
 not

o CBTC
entered
into
CBA
with
the
Union.
Negotiations
were
 concern
any
ecclesiastical
matter.
What
is
involved
is

suspended
 because
 the
 bank
 had
 entered
 into
 a
 merger
 only
the
relationship
of
the
church
as
an
EMPLOYER

with
the
BPI.
Union
filed
a
case
with
the
CFI
against
CBTC
 and
 the
 minister
 as
 an
 employee
 which
 is
 purely

and
 BPI
 for
 specific
 performance,
 damages
 and
 SECULAR
 in
 character
 and
 has
 no
 relation

preliminary
injunction.
CFI
dismissed
the
case.
 whatsoever
to
practice
of
faith,
worship.

o Dismissal
 is
 correct.
 The
 case
 is
 an
 unfair
 labor
 practice
 • Termination
of
corporate
officer;
jurisdiction
over
intra­corporate

controversy
within
the
original
and
exclusive
jurisdiction
of
 disputes
transferred
from
SEC
to
RTC

the
labor
arbiters
and
the
exclusive
appellate
jurisdiction
of
 o Dismissal
 of
 a
 corporate
 officer
 by
 a
 corporate
 board
 is
 a

the
NLRC.

 corporate
 dispute
 that
 should
 be
 brought
 to
 the
 regular

6. CBA
violation
amounting
to
ULP
 courts.

• Under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
labor
arbiters
and
the
NLRC
  Jurisdiction
 of
 the
 SEC
 over
 such
 case
 has
 been

• Only
 gross
 violations
 of
 a
 CBA
 are
 considered
 unfair
 labor
 practice,
 transferred
 to
 the
 courts
 by
 the
 Securities

hence
 within
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 a
 labor
 arbiter.
 If
 not
 gross,
 the
 Regulation
Code
(RA
8799)

violation
is
not
ULP
 o Dy,
et
al.
v.
NLRC

7. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:

termination
disputes
  CHV
 was
 director
 and
 stockholder
 and
 also

• Termination
 disputes
 or
 illegal
 dismissal
 complaints
 fall
 within
 the
 manager
of
ARB,
a
banking
institution.
A
new
board

jurisdiction
of
a
labor
arbiter
 passed
 a
 resolution,
 electing
 a
 new
 bank
 manager.

• But
a
question
of
overlapping
jurisdiction
has
arisen
because
of
Article
 CHV
 filed
 a
 complained
 for
 illegal
 dismissal
 with

217,
last
sentence.
It
requires
a
labor
arbiter
to
refer
to
the
grievance
 the
Ministry
of
Labor
and
Employment
against
the

machinery
 and
 voluntary
 arbitration
 all
 cases
 arising
 from
 President
and
VP
of
ARB.

interpretation
 or
 enforcement
 of
 collective
 bargaining
 agreement
 or
  The
 controversy
 is
 intra­corporate.
 It
 revolves

company
personnel
policies.
 around
the
election
of
directors,
officers
or
managers

o Is
 the
 dismissal
 of
 an
 employee
 an
 enforcement
 of
 of
 the
 bank,
 the
 relation
 between
 and
 among

personnel
 policy
 and,
 therefore,
 should
 be
 brought
 to
 a
 stockholders,
 and
 between
 them
 and
 the

voluntary
arbitrator
instead
of
a
labor
arbiter?
 corporation.
 These
 matters
 fall
 within
 the

 No,
not
necessarily.
 jurisdiction
of
the
SEC.

 San
 Miguel
 Corp
 v.
 NLRC:
 The
 usual
 grievances,
  This
is
not
a
case
of
dismissal.
The
situation
is
that
of

however,
 is
 the
 rules
 and
 regulations
 governing
 a
corporate
officer
having
been
declared
vacant
and

disciplinary
 actions.
 Judging
 therefrom,
 the
 of
 CHV’s
 not
 having
 been
 elected
 thereafter.
 The

questioned
 discharges
 due
 to
 alleged
 redundancy
 matter
 of
 whom
 to
 elect
 is
 a
 prerogative
 that

can
hardly
be
considered
company
personnel
policies
 belongs
to
the
Board.
The
question
of
remuneration,

and,
 therefore,
 need
 not
 directly
 be
 subject
 to
 the
 involving
 a
 person
 who
 is
 a
 stockholder
 and
 officer,

grievance
machinery
nor
to
voluntary
arbitration.
 is
 not
 a
 simple
 labor
 problem
 but
 a
 matter
 that

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 6

 comes
 within
 the
 area
 of
 corporate
 affairs
 and
 SEC.
The
better
policy
to
be
followed
should
be
to
consider

management,
 and
 is
 in
 fact
 an
 intra­corporate
 the
concurrent
factors
 such
as
the
status
or
relationship
of

controversy
in
contemplation
of
the
corporation.
 the
parties
or
the
nature
of
the
question
that
is
the
subject

o The
election,
appointment
or
removal
of
an
executive
VP
is
a
 of
 their
 controversy.
 In
 the
 absence
 of
 any
 one
 of
 these

prerogative
vested
upon
a
corporate
board.
Fortune
Cement
 factors,
 the
 SEC
 will
 not
 have
 jurisdiction.
 Furthermore,
 it

Corp.
v.
NLRC
 does
not
necessarily
follow
that
every
conflict
between
the

o PD
 902­A:
 A
 corporate
 officer’s
 dismissal
 is
 always
 a
 corporation
 and
 its
 stockholders
 would
 involve
 such

corporate
 act,
 or
 an
 extra­corporate
 controversy
 and
 the
 corporate
 matters
 as
 only
 the
 SEC
 can
 resolve
 in
 the

nature
 is
 not
 altered
 by
 the
 reason
 or
 wisdom
 with
 which
 exercise
of
its
adjudicatory
or
quasi‐judicial
powers.


the
Board
of
Directors
may
have
in
taking
such
action.
 o In
 the
 case
 at
 bench,
 the
 claim
 for
 unpaid
 wages
 and

• Effect
of
claim
for
backwages,
benefits,
or
damages
 separation
 pay
 involves
 a
 labor
 dispute.
 It
 relates
 to
 an

o Where
 the
 occupant
 is
 not
 reelected
 by
 the
 Board
 of
 employer­employee
 relationship
 which
 is
 distinct
 from
 the

Directors,
 the
 officer’s
 complaint
 should
 be
 lodged
 with
 corporate
relationship.

the
SEC
[now
the
regular
court],
not
the
NLRC,
even
if
the
 • Tabang
v.
NLRC:
SEC
jurisdiction
reaffirmed;
corporate
officer
and

complaint/petitioner
 has
 claims
 for
 backwages,
 intra­corporate
controversy
defined

employment
benefits,
and
damages.
 o The
 Court
 ruled
 that
 all
 kinds
 of
 controversies
 between

o Andaya
v.
Abadia:
in
intra­corporate
matters,
such
as
those
 stockholders
 and
 corporations
 fall
 under
 SEC’s

affecting
the
corporation,
its
directors,
trustees,
officers
and
 jurisdiction.


shareholders,
 the
 issue
 of
 consequential
 damages
 may
 just
 o A
corporate
officer
is
the
president,
secretary,
or
treasurer

as
well
be
resolved
and
adjudicated
by
the
SEC.
 of
 the
 corporation
 or
 any
 other
 officer
 whose
 office
 is

• Mainland
 v.
 Movilla:
 The
 “Better
 Policy”
 in
 determining
 SEC
 created
 by
 the
 board
 of
 directors
 as
 authorized
 or

jurisdiction
 required
by
the
corporate
charter
or
by‐laws.

o In
this
case,
the
court
upheld
the
jurisdiction
of
the
NLRC
 o An
office
is
created
by
the
charter
of
the
corporation
and

as
against
that
of
the
SEC.
The
Court
set
forth
the
“Better
 the
 officer
 is
 elected
 by
 the
 directors
 or
 stockholders.
 An

policy”
 in
 determining
 the
 SEC
 jurisdiction;
 “that
 the
 employee
 usually
 occupies
 no
 office
 and
 is
 generally

parties
 involved
 are
 the
 stockholders
 and
 the
 corporation
 employed
 not
 by
 action
 of
 the
 directors
 or
 stockholders

does
 not
 necessarily
 place
 the
 dispute
 within
 the
 ambit
 of
 but
 by
 the
 managing
 officer
 of
 the
 corporation
 who
 also

the
jurisdiction
of
the
SEC”.
 determines
the
compensation
to
be
paid
to
such
employee.

o Movilla
was
elected
as
board
member
and
Administrative
 o An
 intra‐corporate
 controversy
 is
 one
 which
 arises

Manager
 of
 Mainland
 Construction.
 DOLE
 ordered
 the
 between
 a
 stockholder
 and
 the
 corporation.
 There
 is
 no

corporation
to
pay
its
13
employees,
including
Movilla,
the
 distinction,
 qualification,
 nor
 any
 exemption
 whatsoever.

unpaid
 holiday
 pay,
 service
 incentive
 leave,
 etc.
 The
 The
 provision
 is
 broad
 and
 covers
 all
 kinds
 of

employer
 paid
 all
 except
 Movilla.
 Hence,
 he
 filed
 a
 controversies
between
stockholders
and
corporations.

complaint
with
the
NLRC.
The
Labor
arbiter
dismissed
the
 o Nacpil
v.
International
Broadcasting
Corp.

complaint
and
said
that
the
SEC
had
jurisdiction
because
it
  Nacpil
 was
 Assistant
 General
 Manager
 and

constitutes
a
corporate
controversy.
 Comptroller
of
IBC.
He
alleged
that
he
was
forced
to

o The
NLRC
has
jurisdiction.
 retire
 by
 the
 new
 IBC
 president.
 Hence,
 he
 filed
 a

o In
 order
 that
 the
 SEC
 can
 take
 cognizance
 of
 a
 case,
 the
 case
 with
 the
 NLRC
 for
 illegal
 dismissal
 and
 non‐
controversy
 must
 pertain
 to
 any
 of
 the
 following
 payment
of
benefits

relationships:
 a)
 between
 the
 corporation,
 partnership
 or
  2
elements
to
be
considered
in
determining
whether

association
 and
 the
 public;
 b)
 between
 the
 corporation,
 the
SEC
has
jurisdiction
over
the
controversy,
to
wit:

partnership
 or
 association
 and
 its
 stockholders,
 partners,
 (1)
 the
 status
 or
 relationship
 of
 the
 parties,
 and
 (2)

members
 or
 officers;
 c)
 between
 the
 corporation,
 the
nature
of
the
question
that
is
the
subject
of
their

partnership
 or
 association
 and
 the
 State
 as
 far
 as
 its
 controversy.

franchise,
permit
or
license
to
operate
is
concerned;
and
d)
  As
petitioner’s
appointment
as
comptroller
required

among
 the
 stockholders,
 partners
 or
 associates
 themselves.
 the
approval
and
formal
action
of
the
IBC’s
Board
of

The
fact
that
the
parties
involved
in
the
controversy
are
all
 Directors
 to
 become
 valid,
 it
 is
 clear
 therefore
 that

stockholders
 or
 that
 the
 parties
 involved
 are
 the
 petitioner
is
a
corporate
officer
whose
dismissal
may

stockholders
 and
 the
 corporation
 does
 not
 necessarily
 be
the
subject
of
a
controversy
cognizable
by
the
SEC

place
 the
 dispute
 within
 the
 ambit
 of
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 [now
 RTC]
 which
 includes
 controversies
 involving

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 7

 both
 election
 and
 appointment
 of
 corporate
 terminated.
 He
 filed
 with
 the
 CFI.

directors,
trustees,
officers,
and
managers.
 Company
moved
to
dismiss
the
complaint

o CLV:
 business
 judgment
 doctrine
 encompasses
 the
 on
grounds
of
lack
of
jurisdiction

removal
from
office
of
a
corporate
officer
at
the
discretion
 - Labor
arbiter
has
jurisdiction

of
 the
 board
 of
 directors.
 He
 ahs
 no
 security
 of
 tenure.
 - The
 claim
 for
 said
 prize
 unquestionably

(CLV
sees
an
open
constitutional
issue)
 arose
from
an
employer­employee
relation

• When
bank
officer
may
be
a
regular
employee
 and,
therefore,
falls
within
the
coverage
of

o Prudential
Bank
and
Trust
Co.
v.
Reyes
 Article
 217
 of
 the
 Labor
 Code.
 Tumala

 The
 primary
 standard
 of
 determining
 regular
 would
 not
 have
 qualified
 for
 the
 contest,

employment
 is
 the
 reasonable
 connection
 between
 much
 less
 won
 the
 prize,
 if
 he
 was
 not
 an

the
particular
activity
performed
by
the
employee
in
 employee
of
the
company
at
the
time
of
the

relation
 to
 the
 usual
 trade
 or
 business
 of
 the
 holding
 of
 the
 contest.
 To
 hold
 that

employer.
 As
 assistant
 vice­president
 of
 the
 foreign
 Tumala’s
 claim
 for
 the
 prize
 should
 be

department
 of
 the
 bank
 she
 performs
 tasks
 integral
 passed
upon
by
the
regular
courts
of
justice

to
 the
 operations
 of
 the
 bank
 and
 her
 length
 of
 independently
 and
 separately
 from
 his

service
 with
 the
 bank
 totaling
 28
 years
 speaks
 claim
for
back
salaries,
retirement
benefits

volumes
 of
 her
 status
 as
 a
 regular
 employee
 of
 the
 and
 damages,
 would
 be
 to
 sanction
 split

bank.
 As
 such,
 she
 is
 entitled
 to
 security
 of
 tenure.
 jurisdiction

Her
 services
 may
 be
 terminated
 only
 for
 a
 just
 or
  San
Miguel
Corp.
v.
NLRC

authorized
cause.
The
NLRC
has
jurisdiction.
 - SMC
 sponsored
 a
 program
 granting
 cash

8. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:
money
claims
 awards
 to
 employees
 who
 would
 submit

• A
 money
 claim
 arising
 from
 employer‐employee
 relations,
 excepting
 ideas
 and
 suggestions
 beneficial
 to
 the

SSS/ECC/Medicare
claims,
is
within
the
jurisdiction
of
a
labor
arbiter
–
 corporation.
 Rustico
 filed
 a
 proposal
 and

o If
 the
 claim,
 regardless
 of
 amount,
 is
 accompanied
 with
 a
 was
 accepted
 and
 implemented
 by
 SMC.

claim
for
reinstatement;
or
 He
 demanded
 a
 cash
 award
 of
 60k.
 SMC

o If
the
claim,
whether
or
not
accompanied
with
a
claim
for
 refused
to
pay.

reinstatement,
exceeds
5k
per
claimant
 - Claim
 should
 be
 filed
 with
 a
 regular

• Only
money
claims
NOT
arising
from
CBA
 court.

o Original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 is
 - Money
 claims
 of
 workers
 which
 now
 fall

limited
 only
 to
 those
 arising
 from
 statutes
 or
 contracts
 within
 the
 original
 and
 exclusive

other
than
a
CBA.
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 are
 those

o The
voluntary
arbitrator
or
panel
of
voluntary
arbitrators
 money
claims
which
have
some
reasonable

will
 have
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 over
 money
 causal
 connection
 with
 the
 employer­
claims
“arising
from
the
interpretation
or
implementation
 employee
relationship.
The
money
claim
of

of
 the
 CBA,
 and
 those
 arising
 from
 the
 interpretation
 or
 Rustico
 arouse
 out
 of
 employer­employee

enforcement
 of
 company
 personnel
 policies”,
 under
 relationship.
 However,
 such
 fact
 is
 not

Article
261
 enough
 to
 bring
 such
 money
 claim
 within

• Money
claims
must
have
arisen
out
of
employment
 the
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 of

o Money
 claims
 of
 workers
 which
 do
 not
 arise
 out
 of
 or
 in
 the
labor
arbiters.

connection
with
their
employer‐employee
relationship
fall
 - Where
 the
 claim
 to
 the
 principal
 relief

within
the
general
jurisdiction
of
regular
courts
of
justice
 sought
is
to
be
resolved
not
by
reference
to

o If
 an
 employee
 is
 claiming
 a
 prize
 under
 an
 incentive
 the
 Labor
 Code
 or
 other
 labor
 relations

program
in
his
company,
where
should
he
file
his
claim?
 statute
 or
 a
 CBA
 but
 by
 the
 general
 civil

 Pepsi­cola
Bottling
Co.
v.
Martinez
 law,
 the
 jurisdiction
 over
 the
 dispute

- Tumala
was
declared
winner
of
the
Lapu‐ belongs
to
the
regular
courts
of
justice
and

Lapu
 Award
 in
 the
 annual
 Sumakwel
 not
to
the
labor
arbiter
and
the
NLRC.

contest.
 He
 was
 entitled
 to
 a
 prize
 of
 a
 • Money
claims
of
coop
employees

house
 and
 lot,
 but
 petitioner
 company,
 o Coop
 argues
 that
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 has
 no
 jurisdiction

despite
 demands,
 refused
 to
 deliver
 the
 because
the
complainants
failed
to
submit
their
dispute
to

prize.
 His
 employment
 was
 also
 the
grievance
machinery
under
PD
175
and
because
of
the

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 8

 non‐issuance
of
a
Certificate
of
Non‐Resolution
under
the
 • BUT
the
power
to
issue
injunction
is
lodged
with
the
NLRC
division

Coop
Development
Authority
Law.
The
argument
does
not
 • National
 interest
 cases
 are
 handled
 differently
 
 DOLE
 secretary
 or

hold.
 The
 provisions
 apply
 to
 members,
 officers
 and
 the
President
to
assume
jurisdiction
or
refer
the
case
to
the
NLRC

directors
 of
 the
 coop
 involved
 in
 disputes
 within
 a
 • Another
 limit
 to
 the
 arbiter’s
 jurisdiction
 is
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 the

cooperative
 or
 between
 cooperatives.
 There
 is
 no
 evidence
 regular
 courts
 to
 hear
 and
 decide
 actions
 filed
 by
 third
 parties
 being

that
 private
 respondents
 are
 members
 of
 the
 cooperative,
 affected
by
a
strike
of
people
who
are
not
their
employees

and
even
if
they
are,
the
dispute
is
about
payment
of
wages,
 • If
 a
 crime
 is
 committed
 whether
 in
 relation
 to
 a
 strike
 or
 not,
 regular

overtime
 pay,
 rest
 day
 and
 termination
 of
 employment.
 court
has
jurisdiction

Dispute
 with
 the
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 10. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:
OFW’s
money
claims
or
dismissal

labor
arbiter.
 • RA
 8042:
 transfers
 from
 the
 POEA
 to
 Labor
 Arbiters
 the
 original
 and

• Jurisdiction
over
claims
for
damages
(Suario
v.
BPI)
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 to
 hear
 and
 decide
 claims
 arising
 out
 of
 an

o Money
 claims
 of
 workers
 over
 which
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 has
 employer‐employee
 relationship
 or
 by
 virtue
 of
 any
 law
 or
 contract

original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 are
 comprehensive
 involving
 Filipino
 workers
 for
 overseas
 deployment,
 including
 claims

enough
to
include
claims
for
moral
damages
of
a
dismissed
 for
actual,
moral,
exemplary
and
other
forms
of
damages

employee
 against
 his
 employer.
 Labor
 arbiters
 and
 the
 • PNB
v.
Cabansag

NLRC
 has
 jurisdiction
 to
 award
 all
 kinds
 of
 damages
 in
 o While
 in
 Singapore
 as
 a
 tourist,
 Cabansag
 god
 a
 job
 with

cases
arising
from
employer­employee
relations.
Legislative
 the
PNB
Singapore
Branch
as
a
Branch
Credit
Officer.
She

intent
appears
clear
to
allow
recovery
in
proceedings
before
 obtained
 from
 the
 Singapore
 Government
 an
 “Employee

Labor
Arbiters
of
moral
and
other
forms
of
damages,
in
all
 Pass”
 and
 with
 the
 POEA
 an
 “Overseas
 Employment

cases
or
matters
arising
from
employer­employee
relations
 Certificate”
 She
 was
 fired.
 She
 filed
 an
 illegal
 dismissal

• Splitting
of
actions
not
allowed
 complaint
 with
 the
 NLRC.
 PNB
 contended
 that
 she
 was
 a

o Employee
who
has
been
illegally
dismissed
so
as
to
cause
 local
 hire,
 having
 been
 hired
 in
 Singapore
 and
 therefore

him
 moral
 damages
 has
 a
 cause
 of
 action
 for
 Singapore
laws,
customs
and
practice
should
govern

reinstatement,
 backwages
 and
 damages.
 When
 he
 o Cabansag’s
 obtaining
 an
 employment
 pass
 from
 Singapore

institutes
proceedings
before
the
Labor
Arbiter,
he
should
 Ministry
 of
 Manpower
 was
 merely
 a
 compliance
 with
 that

make
a
claim
for
all
said
relief.
 country’s
 immigration
 regulations.
 The
 pass
 or
 the
 permit

o The
grant
of
jurisdiction
to
the
labor
arbiter
is
sufficiently
 does
 not
 imply
 a
 waiver
 of
 the
 worker’s
 national
 laws
 on

comprehensive
to
include
claims
for
moral
and
exemplary
 labor.
 Absent
 clear
 evidence
 to
 the
 contrary,
 the
 permit

damages
sought
to
be
recovered
from
an
employer
by
an
 simply
means
that
its
holder
has
a
legal
status
as
worker
in

employee
 upon
 the
 theory
 of
 his
 illegal
 dismissal.
 A
 the
issuing
country.
Cabansag
is
a
migrant
worker,
making

contrary
 rule
 would
 result
 in
 the
 splitting
 of
 actions
 and
 her
 subject
 to
 Philippine
 laws
 on
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 the

the
consequent
multiplication
of
suits.
 NLRC
 and
 the
 labor
 statutes.
 Based
 on
 RA
 8042,
 labor

o Hence,
 the
 judgment
 of
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 granting
 arbiters
 clearly
 have
 original
 and
 jurisdiction
 over
 claims

separation
pay
operated
as
a
bar
to
his
subsequent
action
 arising
 from
 employer­employee
 relations,
 including

for
 the
 recover
 of
 damages
 before
 the
 CFI
 under
 the
 termination
 disputes
 involving
 all
 workers,
 among
 whom

doctrine
of
res
judicata.
 are
OFWs.

• Employer’s
complaint
for
damages
 o Whether
 employed
 locally
 or
 overseas,
 all
 Filipino
 workers

o Employer’s
 claim
 for
 damages
 against
 an
 employee
 may
 enjoy
 the
 protective
 mantle
 of
 the
 Philippine
 labor
 and

be
 filed
 as
 counterclaim
 in
 the
 illegal
 dismissal
 case
 filed
 social
 legislation,
 contract
 promulgated,
 or
 by

by
the
employee.
Such
claim
for
jurisdiction,
arising
from
 determination
 or
 conventions
 agreed
 upon
 in
 a
 foreign

employment
relationship,
is
outside
the
jurisdiction
of
the
 country.

regular
courts
 11. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:
wage
distortion

9. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:
strikes
and
lockouts
 • Salary
 distortion
 case
 is
 resolved
 either
 through
 the
 CBA
 mechanism

• Questions
 relating
 to
 work
 stoppage
 fall
 within
 the
 labor
 arbiter’s
 or,
in
unorganized
establishments,
through
the
NCMB.

jurisdiction
 • If
 NCMB
 fails
 to
 resolve
 the
 dispute
 in
 10
 days
 of
 conciliation

• Labor
arbiter
may
be
called
upon
to
decide
–

 conferences,
it
shall
be
referred
to
the
appropriate
branch
of
the
NLRC

o Whether
the
alleged
reason
for
the
strike
is
“strikeable”
 12. Labor
arbiter’s
jurisdiction:
disputes
over
compromise
settlements

o Whether
the
required
strike
procedure
is
followed
 • If
there
is
noncompliance
with
the
compromise
agreement
or
if
there
is

o Whether
 the
 strikers
 committed
 prohibited
 acts
 during
 a
 prima
 facie
 evidence
 that
 the
 settlement
 was
 obtained
 through
 fraud

strike

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 9

 misrepresentation,
 or
 coercion,
 the
 NLRC
 through
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 Not
all
contracts
entered
into
by
the
government
operate
as

o
may
assume
jurisdiction
over
such
dispute
 a
 waiver
 of
 its
 nonsuability;
 distinction
 must
 still
 be
 made

13. Submission
to
jurisdiction
 between
 one
 which
 is
 executed
 in
 the
 exercise
 of
 sovereign

• Party
can’t
invoke
the
jurisdiction
of
a
court
to
secure
affirmative
relief
 function
 and
 another
 which
 is
 done
 in
 its
 proprietary

against
his
opponent
and,
after
obtaining
or
failing
to
obtain
such
relief,
 capacity

repudiate
or
question
that
same
jurisdiction
 o The
DA
has
not
pretended
to
have
assumed
a
capacity
apart

• Soco
v.
Mercantile
Corp.
 from
 its
 being
 a
 governmental
 entity
 when
 it
 entered
 into

o When
the
complaint
for
underpayment
of
minimum
wage
 the
 questioned
 contract.
 The
 claims
 of
 private
 respondent

was
 pending
 before
 the
 Regional
 Director,
 the
 employer
 arising
 from
 Contract
 for
 Security
 Services,
 clearly

did
 not
 raise
 the
 issue
 of
 jurisdiction
 but
 instead
 actively
 constitute
money
claims.

participated
 in
 the
 hearings.
 When
 the
 case
 reached
 the
 o CA
 327
 
 money
 claim
 should
 first
 be
 brought
 to
 the

SC,
 employer
 objected
 to
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 Secretary
 Commission
on
Audit

of
Labor
and
the
Regional
Director
 16. Local
water
district

o This
 contention
 can’t
 be
 considered.
 After
 voluntarily
 • Hagonoy
 Water
 District
 v.
 NLRC:
 local
 water
 districts
 are
 quasi‐public

submitting
a
cause
and
encountering
an
adverse
decision
on
 corporations
whose
employees
belong
to
the
civil
service,
hence,
cases

the
 merits,
 it
 is
 too
 late
 of
 the
 loser
 to
 question
 the
 shall
be
governed
by
the
civil
service
law

jurisdiction
or
power
of
the
court.
 • Exception:
where
NLRC
jurisdiction
is
invoked

• Another
line
of
court
decisions
holds
a
different
view:
it
is
the
law
that
 o Zamboanga
 Water
 District
 had
 a
 strike
 and
 management

determines
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 an
 adjudicating
 body
 and
 not
 the
 filed
a
complaint
with
the
labor
arbiter.
The
water
district

initiative
or
acquiescence
of
the
disputants
 questioned
the
jurisdiction
with
the
SC.


o Whenever
it
appears
that
the
court
has
no
jurisdiction
over

the
 subject
 matter,
 the
 action
 shall
 be
 dismissed.
 This
 It
is
only
now
in
this
case
before
us,
after
the
NLRC
ordered
payment,
that
petitioner
raises

defense
may
be
imposed
at
any
time.
(La
Naval
Drugs
v.
CA)
 the
 issue
 of
 lack
 of
 jurisdiction.
 It
 is
 not
 fair
 for
 a
 party
 who
 has
 voluntarily
 invoked
 the

14. Immunity
of
foreign
governments
 jurisdiction
of
a
tribunal
in
a
particular
matter
to
secure
an
affirmative
relief
therefrom,
to

• Immunity
is
the
exemption
of
the
state
and
its
organs
from
the
judicial
 afterwards
repudiate
and
deny
that
very
same
jurisdiction.

jurisdiction
of
another
state;
an
equal
has
no
power
over
an
equal

• Application
of
the
doctrine
of
immunity
from
suit
has
been
restricted
to
 17. RA
6715
–
Retroactive?

sovereign
or
governmental
activities
(jure
imperii)
 • Retroactive,
 because
 amendments
 relative
 to
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 Labor

• It
can’t
be
extended
to
commercial,
private,
and
proprietary
acts
(jure
 Arbiters
partake
of
the
nature
of
curative
statutes

gestionis)
 • But
there
are
different
SC
cases
where
retroactivity
was
not
applied

• Immunity
of
the
UN
and
its
specialized
agencies
 o SC
explains
as
such:

o Convention
 on
 the
 Privileges
 and
 Immunities
 of
 the
  Decisions
 on
 whether
 to
 give
 RA
 6715
 retroactive

Specialized
 Agencies
 of
 the
 UN:
 immunity
 granted
 to
 the
 application
 or
 not
 depended
 to
 a
 great
 extent
 on

UN
and
its
specialized
agencies
 what
amended
provisions
were
under
consideration,

o United
 Nations
 Revolving
 Fund
 for
 Natural
 Resources
 as
 well
 as
 the
 factual
 circumstances
 to
 which
 they

Exploration:
grants
immunity
 were
made
to
apply.


15. Executing
money
claims
against
the
government

• Even
when
a
government
agency
enters
into
a
business
contract
with
a
 

private
 entity,
 it
 is
 not
 the
 Labor
 Code
 but
 CA
 327
 that
 applies
 in

pursuing
 a
 money
 claim
 (against
 the
 Government)
 arising
 from
 such
 Chapter
II:
Powers
and
Duties

contract

• DA
v.
NLRC
 Article
218.
Powers
of
the
Commission

o Department
 of
 Agriculture
 and
 Sultan
 Security
 Agency

entered
 into
 a
 contract
 for
 security
 service.
 Guards
 from
 Article
219.
Ocular
inspection

the
 Agency
 filed
 a
 complaint
 for
 underpayment
 of
 wages,

nonpayment
of
13th
month
pay,
uniform
allowances,
night
 1. Powers
of
the
Commission

shift
 differential
 pay,
 holiday
 pay
 and
 overtime
 pay
 and
 • Rule­making
power

damages
against
the
DA
and
Agency.
 o Commission
 has
 the
 power
 to
 promulgate
 rules
 and

o Doctrine
of
state’s
immunity
from
suit
 regulations
–


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 10

  Governing
 the
 hearing
 and
 disposition
 of
 cases
 o Azucena:
 inspection
 power
 is
 but
 an
 adjunct
 to
 the

before
it
and
its
regional
branches
 adjudicatory
function;
can
only
be
exercised
only
to
assist

 Pertaining
to
its
internal
functions
 or
expedite
adjudication
of
a
pending
dispute

 Those
 that
 may
 be
 necessary
 to
 carry
 out
 the
 • Adjudicatory
power:
original

purposes
of
this
Code
 o NLRC
divisions
has
original
jurisdiction
over
petitions
for

o These
 rules
 and
 regulations
 have
 the
 force
 and
 effect
 of
 injunction
or
for
TRO

law
 o It
 has
 original
 jurisdiction
 to
 hear
 and
 decide
 national

 Admin
law:
administrative
regulations
and
policies
 interest
cases
certified
to
it
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor

enacted
 by
 administrative
 bodies
 to
 interpret
 the
  NLRC
 gains
 jurisdiction
 over
 all
 questions

law
 which
 they
 are
 entrusted
 to
 enforce,
 have
 the
 submitted,
 even
 over
 issues
 that
 otherwise
 fall

force
of
law
and
are
entitled
to
great
respect
 within
the
labor
arbiter’s
exclusive
jurisdiction

 Rules
 and
 regulations
 must
 not
 be
 in
 conflict
 with
 • Adjudicatory
power:
appellate

or
contrary
to
the
Labor
Code
and
other
laws
 o NLRC
 has
 exclusive
 appellate
 jurisdiction
 over
 all
 cases

• Power
to
issue
compulsory
process
 decided
 by
 the
 labor
 arbiters
 and
 the
 DOLE
 regional

o Commission
has
power
to
–
 director
or
hearing
officers

 Administer
oaths
  Where
the
labor
arbiter
has
no
jurisdiction,
or
has

 Summon
parties
 not
acquired
jurisdiction,
neither
has
the
NLRC.

 Issue
subpoenas
ad
testificandum
and
duces
tecum
 o NLRC
 has
 no
 appellate
 jurisdiction
 over
 the
 decisions

• Power
to
investigate
and
hear
disputes
within
its
jurisdiction
 enumerated
below,
because
they
are
instead
appealable
to

o Commission
has
power
to
–
 the
CA
–

 Conduct
 investigations
 for
 the
 determination
 of
 a
  Decisions
by
a
voluntary
arbitrator

question,
 matter
 or
 controversy
 within
 its
  The
Secretary
of
Labor

jurisdiction;
and
  The
 Bureau
 of
 Labor
 Relations
 Director
 on
 cases

 Proceed
to
hear
and
determine
the
disputes
in
the
 appealed
from
the
DOLE
regional
offices

manner
 laid
 down
 under
 paragraph
 (c)
 of
 Article
 o Pondoc
v.
NLRC

218
  Pondoc
won
a
judgment
at
the
labor
arbiter’s
level,

• Contempt
power
 ordering
 his
 employer
 to
 pay
 sums
 of
 money.

o Contempt
 is
 disobedience
 to
 the
 Court
 by
 setting
 up
 an
 Employer
 moved
 that
 his
 liabilities
 be
 set‐off

opposition
to
its
authority,
justice
and
dignity.

 against
 the
 employee’s
 alleged
 unpaid

o Contempt
signifies
willful
disregard
or
disobedience
of
the
 indebtedness
 to
 him.
 Labor
 arbiter
 denied
 and

court’s
 orders
 and
 it
 is
 conduct
 that
 tends
 to
 bring
 the
 issued
 writ
 of
 execution.
 But
 the
 employer
 then

authority
 of
 the
 court
 and
 the
 administration
 of
 law
 into
 filed
 with
 the
 NLRC
 an
 action
 for
 injunction
 and

disrepute
 or
 in
 some
 manner
 to
 impede
 the
 due
 damages.
NLRC
set
aside
order
of
the
labor
arbiter

administration
of
justice
 and
allowed
set‐off

o Disobedience
or
resistance
to
a
lawful
writ,
process,
order,
  Issue:
 May
 a
 division
 of
 the
 NLRC
 defeat
 a
 final

judgment
or
command
of
a
court
or
injunction
granted
by
 judgment
 of
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 by
 entertaining
 a

a
court
or
judge
constitutes
indirect
contempt,
punishable
 petition
 for
 injunction
 and
 damages
 and
 by

under
Rule
71
of
the
Rules
of
Court
 receiving
evidence
regarding
the
indebtedness?
NO

• Power
to
conduct
ocular
inspection
  The
 NLRC
 SHOULD
 NOT
 have
 entertained
 the

o (1)
 Chairman,
 (2)
 Commissioner,
 (3)
 Labor
 Arbiter,
 (4)
 separate
 action
 for
 injunction
 and
 damages.
 It
 was

representative
may,
AT
ANY
TIME
DURING
WORK
HOURS
 an
 obvious
 scheme
 to
 defeat
 the
 decision
 of
 the

–
 labor
 arbiter.
 The
 Labor
 Code
 does
 not
 provide

 Conduct
 an
 ocular
 inspection
 on
 establishment,
 blanket
authority
to
the
NLRC
or
any
of
its
divisions

building,
 ship
 or
 vessel,
 place
 or
 premises,
 to
issue
writs
of
injunctions.

including
 any
 work,
 material,
 implement,
  Appeal
of
employer
was
not
from
the
decision,
but

machinery,
appliance
or
any
object
therein
 from
the
order
of
the
labor
arbiter,
denying
the
set‐
 Ask
 any
 employee,
 laborer
 or
 any
 person
 for
 off.
 Hence,
 employer
 admitted
 the
 executory

information
 concerning
 any
 matter
 or
 question
 character
of
the
judgment.

relative
to
the
object
of
the
investigation
  Besides,
no
showing
that
indebtedness
asserted
by

employer
 arose
 out
 of
 the
 employer‐employee

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 11

 relationship.
 Hence,
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 did
 not
 have
 threatened
or
committed
charged
with
the
duty
to

jurisdiction
 over
 that
 claim.
 If
 a
 claim
 does
 not
 fall
 protect
complaint’s
property

within
the
exclusive
original
jurisdiction
of
the
Labor
  Reception
 at
 the
 hearing
 of
 “testimony
 of

Arbiter,
the
NLRC
cannot
have
appellate
jurisdiction
 witnesses,
with
opportunity
for
cross‐examination,

thereon.
 in
 support
 of
 the
 allegations
 of
 a
 complaint
 made

2. Power
to
issue
injunction
or
TRO
 under
 oath,”
 as
 well
 as
 “testimony
 in
 opposition

• Injunction
power
is
the
power
to
command
that
an
act
be
done
or
not
 thereto,
if
offered”

done.
It
may
either
require,
forbid,
or
stop
the
doing
of
an
act
  “A
 finding
 of
 fact
 by
 the
 Commission
 to
 the
 effect:

• Injunction
or
restraining
orders
are
frowned
upon
as
a
matter
of
labor
 (1)
 that
 prohibited
 or
 unlawful
 acts
 have
 been

relations
policy
 threatened
 and
 will
 be
 committed
 and
 will
 be

• Action
 for
 injunction
 is
 distinct
 from
 the
 ancillary
 remedy
 of
 continued
 unless
 restrained,
 but
 no
 injunction
 or

preliminary
 injunction
 which
 cannot
 exist
 except
 only
 as
 part
 or
 an
 TRO
 shall
 be
 issued
 on
 account
 of
 any
 threat,

incident
of
an
independent
action
or
proceeding
 prohibited
 or
 unlawful
 act,
 except
 against
 the

• Under
the
present
state
of
the
law,
the
main
action
of
injunction
seeks
 person
 or
 persons,
 association
 or
 organization

a
 judgment
 embodying
 a
 final
 injunction
 which
 is
 distinct
 from,
 and
 making
the
threat,
or
committing
the
prohibited
or

should
 not
 be
 confused
 with
 the
 provisional
 remedy
 of
 preliminary
 unlawful
act
or
actually
authorizing
or
ratifying
the

injunction,
the
sole
object
of
which
is
to
preserve
the
status
quo
until
 same
 after
 actual
 knowledge
 thereof;
 (2)
 that

the
 merits
 can
 be
 herd.
 A
 writ
 of
 preliminary
 injunction
 is
 generally
 substantial
 and
 irreparable
 injury
 to
 complaint’s

based
 solely
 on
 initial
 and
 incomplete
 evidence.
 Evidence
 submitted
 property
 will
 follow;
 (3)
 that
 as
 to
 each
 item
 of

during
 the
 hearing
 on
 an
 application
 for
 a
 writ
 of
 preliminary
 relief
to
be
granted,
greater
injury
will
be
inflicted

injunction
 is
 not
 conclusive
 or
 complete
 for
 only
 a
 “sampling”
 is
 upon
 complainant
 by
 the
 denial
 of
 relief
 than
 will

needed
 to
 give
 the
 trial
 court
 an
 idea
 of
 the
 justification
 for
 the
 be
 inflicted
 upon
 defendants
 by
 the
 granting
 of

preliminary
injunction
pending
the
decision
of
the
case
on
the
merits.
 relief;
 (4)
 that
 complainant
 has
 no
 adequate

• Reasons
for
the
petition
for
injunction
must
be
specified,
but
it
is
not
 remedy
 at
 law;
 and
 (5)
 that
 the
 public
 officers

necessary
 to
 allege
 in
 verbatim
 the
 requisites
 for
 the
 issuance
 of
 the
 charged
 with
 the
 duty
 to
 protect
 complainant’s

temporary
 restraining
 order
 and/or
 writ
 of
 preliminary
 injunction
 property
 are
 unable
 or
 unwilling
 to
 furnish

under
Article
218
(e)
of
the
Labor
Code
 adequate
protection

• Where
 the
 NLRC
 did
 not
 follow
 and
 observe
 the
 procedure
 outlined
 • Conditions
for
issuance
ex
parte
of
a
TRO

and
 provided
 for
 the
 Labor
 Code
 in
 issuing
 the
 preliminary
 writ
 of
 o TRO
(valid
only
for
20
days)
may
be
issued
ex
parte
under

prohibitory
 injunction,
 the
 said
 writ
 is
 illegal
 and
 void,
 although
 the
 the
following
conditions:

court
had
jurisdiction
to
issue
it
  Complainant
 shall
 also
 allege
 that,
 unless
 a
 TRO

• Injunction
by
labor
arbiter
 shall
 be
 issued
 without
 notice,
 a
 substantial
 and

o Rules
of
Procedure
(1990)
of
the
NLRC

ancillary
power
 irreparable
injury
to
complainant’s
property
will
be

of
 issuing
 preliminary
 injunction
 or
 a
 restraining
 order
 unavoidable

“may
be
exercised
by
the
Labor
Arbiter
only
as
an
incident
  There
 is
 testimony
 under
 oath,
 sufficient,
 if

to
the
cases
pending
before
them
in
order
to
preserve
the
 sustained,
 to
 justify
 the
 Commission
 in
 issuing
 a

rights
of
the
parties
during
the
pendency
of
the
cases
but
 temporary
injunction
upon
hearing
after
notice

excluding
labor
disputes
involving
strie
or
lockout
  Complainant
 shall
 first
 file
 an
 undertaking
 with

o NOW,
2002
and
2005
NLRC
Rules

the
above
statement
 adequate
 security
 in
 an
 amount
 to
 be
 fixed
 by
 the

no
 longer
 appears;
 Commissioner
 Veloso
 said
 that
 the
 Commission
 sufficient
 to
 recompense
 those

labor
 arbiter
 is
 “excluded
 statutorily,”
 hence
 no
 NLRC
 enjoined
for
any
loss,
expense
or
damage
caused
by

Rules
can
grant
him
that
power
 the
 improvident
 or
 erroneous
 issuance
 of
 such

• Requisites
for
issuance
of
restraining
order
or
injunction
 order
 or
 injunction,
 including
 all
 reasonable
 costs,

o Restraining
 orders
 or
 injunctions
 DO
 NOT
 issue
 ex
 parte
 together
 with
 a
 reasonable
 attorney’s
 fee,
 and

and
only
after
compliance
with
the
following
requisites:
 expense
of
defense
against
the
order
or
against
the

 A
 hearing
 held
 “after
 due
 and
 personal
 notice
 granting
of
any
injunctive
relief
sought
in
the
same

thereof
 has
 been
 served
 to
 all
 known
 persons
 proceeding
 and
 subsequently
 denied
 by
 the

against
whom
relief
is
sought,
and
also
to
the
Chief
 Commission

Executive
and
other
public
officials
of
the
province
  TRO
 shall
 be
 effective
 for
 no
 longer
 than
 20
 days

or
 city
 within
 which
 the
 unlawful
 acts
 have
 been
 and
shall
become
void
at
the
expiration
of
20
days

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 12

 o Issuance
 should
 be
 characterized
 by
 care
 and
 caution
 for
 erroneous
 issuance
 of
 such
 order
 or
 injunction,
 including

the
 law
 requires
 that
 it
 be
 clearly
 justified
 by
 all
 reasonable
 costs,
 attorney’s
 fee,
 expense
 of
 defense

considerations
of
extreme
necessity
 against
the
order
or
against
the
granting
of
any
injunctive

o Injury
 is
 irreparable
 if
 it
 is
 of
 such
 constant
 and
 frequent
 relief
 sought
 in
 the
 same
 proceeding
 and
 subsequently

recurrence
that
no
fair
and
reasonable
redress
can
be
had
 denied
by
the
Commission

therefore
 in
 a
 court
 of
 law
 or
 where
 there
 is
 no
 standard
 • Scope

by
 which
 their
 amount
 can
 be
 measured
 with
 reasonable
 o Injunction
 restricted
 not
 only
 to
 the
 specific
 acts

accuracy,
 that
 is,
 it
 is
 not
 susceptible
 of
 mathematical
 complained
 of
 in
 the
 pleadings
 and
 proven
 at
 trials
 as

computation.
 wrongful,
 but
 further,
 limits
 the
 injunction
 to
 only
 those

 It
can’t
be
adequately
compensated
in
damages
due
 alleged
 and
 proven
 guilty
 of
 actual
 participation,

to
the
nature
of
the
injury
itself
or
the
nature
of
the
 authorization
or
ratification
of
such
acts

right
 or
 property
 injured
 or
 
 when
 there
 exists
 no
 o Power
of
NLRC
to
enjoin
or
restrain
the
commission
of
any

certain
pecuniary
standard
for
the
measurement
of
 or
all
prohibited
or
unlawful
acts
can
ONLY
be
exercised
in

damages
 a
labor
dispute

o Property
 includes
 not
 only
 tangible
 property
 but
 also
 the
 • Reception
of
evidence

right
to
use
such
property
 o Reception
 of
 evidence
 may
 be
 delegated
 by
 the

o Public
officers
means
local
law
enforcing
officers
 Commission
to
any
of
its
Labor
Arbiters
[now
Commission

o Injunction
 can’t
 issue
 against
 unlawful
 acts,
 unless
 the
 Attorney,
 as
 per
 RA
 9347]
 who
 shall
 conduct
 such

local
authorities
whose
duty
is
to
keep
the
peace
have
first
 hearings
 in
 such
 places
 as
 he
 may
 determine
 to
 be

been
 resorted
 to
 and
 have
 either
 advised
 that
 they
 could
 accessible
 to
 the
 parties
 and
 their
 witnesses
 and
 shall

not
 or
 would
 not
 keep
 it,
 or
 advising
 that
 they
 could
 and
 submit
thereafter
his
recommendation
to
the
Commission

would
have
failed
through
inability
or
unwillingness
to
do
 • Twenty­day
life
of
TRO

so
 o TRO,
 if
 issued,
 valid
 only
 for
 20
 days
 and
 becomes
 void

o Protection
 
 is
 that
 which
 would
 enable
 the
 employer
 to
 ipso
facto
at
the
end
of
that
period

proceed
with
the
work
 o TRO
takes
effect
upon
its
issuance
and
not
upon
receipt
of

o Employer
 may
 not
 seek
 by
 injunction
 protection
 from
 the
parties

losses
which
the
exercise
of
the
powers
of
the
police
could
 o Maximum
 20
 days
 includes
 Saturdays,
 Sundays,
 and

not
be
calculated
to
prevent
 holidays

 Intent
 of
 this
 requirement
 is
 to
 take
 the
 executive
 • Illustrative
case:
issuance
of
TRO

function
 of
 law
 enforcement
 out
 of
 the
 court
 and
 o Ilaw
 at
 Buklod
 ng
 Manggagawa
 v.
 NLRC
 and
 San
 Miguel

leave
it
to
the
appropriate
executive
officers,
unless
 Corp:
petition
for
injunction
and
TRO
may
be
filed
with
the

they
fail
to
function
 NLRC
 where
 the
 complaint
 filed
 with
 the
 labor
 arbiter

 Public
officers
should
be
served
notice
of
hearing
of
 against
 slowdown
 by
 petitioner’s
 employees
 has
 not

the
application
for
injunction
 yielded
adequate
relief

• No
adequate
remedy
  Claiming
 that
 its
 action
 in
 the
 Arbitration
 Branch

o Adequate
 remedy
 at
 law
 is
 one
 that
 affords
 relief
 with
 had
as
yet
yielded
no
relief,
San
Miguel
Corp
(SMC)

reference
 to
 the
 matter
 in
 controversy,
 and
 which
 is
 filed
 another
 complaint
 against
 the
 Union
 and

appropriate
to
the
particular
circumstances
of
the
case
 members
 thereof
 directly
 with
 the
 NLRC,
 to
 enjoin

o Existence
of
a
remedy
at
law
does
not
necessarily
preclude
 and
restrain
illegal
slowdown
and
for
damages,
with

injunctive
 relief.
 A
 remedy
 at
 law
 must,
 in
 the
 first
 place,
 prayer
 for
 the
 issuance
 of
 a
 cease­and­desist
 and

be
 plain
 and
 no
 doubtful
 or
 obscure.
 It
 must
 also
 be
 TRO.
TRO
was
issued.
Union
filed
petition,
asserting

complete
 NLRC
 had
 no
 jurisdiction
 to
 act
 on
 the
 plea
 for

• Cash
bond
 injunction
in
the
first
instance

o No
 TRO
 or
 writ
 of
 preliminary
 injunction
 shall
 be
 issued
  SC
 ruled
 that
 NLRC
 acted
 within
 its
 jurisdiction.
 It

except
 on
 the
 condition
 that
 petitioner
 shall
 first
 file
 an
 acted
on
SMC’s
application
for
immediate
issuance
of

undertaking
 to
 answer
 for
 the
 damages
 and
 post
 a
 cash
 a
 TRO
 ex
 parte
 on
 the
 ground
 that
 substantial
 and

bond
(50k),
or
such
higher
amount
as
may
determined
by
 irreparable
 injury
 to
 its
 property
 would
 transpire

the
Commission.
 before
the
matter
could
be
heard
on
notice

o Purpose:
 to
 recompense
 those
 enjoined
 for
 any
 loss,
 • Injunction
from
NLRC
not
the
proper
remedy
against
employee’s

expense
 or
 damage
 caused
 by
 the
 improvident
 or
 dismissal

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 13

 o PAL
 v.
 NLRC:
 Employee
 dismissal;
 no
 case
 had
 yet
 been
 o Evidence
must
be
substantial
or
such
relevant
evidence
as

filed
 with
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 when
 the
 petition
 for
 a
reasonable
mind
might
accept
as
adequate
to
support
a

injunction
was
filed
with
the
NLRC.
The
SC
invalidated
the
 conclusion

injunction
issued
by
NLRC.
A
petition
for
injunction
is
not
 • Cardinal
rights
in
quasi­judicial
proceedings

the
way
to
halt
on
employee’s
dismissal
 o There
 are
 cardinal
 primary
 rights
 which
 must
 be

 PAL
dismissed
2
flight
stewards
for
involvement
in
 respected
in
administrative
or
quasi‐judicial
proceedings.

alleged
 smuggling.
 Employees,
 instead
 of
 filing
 an
 o Ang
Tibay
v.
CIR

illegal
 dismissal
 complaint
 before
 a
 labor
 arbiter,
  Case
regarding
laying
off
of
employees
of
Ang
Tibay

directly
 petitioned
 the
 NLRC
 for
 injunction,
 with
 belonging
to
the
National
Labor
Union
(NLU

prayer
 for
 a
 TRO,
 to
 prohibit
 PAL
 from
 effecting
  Issue:
Whether
there
was
due
process
observed
in

their
 dismissal.
 NLRC
 issued
 the
 injunction.
 PAL
 the
CIR
proceedings?

disputed
legality
of
the
issuance
of
the
injunction.
  CIR
 is
 more
 of
 a
 administrative
 board;
 It
 is
 not

 Power
 of
 the
 NLRC
 to
 issue
 an
 injunctive
 writ
 narrowly
 constrained
 by
 technical
 rules
 of

originates
 from
 any
 labor
 dispute
 upon
 application
 procedure.
 However,
 this
 does
 not
 mean
 that
 it
 can

by
 a
 party
 thereof,
 which
 application
 if
 not
 granted
 entirely
 ignore
 or
 disregard
 the
 fundamental
 and

may
cause
grave
or
irreparable
damage
to
any
party
 essential
 requirements
 of
 due
 process
 in
 trials
 and

or
 render
 ineffectual
 any
 decision
 in
 favor
 of
 such
 investigations
of
an
administrative
character.


party
  There
 are
 cardinal
 primary
 rights
 which
 must
 be

 It
is
an
essential
requirement
that
there
must
first
be
 respected
even
in
proceedings
of
this
character:

a
 labor
 dispute
 between
 the
 contending
 parties
  Right
to
a
hearing

before
the
labor
arbiter.
  Tribunal
 must
 consider
 the
 evidence

 In
 the
 present
 case,
 there
 is
 no
 labor
 dispute
 presented

between
 PAL
 and
 the
 employees
 as
 there
 has
 yet
  Decision
must
be
supported
by
something

been
 no
 complaint
 for
 illegal
 dismissal
 filed
 with
 (evidence)

the
 labor
 arbiter
 by
 the
 employees
 against
 the
  Supporting
evidence
must
be
substantial

petitioner.
  Decision
 must
 be
 rendered
 on
 the

evidence
 presented
 or
 at
 least
 contained


 in
the
record
and
disclosed
to
the
parties

affected

Chapter
II:
Powers
and
duties
(cont’d.)
  Body
or
CIR
or
any
of
its
judges
must
act

on
 his
 own
 independent
 consideration
 of

Article
221.
Technical
rules
not
binding
and
prior
resort
to
amicable
settlement.
 the
 law
 and
 facts,
 and
 not
 simply
 accept

the
views
of
the
subordinate
in
arriving
at

1. Proceedings
 before
 labor
 arbiter
 or
 the
 Commission;
 technical
 rules
 not
 a
decision

applicable
  Decide
 in
 such
 manner
 that
 parties
 can

• Administrative
 and
 quasi‐judicial
 bodies
 are
 not
 bound
 by
 the
 know
the
various
issues
involved
and
the

technical
rules
of
procedure
in
the
adjudication
of
cases
 reason
for
the
decision

• Simplification
of
procedure,
without
regard
to
technicalities
of
law
or
 • Verification

procedure
 and
 without
 sacrificing
 the
 fundamental
 requisites
 of
 due
 o A
 pleading
 is
 verified
 by
 an
 affidavit
 that
 the
 affiant
 has

process,
is
mandated
to
insure
speedy
administration
of
justice
 read
the
pleading
and
that
the
allegations
therein
are
true

o NLRC
 or
 Labor
 Arbiter
 can
 decide
 case
 on
 the
 basis
 of
 and
correct
of
his
knowledge
and
belief.


position
papers
and
other
documents
alone
 o It
is
intended
to
assure
that
the
allegations
in
the
pleading

o Affidavits
 may
 be
 given
 evidentiary
 value
 even
 if
 the
 have
been
prepared
in
good
faith
or
are
true
and
correct,

affiants
were
not
cross‐examined;
hearsay
does
not
apply
 not
mere
speculations

• Modicum
of
Admissibility;
substantial
evidence
 o Generally,
 lack
 of
 verification
 is
 merely
 a
 formal
 defect

o Evidence
 presented
 before
 it
 must
 at
 least
 have
 a
 that
is
neither
jurisdictional
nor
fatal

modicum
of
admissibility
for
it
to
be
given
some
probative
  Court
 may
 order
 correction
 of
 pleading
 or
 act
 on

value
 the
 unverified
 pleading
 if
 the
 attending

circumstances
are
such
that
strict
compliance
with


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 14

 the
 rule
 may
 be
 dispensed
 with
 in
 order
 to
 serve
  Determining
the
real
parties
in
the
interest

the
ends
of
justice
  Determining
 the
 necessity
 of
 amending
 the

• Party
Respondent
 complaint
and
including
all
causes
of
action

o Mayon
Hotel
&
Restaurant,
et
al.
v.
Adarna
  Defining
and
simplifying
the
issues
in
the
case

 Mayon
 Hotel
 &
 Restaurant
 is
 a
 single
 proprietor
  Entering
into
admissions
or
stipulation
of
facts

business
 registered
 in
 the
 name
 of
 Pacita
 O.
 Po,
  Threshing
out
all
the
other
preliminary
matters

whose
 mother,
 Josefa,
 manages
 the
 establishment.
 o Labor
 arbiter
 shall
 preside
 and
 take
 full
 control
 of
 the

Employees
 filed
 complaints
 for
 underpayment
 of
 proceedings

wages
and
other
money
claims
against
petitioners.
 o Conciliation
and
mediation
efforts
shall
be
exerted
by
the

Labor
 arbiter
 granted
 the
 money
 claims.
 Labor
 Labor
 Arbiter
 all
 throughout
 the
 proceedings.
 Should
 the

arbiter
also
held
that
based
on
the
evidence,
Josefa
 parties
 arrive
 at
 any
 agreement
 as
 to
 the
 whole
 or
 any

Po
Lam
was
the
owner/proprietor
even
though
the
 part
 of
 the
 dispute,
 the
 same
 shall
 be
 reduced
 to
 writing

registered
owner
was
Pacita,
the
daughter.

 and
 signed
 by
 the
 parties
 and
 their
 respective
 counsel
 or

 Was
 it
 correct
 to
 hold
 Josefa
 Po
 Lam
 liable
 as
 the
 authorized
representative,
if
any,
before
the
Labor
Arbiter

owner,
and
the
proper
respondent
in
the
case?
YES.
 o Compromise
 agreement
 shall
 be
 approved
 by
 the
 Labor

 Only
Josefa
appeared
in
the
proceedings
and
it
was
 Arbiter,
 if
 after
 explaining
 to
 the
 parties,
 particularly
 to

only
on
appeal
with
the
NLRC
that
Pacita
signed
the
 the
complainants,
he
is
satisfied
that
they
understand
the

pleading.
 The
 findings
 of
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 were
 agreement,
 that
 the
 same
 was
 entered
 into
 freely
 and

based
 on
 credible,
 competent
 and
 substantial
 voluntarily
 by
 them,
 and
 that
 it
 is
 not
 contrary
 to
 law,

evidence.
 morals,
and
public
policy

 Article
221
of
the
Labor
Code
is
clear:
technical
rules
 o Compromise
 agreement
 
 final
 and
 binding
 upon
 the

are
 not
 binding,
 and
 the
 application
 of
 technical
 parties
 and
 shall
 have
 the
 force
 and
 effect
 of
 judgment

rules
 of
 procedure
 may
 be
 relaxed
 in
 labor
 cases
 to
 rendered
by
the
Labor
Arbiter

serve
 the
 demand
 of
 substantial
 justice.
 In
 a
 o Mandatory
 conciliation
 and
 mediation
 conference
 shall,

complaint
 for
 underpayment
 of
 wages
 and
 other
 except
 for
 justifiable
 grounds,
 be
 terminated
 within
 30

money
 claims
 filed
 by
 employees
 of
 a
 single
 calendar
days
from
the
date
of
the
first
conference

proprietorship
 business,
 the
 respondent
 should
 be
 o No
 motion
 for
 postponement
 shall
 be
 entertained
 except

the
business
owner.
This
is
not
necessarily
the
person
 on
meritorious
grounds

in
whose
name
the
business
is
registered.
 • Effect
of
failure
of
conciliation
and
mediation

• 
Prohibited
pleadings
and
motions
 o If
parties
fail
to
agree
upon
an
amicable
settlement,
Labor

o NLRC
2005
Rules
prohibit
the
following:
 Arbiter
 shall
 terminate
 the
 conciliation
 and
 mediation

 Motion
 to
 dismiss
 the
 complaint
 except
 on
 the
 stage
 and
 proceed
 to
 pursue
 the
 other
 purposes

ground
 of
 lack
 of
 jurisdiction
 over
 the
 subject
 mentioned
above

matter,
 improper
 venue,
 res
 judicata,
 prescription
 o Thereafter,
 Labor
 arbiter
 shall
 direct
 parties
 to

and
forum
shopping
 simultaneously
file
their
respective
position
papers
on
the

 Motion
for
a
Bill
of
Particulars
 issues
 agreed
 upon
 by
 the
 parties
 and
 as
 reflected
 in
 the

 Motion
for
new
trial
 minutes
of
the
proceedings

 Petition
 for
 relief
 from
 judgment
 when
 filed
 with
 • Non­appearance
of
parties

the
Labor
Arbiter
 o Non‐appearance
of
complainant
or
petitioner
during
the
2

 Petition
for
Certiorari,
Mandamus,
or
Prohibition
 settings
 for
 mandatory
 conciliation
 and
 mediation

 Motion
to
declare
respondent
in
default
 conference
scheduled
in
the
summons,
despite
due
notice

 Motion
 for
 Reconsideration
 or
 appeal
 from
 any
 thereof,
 shall
 be
 a
 ground
 for
 the
 dismissal
 of
 the
 case

interlocutory
order
of
the
Labor
Arbiter
 without
prejudice

2. Mandatory
 conciliation
 and
 mediation
 conference;
 compromise
 o In
 case
 of
 non‐appearance
 by
 the
 respondent
 during
 the

encouraged
 first
 scheduled
 conference,
 the
 second
 conference
 shall

• Nature
of
proceedings
 proceed
 as
 scheduled
 in
 the
 summons.
 If
 the
 respondent

o Proceedings
before
the
Labor
Arbiter
shall
be
non‐litigous
 still
fails
to
appear
at
the
second
conference
despite
being

• Mandatory
conciliation
and
mediation
conference
 duly
 served
 with
 summons,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall

o Such
is
called
for
the
purpose
of
 immediately
 terminate
 the
 mandatory
 conciliation
 and

 Amicably
settling
the
case
upon
a
fair
compromise
 mediation
 conference.
 The
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 thereafter

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 15

 allow
 the
 complainant
 or
 petitioner
 to
 file
 his
 verified
 individually
 by
 complainants
 denominated
 as

position
 paper
 and
 submit
 evidence
 in
 support
 of
 his
 “Receipts
 and
 Release”
 were
 legally
 binding.
 In

causes
of
action,
and
thereupon
render
his
decision
on
the
 1978,
 complainants
 filed
 another
 complaint
 for

basis
of
the
evidence
on
record.
 illegal
dismissal,
praying
for
reinstatement
with
full

o It
 is
 incumbent
 upon
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 not
 only
 to
 backwages.
 Labor
 Arbiter
 dismissed
 the
 case
 but

persuade
 the
 parties
 to
 settle
 amicably,
 but
 equally
 to
 ordered
the
company
to
pay
separation
pay.
NLRC

ensure
 that
 the
 compromise
 agreement
 entered
 into
 by
 reversed,
 saying
 that
 termination
 pay
 was
 already

them
 is
 a
 fair
 one
 and
 that
 the
 same
 was
 forged
 freely,
 decided
 in
 the
 previous
 case
 and
 was
 barred
 by

voluntarily,
 and
 with
 full
 understanding
 of
 the
 terms
 and
 prior
judgment.

conditions
as
well
as
the
consequences
  Res
 judicata!
 Complainants
 had
 already
 been
 paid

• Binding
effect
of
compromise
agreement
 their
 several
 money
 claims
 including
 their

o A
 judgment
 on
 a
 compromise
 agreement
 puts
 an
 end
 to
 termination
pay.

litigation
and
is
immediately
executory.
  Petitioner
 further
 contend
 that
 their
 acceptance
 of

o Rules
 of
 Court
 requires
 a
 special
 authority
 before
 an
 separation
pay
does
not
operate
as
a
waiver
of
their

attorney
can
compromise
the
litigation
of
his
clients
 claims
 in
 the
 “Illegal
 Dismissal
 Case.”
 Jurisprudence

o NLRC
 Rules:
 Attorneys
 and
 other
 representatives
 of
 exists
to
the
effect
that
a
deed
of
release
or
quitclaim

parties
 shall
 have
 authority
 to
 bind
 their
 clients
 in
 all
 cannot
bar
an
employee
from
demanding
benefits
to

matters
 of
 procedure,
 but
 they
 cannot,
 without
 a
 special
 which
 he
 is
 legally
 entitled;
 that
 quitclaims
 and/or

power
 of
 attorney
 or
 express
 consent,
 enter
 into
 a
 complete
releases
executed
by
the
employees
do
not

compromise
agreement
with
the
opposing
party
in
full
or
 estop
 them
 from
 pursuing
 their
 claim
 arising
 from

partial
discharge
of
a
client’s
claim
 the
 unfair
 labor
 practice
 of
 the
 employer;
 and
 that

o General
Rubber
and
Footwear
Corporation
v.
Drilon
 employees
who
received
their
separation
pay
are
not

 Wage
 Order
 No.
 6
 was
 issued
 increasing
 the
 barred
from
contesting
the
legality
of
their
dismissal,

statutory
 minimum
 wage
 rate.
 General
 Rubber
 and
 that
 acceptance
 of
 those
 benefits
 would
 not

applied
 for
 exemption
 but
 its
 application
 was
 amount
to
estoppel

denied.
Union
declared
a
strike.
Later,
the
company
 • Final
and
executory
judgment
cannot
be
negotiated

and
 Sto.
 Domingo,
 purporting
 to
 represent
 the
 o Although
 compromise
 agreements
 are
 encouraged,
 this

striking
 workers,
 entered
 into
 a
 return‐to‐work
 general
rule
does
not
apply
to
decisions
that
have
become

agreement,
where
the
Union
agreed
not
to
demand
 final
and
executory

the
differential
pay.
100
members
did
not
ratify
the
 o A
 final
 and
 executory
 judgment
 cannot
 be
 negotiated,

document.

 hence,
any
act
to
subvert
it
is
contemptuous


 Is
 the
 waiver
 agreement
 binding
 upon
 all
 the
 3. Motion
to
dismiss

members
of
the
union,
even
those
who
did
not
sign
 • 1989:
 Labor
 code
 and
 the
 NLRC
 Rules
 did
 not
 provide
 for
 a
 specific

it?
 period
within
which
to
file
a
motion
to
dismiss

 The
100
workers
can’t
be
bound
by
the
agreement.
 • NOW:
 2005
 NLRC
 Rules
 
 On
 or
 before
 the
 date
 set
 for
 the

Waiver
of
the
money
claims
is
a
personal
right.
For
 mandatory
 conciliation
 and
 mediation
 conference,
 the
 respondent

a
 waiver
 thereof
 to
 be
 legally
 effective,
 the
 may
file
a
motion
to
dismiss.

individual
consent
or
ratification
of
the
workers
or
 • Motu
proprio
dismissal
of
complaint
based
on
prescription

employees
involved
must
be
shown.
Since
Article
4
 o Motu
proprio
dismiss
if
it
is
apparent
from
its
face
that
the

of
 the
 return­to­work
 agreement
 was
 not
 action
has
prescribed

enforceable
 against
 the
 non­consenting
 union
 • Res
judicata
as
reason
to
dismiss
complaint

members,
 the
 order
 of
 the
 National
 Wages
 Council
 o Delfin,
et
al
v.
Inciong

must
 be
 regarded
 as
 having
 become
 final
 and
  Requisites
for
prior
judgment
to
constitute
a
bar
to
a

executory
 insofar
 as
 the
 non­consenting
 union
 subsequent
case
–

members
were
concerned.
  It
must
be
a
final
judgment
or
order

• Quitclaim
and
waivers
  Court
 rendering
 the
 same
 must
 have

o Olacao,
et
al
v.
NLRC
 jurisdiction
over
subject
matter
and
parties

 Employees
filed
a
complaint
for
unpaid
wages
and
  Judgment
or
order
on
the
merits

living
allowances
against
their
employer.
One
of
the

issues
 was
 whether
 the
 documents
 each
 signed

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 16

  There
must
be
between
the
2
cases
identity
 o The
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 make
 a
 written
 summary
 of
 the

of
 parties,
 subject
 matter
 and
 cause
 of
 proceedings,
 including
 the
 substance
 of
 the
 evidence

action
 presented,
 in
 consultation
 with
 the
 parties.
 The
 written

 Court
 of
 Industrial
 relations
 decision
 was
 already
 summary
shall
be
signed
by
the
parties
and
shall
form
part

final
 and
 executory.
 There
 is
 identity
 in
 cause
 of
 of
the
records.

action
 regarding
 the
 unfair
 labor
 practices
 • Non­appearance
 of
 parties;
 postponement
 of
 hearing
 and

committed
by
Atlantic
against
its
employees.

 clarificatory
conferences

 Union
should
not
be
allowed
to
split
causes
of
action
 o Non‐appearance
 at
 a
 hearing
 or
 clarificatory
 conference

–
 charges
 should
 include
 all
 acts
 of
 unfair
 labor
 by
 the
 complainant
 or
 petitioner,
 who
 was
 duly
 notified

practice
 committed
 against
 any
 and
 all
 members
 of
 thereof,
 may
 be
 sufficient
 cause
 to
 dismiss
 the
 case

the
union
during
that
period.
 without
prejudice.Subject
to
Section
16
of
this
Rule,
where

• No
dismissal
of
complaint
despite
death
 proper
justification
is
shown
by
proper
motion
to
warrant

o Proprietor
 of
 the
 company
 died
 intestate.
 Case
 was
 not
 the
 re‐opening
 of
 the
 case,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 call

extinguished
 because
 of
 the
 death
 of
 the
 proprietor
 another
 hearing
 or
 clarificatory
 conference
 and
 continue

because
 it
 is
 one
 for
 reinstatement
 of
 the
 dismissed
 the
 proceedings
 until
 the
 case
 is
 finally
 decided.
 The

employees
from
their
work.
It
was
not
a
money
claim
 dismissal
 of
 the
 case
 for
 the
 second
 time
 due
 to
 the

• Revival
or
refiling
of
dismissed
case
 unjustified
 non‐appearance
 of
 the
 complainant
 or

o Dismissed
case
is
not
necessarily
dead
 petitioner,
 who
 was
 duly
 notified
 of
 the
 clarificatory

 Party
may
file
a
motion
to
revive
or
re‐open
a
case
 hearing,
shall
be
with
prejudice.

dismissed
 without
 prejudice,
 within
 10
 days
 from
 o In
 case
 the
 respondent
 fails
 to
 appear
 during
 the
 hearing

receipt
of
notice
of
the
order
dismissing
the
same;
 or
clarificatory
conference
despite
due
notice
thereof,
the

otherwise
 his
 only
 remedy
 shall
 be
 to
 refile
 the
 complainant
 shall
 be
 allowed
 to
 present
 evidence
 ex‐
case
in
the
arbitration
branch
of
origin
 parte,
 without
 prejudice
 to
 cross‐examination
 at
 the
 next

4. Submission
of
position
papers
and
reply
 hearing
 or
 conference.
 2
 successive
 non‐appearances
 by

• Determination
of
necessity
of
hearing
or
clarificatory
conference
 the
 respondent
 during
 his
 scheduled
 presentation
 of

o Immediately
 after
 the
 submission
 by
 the
 parties
 of
 their
 evidence
 or
 opportunity
 to
 cross‐examine
 witnesses,

position
 paper
 or
 reply,
 as
 the
 case
 may
 be,
 the
 Labor
 despite
due
notice
thereof,
shall
be
construed
as
a
waiver

Arbiter
shall,
motu
proprio,
determine
whether
there
is
a
 on
 his
 part
 to
 present
 evidence
 or
 conduct
 cross‐
need
 for
 a
 hearing
 or
 clarificatory
 conference.
 At
 this
 examination.

stage,
 he
 may,
 at
 his
 discretion
 and
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 o The
parties
and
their
counsels
appearing
before
the
Labor

making
such
determination,
ask
clarificatory
questions
to
 Arbiter
 shall
 be
 prepared
 for
 continuous
 hearing
 or

further
 elicit
 facts
 or
 information,
 including
 but
 not
 clarificatory
conference.
No
postponement
or
continuance

limited
 to
 the
 subpoena
 of
 relevant
 documentary
 shall
 be
 allowed
 by
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter,
 except
 upon

evidence,
if
any,
from
any
party
or
witness.
 meritorious
 grounds
 and
 subject
 always
 to
 the

• Role
of
the
labor
arbiter
in
hearing
and
clarificatory
conference
 requirement
 of
 expeditious
 disposition
 of
 cases.
 In
 any

o The
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 take
 full
 control
 and
 personally
 case,
 the
 hearing
 or
 clarificatory
 conference
 shall
 be

conduct
 the
 hearing
 or
 clarificatory
 conference.
 Unless
 terminated
within
ninety
(90)
calendar
days
from
the
date

otherwise
 provided
 by
 law,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 of
the
initial
hearing
or
conference.

determine
 the
 order
 of
 presentation
 of
 evidence
 by
 the
 o In
 cases
 involving
 overseas
 Filipino
 workers,
 the

parties,
 subject
 to
 the
 requirements
 of
 due
 process.
 He
 aggregate
 period
 for
 conducting
 the
 mandatory

shall
examine
the
parties
and
their
witnesses
with
respect
 conciliation
 and
 mediation
 conference,
 including
 hearing

to
 the
 matters
 at
 issue;
 and
 ask
 questions
 only
 for
 the
 on
the
merits
or
clarificatory
conference,
shall
not
exceed

purpose
 of
 clarifying
 points
 of
 law
 or
 fact
 involved
 in
 the
 60
 days,
 which
 shall
 be
 reckoned
 from
 the
 date
 of

case.
He
shall
limit
the
presentation
of
evidence
to
matters
 acquisition
 of
 jurisdiction
 by
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 over
 the

relevant
 to
 the
 issue
 before
 him
 and
 necessary
 for
 a
 just
 person
of
the
respondents.

and
speedy
disposition
of
the
case.
 5. Submission
of
the
case
for
decision

o In
 the
 cross‐examination
 of
 witnesses,
 only
 relevant,
 • Upon
the
submission
by
the
parties
of
their
position
papers
or
replies,

pertinent
 and
 material
 questions
 necessary
 to
 enlighten
 or
the
lapse
of
the
period
to
submit
the
same,
the
case
shall
be
deemed

the
Labor
Arbiter
shall
be
allowed.
 submitted
for
decision
unless
the
Labor
Arbiter
calls
for
a
hearing
or

clarificatory
 conference
 in
 accordance
 with
 Section
 8
 of
 this
 Rule,
 in

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 17

 which
 case,
 notice
 of
 hearing
 or
 clarificatory
 conference
 shall
 be
 before
any
court,
tribunal,
board
or
body
shall
be
suspended

immediately
sent
to
the
parties.
Upon
termination
of
the
said
hearing
 accordingly.

or
conference,
the
case
shall
be
deemed
submitted
for
decision.
 o Such
 suspension
 of
 proceedings
 applies
 even
 to
 complaints

• Position
papers
as
basis
of
decision
 for
 illegal
 dismissal,
 unfair
 labor
 practice,
 damages
 and

o Procedure
 by
 which
 issues
 are
 resolved
 based
 only
 on
 payment
of
separation
pay,
retirement
benefits,
13th
month

position
 papers,
 affidavits
 or
 documentary
 evidence,
 if
 pay
 and
 SIL
 which
 employees
 have
 filed
 with
 and
 were

agreed
 upon
 by
 the
 parties,
 may
 be
 availed
 of
 by
 the
 awaiting
resolution
by
a
labor
arbiter.

arbiter
 7. Filing
and
service
of
pleadings
and
decisions

 Not
violative
of
due
process
clause
 • All
 pleadings
 in
 connection
 with
 the
 case
 shall
 be
 filed
 with
 the

 Affidavits
 in
 such
 case
 may
 take
 the
 place
 of
 their
 appropriate
 docketing
 unit
 of
 the
 Regional
 Arbitration
 Branch
 of
 the

direct
testimony
 Commission,
as
the
case
maybe

 Labor
arbiter
may
still
choose
to
call
for
a
hearing
 • Party
filing
the
pleading
shall
serve
the
opposing
parties
with
a
copy

o If
 the
 employer
 filed
 no
 position
 paper
 despite
 adequate
 thereof
 and
 its
 supporting
 documents
 in
 the
 manner
 provided
 in
 the

notice,
labor
arbiter
is
justified
in
deciding
the
case
based
 NLRC
Rules
with
proof
of
service
thereof

on
the
position
papers
on
record
 • Service
of
notice
and
resolutions

• Lack
of
verification,
not
fatal
 o Notices
or
summons
and
copies
of
orders,
shall
be
served

o Lack
 of
 verification
 of
 position
 paper‐affidavit
 is
 a
 formal
 on
the
parties
to
the
case
personally
by
the
Bailiff
or
duly

defect.
It
could
easily
be
corrected
by
requiring
an
oath
 authorized
 public
 officer
 within
 three
 (3)
 days
 from

• Due
process:
opportunity
to
be
heard
 receipt
 thereof
 or
 by
 registered
 mail;
 Provided
 that
 in

o Procedural
due
process
means
that
a
party
to
a
case
must
 special
 circumstances,
 service
 of
 summons
 may
 be

be
given
sufficient
opportunity
to
be
heard
 effected
in
accordance
with
the
pertinent
provisions
of
the

o What
the
law
prohibits
is
the
absolute
lack
of
opportunity
 Rules
of
Court;
Provided
further,
that
in
cases
of
decisions

to
be
heard
 and
 final
 awards,
 copies
 thereof
 shall
 be
 served
 on
 both

 There
 is
 no
 denial
 of
 due
 process
 where
 the
 parties
 and
 their
 counsel
 or
 representative
 by
 registered

employer
 was
 duly
 represented
 by
 counsel
 and
 mail;
 Provided
 further
 that
 in
 cases
 where
 a
 party
 to
 a

given
 sufficient
 opportunity
 to
 be
 heard
 and
 case
 or
 his
 counsel
 on
 record
 personally
 seeks
 service
 of

present
 his
 evidence,
 nor
 where
 the
 employer’s
 the
 decision
 upon
 inquiry
 thereon,
 service
 to
 said
 party

failure
 to
 be
 heard
 was
 done
 due
 to
 the
 various
 shall
 be
 deemed
 effected
 upon
 actual
 receipt
 thereof;

postponements
 granted
 to
 it
 or
 to
 his
 repeated
 Provided
 finally,
 that
 where
 parties
 are
 so
 numerous,

failure
to
appear
during
the
hearings
 service
shall
be
made
on
counsel
and
upon
such
number
of

• Inhibition
 complainants,
 as
 may
 be
 practicable,
 which
 shall
 be

o 
Labor
 Arbiter
 may
 voluntarily
 inhibit
 himself
 from
 the
 considered
substantial
compliance
with
Article
224
(a)
of

resolution
of
a
case
and
shall
so
state
in
writing
the
legal
 the
 Labor
 Code,
 as
 amended.
 For
 purposes
 of
 appeal,
 the

justifications
 therefor.
 Upon
 motion
 of
 a
 party,
 either
 on
 period
 shall
 be
 counted
 from
 receipt
 of
 such
 decisions,

the
ground
of
relationship
within
the
fourth
civil
degree
of
 resolutions,
or
orders
by
the
counsel
or
representative
of

consanguinity
 or
 affinity
 with
 the
 adverse
 party
 or
 record.

counsel,
 or
 on
 question
 of
 impartiality,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 o The
 Bailiff
 or
 officer
 serving
 the
 notice,
 order,
 resolution

may
inhibit
himself
from
further
hearing
and
deciding
the
 or
 decision
 shall
 submit
 his
 return
 within
 two
 (2)
 days

case.
 Such
 motion
 shall
 be
 resolved
 within
 five
 (5)
 days
 from
 date
 of
 service
 thereof,
 stating
 legibly
 in
 his
 return

from
 the
 filing
 thereof.
 An
 order
 denying
 or
 granting
 a
 his
name,
the
names
of
the
persons
served
and
the
date
of

motion
for
inhibition
is
inappealable.
 receipt,
 which
 return
 shall
 be
 immediately
 attached
 and

• Due
process
includes
impartiality
of
the
appeal
body
 shall
form
part
of
the
records
of
the
case.
In
case
of
service

o Officer
 who
 reviews
 a
 case
 on
 appeal
 should
 not
 be
 the
 by
 registered
 mail,
 the
 Bailiff
 or
 officer
 shall
 write
 in
 the

same
person
whose
decision
is
the
subject
of
review
 return,
 the
 names
 of
 persons
 served
 and
 the
 date
 of

6. Suspension
of
proceedings
 mailing
 of
 the
 resolution
 or
 decision.
 If
 no
 service
 was

• Rubberworld
(Phil.)
Inc.
v.
NLRC
 effected,
the
service
officer
shall
state
the
reason
therefor

o When
a
corporation
petitions
the
SEC
for
a
declaration
of
 in
the
return.

suspension
of
payments
and
that
it
is
being
rehabilitated,
 • Proof
and
completeness
of
service

all
 actions
 for
 claims
 against
 such
 corporation
 pending
 o The
 return
 is
 prima
 facie
 proof
 of
 the
 facts
 indicated

therein.
 Service
 by
 registered
 mail
 is
 complete
 upon

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 18

 receipt
by
the
addressee
or
his
agent;
but
if
the
addressee
 o In
 cases
 involving
 monetary
 awards,
 the
 decisions
 or

fails
 to
 claim
 his
 mail
 from
 the
 post
 office
 within
 five
 (5)
 orders
 of
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 contain
 the
 amount

days
 from
 the
 date
 of
 first
 notice
 of
 the
 postmaster,
 awarded.

service
shall
take
effect
after
such
time.
 o In
case
the
decision
of
the
Labor
Arbiter
includes
an
order

o Section
 4,
 Rule
 13
 of
 the
 Rules
 of
 Court
 which
 is
 of
reinstatement,
it
shall
likewise
contain:

suppletory
 provides:
 Service
 of
 the
 papers
 may
 be
 made
  Statement
 that
 the
 reinstatement
 aspect
 is

by
 delivering
 personally
 a
 copy
 to
 the
 party
 or
 his
 immediately
executory;
and

attorney,
or
by
leaving
it
in
his
office
with
his
clerk
or
with
  Directive
 for
 the
 employer
 to
 submit
 a
 report
 of

a
person
having
charge
thereof.
If
no
person
is
found
in
his
 compliance
 within
 ten
 (10)
 calendar
 days
 from

office,
or
his
office
is
not
known,
then
by
leaving
the
copy,
 receipt
of
the
said
decision.

between
 the
 hours
 of
 8
 in
 the
 morning
 and
 6
 in
 the
 • No
 motions
 for
 reconsideration
 and
 petitions
 for
 relief
 from

evening,
 at
 the
 party’s
 or
 attorney’s
 residence,
 if
 known,
 judgment

with
a
person
of
sufficient
discretion
to
receive
the
same.
 o No
motions
for
reconsideration
or
petitions
for
relief
from

8. Resolution
of
doubt
in
law
or
evidence
 judgment
 of
 any
 decision,
 resolution
 or
 order
 of
 a
 Labor

• Doubt
as
to
the
interpretation
of
labor
laws
and
regulations
has
to
be
 Arbiter
shall
be
allowed.
However,
when
one
such
motion

resolved
in
favor
of
labor
 for
reconsideration
is
filed,
it
shall
be
treated
as
an
appeal

o This
legal
precept
extends
to
doubts
about
the
evidence
of
 provided
 that
 it
 complies
 with
 the
 requirements
 for

the
disputants
 perfecting
 an
 appeal.
 In
 the
 case
 of
 a
 petition
 for
 relief

• Nicario
v.
NLRC,
Mancao
Supermarket
 from
judgment,
the
Labor
Arbiter
shall
elevate
the
case
to

o In
 her
 claim
 for
 overtime
 pay,
 petitioner
 alleged
 that
 she
 the
Commission
for
disposition.

worked
12
hours
a
day.
Company
relied
on
her
daily
time

records
 (DTRs)
 to
 allege
 that
 she
 only
 worked
 8
 hours
 a
 Article
222.
Appearances
and
fees.

day.
NLRC
sided
with
the
company

o NLRC’s
 reliance
 on
 the
 DTRs
 submitted
 by
 the
 employer
 is
 1. Appearance
of
non­lawyers

misplaced.
 The
 time
 records
 were
 unreliable
 because
 the
 • A
 non‐lawyer
 may
 appear
 before
 the
 Commission
 or
 Labor
 Arbiter

originals
were
not
presented,
company
makes
it
appear
that
 only
if:

employee
 has
 2
 hour
 rest
 period,
 and
 that
 all
 entries
 are
 o He
represents
himself
as
party
to
the
case

suspiciously
consistent.
If
doubts
exist
between
the
evidence
 o He
 represents
 a
 legitimate
 labor
 organization,
 as
 defined

presented
 by
 the
 employer
 and
 the
 employee,
 the
 scales
 of
 under
Article
212
and
242
of
the
Labor
Code,
as
amended,

justice
 must
 be
 tilted
 in
 favor
 of
 the
 latter.
 Doubts
 which
is
a
party
to
the
case:
Provided,
that
he
presents:

reasonably
arising
from
evidence,
or
in
the
interpretation
of
  A
 certification
 from
 the
 Bureau
 of
 Labor
 Relations

agreements
and
writing
should
be
resolved
in
the
laborer’s
 (BLR)
 or
 Regional
 Office
 of
 the
 Department
 of

favor.
 Labor
 and
 Employment
 attesting
 that
 the

9. Decision
of
labor
arbiter
 organization
 he
 represents
 is
 duly
 registered
 and

• 
The
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 render
 his
 decision
 within
 thirty
 (30)
 listed
 in
 the
 roster
 of
 legitimate
 labor

calendar
days,
without
extension,
after
the
submission
of
the
case
by
 organizations;

the
 parties
 for
 decision,
 even
 in
 the
 absence
 of
 stenographic
 notes;
  A
verified
certification
issued
by
the
secretary
and

Provided
 however,
 that
 cases
 involving
 overseas
 Filipino
 workers
 attested
to
by
the
president
of
the
said
organization

shall
be
decided
within
ninety
(90)
calendar
days
after
the
filing
of
the
 stating
 that
 he
 is
 authorized
 to
 represent
 the
 said

complaint
which
shall
commence
to
run
upon
acquisition
by
the
Labor
 organization
in
the
said
case;
and

Arbiter
of
jurisdiction
over
the
respondents
  A
copy
of
the
resolution
of
the
board
of
directors
of

• Contents
of
decisions
 the
said
organization
granting
him
such
authority

o The
 decisions
 and
 orders
 of
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 be
 o He
represents
a
member
or
members
of
a
legitimate
labor

clear
 and
 concise
 and
 shall
 include
 a
 brief
 statement
 of
 organization
 that
 is
 existing
 within
 the
 employer's

the:
 establishment,
who
are
parties
to
the
case:
Provided,
that

 Facts
of
the
case;
 he
presents:

 Issues
involved;
  A
 verified
 certification
 attesting
 that
 he
 is

 Applicable
laws
or
rules;
 authorized
 by
 such
 member
 or
 members
 to

 Donclusions
and
the
reasons
therefor;
 represent
them
in
the
case;
and

 Specific
remedy
or
relief
granted.


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 19

  A
verified
certification
issued
by
the
secretary
and
 before
 the
 labor
 arbiters
 could
 not
 bind
 the

attested
to
by
the
president
of
the
said
organization
 petitioner
company.

stating
 that
 the
 person
 or
 persons
 he
 is
 4. Attorney’s
fee

representing
 are
 members
 of
 their
 organization
 • Labor
 Code
 prohibits
 payment
 of
 attorney’s
 fees
 only
 when
 it
 is

which
is
existing
in
the
employer's
establishment
 effected
 through
 forced
 contributions
 from
 workers
 from
 their
 own

o He
 is
 a
 duly‐accredited
 member
 of
 any
 legal
 aid
 office
 funds
as
distinguished
from
the
union
funds.

recognized
by
the
Department
of
Justice
or
Integrated
Bar
 o The
obligation
to
pay
belongs
to
the
union
and
cannot
be

of
the
Philippines:
Provided,
that
he
 shunted
to
the
workers
as
their
direct
responsibility

 Presents
proof
of
his
accreditation;
and
 • Any
 agreement
 to
 the
 contrary
 regarding
 such
 payment
 is
 null
 and

 Represents
a
party
to
the
case
 void

o He
 is
 the
 owner
 or
 president
 of
 a
 corporation
 or
 • Negotiation
fee

establishment
which
is
a
party
to
the
case:
Provided,
that
 o Cebu
Institute
of
Technology
v.
Ople

he
presents:
  The
first
matter
raised
for
clarification
in
this
case

 A
 verified
 certification
 attesting
 that
 he
 is
 concerns
 the
 award
 of
 10%
 of
 the
 backwages

authorized
 to
 represent
 said
 corporation
 or
 payable
 to
 all
 members
 of
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 as

establishment;
and
 negotiation
 fee
 which
 covers
 attorney’s
 fees,

 A
copy
of
the
resolution
of
the
board
of
directors
of
 agency
fee
and
the
like.

said
 corporation,
 or
 other
 similar
 resolution
 or
  SC
sided
with
the
school.
The
whole
90%
economic

instrument
 issued
 by
 said
 establishment,
 granting
 package
awarded
by
the
NLRC
can’t
be
the
basis
for

him
such
authority
 computing
the
negotiation
fees.
The
law
has
already

2. Change
of
lawyer
 provided
 for
 the
 minimum
 percentage
 of
 tuition
 fee

• No
 substitution
 of
 attorney
 will
 be
 allowed
 unless
 the
 following
 increases
 to
 be
 allotted
 for
 teachers
 and
 other

requisites
concur:
 personnel.
 It
 follows
 that
 only
 the
 amount
 beyond

o There
must
be
filed
a
written
application
for
substitution
 that
 mandated
 by
 law
 should
 be
 subject
 to

o There
must
be
filed
the
written
consent
of
the
client
to
the
 negotiation
 fees
 and
 attorney’s
 fees
 for
 the
 simple

substitution
 reason
that
it
is
only
this
which
the
employees
had
to

o There
must
be
filed
the
written
consent
of
the
attorney
to
 bargain
for

be
substituted,
if
such
consent
can
be
obtained
 • For
services
rendered
by
Union
Officers

o In
 case
 such
 written
 consent
 cannot
 be
 procured,
 there
 o Labor
 Code
 prohibits
 the
 imposition
 on
 any
 individual

must
be
filed
with
the
application
for
substitution,
proof
of
 union
 member
 of
 attorney’s
 fees,
 negotiation
 fees
 and

the
 service
 of
 notice
 of
 such
 motion
 in
 the
 manner
 similar
 charges
 arising
 from
 negotiation
 of
 a
 bargaining

required
by
the
rules,
on
the
attorney
to
be
substituted
 agreement

• Under
 the
 NLRC
 Rules
 any
 change
 or
 withdrawal
 of
 counsel
 or
  Collection
 of
 the
 special
 assessment
 partly
 for
 the

representative
shall
be
made
in
accordance
with
the
Rules
of
Court
 payment
 of
 services
 rendered
 by
 union
 officers,

3. Authority
to
bind
party
 consultants
and
others

similar
charges

• Attorneys
have
authority
to
bind
clients
in
all
manners
of
procedure;
 • Attorney’s
fee
collectible
only
from
union
funds

but
 the
 cannot,
 without
 a
 special
 power
 of
 attorney
 express
 consent,
 o Article
222
(b)
allows
attorney’s
fees
to
be
charged
against

enter
into
a
compromise
agreement
with
the
opposing
party
in
full
or
 “union
funds”

partial
discharge
of
a
client’s
claim

o Kanlaon
Construction
Co
v.
NLRC
 

 Laborers
of
a
construction
company
filed
claims
for

wages
 and
 13th
 month
 pay.
 Company
 engineers
 Chapter
III:
Appeal

admitted
the
company’s
liability
and
agreed
to
pay

the
money
claims.
 Article
223.
Appeal.

 Appearance
on
behalf
of
the
company
required
proof

of
 authorization.
 The
 engineers
 did
 not
 have
 this.
 It
 1. No
motion
for
reconsideration
of
labor
arbiter’s
decision

was
 incumbent
 upon
 the
 labor
 arbiters
 to
 ascertain
 • If
any
of
the
grounds
mentioned
in
Article
223
exists,
the
losing
party

this
 authority.
 Absent
 this
 authority,
 whatever
 may
 appeal
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter’s
 decision
 to
 the
 NLRC
 within
 10
 days

statements
 and
 declarations
 made
 by
 the
 engineer
 from
receipt
of
the
decision


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 20

 • No
 motion
 for
 reconsideration
 need
 be
 filed;
 NLRC
 Rules
 does
 not
 o Mandatory
 because
 it
 is
 in
 the
 interest
 of
 labor
 that
 the

allow
a
MR
of
a
labor
arbiter’s
decision
 law
 has
 commanded
 that
 labor
 cases
 be
 promptly
 if
 not

• BUT
in
appealing
an
NLRC
decision,
it
may
be
elevated
to
the
CA
but
a
 peremptorily
be
disposed
of

MR
should
first
be
filed
 o Only
 strong
 consideration
 of
 equity
 will
 lead
 the
 SC
 to

• Final
decisions
cannot
be
amended
 allow
an
exception
to
the
procedural
rule
in
the
interest
of

o If
 not
 appealed
 on
 time,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter’s
 decision
 substantial
justice

becomes
final
and
cannot
be
amended
 3. Grounds
of
appeal
(exclusive
list)

2. Period
to
appeal
from
labor
arbiter
 • If
there
is
prima
facie
evidence
of
abuse
of
discretion
on
the
part
of
the

• Ten
calendar
days
 Labor
Arbiter
or
Regional
Director

o A
period
of
10
days
from
receipt
of
any
order
is
granted
to
 • If
 the
 decision,
 resolution
 or
 order
 was
 secured
 through
 fraud
 or

either
or
to
both
parties
involved
to
appeal
to
the
NLRC
 coercion,
including
graft
and
corruption

o 10
 days
 refer
 to
 calendar
 days
 and
 not
 working
 days.
 • If
made
purely
on
question
of
law

Hence,
 Saturdays,
 Sundays
 and
 legal
 holidays
 are
 NOT
 to
 • If
 serious
 errors
 in
 the
 findings
 of
 fact
 are
 raised
 which,
 if
 not

be
excluded
(Vir­jen
Shipping
v.
NLRC)
 corrected,
 would
 cause
 grave
 or
 irreparable
 damage
 or
 injury
 to
 the

o Vir‐Jen
 ruling
 can’t
 be
 applied
 prior
 to
 its
 promulgation,
 appellant

July
20,
1982
 4. Where
to
file
appeal

• Under
the
2005
NLRC
Rules
of
Procedure
 • With
 the
 Regional
 Arbitration
 Branch
 or
 Regional
 Office
 where
 the

o Decisions,
resolutions
or
orders
of
the
Labor
Arbiter
shall
 case
was
heard
and
decided

be
final
and
executory
unless
appealed
to
the
Commission
 5. Requisites
for
perfection
of
appeal

by
any
or
both
parties
within
ten
(10)
calendar
days
from
 • 
The
appeal
shall
be:

receipt
 thereof;
 and
 in
 case
 of
 decisions,
 resolutions
 or
 o Filed
within
the
reglementary
period


orders
 of
 the
 Regional
 Director
 of
 the
 Department
 of
 o Verified
by
the
appellant
himself

Labor
 and
 Employment
 pursuant
 to
 Article
 129
 of
 the
 o In
the
form
of
a
memorandum
of
appeal
which
shall
state

Labor
 Code,
 within
 five
 (5)
 calendar
 days
 from
 receipt
 the
 grounds
 relied
 upon
 and
 the
 arguments
 in
 support

thereof.
If
the
10th
or
5th
day,
as
the
case
may
be,
falls
on
 thereof,
the
relief
prayed
for,
and
with
a
statement
of
the

a
 Saturday,
 Sunday
 or
 holiday,
 the
 last
 day
 to
 perfect
 the
 date
 the
 appellant
 received
 the
 appealed
 decision,

appeal
 shall
 be
 the
 first
 working
 day
 following
 such
 resolution
or
order;

Saturday,
Sunday
or
holiday.
 o In
three
(3)
legibly
typewritten
or
printed
copies;
and


• Date
of
receipt
by
mail
 o Accompanied
by

o Service
 by
 registered
 mail
 is
 complete
 either
 upon
 actual
  Proof
of
payment
of
the
required
appeal
fee;

receipt
by
the
addressee
or
at
the
end
of
5
days,
if
he
does
  Posting
of
a
cash
or
surety
bond

not
 claim
 it
 within
 5
 days
 from
 the
 first
 notice
 of
 the
  Certificate
of
non‐forum
shopping;
and

postmaster
  Proof
of
service
upon
the
other
parties.

 Purpose:
 to
 place
 the
 date
 of
 receipt
 beyond
 the
 • A
 mere
 notice
 of
 appeal
 without
 complying
 with
 the
 other
 requisites

power
of
the
party
being
served
to
determine
at
his
 aforestated
 shall
 not
 stop
 the
 running
 of
 the
 period
 for
 perfecting
 an

pleasure
 appeal.

• Failure
to
give
copy
of
appeal
to
adverse
party
within
10
days
 • The
 appellee
 may
 file
 with
 the
 Regional
 Arbitration
 Branch
 or

o Such
is
not
fatal
if
the
appellee
was
not
prejudiced
by
the
 Regional
 Office
 where
 the
 appeal
 was
 filed,
 his
 answer
 or
 reply
 to

delay
in
the
service
of
said
copy
of
the
appeal
 appellant's
 memorandum
 of
 appeal,
 not
 later
 than
 ten
 (10)
 calendar

o Dismissal
 of
 an
 appeal
 on
 purely
 technical
 grounds
 is
 days
from
receipt
thereof.
Failure
on
the
part
of
the
appellee
who
was

frowned
upon
 properly
furnished
with
a
copy
of
the
appeal
to
file
his
answer
or
reply

o In
 labor
 cases,
 non‐service
 of
 the
 copy
 of
 the
 appeal
 or
 within
the
said
period
may
be
construed
as
a
waiver
on
his
part
to
file

appeal
 memorandum
 to
 the
 adverse
 party
 is
 not
 a
 the
same.

jurisdictional
 defect
 and
 does
 not
 justify
 the
 dismissal
 of
 • Subject
 to
 the
 provisions
 of
 Article
 218
 of
 the
 Labor
 Code,
 once
 the

the
appeal
 appeal
 is
 perfected
 in
 accordance
 with
 these
 Rules,
 the
 Commission

• No
extension
of
period
within
which
to
perfect
an
appeal
shall
be
 shall
limit
itself
to
reviewing
and
deciding
only
the
specific
issues
that

allowed
 were
elevated
on
appeal.

• Periods
generally
mandatory
 6. Frivolous
appeal

• Commission
 AND
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 may
 impose
 reasonable
 penalties,

including
fines
and
censures,
upon
a
party
for
filing
a
frivolous
appeal

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 21

 • Unverified
letter
not
proper
appeal
 incorporated
in
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
surety
bond,
and
shall

o Garcia
v.
NLRC
 be
binding
on
the
appellants
and
the
bonding
company

 After
 receiving
 a
 copy
 of
 the
 decision,
 employer
 • The
 appellant
 shall
 furnish
 the
 appellee
 with
 a
 certified
 true
 copy
 of

wrote
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 a
 letter
 expressing
 dismay
 the
 said
 surety
 bond
 with
 all
 the
 above‐mentioned
 supporting

over
the
judgment.
No
appeal
was
taken.
 documents.
 The
 appellee
 shall
 verify
 the
 regularity
 and
 genuineness

 Even
 assuming
 for
 the
 sake
 of
 argument
 that
 the
 thereof
and
immediately
report
any
irregularity
to
the
Commission.

letter
 is
 a
 valid
 notice
 of
 appeal,
 the
 lack
 of
 cash
 or
 • Upon
verification
by
the
Commission
that
the
bond
is
irregular
or
not

surety
 bond
 in
 a
 decision
 considering
 a
 monetary
 genuine,
 the
 Commission
 shall
 cause
 the
 immediate
 dismissal
 of
 the

award
 is
 fatal
 to
 the
 appeal.
 The
 NLRC
 acted
 with
 appeal,
 and
 censure
 or
 cite
 in
 contempt
 the
 responsible
 parties
 and

grave
abuse
of
discretion
and
in
excess
of
jurisdiction
 their
counsels,
or
subject
them
to
reasonable
fine
or
penalty.

in
treating
the
letter
as
an
appeal
from
the
judgment
 • No
motion
to
reduce
bond
shall
be
entertained
except
on
meritorious

7. Payment
of
appeal
fees
 grounds,
and
only
upon
the
posting
of
a
bond
in
a
reasonable
amount

• Appellant
 shall
 pay
 an
 appeal
 fee
 of
 150Php
 to
 the
 Regional
 in
relation
to
the
monetary
award.

Arbitration
Branch
or
Regional
office
of
origin
and
the
official
receipt
 • The
 mere
 filing
 of
 a
 motion
 to
 reduce
 bond
 without
 complying
 with

of
such
payment
shall
form
part
of
the
records
of
the
case
 the
requisites
in
the
preceding
paragraphs
shall
not
stop
the
running

• Failure
 to
 pay
 confers
 a
 directory
 and
 not
 a
 mandatory
 power
 to
 of
the
period
to
perfect
an
appeal.

dismiss
 an
 appeal,
 and
 such
 power
 must
 be
 exercised
 with
 a
 sound
 • Previous
 SC
 rulings,
 as
 in
 the
 Rosewood
 case,
 Court
 ruled
 that
 a

discretion
and
with
a
great
deal
of
circumspection
 relaxation
 of
 the
 appeal
 bond
 requirement
 could
 be
 justified
 by

8. Appeal
bond;
filing
on
time;
exceptions
 substantial
compliance
with
the
rule

• If
 decision
 of
 labor
 arbiter
 or
 regional
 director
 involves
 a
 monetary
 • BUT
 the
 more
 recent
 SC
 cases
 require
 strict
 observance
 of
 the

award,
 an
 appeal
 by
 the
 employer
 may
 be
 perfected
 ONLY
 upon
 the
 reglementary
period

posting
 of
 a
 bond
 (either
 cash
 or
 surety
 equivalent
 in
 amount
 to
 the
 • Sameer
Overseas
Placement
Agency
Inc.
v.
Levantino,
et
al

monetary
award,
exclusive
of
damages
and
attorney’s
fees)
 o Employee
 complained
 of
 illegal
 dismissal,
 among
 others.

• In
case
of
surety
bond,
the
same
shall
be
issued
by
a
reputable
bonding
 Labor
arbiter
upheld
the
dismissal
but
granted
a
monetary

company
 duly
 accredited
 by
 the
 Commission
 or
 the
 Supreme
 Court,
 award.
 Sameer,
 the
 agency
 appealed.
 NLRC
 dismissed
 for

and
 shall
 be
 accompanied
 by
 original
 or
 certified
 true
 copies
 of
 the
 failure
 to
 perfect
 the
 appeal
 within
 10
 day
 period;

following:
 apparently,
did
not
file
an
appeal
bond
on
time

o A
 joint
 declaration
 under
 oath
 by
 the
 employer,
 his
 o Appeal
 bond
 requirement
 is
 not
 merely
 procedural
 but

counsel,
and
the
bonding
company,
attesting
that
the
bond
 jurisdictional,
 for
 without
 it,
 the
 NLRC
 does
 not
 acquire

posted
 is
 genuine,
 and
 shall
 be
 in
 effect
 until
 final
 jurisdiction
 over
 the
 appeal.
 NLRC
 did
 not
 acquire

disposition
of
the
case.
 jurisdiction
 because
 he
 filed
 the
 bond
 6
 days
 AFTER
 the

o An
indemnity
agreement
between
the
employer‐appellant
 lapse
of
the
10
days.


and
bonding
company;
 • Motion
to
reduce
bond
under
NLRC
rules

o Proof
 of
 security
 deposit
 or
 collateral
 securing
 the
 bond:
 o Motion
to
reduce
amount
may
be
entertained


provided,
 that
 a
 check
 shall
 not
 be
 considered
 as
 an
 o No
 motion
 shall
 be
 entertained
 unless
 on
 meritorious

acceptable
security;
 grounds
 and
 ONLY
 upon
 posting
 of
 a
 bond
 in
 reasonable

o Certificate
of
authority
from
the
Insurance
Commission;
 amount
in
relation
to
the
monetary
award

o Certificate
 of
 registration
 from
 the
 Securities
 and
 o Mere
filing
of
the
motion
to
reduce
bond
without
filing
of
a

Exchange
Commission;
 bind
shall
not
stop
the
running
of
the
period
to
perfect
an

o Certificate
 of
 authority
 to
 transact
 surety
 business
 from
 appeal

the
Office
of
the
President;
 • No
bond,
no
appeal
perfected

o Certificate
 of
 accreditation
 and
 authority
 from
 the
 o Borja
Estate,
et
al.
v.
Spouses
R.
Ballad

Supreme
Court;
and
  “Only
upon
the
posting
of
a
cash
or
surety
bond”

o Notarized
 board
 resolution
or
secretary's
 certificate
from
  The
 word
 ONLY
 makes
 it
 perfectly
 clear
 that

the
 bonding
 company
 showing
 its
 authorized
 signatories
 lawmakers
 intended
 by
 the
 posting
 of
 a
 cash
 or

and
their
specimen
signatures.
 surety
 bond
 by
 the
 employer
 to
 be
 the
 exclusive

• A
 cash
 or
 surety
 bond
 shall
 be
 valid
 and
 effective
 from
 the
 date
 of
 means
 by
 which
 an
 employer’s
 appeal
 may
 be

deposit
 or
 posting,
 until
 the
 case
 is
 finally
 decided,
 resolved
 or
 considered
 completed.
 The
 law
 does
 not
 require

terminated,
 or
 the
 award
 satisfied.
 This
 condition
 shall
 be
 deemed
 outright
 payment,
 but
 only
 posting
 of
 a
 bond
 to

ensure
that
the
award
will
be
eventually
paid
should

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 22

 the
 appeal
 fail.
 What
 petitioners
 have
 to
 pay
 is
 a
 • Is
property
bond
acceptable?

moderate
 and
 reasonable
 sum
 for
 the
 premium
 of
 o Case
 where
 labor
 employer
 posted
 a
 real
 estate
 bond

such
bond
 because
it
was
not
in
a
position
to
post
a
cash
bond

 Perfection
 of
 an
 appeal
 in
 the
 manner
 described
 by
 o Court
 allowed
 such
 because
 the
 requirement
 should
 be

law
is
mandatory
and
jurisdictional
 given
a
liberal
interpretation

 (Relaxing
 the
 10
 day
 period)
 Situations
 where
 • Bond
accepted
conditionally

Court
allowed
tardy
appeals:
 o If
 accepted
 conditionally
 by
 the
 NLRC,
 then
 the
 failure
 to

 Presence
 of
 any
 justifying
 circumstance
 fulfill
 those
 conditions
 on
 time
 is
 tantamount
 to
 a
 failure

recognized
by
law,
such
as
fraud,
accident,
 to
post
the
bond
required
by
law

mistake
 or
 excusable
 negligence,
 properly
 • Supersedeas
bond

vested
the
judge
with
discretion
to
approve
 o There
 is
 no
 procedural
 error
 that
 may
 be
 imputed
 to
 the

or
admit
an
appeal
filed
out
of
time
 arbiter
 in
 requiring
 the
 employer
 to
 post
 supersedeas

 Where
 on
 equitable
 grounds,
 a
 bleated
 bond
as
a
condition
for
the
stay
of
immediate
execution
of

appeal
 was
 allowed
 as
 the
 questioned
 the
 judgment
 against,
 AFTER
 the
 appeal
 had
 been
 taken

decision
 was
 served
 directly
 upon
 from
said
judgment

petitioner
 instead
 of
 her
 counsel
 of
 record
 9. Records
and
transmittal

who
at
the
time
was
already
dead
 • The
records
of
a
case
shall
have
a
corresponding
index
of
its
contents

 Where
the
counsel
relied
on
the
footnote
of
 which
shall
include
the
following

the
 notice
 of
 the
 decision
 of
 the
 labor
 o The
original
copy
of
the
complaint;

arbiter
 that
 the
 aggrieved
 party
 may
 o Other
pleadings
and
motions;

appeal
…
within
10
working
days
 o Minutes
 of
 the
 proceedings,
 notices,
 transcripts
 of

 In
 order
 to
 prevent
 miscarriage
 of
 justice
 stenographic
notes,
if
any;

or
 unjust
 enrichment
 such
 as
 where
 the
 o Decisions,
 orders,
 and
 resolutions
 as
 well
 as
 proof
 of

tardy
 appeal
 is
 from
 a
 decision
 granting
 service
thereof,
if
available;

separation
pay
which
was
already
granted
 o The
computation
of
the
award;


in
an
earlier
final
decision
 o Memorandum
of
appeal
and
the
reply
or
answer
thereto,
if

 Where
 there
 are
 special
 circumstances
 in
 any,
and
proof
of
service,
if
available;


the
 case
 combined
 with
 its
 legal
 merits
 or
 o Official
receipt
of
the
appeal
fee;
and

the
amount
and
the
issue
involved
 o The
appeal
bond,
if
any.

• No
 distinction
 between
 “filing
 “
 and
 “perfection”
 of
 appeal;
 Star
 • The
records
shall
be
chronologically
arranged
and
paged
prominently.

Angel
decision,
not
“venerable”
 • Within
forty‐eight
(48)
hours
after
the
filing
of
the
appeal,
the
records

o Star
Angel
ruling:
appeal
must
be
filed
within
10
days
but
 of
the
case
shall
be
transmitted
by
the
Regional
Arbitration
Branch
or

may
be
perfected
after
that
period
 office
of
origin
to
the
Commission.

 Above
ruling
is
merely
obiter!
 10. Effect
of
appeal
of
arbiter’s
decision

 Azucena:
forget
Star
Angel!
 • Without
 prejudice
 to
 immediate
 reinstatement
 pending
 appeal
 under

o Computer
Innovations
Center,
et
al.
v.
NLRC
 Section
 6
 of
 Rule
 XI,
 once
 an
 appeal
 is
 filed,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 loses

 Petitioners
 invoke
 Star
 Angel
 that
 there
 is
 a
 jurisdiction
over
the
case.
All
pleadings
and
motions
pertaining
to
the

distinction
 between
 filing
 within
 the
 reglementary
 appealed
 case
 shall
 thereafter
 be
 addressed
 to
 and
 filed
 with
 the

period
and
perfection
of
the
appeal
 Commission

 In
this
case,
the
motion
for
reduction
of
appeal
bond
 • Execution
or
Reinstatement
pending
appeal

was
 filed
 only
 on
 the
 10th
 day
 and
 can
 no
 longer
 be
 o In
 case
 the
 decision
 includes
 an
 order
 of
 reinstatement,

deemed
to
have
stayed
the
appeal
 and
the
employer
disobeys
the
directive
under
the
second

 The
 reference
 in
 Star
 Angel
 to
 the
 distinction
 paragraph
 of
 Section
 14
 of
 Rule
 V
 or
 refuses
 to
 reinstate

between
 period
 to
 file
 the
 appeal
 and
 to
 perfect
 the
 the
 dismissed
 employee,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall

appeal
 has
 been
 made
 only
 once
 by
 the
 SC;
 thus,
 it
 immediately
issue
writ
of
execution,
even
pending
appeal,

has
 not
 acquired
 the
 seen
 of
 venerability.
 Besides,
 directing
 the
 employer
 to
 immediately
 reinstate
 the

distinction
is
not
particularly
evident
 dismissed
 employee
 either
 physically
 or
 in
 the
 payroll,

• Amount
of
appeal
bond
excludes
damages
 and
 to
 pay
 the
 accrued
 salaries
 as
 a
 consequence
 of
 such

o Bond
 exclusive
 of
 moral
 and
 exemplary
 damages
 as
 well
 reinstatement
at
the
rate
specified
in
the
decision.

as
attorney’s
fees

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 23

 o The
 Sheriff
 shall
 serve
 the
 writ
 of
 execution
 upon
 the
 justice.
He
shall
not
however,
participate
in
the
voting
by

employer
or
any
other
person
required
by
law
to
obey
the
 the
 Division,
 except
 when
 he
 is
 acting
 as
 Presiding

same.
 If
 he
 disobeys
 the
 writ,
 such
 employer
 or
 person
 Commissioner
of
the
Division
in
the
absence
of
the
regular

may
be
cited
for
contempt
in
accordance
with
Rule
IX.
 Presiding
Commissioner.

• Effect
of
perfection
of
appeal
on
execution
 • Issues
on
appeal

o Perfection
 of
 an
 appeal
 shall
 stay
 the
 execution
 of
 the
 o Commission
 shall
 limit
 itself
 to
 reviewing
 those
 issues

decision
 of
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 on
 appeal,
 except
 execution
 which
are
raised
on
appeal

for
reinstatement
pending
appeal
 o Those
 which
 are
 not
 raised
 on
 appeal
 shall
 be
 final
 and

11. Frivolous
or
dilatory
appeals
 executory

• No
 appeal
 from
 an
 interlocutory
 order
 shall
 be
 entertained.
 To
 • Technical
rules
not
binding

discourage
 frivolous
 or
 dilatory
 appeals,
 including
 those
 taken
 from
 o In
any
proceeding
before
the
Commission,
the
parties
may

interlocutory
orders,
the
Commission
may
censure
or
cite
in
contempt
 be
represented
by
legal
counsel
but
it
shall
be
the
duty
of

the
 erring
 parties
 and
 their
 counsels,
 or
 subject
 them
 to
 reasonable
 the
 Chairman,
 any
 Presiding
 Commissioner
 or

fine
or
penalty.
 Commissioner
 to
 exercise
 complete
 control
 of
 the

12. Appeals
from
decisions
of
other
agencies
 proceedings
at
all
stages

• The
 Rules
 provided
 herein
 governing
 appeals
 from
 the
 decisions
 or
 • Evidence
submitted
on
appeal
to
NLRC

orders
 of
 Labor
 Arbiters
 shall
 apply
 to
 appeals
 to
 the
 Commission
 o Rule
is
that
NLRC
is
not
precluded
from
receiving
evidence

from
decisions
or
orders
of
the
other
offices
or
agencies
appealable
to
 on
appeal
as
technical
rules
of
evidence
are
not
binding
in

the
Commission
according
to
law.
 labor
cases

13. Proceedings
before
the
commission
 o Philippine
Telegraph
and
Telephone
Corporation
v.
NLRC

• Commission
 En
 Banc.
‐
 The
 Commission
 shall
 sit
 en
 banc
 only
 for
  On
 appeal,
 employer
 submitted
 evidence
 showing

purposes
of
promulgating
rules
and
regulations
governing
the
hearing
 payment
to
the
employee
of
holiday
pay,
etc.
NLRC

and
disposition
of
cases
before
its
Divisions
and
Regional
Arbitration
 rejected
the
same

Branches,
 and
 for
 the
 formulation
 of
 policies
 affecting
 its
  The
 belated
 presentation
 of
 the
 evidence

administration
 and
 operations.
 It
 may,
 on
 temporary
 or
 emergency
 nothwithstanding,
 NLRC
 should
 have
 considered

basis,
allow
cases
within
the
jurisdiction
of
any
Division
to
be
heard
by
 them
 just
 the
 same.
 Technical
 rules
 of
 evidence
 are

any
 other
 Division
 whose
 docket
 allows
 the
 additional
 workload
 and
 not
binding
in
labor
cases.

such
 transfer
 will
 not
 expose
 litigants
 to
 unnecessary
 additional
 • Conciliation/Mediation

expense.
 o Even
when
the
case
is
elevated
on
appeal
to
the
NLRC,
the

• Divisions.
‐
 Unless
 otherwise
 provided
 by
 law,
 the
 Commission
 shall
 Commission
 shall
 exert
 all
 efforts
 towards
 amicable

exercise
 its
 adjudicatory
 and
 all
 other
 powers,
 functions
 and
 duties
 settlement
of
the
labor
dispute.

through
 its
 five
 (5)
 Divisions.
 Each
 Division
 shall
 consist
 of
 one
 o Settlement
 of
 cases
 on
 appeal,
 to
 be
 valid
 and
 binding

member
 from
 the
 public
 sector
 who
 shall
 act
 as
 the
 Presiding
 between
 the
 parties,
 shall
 be
 made
 before
 the

Commissioner
and
one
member
each
from
the
workers
and
employers
 Commissioner
or
his
authorized
representative

sectors,
respectively.
 • Consultation

o The
 presence
 of
 at
 least
 two
 (2)
 Commissioners
 of
 a
 o The
 conclusions
 of
 a
 Division
 on
 any
 case
 or
 matter

Division
shall
constitute
a
quorum.The
concurrence
of
two
 submitted
 to
 it
 for
 decision
 shall
 be
 reached
 in

(2)
Commissioners
of
a
Division
shall
be
necessary
for
the
 consultation
 before
 the
 case
 is
 assigned
 to
 a
 member
 for

pronouncement
of
a
judgment
or
resolution.
 the
 writing
 of
 the
 opinion.
 It
 shall
 be
 mandatory
 for
 the

o Whenever
 the
 required
 membership
 in
 a
 Division
 is
 not
 Division
 to
 meet
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 the
 consultation

complete
 and
 the
 concurrence
 of
 two
 (2)
 Commissioners
 ordained
herein.

to
 arrive
 at
 a
 judgment
 or
 resolution
 cannot
 be
 obtained,
 o A
 certification
 to
 this
 effect
 signed
 by
 the
 Presiding

the
 Chairman
 shall
 designate
 such
 number
 of
 additional
 Commissioner
 of
 the
 Division
 shall
 be
 issued
 and
 a
 copy

Commissioners
 from
 the
 other
 Divisions
 as
 may
 be
 thereof
attached
to
the
record
of
the
case
and
served
upon

necessary
from
the
same
sector.
 the
parties.

o Role
 of
 Chairman
 in
 the
 Division.
 ‐
 The
 Chairman
 of
 the
 • Dissenting
Opinion

Commission
may
convene
and
preside
over
the
session
of
 o Should
any
member
of
a
Division
indicate
his
intention
to

any
 Division
 to
 consider
 any
 case
 pending
 before
 it
 and
 write
a
dissenting
opinion,
he
may
file
the
same
within
the

participate
 in
 its
 deliberations,
 if
 in
 his
 judgment,
 his
 period
 prescribed
 for
 deciding
 or
 resolving
 the
 appeal;

presence
 therein
 will
 best
 serve
 the
 interests
 of
 labor

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 24

 otherwise,
 such
 written
 dissenting
 opinion
 shall
 not
 be
  Abuse
of
discretion
is
admittedly
within
the
abmit
of

considered
part
of
the
records
of
the
case.
 certiorari
and
its
grant
thereof
to
the
NLRC
indicates

• Inhibition
 the
lawmakers’
intention
to
broaden
the
meaning
of

o No
motion
to
inhibit
the
entire
Division
of
the
Commission
 appeal
as
that
term
is
used
in
the
Code

shall
 be
 entertained.
 However,
 any
 Commissioner
 may
  Being
 the
 administrative
 agency
 tasked
 with
 the

inhibit
 himself
 from
 the
 consideration
 and
 resolution
 of
 review
of
labor
cases,
the
NLRC
is
in
a
better
position

any
case
or
matter
before
the
Division
and
shall
so
state
in
 to
 determine
 whether
 grounds
 for
 certiorari
 are

writing
 the
 legal
 or
 justifiable
 grounds
 therefor.
 In
 the
 meritorious

event
 that
 a
 member
 inhibits
 himself,
 the
 case
 shall
 be
  Hence,
 NLRC
 has
 authority
 to
 rule
 on
 a
 matter

raffled
by
the
Executive
Clerk
or
Deputy
Executive
Clerk
to
 involving
 grave
 abuse
 of
 discretion
 that
 may
 be

either
 of
 the
 two
 (2)
 remaining
 Commissioners.
 In
 case
 committed
by
a
labor
arbiter

two
(2)
Commissioners
in
a
Division
inhibit
themselves
in
 15. Finality
of
decision
of
the
Commission
and
entry
of
final
judgment

a
 case
 or
 matter
 before
 it,
 the
 Chairman
 shall,
 as
 far
 as
 • Finality
 of
 the
 Decisions,
 Resolutions
 or
 Orders
 of
 the
 Commission.
 ‐

practicable,
 appoint
 two
 (2)
 Commissioners
 from
 other
 Except
as
provided
in
Section
9
of
Rule
X,
the
decisions,
resolutions
or

Divisions
 representing
 the
 sector
 of
 the
 Commissioners
 orders
 of
 the
 Commission
 shall
 become
 final
 and
 executory
 after
 ten

who
inhibited
themselves
 (10)
calendar
days
from
receipt
thereof
by
the
parties.

14. Form
of
decision,
resolution
and
order
 • Entry
of
Judgment.
‐
Upon
the
expiration
of
the
ten
(10)
calendar
day

• The
 decision,
 resolution
 and
 order
 of
 the
 Commission
 shall
 state
 period,
the
decision,
resolution,
or
order
shall
be
entered
in
a
book
of

clearly
 and
 distinctly
 the
 findings
 of
 facts,
 issues,
 and
 conclusions
 of
 entries
of
judgment.

law
on
which
it
is
based,
and
the
relief
granted,
if
any.
If
the
decision,
 • The
 Executive
 Clerk
 or
 Deputy
 Executive
 Clerk
 shall
 consider
 the

resolution
or
order
involves
monetary
awards,
the
same
shall
contain
 decision,
 resolution
 or
 order
 as
 final
 and
 executory
 after
 sixty
 (60)

the
specific
amount
awarded
as
of
the
date
the
decision
is
rendered
 calendar
 days
 from
 date
 of
 mailing
 in
 the
 absence
 of
 return
 cards,

• Commission
 shall
 decide
 all
 cases
 within
 20
 calendar
 days
 from
 certifications
from
the
post
office,
or
other
proof
of
service
to
parties.

receipt
of
the
answer
of
the
appellee
 16. Motions
for
reconsideration

• Decision
 of
 Commission
 shall
 be
 final
 and
 executory
 after
 10
 days
 • Motion
for
reconsideration
of
any
decision,
resolution
or
order
of
the

from
receipt
by
the
parties
 Commission
 shall
 not
 be
 entertained
 except
 when
 based
 on
 palpable

• Any
enforcement
agency
may
be
deputized
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor
 or
 patent
 errors;
 provided
 that
 the
 motion
 is
 under
 oath
 and
 filed

or
the
Commission
in
the
enforcement
of
decision,
awards,
orders
 within
 ten
 (10)
 calendar
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 decision,
 resolution
 or

• Reasoned
reversal
 order,
 with
 proof
 of
 service
 that
 a
 copy
 of
 the
 same
 has
 been

o It
 stands
 to
 reason
 that
 NLRC
 should
 state
 an
 acceptable
 furnished,
 within
 the
 reglementary
 period,
 the
 adverse
 party;
 and

cause
for
setting
aside
labor
aribter’s
findings
 provided
further,
that
only
one
such
motion
from
the
same
party
shall

o It
would
otherwise
be
a
whimsical,
capricious,
oppressive,
 be
entertained.

unreasonable
 exercise
 of
 quasi‐judicial
 prerogative,
 • Should
 a
 motion
 for
 reconsideration
 be
 entertained
 pursuant
 to
 this

subject
 to
 invalidation
 by
 the
 extraordinary
 writ
 of
 section,
the
resolution
shall
be
executory
after
ten
(10)
calendar
days

certiorari
 from
receipt
thereof.

• Extended
meaning
of
“appeal”
under
Article
223;
NLRC
may
issue
 • NLRC
rules
does
not
allow
second
MR

writ
of
Certiorari
 • Supplemental
 MR
 filed
 outside
 the
 10
 day
 appeal
 period
 cannot
 be

o Triad
Security
v.
Ortega
 entertained

 For
a
petition
for
certiorari
to
prosper,
requisites
–
 • Party
who
failed
to
appeal
on
time
from
decision
of
labor
arbiter

 Writ
 is
 directed
 against
 a
 tribunal,
 board,
 may
still
file
MR
of
NLRC
decision

or
 officer
 exercising
 judicial
 or
 quasi­ o Sadol
v.
Pilipinas
Kao,
Inc.

judicial
functions
  Sadol
was
employed
by
Pilipinas
Kao,
Inc.
(PKI).
He

 Tribunal,
 board,
 officer
 has
 acted
 without
 claims
he
was
summarily
dismissed
and
thus
filed
a

or
 in
 excess
 of
 jurisdiction
 or
 with
 grave
 complaint
 for
 reinstatement
 and
 backwages.

abuse
 of
 discretion
 amounting
 to
 lack
 or
 Private
 respondents
 was
 ordered
 by
 the
 labor

excess
of
jurisdiction
 arbiter
to
pay
separation
pay

 There
is
no
appeal
or
any
plain
speedy
and
  NLRC
 modified
 the
 decision,
 ordered

adequate
remedy
in
the
ordinary
course
of
 reinstatement.
 Appeal
 of
 PKI
 was
 dismissed
 for

law
 being
 filed
 out
 of
 time.
 PKI
 received
 a
 copy
 of
 the


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 25

 decision
 of
 the
 NLRC
 thereafter.
 MR
 was
 filed.
 o Party
 prays
 that
 judgment
 be
 rendered
 annulling
 or

NLRC
dismissed
the
case
 modifying
 the
 proceedings,
 as
 the
 law,
 requires
 of
 such

 Party
 who
 failed
 to
 appeal
 from
 a
 decision
 of
 the
 tribunal,
board
or
officer

Labor
 Arbiter
 to
 the
 NLRC
 can
 still
 participate
 in
 a
 • “Grave
abuse
of
discretion”

separate
appeal
timely
filed
by
the
adverse
party
by
 o By
 grave
 abuse
 of
 discretion
 is
 meant
 capricious
 and

a
MR
of
the
decision
of
the
NLRC
on
appeal
 whimsical
exercise
of
judgment
and
is
equivalent
to
lack
of

 Having
lost
the
right
to
appeal,
can
PKI
file
a
MR
of
 jurisdiction.
Mere
abuse
of
discretion
is
not
enough

said
decision?
Yes.
Rules
of
technicality
must
yield
 o Power
is
exercised
in
an
arbitrary
or
despotic
manner

to
the
broader
interest
of
justice
 • Sole
office
of
Certiorari

17. Certified
cases
 o The
sole
office
of
the
writ
of
certiorari
is
the
correction
of

18. Appeal
from
the
NLRC
 errors
 of
 jurisdiction
 including
 the
 commission
 of
 grave

• Review
by
Certiorari
by
the
CA;
the
St.
Martin
case
 abuse
 of
 discretion
 amounting
 to
 lack
 or
 excess
 of

o St.
Martin
Funeral
Homes
v.
NLRC
 jurisdiction

 Issue
involved
was
whether
or
not
the
respondent
 • Not
a
slave
to
technical
rules

was
a
employee
of
the
petitioner
 o Reyes
v.
NLRC

 SC
 did
 not
 answer
 the
 question
 and
 referred
 the
  Dismissed
employee
was
ordered
reinstated
by
the

matter
to
the
CA
 labor
arbiter.
NLRC
reversed.
 On
appeal
to
the
CA,

 Court
noted
that
the
present
laws
provide
no
appeals
 CA
dismissed
on
the
ground
that
he
did
not
serve
a

from
NLRC
decisions.
RA
7902’s
purpose
was
to
ease
 copy
of
the
petition
to
the
adverse
party

the
workload
of
the
SC
by
the
transfer
of
some
of
its
  Liberal
 construction
 when
 the
 doing
 so
 would
 be
 in

burden
of
review
of
factual
issues
to
the
CA
 the
service
of
the
demands
of
substantial
justice
and

 Appeals
from
the
NLRC
to
the
SC
are
interpreted
and
 in
the
exercise
of
the
equity
jurisdiction
of
this
Court

hereby
 declared
 to
 mean
 and
 refer
 to
 petitions
 for
 • Appeal
from
OSEC
to
CA;
St.
Martin
ruling
applies

ceritorari
under
Rule
65.
All
such
petitions
should
be
 o Rulings
by
the
Office
of
the
Secretary
(OSEC)
of
DOLE
may

initially
filed
in
the
CA.
 be
appealed
to
the
CA,
not
the
SC

 In
a
nutshell
–
 o Instances
 of
 possible
 appeal
 to
 the
 CA
 from
 the
 DOLE

 Way
to
review
NLRC
decisions
is
through
 Secretary:

SCA
of
certiorari
under
Rule
65
  Under
 the
 rules
 governing
 local
 employment,

 Jurisdiction
 over
 such
 action
 belongs
 to
 regarding
 the
 regional
 director’s
 decisions
 on

both
the
SC
and
CA;
BUT
 complaints
of
employment
agencies

 In
 line
 with
 the
 doctrine
 on
 hierarchy
 of
  Compliance
 order
 in
 labor
 standards
 cases;
 rules

courts,
 the
 petition
 should
 be
 initially
 on
 disposition
 of
 labor
 standard
 cases;
 execution

presented
 to
 the
 lower
 of
 the
 2
 courts,
 on
occupational
health
and
safety
cases

that
is
the
CA
  Denial
 of
 application
 for
 registration
 by
 BLR
 of

• When
and
where
to
file
petition
 registration
 of
 federation,
 national
 or
 industry

o Filed
 not
 later
 than
 60
 days
 from
 notice
 of
 judgment,
 union,
or
trade
union
center

order,
or
resolution
sought
to
be
assailed
  Cancellation
 of
 registration
 by
 BLR
 or
 Regional

o In
case
a
MR
or
MNT
is
timely
filed,
whether
such
motion
 Office

is
required
or
not,
the
60
day
period
shall
be
counted
from
  Order
 of
 a
 med‐arbiter
 on
 a
 petition
 for

notice
of
the
denial
of
said
motion
 certification
 election
 or
 as
 to
 the
 results
 of
 a

o 60
day
period
must
be
carefully
observed
 certificate
election

o In
 such
 appeals,
 a
 certified
 copy
 of
 the
 questioned
  Decision
 of
 the
 BLR
 regarding
 administration
 of

judgment,
final
order
or
resolution
is
required
 union
funds

• Effect
on
NLRC’s
decision
  Decisions
in
cases
of
assumption
of
jurisdiction

o Petition
 for
 certiorari
 shall
 not
 stay
 the
 execution
 of
 the
 • Exhaustion
 of
 administrative
 remedies;
 motion
 for

assailed
decision
of
the
NLRC
unless
a
TRO
is
issued
by
the
 reconsideration
required

CA
or
SC
 o A
petition
for
certiorari
should
be
preceded
by
exhaustion

• Appeal
to
Labor
Secretary
abolished
 of
administrative
remedies

• Grounds
for
certiorari

o See
requisites
in
Triad
Security
v.
Ortega

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 26

 o When
an
administrative
remedy
is
provided
by
law,
relief
 o Findings
of
administrative
agencies
are
accorded
not
only

must
 be
 sought
 by
 first
 exhausting
 that
 remedy
 before
 respect
but
even
finality

seeking
judicial
intervention.
Failure
to
do
so
is
fatal
 o If
 the
 findings
 of
 fact
 is
 unsupported
 by
 substantial
 and

o Exceptions
–

 credible
evidence
do
not
bind
the
SC
or
CA,
neither
will
it

 When
the
issues
raised
is
one
or
purely
of
law
 uphold
 erroneous
 conclusions
 of
 the
 NLRC
 when
 it
 finds

 Where
public
interest
is
involved
 that
the
latter
committed
grave
abuse
of
discretion

 In
cases
of
urgency
 • Exceptions
re:
SC
is
not
a
trier
of
facts

 Where
 special
 circumstances
 warrant
 immediate
 o When
 the
 findings
 are
 grounded
 entirely
 on
 speculation,

or
more
direct
action
 surmises
or
conjectures

 Where
 the
 controverted
 act
 is
 patently
 illegal
 or
 o When
 the
 inference
 made
 is
 manifestly
 mistaken,
 absurd

was
performed
without
jurisdiction
or
in
excess
of
 or
impossible

jurisdiction
 o When
there
is
grave
abuse
of
discretion

o Despite
 the
 jurisprudence
 insisting
 on
 exhaustion
 of
 o When
the
judgment
is
based
on
a
misapprehension
of
facts

remedies,
the
DOLE
department
order
states:
The
decision
 o When
the
findings
of
facts
are
conflicting

of
the
Secretary
shall
become
final
and
executory
after
10
 o When
 in
 making
 its
 findings
 the
 CA
 went
 beyond
 the

days
 from
 receipt
 thereof
 by
 the
 parties.
 No
 motion
 for
 issues
 of
 the
 case,
 or
 its
 findings
 are
 contrary
 to
 the

reconsideration
of
the
decision
shall
be
entertained.
 admissions
of
both
the
appellant
and
the
appellee

19. Certificate
of
non­forum
shopping
 o When
the
findings
are
contrary
to
the
trial
court

• Forum
 shopping
 is
 the
 act
 or
 attempt
 to
 present
 the
 same
 dispute
 to
 o When
 the
 findings
 are
 conclusions
 without
 citation
 of

different
 adjudicators
 in
 the
 hope
 of
 securing
 a
 favorable
 ruling.
 It
 is
 specific
evidence
on
which
they
are
based

not
allowed
because
it
mocks
the
basic
tenet
that
one
dispute
ought
to
 o When
 the
 facts
 set
 forth
 in
 the
 petition
 as
 well
 as
 in
 the

be
litigated
only
once
in
only
one
forum
 petitioner’s
main
and
reply
briefs
are
not
disputed
by
the

• Failure
 to
 comply
 with
 the
 requirements
 concerning
 the
 certification
 respondent

against
 forum
 shopping
 shall
 be
 cause
 for
 the
 dismissal
 of
 the
 case
 o When
 the
 findings
 of
 fact
 are
 premised
 on
 the
 supposed

without
 prejudice,
 unless
 otherwise
 provided,
 upon
 motion
 and
 after
 absence
 of
 evidence
 and
 contradicted
 by
 the
 evidence
 on

hearing
 record

• Certification
of
non­forum
shopping
must
be
made
by
petitioner
 o When
the
CA
manifestly
overlooked
certain
relevant
facts

o Santos,
et
al
v.
CA
 not
disputed
by
the
parties,
which,
if
properly
considered

 Section
 3,
 Rule
 46
 of
 the
 Rules
 of
 Court
 –
 would
justify
a
different
conclusion

certification
 must
 be
 made
 by
 petitioner
 himself
 • Examples:
some
findings
of
fact
reversed

and
 not
 by
 counsel
 since
 it
 is
 petitioner
 who
 is
 in
 21. From
CA
to
SC:
only
question
of
law,
Rule
45

the
 best
 position
 to
 know
 whether
 he
 has
 • To
appeal
to
the
SC,
the
proper
remedy
is
a
petition
for
review
under

previously
commenced
any
similar
action
involving
 Rule
 45
 of
 the
 Rules
 of
 Court.
 Such
 petition
 for
 review
 on
 certiorari

the
same
issues
in
any
other
tribunal
or
agency
 can
 raise
 only
 questions
 of
 law.
 It
 must
 be
 filed
 within
 15
 days
 from

20. Disposition
by
the
CA
 notice
of
the
judgment
or
final
order
or
resolution
appealed
from,
or
of

• Remand
 the
denial
of
the
petitioner’s
MNT
or
MR

o Where
 the
 appraisal
 of
 the
 NLRC
 and
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 • Where
 the
 appealing
 party
 failed
 to
 file
 the
 petition
 under
 Rule
 45

lacks
 precision,
 giving
 rise
 to
 an
 ambiguity
 that
 lends
 within
the
said
15
days,
the
petition
for
certiorari,
in
the
nature
of
SCA,

plausibility
 to
 a
 petition
 for
 certiorari,
 and
 there
 are
 is
not
available

matters
 regarding
 the
 quitclaim
 that
 still
 need
 to
 be

clarified,
equity
calls
for
a
remand
of
the
case
to
the
NLRC
 

for
an
ascertainment
of
greater
detail
of
the
circumstances

surrounding
the
execution
of
the
quitclaim
 Article
224.
Execution
of
decisions,
orders
or
awards.

• Dismissal
of
appeal

o Even
 if
 appeal
 is
 still
 pending
 with
 NLRC,
 if
 the
 SC
 or
 CA
 1. Execution

finds
 that
 the
 appeal
 was
 filed
 late
 and
 it
 was
 patently
 • Writ
 of
 execution
 is
 an
 order
 to
 carry
 out,
 to
 implement,
 a
 final

dilatory,
 it
 may
 be
 constrained
 to
 order
 the
 NLRC
 to
 judgment

dismiss
the
appeal
 • Writ
of
execution
may
be
issued
by
the
following
officials
for
the
final

• Findings
of
facts
generally
final
 decisions,
orders
or
awards
promulgated
by
them:

o Secretary
of
Labor
and
Employment

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 27

 o DOLE
Regional
Director
 out
 matters
 relevant
 to
 execution,
 including
 the

o NLRC
 computation
of
the
award.

o Labor
Arbiter
 • Form
and
contents
of
a
writ
of
execution

o Med‐Arbiter
 o Issued
in
the
name
of
the
Republic
of
the
Philippines

o Voluntary
Arbitrator;
or
 o Signed
by
the
Commission
or
Labor
Arbiter

o Panel
of
Arbitrators
 o Requiring
 the
 Sheriff
 to
 execute
 the
 decision,
 order,
 or

• Writ
 of
 execution
 on
 a
 judgment
 may
 be
 issued
 motu
 proprio
 OR
 on
 award
of
the
Commission
or
Labor
Arbiter,
and


motion
 of
 any
 interested
 party
 within
 5
 years
 from
 the
 date
 it
 o Must
 contain
 the
 dispositive
 portion
 thereof,
 the
 amount,

becomes
final
and
executory
 if
any,
to
be
demanded,
and
all
lawful
fees
to
be
collected

• Execution
is
done
through
the
regular
or
special
sheriff
 from
the
losing
party
or
any
other
person
required
by
law

o But
 Secretary,
 Commission,
 any
 Labor
 Arbiter,
 the
 to
obey
the
same

Regional
 Director
 or
 the
 Director
 of
 the
 Bureau
 of
 Labor
 • Computation
during
execution

Relations
 in
 appropriate
 cases
 may
 deputize
 the
 PNP
 or
 o Where
 further
 computation
 of
 the
 award
 in
 the
 decision,

any
 other
 law
 enforcement
 agencies
 in
 enforcement
 of
 resolution
 or
 order
 is
 necessary
 during
 the
 course
 of
 the

final
awards,
orders
or
decisions
 execution
proceedings,
no
writ
of
execution
shall
be
issued

• Both
party
and
counsel
should
be
notified
 until
 after
 the
 computation
 has
 been
 approved
 by
 the

o In
 labor
 cases,
 both
 the
 party
 AND
 its
 counsel
 must
 be
 Labor
 Arbiter
 in
 an
 order
 issued
 after
 the
 parties
 have

duly
served
their
separate
copies
of
the
order,
decision,
or
 been
duly
notified
and
heard
on
the
matter.

resolution,
 unlike
 in
 ordinary
 judicial
 proceedings
 where
 • Execution
of
monetary
judgment

notice
to
counsel
is
deemed
notice
to
the
party
 o Immediate
payment
on
demand.
‐
The
Sheriff
shall
enforce

• Article
224
is
execution,
not
appeal,
procedure
 a
 monetary
 judgment
 by
 demanding
 the
 immediate

o Article
 224
 refers
 to
 the
 execution
 of
 “final
 decisions,
 payment
of
the
full
amount
stated
in
the
writ
of
execution

orders
 or
 awards”
 and
 requires
 the
 sheriff
 or
 a
 duly
 and
 all
 lawful
 fees
 from
 the
 losing
 party
 or
 any
 other

deputized
officer
to
furnish
both
parties
and
their
counsel
 person
required
by
law
to
obey
the
same.

with
copies
of
the
decision
or
award
 o In
the
event
of
failure
or
refusal
of
the
losing
party
to
pay

o Period
or
manner
of

“appeal”
from
the
NLRC
to
the
CA
is
 the
judgment
award,
the
Sheriff
shall
immediately
proceed

governed
by
Rule
65
of
the
Rules
of
Court
 against
 the
 cash
 deposit
 or
 surety
 bond
 posted
 by
 the

2. Execution
upon
finality
of
decision
or
order
 losing
party,
if
any;

• A
writ
of
execution
may
be
issued
motu
proprio
or
on
motion,
upon
a
 o If
the
bonding
company
refuses
to
comply
with
the
writ
of

decision
 or
 order
 that
 finally
 disposes
 of
 the
 action
 or
 proceedings
 execution,
 then
 its
 president
 and
 officers
 or
 authorized

after
the
parties
and
their
counsels
or
authorized
representatives
are
 representatives
 shall
 be
 cited
 for
 contempt,
 and
 the

furnished
 with
 copies
 of
 the
 decision
 or
 order
 in
 accordance
 with
 bonding
 company
 shall
 be
 barred
 from
 transacting

these
Rules,
but
only
after
the
expiration
of
the
period
to
appeal
if
no
 business
with
the
Commission;

appeal
 has
 been
 filed,
 as
 shown
 by
 the
 certificate
 of
 finality.
 If
 an
 o Should
the
cash
deposit
or
surety
bond
be
insufficient,
or

appeal
has
been
filed,
a
writ
of
execution
may
be
issued
when
there
is
 in
 case
 the
 surety
 bond
 cannot
 be
 proceeded
 against
 for

an
entry
of
judgment
as
provided
for
in
Section
14
of
Rule
VII.
 any
 reason,
 the
 Sheriff
 shall,
 within
 5
 days
 from
 demand,

• No
 motion
 for
 execution
 shall
 be
 entertained
 nor
 a
 writ
 of
 execution
 execute
 the
 monetary
 judgment
 by
 levying
 on
 the

be
issued
unless
the
Labor
Arbiter
or
the
Commission
is
in
possession
 property,
personal
and
real,
of
the
losing
party
not
exempt

of
the
records
of
the
case
which
shall
include
an
entry
of
judgment
if
 from
 execution,
 sufficient
 to
 cover
 the
 judgment
 award,

the
 case
 was
 appealed;
 except
 that,
 as
 provided
 for
 in
 Section
 14
 of
 which
may
be
disposed
of
for
value
at
a
public
auction
to

Rule
 V
 and
 Section
 6
 of
 this
 Rule,
 and
 in
 those
 cases
 where
 partial
 the
highest
bidder.

execution
 is
 allowed
 by
 law,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 retain
 duplicate
 o Proceeds
of
execution
shall
be
deposited
with
the
Cashier

original
copies
of
the
decision
to
be
implemented
and
proof
of
service
 of
the
concerned
Division
or
Regional
Arbitration
Branch,

thereof
for
the
purpose
of
immediate
enforcement.
 or
with
an
authorized
depositary
bank.
Where
payment
is

• Pre­execution
conference
 made
in
the
form
of
a
check,
the
same
shall
be
payable
to

o Within
 2
 working
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 a
 motion
 for
 the
 the
Commission.

issuance
 of
 a
 writ
 of
 execution,
 and
 subject
 to
 Section
 1,
 • Enforcement
of
writ
of
execution

paragraph
 (b)
 of
 this
 Rule,
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 shall
 o In
executing
a
decision,
resolution
or
order,
the
Sheriff,
or

schedule
 a
 pre‐execution
 conference
 or
 hearing
 to
 thresh
 other
 authorized
 officer
 acting
 as
 Sheriff
 of
 the

Commission,
shall
be
guided
strictly
by
these
Rules,
and
by

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 28

 the
 Manual
 on
 Execution
 of
 Judgment,
 which
 shall
 form
 possible
off­set
of
the
petitioners’
advances
or
debts
against

part
of
these
Rules.
 their
total
claim,
their
discontinuance
from
employment
by

o In
 the
 absence
 of
 applicable
 rules,
 the
 Rules
 of
 Court,
 as
 abandonment
 or
 resignation,
 and
 other
 relevant

amended,
shall
be
applied
in
a
suppletory
manner.
 developments

• Execution
by
motion
or
by
independent
action
 • Pacific
Mills,
Inc
v.
NLRC


o A
 decision
 or
 order
 may
 be
 executed
 on
 motion
 within
 5
 o An
 initial
 case
 with
 the
 same
 parties
 had
 already
 been

years
from
the
date
it
becomes
final
and
executory.
 dismissed
 by
 the
 SC
 and
 the
 entry
 of
 judgment
 having

o After
the
lapse
of
such
period,
the
judgment
shall
become
 been
 effected.
 NLRC
 computed
 the
 award
 and
 issued

dormant,
 and
 may
 only
 be
 enforced
 by
 an
 independent
 partial
writ
of
execution

action
within
a
period
of
10
years
from
date
of
its
finality.
 o Pacific
 Mills
 filed
 a
 motion
 to
 stay

• Effect
of
petition
for
certiorari
on
execution
 execution/reconsideration
 citing
 supervening
 events
 that

o Such
 petition
 with
 the
 CA
 or
 SC
 shall
 NOT
 stay
 the
 affected
 the
 computation
 of
 the
 award
 such
 as
 non‐
execution
 of
 the
 assailed
 decision
 UNLESS
 a
 restraining
 consideration
of
the
length
of
service
of
each
complainant,

order
is
issued
by
said
courts
 non‐consideration
 of
 wage
 exemptions,
 inclusion
 of

• Resolution
of
motion
to
quash
 payment
 of
 awards
 to
 a
 complainant
 who
 had
 been

o Mere
filing
of
a
motion
to
quash
shall
NOT
stay
execution
 recalled
to
active
duty,
etc

proceedings.
 o NLRC
did
not
stay
execution

o Motion
 to
 quash
 shall
 be
 resolved
 by
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 o No
 question
 that
 the
 supervening
 events
 would
 certainly

within
 10
 working
 days
 from
 submission
 of
 said
 motion
 affect
 the
 computation
 of
 the
 award
 in
 the
 decision
 of
 the

for
resolution
 NLRC.
 It
 is
 the
 duty
 of
 the
 NLRC
 to
 consider
 the
 same
 and

3. Appeal
on
the
execution
of
decision;
supervening
events
 inquire
 into
 the
 correctness
 of
 the
 execution,
 as
 such

• GR:
 once
 judgment
 becomes
 final
 and
 executory,
 it
 can
 no
 longer
 be
 supervening
events
may
affect
such
execution

disturbed,
altered
or
modified
 4. General
rule:
RTC
cannot
issue
injunction
against
NLRC

• Exceptions:
 • Regular
court
HAS
NO
jurisdiction
to
hear
and
decide
questions
which

o As
 in
 cases
 where,
 because
 of
 supervening
 events,
 it
 arise
 and
 are
 incidental
 to
 the
 enforcement
 of
 decisions,
 orders
 or

becomes
 imperative,
 in
 the
 highest
 interest
 of
 justice,
 to
 awards
rendered
in
labor
cases
by
appropriate
officers
and
tribunals

direct
its
modification
 of
the
DOLE

• Although
 decision
 of
 the
 Labor
 Arbiter
 has
 become
 final,
 the
 • Corollarily,
any
controversy
in
the
execution
of
the
judgment
shall
be

correctness
 of
 the
 execution
 of
 the
 decision
 may
 be
 appealed
 to
 and
 referred
to
the
tribunal
which
issued
the
writ
of
execution
since
it
has

reviewed
by
the
NLRC
 the
inherent
power
to
control
its
own
processes
in
order
to
enforce
its

• Abbot
v.
NLRC
 judgments
and
orders

o Finality
of
judgment
becomes
a
fact
upon
the
lapse
of
the
 • While
an
action
for
damages
is
within
the
jurisdiction
of
a
RTC,
it
HAS

reglementary
period
of
appeal
if
no
appeal
is
perfected.
In
 NO
jurisdiction
to
issue
a
TRO
in
labor
cases

such
situation
the
prevailing
part
is
entitled
as
a
matter
of
 • Execution
 over
 property
 owned
 only
 by
 judgment
 debtor;

right
 to
 a
 writ
 of
 execution,
 and
 issuance
 thereof
 is
 a
 remedies
of
third
party
claimant;
the
Yupangco
case

ministerial
duty,
compellable
by
mandamus
 o Jurisprudence:
power
of
the
Court
or
the
NLRC
to
execute

o In
 this
 case,
 what
 is
 sought
 to
 be
 reviewed
 is
 not
 the
 its
 judgment
 extends
 only
 to
 properties
 unquestionably

decision
but
the
manner
of
its
execution
 belonging
 to
 the
 judgment
 debtor.
 Therefore
 if
 the

o While
it
is
true
that
the
decision
itself
ahs
become
final
and
 property
 under
 levy
 does
 not
 belong
 to
 the
 judgment

executory
 and
 so
 can
 no
 longer
 be
 challenged,
 there
 is
 no
 debtor
in
the
NLRC
case,
it
couldn’t
be
levied
upon
by
the

question
 either
 that
 it
 must
 be
 enforced
 and
 so
 can
 no
 sheriff.
 Even
 upon
 a
 mere
 prima
 facie
 showing
 of

longer
be
challenged,
there
is
no
question
either
that
it
must
 ownership
 by
 the
 third‐party
 claimant,
 if
 the
 third‐party

be
 enforced
 in
 accordance
 with
 its
 terms
 and
 conditions.
 claim
 does
 not
 arise
 involve
 nor
 grows
 out
 of,
 a
 labor

Any
 deviation
 therefrom
 can
 e
 the
 subject
 of
 a
 proper
 dispute,
a
separate
action
for
injunctive
relief
against
such

appeal
 levy
may
be
maintained
in
court

o In
this
case

labor
arbiter,
in
recomputing
award
in
the
 o Revised
 Rules
 of
 NLRC/Sheriff’s
 manual:
 when
 a
 third

original
decision
raised
it
from
98,883.80
to
1,372,451.55
 party
claims
the
property
subject
of
the
execution
and
files

o Ruling:
NLRC
has
authority
to
look
into
the
correctness
of
 an
 affidavit,
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 shall
 conduct
 a
 hearing
 and

the
 execution
 of
 the
 decision
 and
 to
 consider
 the
 resolve
the
validity
of
the
claim

supervening
 events
 that
 may
 affect
 such
 execution,
 like
 the

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 29

  This
 rule
 prescribes
 only
 the
 procedure
 to
 be
 o A
 third
 party
 claim
 shall
 be
 filed
 within
 5
 days
 from
 the

followed
 by
 the
 sheriff
 (or
 the
 arbiter
 or
 officer
 of
 last
day
of
posting
or
publication
of
the
notice
of
execution

the
 Commission)
 if
 the
 levied
 property
 is
 claimed
 sale;
otherwise
the
claim
shall
be
forever
barred.

by
any
other
party
 o The
third
party
claimant
shall
execute
an
affidavit
stating

 It
applies
only
to
the
sheriff
and
such
other
officers;
 his
title
to
the
property
or
right
to
possession
thereof
with

and
only
when
the
third‐party
claimant
chooses
to
 supporting
 evidence,
 and
 shall
 file
 the
 same
 with
 the

file
 his
 claim
 with
 the
 labor
 arbiter
 or
 the
 NLRC
 Sheriff
 and
 the
 Commission
 or
 Labor
 Arbiter
 who
 issued

(does
not
limit
the
procedure
to
be
followed
by
the
 the
writ
of
execution.

third‐party
claimant)
 o Upon
receipt
of
the
third
party
claim,
all
proceedings,
with

o Yupangco
Cotton
Mills,
Inc
v.
CA
 respect
 to
 the
 execution
 of
 the
 property
 subject
 of
 such

 A
 third­party
 whose
 property
 has
 been
 levied
 upon
 claim,
shall
automatically
be
suspended.

by
a
sheriff
to
enforce
a
decision
against
a
judgment
 o The
 Labor
 Arbiter
 who
 issued
 the
 writ
 may
 require
 the

debtor
 is
 afforded
 with
 several
 alternative
 remedies
 third
 party
 claimant
 to
 adduce
 additional
 evidence
 in

to
 protect
 its
 interests.
 He
 may
 avail
 himself
 of
 support
 of
 his
 third
 party
 claim
 and
 to
 post
 a
 cash
 or

alternative
 remedies
 cumulatively,
 and
 one
 will
 not
 surety
 bond
 equivalent
 to
 the
 amount
 of
 his
 claim,
 as

preclude
the
third­party
from
availing
himself
of
the
 provided
 for
 in
 Section
 6
 of
 Rule
 VI,
 without
 prejudice
 to

other
 alternative
 remedies
 in
 the
 event
 he
 failed
 in
 the
posting
by
the
prevailing
party
of
a
supersedeas
bond

the
remedy
first
availed
of
 in
an
amount
equivalent
to
that
posted
by
the
third
party

 Third­party
 may
 avail
 himself
 of
 the
 following
 claimant.

alternative
remedies:
 o The
Labor
Arbiter
shall
resolve
the
propriety
of
such
third

 File
 a
 third­party
 claim
 with
 the
 sheriff
 or
 party
 claim
 within
 10
 working
 days
 from
 submission
 of

the
labor
arbiter
 said
claim
for
resolution

 If
the
third­party
claim
is
denied,
the
third
 • Simulated
sale,
void
ab
initio

party
may
appeal
the
denial
to
the
NLRC
 o Tanongon
v.
Samson

 File
 a
 proper
 action
 with
 a
 competent
  4
 employees
 won
 in
 their
 illegal
 dismissal
 case.

court
to
recover
ownership
of
the
property
 Labor
 arbiter
 issued
 writ
 of
 execution.
 Sheriff

illegally
seized
by
the
sheriff
(§16,
Rule
39,
 levied
 uon
 tanker
 purportedly
 belonging
 to
 the

Rules
of
Court)
 employer.
 Tanongon
 filed
 a
 third‐party
 claim,

• RTC
injunction
against
labor
arbiter
or
NLRC,
when
allowed
 alleging
 ownership
 of
 the
 tanker
 because
 it
 had

o Yupangco
Cotton
Mills
Inc.
v.
CA
 been
sold
to
her

 RTC
 where
 the
 reinvindicatory
 action
 is
 filed
 can
  Execution
can
proceed.

issue
 an
 injunction
 or
 TRO
 against
 the
 execution
  Act
of
employer
was
a
way
to
evade
payment
of
the

ordered
by
a
labor
arbiter
or
the
NLRC
 debt.
 The
 contract
 was
 simulated
 or
 fictitious
 and

 The
 GR
 that
 no
 court
 has
 the
 power
 to
 interfere
 by
 thus,
void
ab
initio.


injunction
with
the
judgments
or
decrees
of
another
  A
 third­party
 claim
 on
 a
 levied
 property
 does
 not

court
 with
 concurrent
 or
 coordinate
 jurisdiction
 automatically
 prevent
 the
 execution.
 When
 a
 third­
possessing
 equal
 power
 to
 grant
 injunctive
 relief
 party
 claim
 is
 filed,
 the
 sheriff
 is
 not
 bound
 to

applies
 ONLY
 when
 no
 third­party
 claimant
 is
 proceed
 with
 the
 levy
 unless
 the
 judgment
 creditor

involved.
 When
 a
 third­party,
 or
 a
 stranger
 to
 the
 posts
an
indemnity
bond.
Where
the
bond
is
filed,
the

action,
asserts
a
claim
over
the
property
levied
upon,
 remedy
 of
 the
 third­party
 is
 to
 file
 an
 independent

the
 claimant
 may
 vindicate
 his
 claim
 by
 an
 reivindicatory
 action
 against
 the
 judgment
 creditor

independent
 action
 in
 the
 proper
 civil
 court
 which
 or
 the
 purchaser
 of
 the
 property
 at
 public
 auction.

may
stop
the
execution
of
the
judgment
on
property
 NLRC
should
not
have
automatically
lifted
the
levy

not
belonging
to
the
judgment
debtor
 and
restrained
execution
just
because
a
third‐party

 A
person
other
than
the
judgment
debtor
who
claims
 claim
has
been
filed.

ownership
 or
 right
 over
 the
 levied
 properties
 is
 not

precluded,
 however,
 from
 taking
 other
 legal
 

remedies

• Third
Party
claim
 Article
225.
Contempt
powers
of
the
secretary
of
labor.


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 30


 o Complaint
 may
 be
 filed
 by
 a
 party‐in‐interest
 who
 is
 not

necessarily
a
union
or
union
member

Title
III:
Bureau
of
Labor
Relations
 • If
 conflict
 involves
 an
 independent
 union,
 a
 chartered
 local,
 or
 a

worker’s
association,
complaint
shall
be
filed
with
the
DOLE
Regional

Article
226.
Bureau
of
Labor
Relations
 Office

• DO
No.
40­03

1. BLR
jurisdiction
and
functions
 o Covers
the
entire
subject
of
labor
relations,
except
NLRC

• BLR
 no
 longer
 handles
 “all”
 labor‐management
 disputes;
 rather,
 its
 o Introduced
 new
 concepts
 such
 as
 union
 merger
 or

functions
and
jurisdiction
are
largely
confined
to
–
 consolidation
and
multi‐employer
bargaining

o Union
matters
 o Specific
objectives
of
the
Order:

o Collective
bargaining
registry
  To
 simplify
 the
 formation
 and
 registration
 of

o Labor
education
 unions,
especially
chartered
locals

• The
 mediation
 and
 conciliation,
 and
 arbitration
 functions
 of
 the
 BLR
  To
simplify
and
expedite
the
holding
of
certification

are
now
with
the
NCMB
 elections

• Executive
Order
No.
292
or
the
1987
Administrative
Code:
The
BLR
shall
  To
 promote
 responsible
 unionism,
 particularly
 in

–

 administration
of
funds

o Set
 policies,
 standards,
 and
 procedures
 on
 the
 registration
  To
 authorize
 union
 merger,
 consolidation
 and

and
 supervision
 of
 legitimate
 labor
 union
 activities,
 change
of
name

including
denial
cancellation
and
revocation
of
labor
permits
  To
authorize
deregistration
of
CBAs

o Set
policies,
standards,
and
procedures
relating
to
CBAs
and
 • Effect
of
pendency

the
 examination
 of
 financial
 records
 of
 accounts
 of
 labor
 o 
The
 rights,
 relationships
 and
 obligations
 of
 the
 parties

organizations
to
determine
compliance
with
relevant
laws
 litigants
 against
 each
 other
 and
 other
 parties‐in‐interest

o Provide
proper
orientation
to
workers
on
their
schemes
and
 prior
 to
 the
 institution
 of
 the
 petition
 shall
 continue
 to

projects
 for
 improvement
 of
 the
 standards
 of
 living
 of
 remain
 during
 the
 pendency
 of
 the
 petition
 and
 until
 the

workers
and
their
families
 date
of
finality
of
the
decision
rendered
therein.
Thereafter,

2. Inter­union
and
intra­union
disputes;
DO
No.
40­03
 the
 rights,
 relationships
 and
 obligations
 of
 the
 parties

• BLR
handles
such
 litigants
 against
 each
 other
 and
 other
 parties‐in‐interest

• Inter‐union
 dispute
 –
 any
 conflict
 between
 and
 among
 legitimate
 shall
be
governed
by
the
decision
so
ordered.

labor
 unions
 involving
 representation
 questions
 for
 purposes
 of
 o The
filing
or
pendency
of
any
inter/intra‐union
dispute
and

collective
 bargaining
 or
 to
 any
 other
 conflict
 or
 dispute
 between
 other
 related
 labor
 relations
 dispute
 is
 not
 a
 prejudicial

legitimate
labor
unions
 question
 to
 any
 petition
 for
 certification
 election
 and
 shall

• Intra‐union
 dispute
 –
 any
 conflict
 between
 and
 among
 union
 not
 be
 a
 ground
 for
 the
 dismissal
 of
 a
 petition
 for

members,
including
grievances
arising
from
any
violation
of
the
rights
 certification
 election
 or
 suspension
 of
 proceedings
 for

and
conditions
of
membership,
violation
of
or
disagreement
over
any
 certification
election.

provision
 of
 the
 union’s
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 or
 disputes
 arising
 • Appeal

from
chartering
or
affiliation
of
union
 o Section
 16.
 Appeal.
 ‐
 The
 decision
 of
 the
 Med‐Arbiter
 and

• Rule
XI
of
DO
No.
40­03
includes:
 Regional
 Director
 may
 be
 appealed
 to
 the
 Bureau
 by
 any
 of

o Cancellation
of
union
registration
 the
 parties
 within
 ten
 (10)
 days
 from
 receipt
 thereof,
 copy

o Audit
of
union
funds
 furnished
 the
 opposing
 party.
 The
 decision
 of
 the
 Bureau

o Violation
 of
 union
 members’
 rights
 and
 other
 disputes
 Director
 in
 the
 exercise
 of
 his/her
 original
 jurisdiction
 may

between
unions
or
between
a
union
and
its
members
 be
appealed
to
the
Office
of
the
Secretary
by
any
party
within

• Complaint
 involving
 inter/intra‐union
 dispute
 may
 be
 filed
 by
 a
 the
 same
 period,
 copy
 furnished
 the
 opposing
 party.
 The

legitimate
labor
organization
or
its
members
 appeal
 shall
 be
 verified
 under
 oath
 and
 shall
 consist
 of
 a

o Where
 issue
 involves
 membership,
 complaint
 shall
 be
 memorandum
 of
 appeal
 specifically
 stating
 the
 grounds

supported
by
at
least
30%
of
membership
 relied
upon
by
the
appellant,
with
supporting
arguments
and

• (Second
category)
Other
related
labor
relations
disputes
–
any
conflict
 evidence.


between
 a
 labor
 union
 and
 the
 employer
 or
 any
 individual,
 entity
 or
 o Section
 17.
 Where
 to
 file
 appeal.
 ‐
 The
 memorandum
 of

group
 that
 is
 not
 a
 labor
 organization
 or
 workers’
 association;
 such
 appeal
shall
be
filed
in
the
Regional
Office
or
Bureau
where

dispute
 include
 cancellation
 of
 registration
 of
 labor
 organization
 and
 the
 complaint
 or
 petition
 originated.
 Within
 twenty‐four

interpleader
 (24)
 hours
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 memorandum
 of
 appeal,
 the

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 31

 Bureau
 or
 Regional
 Director
 shall
 cause
 the
 transmittal
 • Because
 it
 applies
 only
 to
 courts
 of
 justice
 and
 not
 to
 labor
 relations

thereof
 together
 with
 the
 entire
 records
 of
 the
 case
 to
 the
 commissions
or
labor
arbitrators’
offices

Office
of
the
Secretary
or
the
Bureau,
as
the
case
may
be.

 • Requiring
 conciliation
 of
 labor
 disputes
 before
 the
 barangay
 courts

o Section
 18.
 Finality
 of
 Decision.
 ‐
 Where
 no
 appeal
 is
 filed
 would
defeat
the
purposes
of
the
law

within
the
ten‐day
period,
the
Bureau
and
Regional
Director
 • Instead
 of
 simplifying
 proceedings,
 barangay
 conciliation
 would
 only

or
Med‐Arbiter,
as
the
case
may
be,
shall
enter
the
finality
of
 duplicate
 the
 conciliation
 proceedings
 and
 unduly
 delay
 the

the
 decision
 in
 the
 records
 of
 the
 case
 and
 cause
 the
 disposition
of
the
labor
case

immediate
implementation
thereof.


o Section
 19.
 Period
 to
 reply.
 ‐
 A
 reply
 to
 the
 appeal
 may
 be
 

filed
 by
 any
 party
 to
 the
 complaint
 or
 petition
 within
 ten

(10)
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 memorandum
 of
 appeal.
 The
 Article
227.
Compromise
agreements.

reply
 shall
 be
 filed
 directly
 with
 the
 Bureau
 or
 the
 Office
 of

the
Secretary,
as
the
case
may
be.

 1. Compromise
agreements

o Section
20.
Decision
of
the
Bureau/Office
of
the
Secretary.
‐
 • The
Constitution
commands
the
State
to
promote
the
preferential
use

The
 Bureau
 Director
 or
 the
 Secretary,as
 the
 case
 may
 be,
 of
 voluntary
 modes
 in
 settling
 disputes
 since
 the
 maintenance
 of

shall
 have
 twenty
 (20)
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 entire
 industrial
peace
is
a
joint
responsibility
of
workers
and
employers

records
 of
 the
 case
 within
 which
 to
 decide
 the
 appeal.
 The
 • Assistance
 of
 the
 BLR
 or
 the
 regional
 office
 of
 the
 DOLE
 in
 the

filing
of
the
memorandum
of
appeal
from
the
decision
of
the
 execution
 of
 a
 compromise
 settlement
 is
 generally
 a
 basic

Med‐Arbiter
or
Regional
Director
and
Bureau
Director
stays
 requirement;
without
it,
there
can
be
no
valid
compromise
settlement

the
 implementation
 of
 the
 assailed
 decision.
 The
 Bureau
 or
 • Hence,
 any
 compromise
 settlement,
 even
 on
 labor
 standard
 matters,

Office
of
the
Secretary
may
call
the
parties
to
a
clarificatory
 agreed
 to
 by
 the
 parties
 with
 the
 assistance
 of
 the
 BLR
 or
 regional

hearing
in
aid
of
its
appellate
jurisdiction.

 office
of
the
DOLE
is
allowed.
Resulting
agreement
is
legally
binding!

o Section
 21.
 Finality
 of
 Decision
 of
 Bureau/Office
 of
 the
 • NLRC
or
any
court
shall
not
assume
jurisdiction
over
issues
involved

Secretary.
 ‐
 The
 decision
 of
 the
 Bureau
 or
 the
 Office
 of
 the
 therein,
except
–

Secretary
 shall
 become
 final
 and
 executory
 after
 ten
 (10)
 o In
 case
 of
 noncompliance
 with
 the
 compromise
 agreement

days
from
receipt
thereof
by
the
parties,
unless
a
motion
for
 or

its
 reconsideration
 is
 filed
 by
 any
 party
 therein
 within
 the
 o If
 there
 is
 prima
 facie
 evidence
 that
 the
 settlement
 was

same
period.
Only
one
(1)
motion
for
reconsideration
of
the
 obtained
through
fraud,
misrepresentation
or
coercion

decision
 of
 the
 Bureau
 or
 the
 Office
 of
 the
 Secretary
 in
 the
 • Note
that
not
all
quitclaims
are
per
se
invalid,
or
against
public
policy,

exercise
of
their
appellate
jurisdiction
shall
be
allowed.

 except
–

o Section
22.
Execution
of
decision.
‐
The
decision
of
the
Med‐ o Where
there
is
clear
proof
that
the
waiver
was
wangled
from

Arbiter
 and
 Regional
 Director
 shall
 automatically
 be
 stayed
 an
unsuspecting
or
gullible
person

pending
appeal
with
the
Bureau.
The
decision
of
the
Bureau
 o Where
 the
 terms
 of
 the
 settlement
 are
 unconscionable
 on

in
 the
 exercise
 of
 its
 appellate
 jurisdiction
 shall
 be
 their
faces

immediately
 executory
 upon
 issuance
 of
 entry
 of
 final
 2. Formal
requirements
of
compromise
agreement

judgment.
 The
 decision
 of
 the
 Bureau
 in
 the
 exercise
 of
 its
 • Union
of
Filipino
Workers
v.
NLRC

original
 jurisdiction
 shall
 automatically
 be
 stayed
 pending
 o Compromise
agreements
involving
labor
standards
cases
must

appeal
 with
 the
 Office
 of
 the
 Secretary.
 The
 decision
 of
 the
 –

Office
of
the
Secretary
shall
be
immediately
executory
upon
  Be
reduced
to
writing

issuance
of
entry
of
final
judgment.
  Signed
in
the
presence
of
the
Regional
Director
or
his

3. Extent
of
BLR
Authority
 duly
authorized
representative

• Described
as
broad
and
expansive
 o Acknowledgement
receipt
and
undertaking
≠
signed

• It
may
hold
a
referendum
election
among
members
of
a
union
for
the
 o SPA
required
before
an
agent
can
be
authorized
to
enter
into

purpose
 of
 determining
 whether
 or
 not
 they
 desire
 to
 be
 affiliated
 a
compromise

with
a
federation
 3. Valid
compromise
and
quitclaim

• BUT
it
has
no
authority
to
order
a
referendum
among
union
members
 • Veloso
and
Liguaton
v.
DOLE,
Noah’s
Ark
Sugar
Carriers

to
decide
whether
to
expel
or
suspend
union
officers
 o Complainants
 won
 case
 against
 employer
 for
 ULP,
 among

• Neither
 does
 it
 have
 authority
 to
 forward
 a
 case
 to
 the
 Trade
 Union
 others.
 Employer
 filed
 a
 MR
 and
 recomputation
 of
 the

Congress
of
the
Philippines
for
arbitration
and
decision
 amount
awarded.

4. Katarungang
pambarangay,
not
applicable
to
labor
disputes

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 32

 oWhile
 case
 was
 pending,
 Veloso,
 through
 his
 wife,
 signed
 a
 oMust
be
executed
with
assistance
of
the
BLR
or
the
Regional

Quitclaim
and
Release
in
consideration
of
P25,000.
Liguaton
 Office
of
the
DOLE

signed
on
for
P20,000
 • Even
 when
 a
 compromise
 agreement
 is
 approved
 by
 a
 labor
 arbiter,

o Releases
 were
 impugned
 by
 petitioners,
 claiming
 that
 they
 the
 judgment
 cannot
 have
 the
 effect
 of
 res
 judicata
 upon
 persons

had
to
sign
because
of
extreme
necessity
 whoa
re
not
parties
to
the
compromise
agreement

o Held:
Releases
were
VALID
 6. When
to
effect
compromise:
final
decision,
negotiable?

o The
 law
 looks
 with
 disfavor
 upon
 quitclaims
 and
 releases
 by
 • A
 compromise
 agreement
 may
 be
 effected
 at
 any
 stage
 of
 the

employees
who
are
inveigled
or
pressured
into
signing
them
by
 proceedings
 and
 even
 when
 there
 is
 already
 a
 final
 executory

unscrupulous
 employers
 seeking
 to
 evade
 their
 legal
 judgment,
except
for
vices
of
consent
or
forgery

responsibilities.
 On
 the
 other
 hand,
 there
 are
 legitimate
 • Magbanua,
et
al
v.
Uy

waivers
 that
 represent
 a
 voluntary
 settlement
 of
 laborer's
 o NLRC
 decision
 awarding
 wage
 differentials
 amounting
 to

claims
 that
 should
 be
 respected
 by
 the
 courts
 as
 the
 law
 1.4M
became
final
and
exceutory.
But
before
issuance
of
writ

between
the
parties.
 of
 execution,
 parties
 reached
 a
 compromise.
 They
 got
 40k

o "Dire
necessity"
is
not
an
acceptable
ground
for
annulling
the
 each
from
the
employer

releases,
 especially
 since
 it
 has
 not
 been
 shown
 that
 the
 o Employees
still
prayed
for
writ
of
execution

employees
 had
 been
 forced
 to
 execute
 them.
 It
 has
 not
 even
 o Rights
 may
 be
 waived
 through
 a
 compromise
 agreement,

been
 proven
 that
 the
 considerations
 for
 the
 quitclaims
 were
 notwithstanding
a
final
judgment
that
has
already
settled
the

unconscionably
low
and
that
the
petitioners
had
been
tricked
 rights
 of
 the
 contracting
 parties.

 To
 be
 binding,
 the

into
 accepting
 them.
 In
 any
 event,
 no
 deception
 has
 been
 compromise
 must
 be
 shown
 to
 have
 been
 voluntarily,
 freely

established
 on
 the
 part
 of
 the
 Private
 respondent
 that
 would
 and
 intelligently
 executed
 by
 the
 parties,
 who
 had
 full

justify
the
annulment
of
the
Petitioners'
quitclaims.
 knowledge
 of
 the
 judgment.

 Furthermore,
 it
 must
 not
 be

4. Compromise
should
be
duly
authorized
 contrary
to
law,
morals,
good
customs
and
public
policy.

• Jag
&
Haggar
Jeans
and
Sportswear
Corp.
v.
NLRC
 o There
is
no
justification
to
disallow
a
compromise
agreement,

o Issue:
 W/N
 the
 compromise
 agreement
 entered
 into
 by
 solely
 because
 it
 was
 entered
 into
 after
 final
 judgment.

 The

company
 and
 Union
 (which
 constitute
 the
 majority)
 is
 validity
 of
 the
 agreement
 is
 determined
 by
 compliance
 with

binding
upon
the
other
complainants
(minority)?
 the
 requisites
 and
 principles
 of
 contracts,
 not
 by
 when
 it
 was

o Minority
 claims
 that
 for
 the
 agreement
 to
 be
 binding
 upon
 entered
 into.

 As
 provided
 by
 the
 law
 on
 contracts,
 a
 valid

them,
there
must
be
a
SPA
or
their
express
consent
 compromise
must
have
the
following
elements:
(1)
the
consent

o The
 waiver
 of
 reinstatement,
 like
 waivers
 of
 money
 claims,
 of
the
parties
to
the
compromise,
(2)
an
object
certain
that
is

must
be
regarded
as
a
personal
right
which
must
be
exercised
 the
subject
matter
of
the
compromise,
and
(3)
the
cause
of
the

personally
by
the
workers
themselves.
"For
a
waiver
thereof
to
 obligation
that
is
established.

be
legally
effective,
the
individual
consent
or
ratification
of
the
 o In
 the
 present
 factual
 milieu,
 compliance
 with
 the
 elements

workers
 or
 employees
 involved
 must
 be
 shown.
 Neither
 the
 of
 a
 valid
 contract
 is
 not
 in
 issue.

 Petitioners
 do
 not

officers
 nor
 the
 majority
 of
 the
 union
 had
 any
 authority
 to
 challenge
 the
 factual
 finding
 that
 they
 entered
 into
 a

waive
the
accrued
rights
pertaining
to
the
dissenting
minority
 compromise
 agreement
 with
 respondent.

 There
 are
 no

members.
The
members
of
the
union
need
the
protective
shield
 allegations
of
vitiated
consent.

of
 this
 doctrine
 not
 only
vis­a­vis
their
 employer
 but
 also,
 at
 • Absence
of
counsel
remedied

times,
vis­a­vis
the
 management
 of
 their
 own
 union,
 and
 at
 o The
labor
arbiter’s
absence
when
the
waivers
were
executed

other
 times
 even
 against
 their
 own
 imprudence
 or
 was
 remedied
 upon
 compliance
 with
 the
 above
 procedure.


impecuniousaess.
 The
 Court
 observes
 that
 the
 arbiter
 made
 searching

o When
it
comes
to
individual
benefits
accruing
to
members
of
a
 questions
 during
 the
 pre‐execution
 conference
 to
 ascertain

union
 from
 a
 favorable
 final
 judgment
 of
 any
 court,
 the
 whether
petitioners
had
voluntarily
and
freely
executed
the

members
themselves
become
the
real
parties
in
interest
and
it
 waivers.
 Likewise,
 there
 was
 evidence
 that
 they
 made
 an

is
 for
 them,
 rather
 than
 for
 the
 union,
 to
 accept
 or
 reject
 intelligent
 choice,
 considering
 that
 the
 contents
 of
 the

individually
the
fruits
of
litigation"
 written
 waivers
 had
 been
 explained
 to
 them.
 The
 labor

5. Ruling
on
compromise
settlements
summarized
 arbiter’s
 absence
 when
 those
 waivers
 were
 executed
 does

• Labor,
et
al
v.
NLRC
and
Gold
City
 not,
therefore,
invalidate
them

o Compromise
 agreement
 would
 be
 valid
 and
 binding
 only
 if
 o Even
 if
 contracted
 without
 the
 assistance
 of
 labor
 officials,

the
agreement
was
voluntarily
entered
into
and
represents
a
 compromise
 agreements
 between
 workers
 and
 their

reasonable
settlement
of
the
claims.


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 33

 employees
 remain
 valid
 and
 are
 still
 considered
 desirable
 Title
IV:
Labor
Organization

means
of
settling
disputes

7. Options
when
compromise
agreement
is
violated
 Chapter
I:
Registration
and
cancellation

• Should
a
party
fail
or
refuse
to
comply
with
the
agreement,
the
other

party
could
either
–
 Article
234.
Requirements
of
registration.

o Enforce
the
compromise
by
a
writ
of
execution

o Regard
 it
 as
 rescinded
 and
 so
 insist
 upon
 his
 original
 Article
234­A.
Chartering
and
creation
of
local
chapter.

demand


 Article
235.
Action
on
application.



Article
236.
Denial
of
registration;
appeal.

Article
228.
Indorsement
of
cases
to
labor
arbiters
(Repealed
by
BP
230)

Article
237.
Additional
requirements
for
federations
or
national
unions.

Article
229.
Issuance
of
subpoenas

1. Labor
organization;
two
broad
purposes

Article
230.
Appointment
of
Bureau
Personnel
 • Worker’s
 right
 to
 self‐organization
 is
 guaranteed
 under
 the

Constitution;
 includes
 the
 right
 to
 form,
 join
 or
 assist
 labor

Article
231.
Registry
of
unions
and
file
of
collective
agreements
 organization
for
the
purpose
of
collective
bargaining

• Definitions
under
DO
No.
40­03

Registry
of
unions
and
CBAs
 o Labor
organization
–
any
union
or
association
of
employees

in
the
private
sector
which
exists
in
whole
or
in
part
for
the

• Bureau
shall
keep
a
registry
of
legitimate
labor
organizations
 purpose
 of
 collective
 bargaining,
 mutual
 aid,
 interest,

• Bureau
shall
also
maintain
a
file
of
all
CBAs
and
other
related
agreements
 cooperation,
protection,
or
other
lawful
purposes

o Parties
 shall
 submit,
 within
 30
 days
 from
 execution,
 copies
 of
 their
  Labor
organization
is
not
always
a
union;
it
may
be

CBA
 directly
 to
 the
 BLR
 or
 the
 Regional
 Offices
 of
 the
 DOLE
 for
 an
association
of
employees

registration
  Purpose
 is
 not
 only
 nor
 necessarily
 collective

o Registration
 of
 the
 CBA
 is
 NOT
 a
 requisite
 for
 its
 validity;
 once
 it
 is
 bargaining
 but
 also
 dealing
 with
 employers

duly
entered
into
and
signed
by
the
parties,
a
CBA
becomes
effective
 concerning
terms
and
conditions
of
employment

as
 between
 the
 parties
 regardless
 of
 whether
 or
 not
 the
 same
 has
 o Legitimate
labor
organization
–
any
labor
organization
in
the

been
certified
by
the
BLR
 private
sector
registered
or
reported
with
the
Department

o Union
 –
 any
 labor
 organization
 in
 the
 private
 sector

Article
232.
Prohibition
on
certification
election.
 organized
 for
 collective
 bargaining
 and
 for
 other
 legitimate

purposes

The
contract­bar
rule
  Not
every
union
is
legitimate!

 Only
 those
 properly
 registered
 are
 considered
 as

• Contract‐bar
rule
means
that
while
a
valid
and
registered
CBA
is
subsisting,
the
 an
LLO

Bureau
is
not
allowed
to
hold
an
election
contesting
the
majority
status
of
the
  Non‐registration
 does
 not
 mean
 it
 is
 illegitimate;

incumbent
union
 just
means
that
it
has
no
legal
personality

o Existence
 of
 the
 CBA
 bars
 the
 holding
 of
 the
 inter‐union
 electoral
 o Exclusive
Bargaining
Representative
–
legitimate
labor
union

contest
 duly
 recognized
 or
 certified
 as
 the
 sole
 and
 exclusive

• Election
is
legally
allowed
only
during
the
“freedom
period”
which
refers
to
the
 bargaining
representative
or
agent
of
all
the
employees
in
a

last
60
days
of
the
5th
year
of
the
CBA
 bargaining
unit

• Objective
of
the
rule:
minimize
politicking
until
the
proper
time
comes
 o Worker’s
Association
–
association
of
workers
organized
for

• In
 any
 case,
 it
 is
 the
 Med‐Arbiters
 in
 the
 DOLE
 regional
 offices
 that
 hear
 the
 mutual
 aid
 and
 protection
 of
 its
 members
 or
 for
 any

petitions
for
certification
election
 legitimate
purpose
other
than
collective
bargaining

o Legitimate
Workers’
Association
–
an
association
of
workers

Article
233.
Privileged
communication.
 organized
 for
 mutual
 aid
 and
 protection
 of
 its
 members
 or

for
 any
 legitimate
 purpose
 other
 than
 collective
 bargaining


 registered
with
the
Department


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 34

 • Distinction
 between
 “collective
 bargaining”
 and
 “dealing
 with
 employment
 policies,
 standards
 and
 programs
 in
 such

employer”
 industry,
which
is
duly
registered
with
the
Department

o Purpose
of
a
labor
organization
is
to
bargain
collectively
(as
 o Trade
 Union
 Center
 –
 group
 of
 national
 unions
 or

a
 group)
 with
 the
 employer,
 and/or
 some
 other
 lawful
 federations
 organized
 for
 the
 mutual
 aid
 and
 protection
 of

purpose,
i.e.,
dealing
with
the
employer
 its
 members,
 for
 assisting
 such
 members
 in
 collective

 Purposes
 deal
 with
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 bargaining,
 or
 for
 participating
 in
 the
 formulation
 of
 social

employment
 and
employment
policies,
standards
and
programs

o To
 bargain
 collectively
 is
 a
 right
 that
 may
 be
 acquired
 by
 a
 o Alliance
 –
 aggregation
 of
 unions
 existing
 in
 one
 line
 of

labor
organization
after
registering
itself
with
the
DOLE
and
 industry,
 or
 in
 a
 conglomerate,
 a
 group
 of
 franchisees,
 a

after
being
recognized
or
certified
by
DOLE
as
the
exclusive
 geographical
area,
or
an
industrial
center

bargaining
representative
(EBR)
of
the
employees
  Each
 member
 union
 retains
 its
 own
 organization,

o Dealing
 with
 the
 employer
 is
 a
 generic
 description
 of
 structure,
and
independence

interaction
 between
 employer‐employees
 concerning
  An
alliance
cannot
represent
its
member
unions
in

grievances,
 wages,
 work
 hours,
 and
 other
 terms
 and
 CBA
negotiations

conditions
 of
 employment,
 even
 if
 the
 employees’
 group
 is
 o Company‐union
 –
 labor
 organization,
 which,
 in
 whole
 or
 in

not
registered
with
the
DOLE
 part,
is
employer‐controlled
or
employer‐dominated

 NLRB
definition:
bilateral
mechanism
that
entails
a
  Company‐union
must
not
be
confused
with
a

union

pattern
or
practice
in
which
a
group
of
employees,
 which,
 although
 comprised
 exclusively
 of
 the

over
 time,
 make
 proposals
 to
 management,
 and
 employees
 of
 a
 given
 employer
 or
 employers,
 is

management
 responds
 to
 those
 proposals
 by
 free
 of
 employer‐influence
 and
 thus
 a
 legitimate

acceptance
or
rejection
by
word
or
deed
 organization
recognized
by
law
as
a
bona
fide
labor

• Labor
organization
not
necessarily
a
union
 union.
 Those
 unions
 are
 commonly
 described
 as

o Instead
of
organizing
a
labor
union,
workers
may
opt
to
form
 inside
unions

something
 shorn
 of
 the
 rigidity
 and
 formality
 of
 a
 labor
 • At
the
enterprise
level

union,
such
as
a
labor‐management
committee
 o Labor
union
at
enterprise
level
is
independent
if
created
by

o It
 is
 a
 medium
 of
 employee‐employer
 interaction
 in
 the
 independent
 registration
 or
 a
 chapter
 if
 created
 through

establishment
 through
 which
 problems
 or
 disputes,
 or
 chartering

potential
 disputes,
 may
 be
 resolved
 by
 consensus,
 o Independent
registration
is
obtained
by
the
union
organizers

compromise
or
other
constructive
voluntary
mode
 in
an
enterprise
through
their
own
action
instead
of
through

o The
richer
the
modes
of
labor‐management
interactions,
the
 the
issuance
of
a
charter
by
a
federation
or
national
union.

better.
 o Independent
 union
 has
 a
 legal
 personality
 of
 its
 own
 not

2. Classification
of
labor
organizations
 derived
from
that
of
a
federation

• At
the
national
level
  DO
 40‐03:
 labor
 organization
 operating
 at
 the

o National
Union/Federation
–
any
labor
organization
with
at
 enterprise
 level
 that
 acquired
 legal
 personality

least
10
locals/chapters
or
affiliates
each
of
which
must
be
a
 through
independent
registration

duly
certified
or
recognized
collective
bargaining
agent
  An
 independent
 union
 may
 affiliate
 with
 a

 DO
 40‐03
 definition:
 a
 group
 of
 legitimate
 labor
 federation
 or
 national
 union,
 in
 which
 case
 it
 may

unions
 in
 a
 private
 establishment
 organized
 for
 also
be
called
an
affiliate

collective
bargaining
or
for
dealing
with
employers
 • Recent
changes
by
RA
9481

concerning
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 employment
 o No
required
number

for
their
member
unions
or
for
participating
in
the
  20%
 registration
 requirement
 applies
 only
 to
 an

formulation
 of
 social
 and
 employment
 policies,
 independent
union

standards
 and
 programs,
 registered
 with
 the
  So
 a
 local
 chapter
 is
 registerable
 even
 if
 its
 initial

Bureau

 membership
is
less
than
20%
of
the
bargaining
unit

 Example:
Federation
of
Free
Workers
(FFW)
 o Tentative
legal
personality

o Industry
Union
–
any
group
of
legitimate
labor
organizations
  A
local
chapter
is
created
once
a
federation
issues
a

operating
 within
 an
 identified
 industry,
 organized
 for
 charter
certificate

collective
 bargaining
 or
 for
 dealing
 with
 employers
  Once
 issued
 a
 charter,
 chapter
 acquires
 legal

concerning
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 employment
 within
 an
 personality
to
file
a
petition
for
CE.
All
other
union

industry,
or
for
participating
in
the
formulation
of
social
and
 rights
will
be
acquired
by
submitting
the
following

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 35

 (which
 should
 be
 certified
 under
 oath
 by
 the
  Non‐disclosure
 (in
 the
 preceding
 number)
 applies

Secretary
 or
 Treasurer
 and
 attested
 by
 the
 also
to
a
federation
that
files
a
PCE
on
behalf
of
its

president)
in
addition
to
the
charter
certificate:
 chapter
 in
 an
 enterprise
 without
 yet
 a
 union
 as

 Names
 and
 addresses
 of
 the
 officers
 and
 bargaining
agent

members
of
the
union
 o Employer,
a
bystander

 Chapter’s
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 which
  In
 a
 PCE
 the
 employer
 is
 a
 bystander
 and
 has
 no

can
be
the
same
as
that
of
the
federation
 right
 to
 oppose
 the
 petition.
 His
 participation
 is

o Specified
grounds
of
cancellation
 limited
to
being
informed
about
the
petition
and
to

o PCE
proceeds
despite
petition
to
cancel
union
registration
 being
 required
 to
 submit
 the
 list
 of
 employees
 if
 a

 Petition
 to
 cancel
 union
 registration
 does
 not
 CE
will
be
held

prevent
the
filing
or
the
hearing
of
a
petition
for
a
 3. Registration
rationale

CE
 • If
registered
with
DOLE,
it
is
considered
legitimate
labor
organization

o Only
3
grounds
to
cancel
 (LLO)

 Any
falsehood
about
the
CBL
 • But
 a
 labor
 organization
 is
 not
 illegitimate
 just
 because
 it
 is

 About
the
election
of
officers
 unregistered.
 It
 is
 still
 a
 lawful
 organization
 and
 can
 deal
 with
 the

 Voluntary
dissolution
 employer,
 but
 it
 has
 no
 legal
 personality
 to
 demand
 collective

o Cancellation
by
action
of
the
members
 bargaining
 with
 the
 employer.
 It
 cannot
 petition
 for
 a
 certification

 At
 least
 2/3
 of
 the
 membership
 may
 vote
 to
 election
and
can’t
hold
a
legal
strike

dissolve
their
organization,
but
this
action
requires
 • Registration
 =
 labor
 organization
 legitimate
 in
 the
 sense
 that
 it
 is

a
subsequent
application
to
cancel
to
be
submitted
 clothed
 with
 legal
 personality
 to
 claim
 the
 representational
 and

by
 the
 board
 of
 the
 organization,
 attested
 by
 the
 bargaining
rights
or
to
strike
and
picket

president
 • Registration
 prescribed
 is
 not
 a
 limitation
 to
 the
 right
 of
 assembly
 or

o Reportorial
requirements
 association
 which
 may
 be
 exercised
 with
 or
 without
 said
 registration.

 Every
 legitimate
 labor
 organization
 has
 to
 submit
 The
latter
is
merely
a
condition
sine
qua
non
for
the
acquisition
of
legal

to
 BLR
 4
 documents
 (non‐submission
 is
 not
 a
 personality
 by
 labor
 organizations,
 associations
 or
 unions
 and
 the

ground
 to
 cancel
 registration,
 but
 erring
 officer
 possession
 of
 the
 rights
 and
 privileges
 granted
 by
 law
 to
 legitimate

may
be
punished
even
by
expulsion)
–
 labor
 organizations.
 The
 Constitution
 does
 not
 guarantee
 these
 rights

 Adoption
 or
 amendments
 to
 constitution
 and
 privileges,
 much
 less
 said
 personality,
 which
 are
 mere
 statutory

and
by‐laws
(CBL)
 creations,
 for
 the
 possession
 and
 exercise
 of
 which
 registration
 is

 Election
 of
 officers,
 with
 list
 of
 voters
 to
 required
 to
protect
both
labor
and
the
public
against
abuses,
fraud,
 or

be
submitted
in
30
days
 impostors
who
pose
as
organizers,
although
not
truly
accredited
agents

 Annual
 financial
 reports
 within
 30
 days
 of
the
union
they
purport
to
represent.
(PAFLU
v.
Sec
of
Labor)

from
close
of
fiscal
year
 • Effect
of
registration
under
the
corporation
law

 Annual
list
of
members
 o Labor
organization
may
be
organized
under
the
Corporation

o Affiliation
with
same
federation
 Law
 as
 a
 nonstock
 corporation
 and
 issued
 a
 certificate
 of

 Supervisors’
union
and
rank
and
file
union
in
same
 incorporation
 by
 the
 SEC.
 But
 such
 incorporation
 has
 only

company
may
affiliate
with
same
federation.
 the
 effect
 of
 giving
 to
 it
 juridical
 personality
 before
 regular

o Commingling
 courts
 of
 justice.
 Such
 incorporation
 does
 not
 grant
 the

 Commingling
 of
 supervisors
 and
 rank
 and
 file
 in
 rights
and
privileges
of
a
legitimate
labor
organization

one
 union
 is
 not
 a
 ground
 to
 cancel
 union
 4. Where
to
register

registration.
 This
 excludible
 member
 is
 • Applications
 for
 registration
 of
 independent
 labor
 unions,
 chartered

automatically
deemed
removed
from
the
list
 locals,
and
workers’
association
shall
be
filed
with
and
acted
upon
by

o Non‐disclosure
of
identity
 the
Regional
Office
where
the
applicant
principally
operates

 In
 an
 organized
 (unionized)
 enterprise
 the
 • For
 registration
 of
 federations,
 national
 unions
 or
 workers’

federation
 who
 files
 a
 Petition
 for
 Certification
 associations
operating
in
more
than
one
region
shall
be
filed
with
the

Election
 (PCE)
 on
 behalf
 of
 a
 chapter
 cannot
 be
 Bureau
or
the
Regional
Offices,
but
shall
be
processed
and
acted
upon

required
 to
 identify
 the
 chapter’s
 officers
 and
 by
the
Bureau
which
has
national
jurisdiction
unlike
a
regional
office

members.
The
PCE
does
not
have
to
be
filed
by
the
 5. Registration
requirements

local
officers
 • Federation
or
National
Union

o Non‐disclosure
even
in
Unionized
company

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 36

 oThe
 application
 for
 registration
 of
 federations
 and
 national
  The
 annual
 financial
 reports
 if
 the
 applicant
 has

unions
shall
be
accompanied
by
the
following
documents:
 been
 in
 existence
 for
 one
 or
 more
 years,
 unless
 it

 A
 statement
 indicating
 the
 name
 of
 the
 applicant
 has
not
collected
any
amount
from
the
members,
in

labor
 union,
 its
 principal
 address,
 the
 name
 of
 its
 which
 case
 a
 statement
 to
 this
 effect
 shall
 be

officers
and
their
respective
addresses;
 included
in
the
application;

 The
 minutes
 of
 the
 organizational
 meeting(s)
 and
  The
 applicant's
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws,
 minutes

the
 list
 of
 employees
 who
 participated
 in
 the
 said
 of
 its
 adoption
 or
 ratification,
 and
 the
 list
 of
 the

meeting(s);
 members
who
participated
in
it.
The
list
of
ratifying

 The
 annual
 financial
 reports
 if
 the
 applicant
 union
 members
 shall
 be
 dispensed
 with
 where
 the

has
been
in
existence
for
one
or
more
years,
unless
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 was
 ratified
 or
 adopted

it
has
not
collected
any
amount
from
the
members,
 during
 the
 organizational
 meeting.
 In
 such
 a
 case,

in
 which
 case
 a
 statement
 to
 this
 effect
 shall
 be
 the
factual
circumstances
of
the
ratification
shall
be

included
in
the
application;
 recorded
 in
 the
 minutes
 of
 the
 organizational

 The
 applicant
 union's
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws,
 meeting(s)

minutes
 of
 its
 adoption
 or
 ratification,
 and
 the
 list
 • Workers’
Association

of
 the
 members
 who
 participated
 in
 it.
 The
 list
 of
 o The
 application
 for
 registration
 of
 a
 workers'
 association

ratifying
 members
 shall
 be
 dispensed
 with
 where
 shall
be
accompanied
by
the
following
documents:

the
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 was
 ratified
 or
  The
name
of
the
applicant
association,
its
principal

adopted
 during
 the
 organizational
 meeting(s).
 In
 address,
 the
 name
 of
 its
 officers
 and
 their

such
 a
 case,
 the
 factual
 circumstances
 of
 the
 respective
addresses;


ratification
shall
be
recorded
in
the
minutes
of
the
  The
 minutes
 of
 the
 organizational
 meeting(s)
 and

organizational
meeting(s);
 the
list
of
members
who
participated
therein;

 The
 resolution
 of
 affiliation
 of
 at
 least
 ten
 (10)
  The
financial
reports
of
the
applicant
association
if

legitimate
 labor
 organizations,
 whether
 it
 has
 been
 in
 existence
 for
 one
 or
 more
 years,

independent
 unions
 or
 chartered
 locals,
 each
 of
 unless
 it
 has
 not
 collected
 any
 amount
 from
 the

which
 must
 be
 a
 duly
 certified
 or
 recognized
 members,
 in
 which
 case
 a
 statement
 to
 this
 effect

bargaining
 agent
 in
 the
 establishment
 where
 it
 shall
be
included
in
the
application;

seeks
to
operate;
and

  The
 applicant's
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 to
 which

 The
 name
 and
 addresses
 of
 the
 companies
 where
 must
 be
 attached
 the
 names
 of
 ratifying
 members,

the
affiliates
operate
and
the
list
of
all
the
members
 the
 minutes
 of
 adoption
 or
 ratification
 of
 the

in
each
company
involved.
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 and
 the
 date
 when

o Labor
 organizations
 operating
 within
 an
 identified
 industry
 ratification
was
made,
unless
ratification
was
done

may
 also
 apply
 for
 registration
 as
 a
 federation
 or
 national
 in
 the
 organizational
 meeting(s),
 in
 which
 case

union
 within
 the
 specified
 industry
 by
 submitting
 to
 the
 such
 fact
 shall
 be
 reflected
 in
 the
 minutes
 of
 the

Bureau
the
same
set
of
documents.
 organizational
meeting(s).

• Independent
labor
union
 o Application
 for
 registration
 of
 a
 workers'
 association

o The
 application
 for
 registration
 of
 an
 independent
 labor
 operating
in
more
than
one
region
shall
be
accompanied,
in

union
shall
be
accompanied
by
the
following
documents:
 addition
to
the
requirements
in
the
preceding
subsection,
by

 The
name
of
the
applicant
labor
union,
its
principal
 a
 resolution
 of
 membership
 of
 each
 member
 association,

address,
 the
 name
 of
 its
 officers
 and
 their
 duly
approved
by
its
board
of
directors.

respective
 addresses,
 approximate
 number
 of
 • Chartered
local

employees
in
the
bargaining
unit
where
it
seeks
to
 o A
 union
 at
 the
 enterprise
 level
 may
 be
 created
 either

operate,
with
a
statement
that
it
is
not
reported
as
 through

a
 chartered
 local
 of
 any
 federation
 or
 national
  Independent
registration
or

union;
  Chartering

 The
 minutes
 of
 the
 organizational
 meeting(s)
 and
  Union
created
through
chartering
is
called

the
 list
 of
 employees
 who
 participated
 in
 the
 said
 a
 local,
 a
 chapter,
 or
 a
 chartered
 local
 in

meeting(s)
 the
employer
enterprise
where
the
union

 The
 name
 of
 all
 its
 members
 comprising
 at
 least
 officers
and
members
are
employees

20%
of
the
employees
in
the
bargaining
unit;
 o Chartered
local
has
to
be
registered,
not
just
reported

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 37

 o A
 duly
 registered
 federation
 or
 national
 union,
 directly
  Pizza
 Hut
 filed
 a
 motion
 to
 dismiss
 alleging
 fraud,

creating
a
chartered
local,
to
submit
to
the
Regional
Office,
2
 falsification
 and
 misrepresentation.
 Med
 arbiter

copies
 of
 the
 following
 (documents
 shall
 be
 certified
 under
 directed
the
holding
of
a
certification
election;
once

oath
 by
 the
 Secretary
 or
 the
 Treasurer
 of
 the
 local/chapter
 a
 labor
 organization
 has
 filed
 the
 necessary

and
attested
by
its
President):
 documents
 and
 papers
 and
 the
 same
 have
 been

 A
 charter
 certificate
 issued
 by
 the
 federation
 or
 certified
 under
 oath
 and
 attested
 to,
 said

national
 union
 indicating
 the
 creation
 or
 organization
 necessarily
 becomes
 clothed
 with
the

establishment
of
the
local/charter
 charter
of
a
LLO.
In
other
words,
recognition
by
the

 The
 names
 of
 the
 local
 chapter’s
 officers,
 their
 BLR
becomes
merely
a
ministerial
function

addresses,
 and
 the
 principal
 office
 of
 the
  SC
 does
 not
 agree.
 After
 a
 labor
 organization
 had

local/chapter
 filed
 the
 necessary
 papers
 and
 documents
 for

 The
 local/chapter’s
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws,
 registration,
 it
 becomes
 mandatory
 for
 the
 BLR
 to

provided
 that
 where
 the
 local/chapter’s
 check
 if
 the
 requirements
 have
 been
 complied
 with.

constitution
and
by
laws
is
the
same
as
that
of
the
 The
 Labor
 Code
 grants
 the
 BLR
 a
 period
 of
 30
 days

federation
 or
 national
 union,
 this
 fact
 shall
 be
 within
 which
 to
 review
 all
 applications
 for

indicated
accordingly
 registration.
 This
 30­day
 period
 ensures
 that
 any

• Legal
personality
only
to
file
a
PCE
 action
taken
by
the
BLR
is
made
in
consonance
with

o A
chapter
acquires
legal
personality
on
the
date
it
was
issued
 the
mandate
of
the
Labor
Code.

a
 charter
 certificate
 by
 its
 mother
 federation
 or
 national
 • Requirements
relaxed

union.
 The
 acquisition
 of
 legal
 personality
 seems
 to
 happen
 o The
 creation
 of
 a
 local
 does
 not
 need
 subscription
 by
 a

automatically,
but
only
for
purposes
of
filing
a
petition
for
a
 minimum
number
of
members.

certification
election
 o The
 20%
 initial
 membership
 is
 required
 to
 register
 an

• Submission
of
confirming
documents
 independent
 union
 but
 not
 a
 local.
 (this
 makes
 it
 easier
 to

o The
acquired
personality
is
tentative
because
it
needs
to
be
 create
a
chapter
than
an
independent
union)

confirmed
by
submission
of
additional
documents,
otherwise
 • Union’s
legitimacy
not
subject
to
collateral
attack

the
chapter
does
not
become
entitled
to
all
other
rights
and
 o Legal
 personality
 may
 be
 questioned
 only
 through
 an

privileges
of
an
LLO.
The
article
does
not
fix
a
time
limit
for
 independent
 petition
 for
 cancellation
 of
 union
 registration

submitting
 those
 additional
 documents
 because
 a
 chapter
 and
 NOT
 by
 the
 way
 of
 collateral
 attack
 in
 the
 petition
 for

that
wants
to
become
a
bargaining
agent
will
waste
no
time
 certification
election

to
permanently
legitimize
its
status
 6. Collective
bargaining
unit
(CBU)

o Med
 Arbiter
 may
 dismiss
 the
 petition
 for
 certification
 • An
independent
union
is
that
the
applicant
should
have
a
membership

election
 if
 the
 union
 is
 not
 listed
 in
 DOLE’s
 registry
 of
 of
at
least
20%
of
the
employees
in
the
bargaining
unit
where
it
seeks

legitimate
unions
or
if
it
fails
to
attach
to
its
petition
a
duly
 to
operate

issued
charter
certificate
 • Bargaining
unit
–
group
of
employees
sharing
mutual
interests
within

• A
trade
union
center
cannot
create
a
chapter
 a
 given
 employer
 unit,
 comprised
 of
 all
 or
 less
 than
 all
 of
 the
 entire

• When
does
a
Chapter
become
an
LLO?
 body
 of
 employees
 in
 the
 employer
 unit
 or
 any
 specific
 occupational

o Before

DO
No.
9,
issued
in
1997:
acquire
legal
personality
 or
geographical
grouping
within
such
employer
unit

from
 the
 date
 of
 filing
 of
 the
 complete
 documents;
 it
 could
 • The
 law
 does
 not
 allow
 supervisors
 and
 rank‐and‐file
 employees
 to

not
be
the
date
of
filing
of
the
documents
 belong
to
the
same
bargaining
unit

o NOW:
 deemed
 registered
 and
 vested
 with
 legal
 personality
 • The
unit
may
be
as
numerous
as
thousands
of
employees
or
as
few
as

on
 the
 date
 of
 issuance
 of
 its
 certificate
 of
 registration
 or
 less
than
a
hundred.
The
law
fixes
no
minimum
or
maximum
number.

certificate
of
creation
of
chartered
local
 Whatever
 the
 number,
 20%
 should
 be
 members
 of
 the
 independent

• Recognition
by
BLR
not
a
ministerial
duty
 union
applying
for
registration

o Progressive
Development
Cor.­Pizza
Hut
v.
Laguesma
 • The
 CBU
 is
 different
 from
 and
 bigger
 than
 a
 union.
 Union
 members

 Nagkakaisang
 Lakas
 ng
 Manggagawa‐Katipunan
 come
 from
 the
 CBU
 and
 there
 can
 be
 several
 rival
 unions
 within
 a

filed
 a
 petition
 for
 certification
 election
 with
 the
 CBU.
 While
 officers
 lead
 and
 represent
 a
 union,
 a
 union
 represents
 a

DOLE
 in
 behalf
 of
 the
 rank
 and
 file
 employees
 of
 CBU.

the
 Progressive
 Development
 Corporation
 (Pizza
 7. Constitution,
by­laws
and
regulations

Hut)
 • Labor
unions
have
the
right
to
adopt
constitutions,
rules
and
by‐laws

within
 the
 scope
 of
 the
 lawful
 purposes
 of
 the
 union
 and
 bind
 their

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 38

 members
 provided
 they
 are
 reasonable,
 uniform,
 and
 not
 the
 application
 or
 notice
 shall
 be
 submitted
 to
 the
 Regional

discriminatory,
and
provided
they
are
not
contrary
to
public
policy
 Office
or
the
Bureau

• A
 union’s
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 govern
 the
 relationship
 between
 • Action
on
the
application/notices

and
among
its
members
 o The
Regional
Office
or
the
Bureau,
as
the
case
may
be,
shall

• Johnson
and
Johnson
Labor
Union­FFW
v.
Director
of
Labor
Relations
 act
on
all
applications
for
registration
or
notice
of
change
of

o Consti
 and
 by‐laws
 reads:
 “a
 member
 who
 has
 been
 name,
 affiliation,
 merger
 and
 consolidation
 within
 ten
 (10)

suspended
or
terminated
without
reasonable
cause
shall
be
 days
 from
 receipt
 either
 by:
 (a)
 approving
 the
 application

extended
 a
 financial
 aid
 from
 the
 compulsory
 contributions
 and
issuing
the
certificate
of
registration/acknowledging
the

in
the
amount
of
.75
from
each
member
weekly
 notice/report;
 or
 (b)
 denying
 the
 application/notice
 for

o Oscar
was
dismissed
by
employer
because
he
did
not
state
in
 failure
of
the
applicant
to
comply
with
the
requirements
for

his
 job
 application
 form
 that
 he
 had
 a
 relative
 in
 the
 registration/notice.


company.
 Union
 refused
 to
 provide
 him
 financial
 aid.
 Oscar
 • Denial
of
application/return
of
notice

filed
a
complaint.
Union
contends
that
giving
the
money
was
 o Where
 the
 documents
 supporting
 the
 application
 for

tantamount
 to
 compelling
 the
 union
 to
 disburse
 its
 funds
 registration/notice
of
change
of
name,
affiliation,
merger
and

without
 authority
 of
 the
 general
 membership
 and
 to
 collect
 consolidation
are
incomplete
or
do
not
contain
the
required

without
the
required
individual
authorizations
 certification
 and
 attestation,
 the
 Regional
 Office
 or
 the

o The
nature
of
the
contribution
being
compulsory
and
the
fact
 Bureau
 shall,
 within
 five
 (5)
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the

that
the
purpose
as
stated
is
for
financial
aid,
clearly
indicate
 application/notice,
 notify
 the
 applicant/labor
 organization

that
 individual
 payroll
 authorizations
 of
 the
 union
 members
 concerned
 in
 writing
 of
 the
 necessary
 requirements
 and

are
not
necessary.
The
union’s
constitution
and
by­laws
govern
 complete
 the
 same
 within
 thirty
 (30)
 days
 from
 receipt
 of

the
 relationship
 between
 and
 among
 its
 members.
 The
 union
 notice.


can
be
ordered
to
release
its
funds
intended
for
the
promotion
 o Where
 the
 applicant/labor
 organization
 concerned
 fails
 to

of
 mutual
 assistance.
 A
 suit
 to
 enforce
 a
 union
 constitution
 complete
 the
 requirements
 within
 the
 time
 prescribed,
 the

does
not
have
to
be
brought
against
each
individual
member.
 application
 for
 registration
 shall
 be
 denied,
 or
 the
 notice
 of

• Limitation
to
by­laws
 change
 of
 name,
 affiliation,
 merger
 and
 consolidation

o Does
 not
 sanction
 rules
 to
 commit
 wrong,
 nor
 does
 it
 returned,
 without
 prejudice
 to
 filing
 a
 new
 application
 or

authorize
 interference
 with
 the
 constitutional
 rights
 of
 notice

others
 o The
notice
of
the
Regional
Office
or
the
Bureau
denying
the

o CBL
should
be
democratically
ratified
 application
for
registration/returning
the
notice
of
change
of

• Amendments
 name,
affiliation,
merger
or
consolidation
shall
be
in
writing

o May
 be
 amended,
 modified,
 and
 extended
 by
 the
 duly
 stating
 in
 clear
 terms
 the
 reasons
 for
 the
 denial
 or
 return.

constituted
union
authorities
 The
denial
may
be
appealed
to
the
Bureau
if
denial
is
made

o Consti
 may
 be
 made,
 changed,
 unmade
 or
 superseded
 by
 a
 by
the
Regional
Office
or
to
the
Secretary
if
denial
is
made
by

majority
vote
of
the
members
or
its
constituent
body
 the
Bureau,
within
ten
(10)
days
from
receipt
of
such
notice,

o Major
policy
questions
are
to
be
deliberated
upon
by
secret
 on
 the
 ground
 of
 grave
 abuse
 of
 discretion
 or
 violation
 of

ballot
 these
Rules.

8. Provisions
 common
 to
 the
 registration
 of
 labor
 organizations
 and
 • Appeal

workers’
association
 o The
 denial
 by
 the
 regional
 office
 may
 be
 appealed
 to
 the

• Attestation,
fee,
copies
of
documents
 Bureau
and
then
to
the
CA.

o Section
 1.
 Attestation
 requirements.
 ‐
 The
 application
 for
 o But
if
denial
originated
at
the
Bureau
itself,
the
appeal
is
to

registration
 of
 labor
 unions
 and
 workers'
 associations,
 the
Secretary
of
Labor

notice
 for
 change
 of
 name,
 merger,
 consolidation
 and
 o It
should
be
filed
within
10
days
from
receipt
of
such
notice,

affiliation
 including
 all
 the
 accompanying
 documents,
 shall
 on
the
ground
of
grave
abuse
of
discretion
or
violation
of
the

be
certified
under
oath
by
its
Secretary
or
Treasurer,
as
the
 Rules

case
may
be,
and
attested
to
by
its
President.

 o The
memorandum
of
appeal
shall
be
filed
with
the
Regional

o Section
 2.
 Payment
 of
 registration
 fee.
 ‐
 A
 labor
 union
 and
 Office
or
the
Bureau
that
issued
the
denial/return
of
notice.

workers'
 association
 shall
 be
 issued
 a
 certificate
 of
 The
 memorandum
 of
 appeal
 together
 with
 the
 complete

registration
upon
payment
of
the
prescribed
registration
fee.

 records
 of
 the
 application
 for
 registration/notice
 of
 change

o Section
3.
Accompanying
documents.
‐
One
(1)
original
copy
 of
 name,
 affiliation,
 merger
 or
 consolidation,
 shall
 be

and
two
(2)
duplicate
copies
of
all
documents
accompanying
 transmitted
 by
 the
 Regional
 Office
 to
 the
 Bureau
 or
 by
 the

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 39

 Bureau
 to
 the
 Office
 of
 the
 Secretary,
 within
 twenty‐four
 • To
 disaffiliate
 is
 a
 right,
 but
 to
 observe
 the
 terms
 of
 affiliation
 is
 an

(24)
hours
from
receipt
of
the
memorandum
of
appeal.

The
 obligation

Bureau
or
the
Office
of
the
Secretary
shall
decide
the
appeal
 • Liberty
Cotton
Mills
Workers
Union
v.
Liberty
Cotton
Mills,
Inc.

within
 twenty
 (20)
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 records
 of
 the
 o In
 their
 CBA,
 company
 recognized
 the
 local
 union,

case.

 represented
by
PAFLU,
as
the
sole
bargaining
agent

9. Affiliation
 o While
the
CBA
was
still
in
force,
32
out
of
36
members
of
the

• Affiliate
 is
 an
 independently
 registered
 union
 that
 enters
 into
 an
 union
disaffiliated
from
PAFLU

agreement
of
affiliation
with
a
federation
or
a
national
union.
 o The
mother
federation
requested
the
company
to
terminate

o Also
 refers
 to
 a
 chartered
 local
 which
 applies
 for
 and
 is
 the
employment
of
the
employees,
which
the
company
did

granted
an
independent
registration
but
does
not
disaffiliate
 o PAFLU,
acting
for
and
in
behalf
of
its
affiliate,
had
the
status
of

from
its
mother
federation
or
national
union
 an
agent
while
the
local
union
remained
the
basic
unit
of
the

• Why?
 association,
 free
 to
 secure
 the
 common
 interest
 of
 all
 its

o To
 secure
 support
 or
 assistance
 particularly
 during
 members
 including
 the
 freedom
 to
 disaffiliate
 when
 the

formative
stage
of
unionization
 circumstances
 warrant.
 This
 was
 clearly
 stated
 in
 its

o To
 utilize
 expertise
 in
 preparing
 and
 pursuing
 bargaining
 constitution
 and
 by­laws
 which
 provided
 that
 the
 local
 union

proposals
 should
 remain
 an
 affiliate
 as
 long
 as
 10
 or
 more
 of
 the

o To
 marshal
 mind
 and
 manpower
 in
 the
 course
 of
 a
 group
 members
 evidence
 their
 desire
 to
 continue
 the
 affiliation.
 As

action
such
as
a
strike
 only
4
did
not
sign
the
resolution
for
disaffiliation,
then
intent

• Federation
or
national
union
ceases
as
such
when
it
loses
its
locals
 to
 disaffiliate
 was
 manifest.
 Hence,
 the
 dismissal
 from

o To
 be
 registrable
 or
 remain
 registered,
 should
 have
 as
 employment
was
not
justified

affiliates
no
less
than
10
locals
or
chapters,
each
of
which
is
a
 • Tropical
Hut
Employees
Union­CGW
v.
Tropical
Hut
Food
Market,
Inc.

duly
 recognized
 bargaining
 agent
 in
 the
 establishment
 o When
 the
 local
 union
 withdrew
 from
 the
 old
 federation
 to

where
it
operates
 join
a
new
one,
it
was
merely
exercising
its
primary
right
to

• Relationship
 between
 a
 local
 or
 chapter
 and
 federation
 or
 union
 is
 self‐organization
 for
 the
 effective
 enhancement
 and

that
of
agency,
where
the
local
is
the
principal
and
the
federation
the
 protection
of
common
interests.
In
the
absence
of
enforceable

agent
 provisions
 in
 the
 federation’s
 constitution
 preventing

• Affiliation
 by
 a
 duly
 registered
 local
 union
 with
 a
 national
 union
 or
 disaffiliation
of
a
local
union,
a
local
may
sever
its
relationship

federation
does
not
make
the
local
union
lose
its
legal
personality
 with
the
parent.

• Report
of
Affiliation;
requirements
 • Local
union
is
the
principal;
federation,
the
agent

o Independently
 registered
 union
 affiliating
 with
 a
 federation
 • When
to
disaffiliate

or
national
union
is
required
to
report
such
affiliation
 o Generally,
 a
 labor
 union
 may
 disaffiliate
 from
 the
 mother

o The
report
of
affiliation
of
independently
registered
labor

 union
 to
 form
 a
 local
 or
 independent
 union
 only
 during
 the

o unions
 with
 a
 federation
 or
 national
 union
 shall
 be
 60‐day
 freedom
 period
 immediately
 preceding
 the

accompanied
by
the
following
documents
–
 expiration
of
the
CBA

 Resolution
 of
 the
 labor
 union's
 board
 of
 directors
 o The
freedom
period
refers
to
the
last
60
days
of
the
fifth
and

approving
the
affiliation;
 last
year
of
a
CBA

 Minutes
 of
 the
 general
 membership
 meeting
 o But
 even
 before
 the
 onset
 of
 the
 freedom
 period,

approving
the
affiliation;
 disaffiliation
 may
 still
 be
 carried
 out,
 but
 such
 must
 be

 The
total
number
of
members
comprising
the
labor
 effected
by
a
majority
of
the
members
in
the
bargaining
unit

union
 and
 the
 names
 of
 members
 who
 approved
  True
 only
 if
 the
 contract
 of
 affiliation
 does
 not

the
affiliation;
 specify
the
period
for
possible
disaffiliation

 The
certificate
of
affiliation
issued
by
the
federation
  If
it
does,
the
stipulation
must
be
observed

in
 favor
 of
 the
 independently
 registered
 labor
 • Disaffiliation
must
be
by
majority
decision

union;
and
 o Disaffiliation
 has
 to
 be
 decided
 by
 the
 entire
 membership

 Written
 notice
 to
 the
 employer
 concerned
 if
 the
 through
secret
balloting

affiliating
union
is
the
incumbent
bargaining
agent.
 o Disaffiliating
the
union
itself
from
its
mother
union
must
be

10. Disaffiliation
 supported
 by
 the
 majority
 of
 the
 members.
 If
 done
 by
 a

• A
 local
 union,
 being
 a
 separate
 and
 voluntary
 association,
 is
 free
 to
 minority,
the
act
may
constitute
disloyalty

serve
 the
 interest
 of
 all
 its
 members
 including
 the
 freedom
 to
 o Villar,
et
al
v.
Inciong

disaffiliate
when
circumstances
warrant

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 40

  Petitioners
 (the
 disaffiliating
 union
 members)
 • Effect
 of
 cancellation
 of
 registration
 of
 federation
 or
 national

insist
that
their
disaffiliation
from
PAFLU
and
fling
 union
on
locals/chapters

a
 petition
 for
 certification
 election
 are
 not
 acts
 of
 o Cancellation
 shall
 operate
 to
 divest
 its
 locals/chapters
 of

disloyalty
 but
 an
 exercise
 of
 their
 right
 to
 self‐ their
 status
 as
 legitimate
 labor
 organizations,
 unless
 the

organization.
SC
thinks
otherwise.
 locals/chapters
 are
 covered
 by
 a
 duly
 registered
 CBA
 (in

 Had
 petitioners
 merely
 disaffiliated
 from
 the
 Amigo
 which
case,
they
shall
be
allowed
to
register
as
independent

Employees
 Union­PAFLU,
 there
 could
 be
 no
 legal
 unions.
 Failing
 to
 do
 so,
 they
 will
 lose
 their
 status
 upon
 the

objections
thereto
for
it
was
their
right
to
do
so.
But
 expiration
of
the
CBA)

they
 had
 constituted
 the
 minority
 in
 the
 Union.
 12. Merger
or
consolidation


Petitioners
 constituted
 a
 small
 minority
 for
 which
 • Merger
 is
 the
 process
 where
 a
 labor
 organization
 absorbs
 another,

reason
 they
 could
 not
 have
 successfully
 disaffiliated
 resulting
 in
 the
 cessation
 of
 the
 absorbed
 labor
 organization’s

the
local
union
from
PAFLU.

 existence
 and
 the
 continued
 existence
 of
 the
 absorbing
 labor

• Disaffiliation:
effect
on
legal
status
 organization

o When
 a
 union
 which
 is
 not
 independently
 registered
 o Effect
 is
 to
 transfer
 to
 the
 absorbing
 organization
 all
 the

disaffiliates
 from
 the
 federation,
 it
 is
 not
 entitled
 to
 the
 rights,
interests
and
obligations
to
the
absorbed
organization

rights
 and
 privileges
 granted
 to
 a
 legitimate
 labor
 o Often
involves
a
larger
union
merging
with
a
smaller
union

organization.
It
can’t
file
a
petition
for
certification
election
 o Union
 merge
 for
 reasons
 similar
 to
 those
 behind
 corporate

• Disaffiliation:
effect
on
union
dues
 mergers,
 as
 in
 to
 gain
 access
 to
 greater
 resources
 and

o The
obligation
of
the
employer
to
deduct
and
remit
dues
to
 expertise,
competition,
job
security
and
institutional
survival

the
 federation
 is
 conditioned
 on
 the
 individual
 check‐off
 • Consolidation
 refers
 to
 creation
 or
 formation
 of
 a
 new
 union
 arising

authorization
of
the
local
union
members
 from
the
unification
of
2
or
more
unions

o The
 federation
 is
 entitled
 to
 receive
 the
 dues
 from
 the
 o Newly
 created
 organization
 acquires
 all
 the
 rights
 and

employer
only
as
long
as
the
local
union
is
affiliated
with
the
 interests
of
the
consolidating
organizations

federation.
Without
said
affiliation,
the
employer
has
no
link
 o Occurs
 between
 2
 unions
 that
 are
 approximately
 the
 same

to
the
mother
union
 size

o The
 obligation
 of
 an
 employee
 to
 pay
 union
 dues
 is
 • Merger/consolidation
does
not
easily
happen

coterminous
with
his
affiliation
or
membership
 o Which
union
will
be
absorbed?
Which
is
dominant?

o A
local
union
which
has
validly
withdrawn
from
its
affiliation
 o How
will
employer
react
to
union
merger?

with
 the
 parent
 association
 and
 which
 continues
 to
 • Notice
 of
 merger/consolidation
 of
 labor
 organizations,
 where
 to

represent
 the
 employees
 of
 an
 employer
 is
 entitled
 to
 the
 file

check‐off
dues
under
a
collective
bargaining
contract
 o Notice
 of
 merger
 or
 consolidation
 of
 independent
 labor

• Disaffiliation;
 effect
 on
 existing
 CBA;
 the
 “substitutionary”
 unions,
 chartered
 locals
 and
 workers'
 associations
 shall
 be

doctrine
 filed
with
and
recorded
by
the
Regional
Office
that
issued
the

o CBA
 continues
 to
 bind
 the
 members
 of
 the
 new
 or
 certificate
of
registration/certificate
of
creation
of
chartered

disaffiliated
 and
 independent
 union
 up
 to
 the
 CBA’s
 local
 of
 either
 the
 merging
 or
 consolidating
 labor

expiration
date
 organization.
 Notice
 of
 merger
 or
 consolidation
 of

o Substitutionary
doctrine
provides
that
the
employees
cannot
 federations
 or
 national
 unions
 shall
 be
 filed
 with
 and

revoke
 the
 validly
 executed
 collective
 bargaining
 contract
 recorded
by
the
Bureau.

with
 their
 employer
 by
 the
 simple
 expedient
 of
 changing
 • Requirements
of
notice
of
merger/consolidation

their
bargaining
agent
 o The
 notice
 of
 merger
 of
 labor
 organizations
 shall
 be

11. Revocation
of
charter
 accompanied
by
the
following
documents:

• A
 federation,
 national
 union
 or
 worker’s
 association
 may
 revoke
 the
  The
 minutes
 of
 merger
 convention
 or
 general

charter
issued
to
a
local/chapter
or
branch
by
serving
on
the
latter
a
 membership
 meeting(s)
 of
 all
 the
 merging
 labor

verified
 notice
 of
 revocation,
 copy
 furnished
 the
 Bureau,
 on
 the
 organizations,
 with
 the
 list
 of
 their
 respective

ground
 of
 disloyalty
 or
 such
 other
 grounds
 specified
 in
 the
 members
who
approved
the
same;
and

constitution
and
by‐laws
of
the
federation,
national
union
or
workers’
  The
 amended
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 and

association
 minutes
 of
 its
 ratification,
 unless
 ratification

• Revocation
shall
divest
the
local/chapter
of
its
legal
personality
upon
 transpired
 in
 the
 merger
 convention,
 which
 fact

receipt
 of
 the
 notice
 by
 the
 Bureau,
 unless
 in
 the
 meantime,
 it
 has
 shall
be
indicated
accordingly.

acquired
independent
registration
 • Certificate
of
registration

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 41

 o The
 certificate
 of
 registration
 issued
 to
 merged
 labor
 oMembers’
 resolution
 should
 be
 followed
 by
 an
 application

organizations
 shall
 bear
 the
 registration
 number
 of
 one
 of
 for
 cancellation
 passed
 and
 submitted
 by
 the
 union’s

the
 merging
 labor
 organizations
 as
 agreedupon
 by
 the
 governing
 board,
 which
 application
 must
 be
 attested
 to
 by

parties
to
the
merger.
 the
president

o The
certificate
of
registration
shall
indicate
the
following:

 • Invalid
grounds

 The
new
name
of
the
merged
labor
organization;
 o Illegal
strike

 The
 fact
 that
 it
 is
 a
 merger
 of
 two
 or
 more
 labor
 o Nonrenewal
of
registration/permit

organizations;
 • Cabo
and
other
grounds
deleted

 The
 name
 of
 the
 labor
 organizations
 that
 were
 • Administrative
cancellation;
the
reportorial
requirements

merged;
 o It
 shall
 be
 the
 duty
 of
 every
 legitimate
 labor
 unions
 and

 Its
office
or
business
address;
and
 workers
associations
to
submit
to
the
Regional
Office
or
the

 The
 date
 when
 each
 of
 the
 merging
 labor
 Bureau
 which
 issued
 its
 certificate
 of
 registration
 or

organizations
 acquired
 legitimate
 personality
 as
 certificate
of
creation
of
chartered
local,
as
the
case
may
be,

stated
 in
 their
 respective
 original
 certificate
 of
 two
(2)
copies
of
each
of
the
following
documents:

registration.
  Any
amendment
to
its
constitution
and
by‐laws
and

13. Change
of
name
 the
 minutes
 of
 adoption
 or
 ratification
 of
 such

• The
notice
for
change
of
name
of
a
registered
labor
organization
shall
 amendments,
 within
 thirty
 (30)
 days
 from
 its

be
 filed
 with
 the
 Bureau
 or
 the
 Regional
 Office
 where
 the
 concerned
 adoption
or
ratification;

labor
organization's
certificate
of
registration
or
certificate
of
creation
  Annual
 financial
 reports
 within
 thirty
 (30)
 days

of
a
chartered
local
was
issued.
 after
the
close
of
each
fiscal
year
or
calendar
year;

• The
 notice
 for
 change
 of
 name
 of
 a
 labor
 organization
 shall
 be
  Updated
 list
 of
 newly‐elected
 officers,
 together

accompanied
by
the
following
documents:
 with
 the
 appointive
 officers
 or
 agents
 who
 are

o Proof
of
approval
or
ratification
of
change
of
name;
and

 entrusted
with
the
handling
of
funds,
within
thirty

o The
amended
constitution
and
by‐laws.
 (30)
 days
 after
 each
 regular
 or
 special
 election
 of

• Effect
of
change
of
name
 officers,
 or
 from
 the
 occurrence
 of
 any
 change
 in

o Shall
not
affect
its
legal
personality
 the
 officers
 of
 agents
 of
 the
 labor
 organization
 or

workers
association;


Article
238.
Cancellation
of
registration.
  Updated
 list
 of
 individual
 members
 of
 chartered

locals,
 independent
 unions
 and
 workers'

Article
238­A.
Effect
of
petition
for
cancellation
of
registration
 associations
within
thirty
(30)
days
after
the
close

of
each
fiscal
year;
and

Article
239.
Grounds
for
cancellation
of
union
registration
  Updated
list
of
its
chartered
locals
and
affiliates
or

member
 organizations,
 collective
 bargaining

Article
239­A.
Voluntary
cancellation
of
registration
 agreements
executed
and
their
effectivity
period,
in

the
 case
 of
 federations
 or
 national
 unions,
 within

1. Cancellation
of
registration;
grounds
 thirty
 (30)
 days
 after
 the
 close
 of
 each
 fiscal
 year,

• Cancellation
 is
 the
 government’s
 act
 that
 divests
 the
 organization
 of
 as
 well
 as
 the
 updated
 list
 of
 their
 authorized

status
 representatives,
 agents
 or
 signatories
 in
 the

• It
reverts
to
its
character
prior
to
the
registration
 different
regions
of
the
country.


• Although
 it
 does
 not
 cease
 to
 exist
 or
 become
 an
 unlawful
 o As
 understood
 in
 these
 Rules,
 the
 fiscal
 year
 of
 a
 labor

organization,
its
juridical
personality
as
well
as
its
statutory
rights
and
 organization
 shall
 coincide
 with
 the
 calendar
 year,
 unless
 a

privileges
is
suspended
 different
 period
 is
 prescribed
 in
 the
 constitution
 and
 by‐
• Third
ground
–
desire
of
the
union
members
themselves;
requisites:
 laws.

o Members
 desire
 to
 dissolve
 or
 cancel
 should
 have
 been
 o Failure
 to
 submit
 for
 5
 consecutive
 years
 authorizes
 the

voted
upon
through
secret
balloting
 Bureau
 to
 institute
 cancellation
 proceedings
 upon
 its
 own

o Balloting
 should
 take
 place
 in
 a
 meeting
 called
 for
 the
 initiative
or
upon
complaint
by
any
party‐in‐interest

purpose
of
deciding
whether
or
not
to
dissolve
the
union
 2. Who
files
petition
for
cancellation

o Vote
to
dissolve
should
represent
2/3
affirmative
vote
of
the
 • Any
 party‐in‐interest
 may
 commence
 a
 petition
 for
 cancellation
 of

general
membership,
not
just
of
the
quorum
 registration

• Employer
is
a
party‐in‐interest

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 42

 • Petition
 to
 cancel
 shall
 be
 under
 oath
 and
 shall
 state
 clearly
 and
 o Degree
 of
 dependence
 of
 the
 individual
 employee
 on
 the

concisely
the
facts
and
grounds
relied
upon,
accompanied
by
proof
of
 union
organization

service
to
the
respondent.
Such
petition
should
be
a
separate
action;
it
 o Comprehensive
 power
 vested
 in
 the
 union
 with
 respect
 to

cannot
be
entertained
in
the
petition
for
certification
election
filed
by
 the
individual

the
union
 • Union
 may
 be
 considered
 but
 the
 agent
 of
 its
 members
 for
 the

3. Where
to
file
petition
 purpose
 of
 securing
 for
 them
 fair
 and
 just
 wages
 and
 good
 working

• Subject
to
the
requirements
of
notice
and
due
process,
the
registration
 conditions

of
 any
 legitimate
 independent
 labor
 union,
 chartered
 local
 and
 o As
agent,
the
union
is
subject
to
the
obligation
of
giving
the

workers'
association
may
be
cancelled
by
the
Regional
Director,
or
in
 members
 as
 its
 principals
 all
 information
 relevant
 to
 union

the
 case
 of
 federations,
 national
 or
 industry
 unions
 and
 trade
 union
 and
labor
matters
entrusted
to
it

centers,
 by
 the
 Bureau
 Director,
 upon
 the
 filing
 of
 an
 independent
 • Duty
 of
 court
 to
 protect
 laborers
 from
 unjust
 exploitation
 by

complaint
or
petition
for
cancellation
 oppressive
employers
and
union
leaders

• Cancellation
orders
issued
by
the
Regional
Director
are
appealable
to
 o Fair
 dealing
 is
 equally
 demanded
 of
 unions
 as
 well
 as
 of

the
BLR.
 employers
in
their
dealings
with
employees

• BLR
decision
is
final
and
executory,
but
may
be
elevated
to
the
CA
by
 3. Rights
of
union
members

certiorari
 • Political
 right
 –
 member’s
 right
 to
 vote
 and
 be
 voted
 for,
 subject
 to

• BLR
 decisions
 on
 cancellation
 cases
 that
 originated
 at
 the
 BLR
 itself
 lawful
provisions
on
qualifications
and
disqualifications

may
be
appealed
to
the
Secretary
of
Labor
and,
by
certiorari
to
the
CA
 • Deliberative
 and
 decision‐making
 right
 –
 member’s
 right
 to

4. Procedure
 participate
 in
 deliberations
 on
 major
 policy
 questions
 and
 decide

• Rules
that
are
applicable
to
inter/intra‐union
disputes
 them
by
secret
ballot

• Certain
procedural
requirements
apply
particularly
to
delisting
due
to
 • Rights
over
money
matters
–


failure
to
comply
with
“reportorial
requirements”
 o Member’s
right
against
excessive
fees

o Right
 against
 unauthorized
 collection
 of
 contributions
 or

Article
240.
Equity
of
the
incumbent.
 unauthorized
disbursements

o Right
 to
 require
 adequate
 records
 of
 income
 and
 expenses


 and
the
right
of
access
to
financial
records

o Right
to
vote
on
officers’
compensation

Chapter
II:
Rights
and
conditions
of
membership.
 o Right
 to
 vote
 on
 proposed
 special
 assessments
 and
 be

deducted
 a
 special
 assessment
 only
 with
 the
 member’s

Article
241.
Rights
and
conditions
of
membership
in
a
labor
organization.
 written
authorization

• Right
 to
 information
 –
 member’s
 right
 to
 be
 informed
 about
 the

1. Democratization
of
unions
 organization’s
constitution
and
by‐laws
and
the
CBA
and
about
labor

• A
fundamental
paradox
in
democratically
governed
market
economies
 laws

in
the
presence
of
democracy
in
the
political
sphere
but
its
absence
in
 • Article
241,
though
not
so
denominated,
carries
the
character
of
a
bill

the
 economic
 setting.
 The
 governing
 philosophy
 is
 ownership
 of
 of
rights
of
union
members

private
property,
not
popular
sovereignty,
and
the
traditional
norm
is
 • Union
 members,
 as
 employees,
 retain
 the
 right
 to
 directly
 present

superior‐subordinate
relationship.
The
workers,
generally,
do
not
get
 grievances
to
the
employer
at
any
time

to
 choose
 their
 superiors
 nor
 decide
 policy
 question
 or
 control
 the
 • Eligibility
for
membership

making
of
rules.
 o When,
 how
 and
 under
 what
 conditions
 an
 employee

• This
 paradox
 germinates
 the
 seed
 of
 unionism
 
 aspiring
 for
 power
 becomes
 a
 union
 member
 
 depends
 on
 the
 union’s

in
their
workplace
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 inasmuch
 as
 Article
 249
 gives
 a

• As
 unionism’s
 aim
 is
 to
 install
 industrial
 democracy,
 the
 unions
 labor
 organization
 the
 right
 to
 prescribe
 its
 own
 rules
 for

themselves
must
be
democratic
 acquisition
or
retention
of
membership

• To
democratize
unions,
Article
241
requires
that
the
union
officers
be
  Nonetheless,
Article
277
states
that
an
employee
is

elected
 directly
 by
 the
 members
 through
 secret
 ballot
 and
 that
 the
 already
qualified
for
union
membership
starting
on

major
 policy
 decisions,
 as
 a
 rule,
 be
 made
 by
 the
 union
 members,
 his
first
day
of
service

again,
by
secret
ballot
 o Employee’s
 membership
 in
 a
 union
 does
 not
 necessarily

2. Nature
of
relationship
between
union
and
its
members
 mean
coverage
by
the
CBA,
if
one
exists

• There
must
be
fair
dealing
between
the
union
and
its
members,
which
  CBA
 defines
 its
 coverage
 as
 agreed
 upon
 by
 the

is
fiduciary
in
nature,
and
arises
out
of
2
factors
–
 parties.
 It
 may
 state
 that
 it
 covers
 only
 regular

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 43

 employees,
 or
 even
 exclude
 certain
 positions
 or
 a
 union
 as
 a
 democratic
 institution
 degenerates
 into
 nothing

jobholders.
 more
than
a
group
of
individuals
governed
by
mob
rule.

 Qualifying
 for
 union
 membership,
 therefore,
 does
 • Eligibility
of
voters

not
 necessarily
 mean
 inclusion
 in
 the
 coverage
 of
 o Only
 members
 of
 the
 union
 can
 take
 part
 in
 the
 election
 of

the
CBA
 union
officers

 Inclusion
 or
 coverage
 in
 the
 CBA
 depends
 on
 the
 o US
Federal
law

member
in
good
standing
has
the
right
to

stipulations
in
the
CBA
itself
 vote

o The
reverse
is
equally
true:
membership
in
the
CBU
does
not
 o A
 member
 in
 good
 standing
 is
 any
 person
 who
 has
 fulfilled

automatically
mean
membership
in
the
union
 the
requirements
for
membership
in
the
union
and
who
has

 CBU
members
vote
to
select
a
bargaining
union
or
 neither
 voluntarily
 withdrawn
 from
 membership
 nor
 been

to
ratify
a
CBA.
But
only
union
members
can
vote
to
 expelled
 or
 suspended
 from
 membership
 after
 appropriate

elect
union
officers,
to
strike
or
not
to
strike,
or
to
 proceedings
 consistent
 with
 the
 lawful
 provisions
 of
 the

decide
major
policy
issues
in
the
union
 union’s
constitution
and
by‐laws

 Inclusion
in
the
CBU
depends
on
the
determination
 o A
 labor
 organization
 may
 prescribe
 reasonable
 rules
 and

of
its
appropriateness
under
Article
234
and
235
 regulations
with
respect
to
voting
eligibility

4. Election
of
union
officers
  The
 right
 to
 vote
 may
 be
 deferred
 within

• Officers
 of
 the
 union
 are
 elected
 directly
 by
 the
 members
 in
 secret
 reasonable
 limits,
 but
 a
 union
 may
 not
 create

ballot
voting
 special
classes
of
nonvoting
members

• Election
 takes
 place
 at
 intervals
 of
 five
 years
 which
 is
 the
 term
 of
  A
labor
organization
may
condition
the
exercise
of

office
 of
 the
 union
 officers
 including
 those
 of
 a
 national
 union,
 the
 right
 to
 vote
 on
 the
 payment
 of
 dues,
 since

federation,
or
trade
union
center
 paying
 dues
 is
 a
 basic
 obligation
 of
 membership.

• What
positions
to
fill
up,
where,
and
how
election
should
be
done
are
 This
rule
is
subject
to
qualifications
–

matters
 left
 by
 law
 to
 the
 union’s
 constitution
 and
 by‐laws
 or
 to
  Any
 rule
 denying
 dues‐delinquent

agreement
among
the
members
 members
 the
 right
 to
 vote
 must
 be

o Only
 in
 absence
 thereof
 will
 the
 IRR
 apply:
 incumbent
 applied
uniformly

president
 to
 create
 an
 election
 committee
 within
 60
 days
  Members
 must
 be
 afforded
 a
 reasonable

before
expiration
of
the
incumbent
officers’
term
 opportunity
to
pay
dues,
including
a
grace

 Rules
specify
the
composition
as
well
as
the
powers
 period
 during
 which
 dues
 may
 be
 paid

and
 duties
 of
 the
 election
 committee,
 but
 its
 rules
 without
any
loss
of
rights

and
 actions
 cannot
 contradict
 the
 Labor
 Code
 o Question
 of
 eligibility
 to
 vote
 may
 be
 determined
 through

mandates
 the
 use
 of
 the
 applicable
 payroll
 period
 and
 employee’s

• If
the
officers
with
expired
term
do
not
call
an
election,
the
remedy
is
 status
during
the
applicable
period

for
 at
 least
 30%
 of
 the
 members
 to
 file
 a
 petition
 with
 the
 DOLE
 o Submission
 of
 the
 employees’
 name
 with
 the
 BLR
 as

Regional
Office
 qualified
 members
 of
 the
 union
 is
 not
 a
 condition
 sine
 qua

• UST
Faculty
Union
et
al
v.
Bitonio
Jr.
 non
 to
 enable
 said
 members
 to
 vote
 in
 the
 election
 of
 the

o Petitioners,
 disgruntled
 union
 members,
 claim
 that
 the
 union’s
officers

numerous
 anomalies
 allegedly
 committed
 by
 the
 union
 • Union
officer
must
be
an
employee

officers
 impelled
 them
 to
 elect
 a
 new
 set
 of
 officers
 before
 o One
should
be
employed
in
the
company
to
qualify
as
officer

the
 end
 of
 the
 term
 of
 the
 incumbents.
 DOLE
 declared
 of
 a
 union
 in
 that
 company
 
 This
 rule,
 while
 deleted
 by

election
 null
 and
 void
 on
 the
 ground
 that
 the
 election
 was
 department
 orders,
 remains
 because
 it
 is
 required
 in
 the

initiated
 and
 conducted
 not
 in
 accordance
 with
 the
 Labor
Code
itself

constitution
and
by‐laws
 • Disqualification
of
union
officers

o Petitioner’s
frustration
over
the
performance
of
the
incumbent
 o No
 person
 who
 has
 been
 convicted
 of
 a
 crime
 involving

officers,
 as
 well
 as
 their
 fears
 of
 a
 “fraudulent”
 election
 to
 be
 moral
 turpitude
 shall
 be
 eligible
 for
 election
 as
 a
 union

held
 under
 the
 latter’s
 supervision,
 could
 not
 justify
 the
 officer
or
for
appointment
to
any
position
in
the
union

method
 they
 chose
 to
 impose
 their
 will
 on
 the
 union.
 It
 does
  Crime
involving
moral
turpitude
–
act
 of
 baseness,

not
 justify
 disregarding
 the
 union’s
 constitution
 and
 by­laws.
 vileness
or
depravity
in
the
private
or
social
duties

The
 point
 to
 be
 stressed
 is
 that
 the
 union’s
 CBL
 is
 the
 which
 a
 man
 owes
 his
 fellowmen,
 or
 to
 society,

fundamental
 law
 that
 governs
 the
 relationship
 between
 and
 contrary
 to
 accepted
 and
 customary
 rule
 of
 right

among
the
members
of
the
union.
Without
respect
for
the
CBL,
 and
 duty
 between
 man
 and
 man,
 or
 conduct

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 44

 contrary
 to
 justice,
 honesty,
 modesty
 or
 good
 the
 economic
 demands
 of
 the
 workers.
 New
 officers
 were

morals
 elected.
 Election
 was
 objected
 to
 by
 FFW.
 Union
 officials

o No
 labor
 organization
 shall
 knowingly
 admit
 as
 member
 or
 thereafter
 expelled
 Ferrer,
 et
 al
 from
 the
 union
 and

continue
 in
 membership
 any
 individual
 who
 belongs
 to
 a
 demanded
 from
 the
 company
 the
 termination
 of
 their

subversive
 organization
 or
 who
 is
 engaged
 directly
 or
 employment

indirectly
in
any
subversive
activity
 o The
 union
 has
 a
 specific
 provision
 for
 the
 permanent
 or

 This
 disqualification
 applies
 with
 equal
 force
 to
 temporary
“expulsion”
of
its
erring
members
in
its
constitution

candidates
 in
 union
 elections
 
 one
 who
 cannot
 and
 by­laws.
 The
 provision
 requires
 that
 there
 be
 a
 hearing.

even
 be
 a
 member
 cannot
 be
 a
 candidate
 for
 an
 Yet,
no
hearing
was
ever
conducted
by
 the
SAMAHAN
to
 look

office
 into
 petitioners’
 explanation
 of
 their
 moves
 to
 oust
 the
 union

• Union
election
protest:
proclamation
of
winners
 leadership.
While
it
is
true
that
petitioners’
actions
might
have

o A
complaint
or
protest
regarding
election
of
union
officers
–
 precipitated
 divisiveness,
 and,
 later,
 showed
 disloyalty
 to
 the

a
subject
not
mentioned
at
all
in
the
Labor
Code
–
is
treated
 union,
 still,
 the
 SAMAHAN
 should
 have
 observed
 its
 own

by
the
IRR
as
an
intra/inter‐union
dispute
 constitution
and
by­laws
by
giving
petitioners
an
opportunity

5. Action
against
union
officers
 to
 air
 their
 side
 and
 explain
 their
 moves.
 If,
 after
 an

• A
union
officer,
after
his
election,
may
not
be
expelled
from
the
union
 investigation
 the
 petitioners
 were
 found
 to
 have
 violated

for
past
malfeasance
or
misfeasance.
To
do
so
would
nullify
the
choice
 union
 rules,
 then
 and
 only
 then
 should
 they
 be
 subjected
 to

made
by
the
members
 proper
disciplinary
measures

• The
remedy
against
erring
union
officers
is
not
referendum
but
union
 • Expulsion
 of
 a
 member
 for
 arbitrary
 or
 impetuous
 reasons
 may

expulsion
 amount
to
ULP
by
the
union

• Absent
 overriding
 considerations
 to
 the
 contrary,
 the
 will
 of
 the
 8. Relief
with
the
union

majority
 of
 the
 workers
 who
 voted
 in
 the
 elections
 should
 be
 • Generally,
 redress
 must
 first
 be
 sought
 within
 the
 union
 itself
 in

respected
 accordance
with
its
CBL

• Even
 if
 the
 disqualification
 could
 be
 justified
 ,
 the
 candidates
 of
 • When
the
CBL
provides
for
the
procedure
for
redress,
this
should
be

petitioner
cannot
be
declared
as
the
winners
in
the
disputed
election.
 resorted
to
not
only
to
give
the
grievance
machinery
or
appeals’
body

The
mere
fact
that
they
obtained
the
second
highest
number
of
votes
 of
the
union
the
opportunity
to
decide
the
matter
by
itself,
but
also
to

does
 not
 mean
 that
 they
 will
 thereby
 be
 considered
 as
 the
 elected
 prevent
 unnecessary
 and
 premature
 resort
 to
 administrative
 or

officers
if
the
true
winners
are
disqualified
 judicial
bodies

6. Due
process
in
impeachment
 • Exceptions

• Litton
Mills
Employees
Association­kapatiran
v.
Ferrer­Calleja
 o When
 exhaustion
 of
 remedies
 within
 the
 union
 itself
 would

o There
 was
 a
 procedure
 set
 in
 the
 union’s
 CBL
 regarding
 practically
 amount
 to
 a
 denial
 of
 justice,
 it
 would
 not
 be

impeachment
 insisted
upon,
as
a
condition
to
the
right
to
invoke
the
aid
of

o It
clearly
appears
that
the
procedure
was
not
followed
by
the
 a
court

petitioners
 when
 they
 impeached
 Umali.
 There
 was
 difficulty
 9. Consequence
of
violation
of
rights

on
 the
 part
 of
 the
 petitioners
 in
 complying
 with
 the
 required
 • If
 the
 conditions
 of
 membership,
 or
 the
 rights
 of
 the
 members,
 are

procedure
 for
 impeachment
 considering
 that
 the
 petition
 to
 violated,
 the
 violation
 may
 result
 in
 the
 cancellation
 of
 the
 union

impeach
had
to
be
addressed
to
the
Chairman
of
the
Executive
 registration
or
the
expulsion
of
the
culpable
officers

Board
of
the
Union,
and
that
the
majority
membership
which
 • Any
 complaint
 or
 petition
 with
 allegations
 of
 mishandling,

would
 decide
 on
 the
 impeachment
 had
 to
 be
 convened
 only
 misappropriation
 or
 non‐accounting
 of
 funds
 in
 violation
 of
 Article

upon
call
of
the
Chairman
of
the
Executive
Board,
who,
in
the
 241
 shall
 be
 treated
 as
 an
 intra‐union
 dispute.
 It
 shall
 be
 heard
 and

case
 at
 bar,
 happened
 to
 be
 Umali
 himself.
 Petitioner
 should
 resolved
by
the
Med‐Arbiter

have
 shown
 substantial
 compliance
 with
 said
 impeachment
 • Exception:
when
30%
not
required

procedure,
 by
 giving
 Umali
 ample
 opportunity
 to
 defend
 o Labor
 Code
 requires
 30%
 of
 the
 members
 to
 report
 a

himself.
 violation
of
the
labor
organization
procedures

7. Expulsion
of
member
 o Nevertheless,
 when
 such
 violation
 directly
 affects
 only
 one

• Just
as
an
officer
is
entitled
to
due
process,
so
does
a
member
 or
 two
 members,
 then
 only
 one
 or
 two
 members
 would
 be

• Ferrer,
et
al
v.
NLRC
 enough
to
report
such
violation

o Ferrer
 and
 companions
 filed
 with
 the
 DOLE
 a
 complaint
  Article
242
of
the
Labor
Code
states
that
a
report
of

seeking
the
expulsion
from
SAMAHAN
of
its
officers
headed
 a
violation
of
rights
and
conditions
of
membership

by
 Capitle
 allegedly
 because
 the
 officers
 failed
 to
 attend
 to
 in
 a
 labor
 organization
 may
 be
 made
 by
 “at
 least

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 45

 30%
of
all
the
members
of
a
union
or
any
member
 they
 were
 withdrawing
 or
 disauthorizing
 the

or
 members
 specially
 concerned”
 
 use
 of
 the
 deduction
of
any
amount
from
their
CBA
lump
sum.

permissive
 “may”
 in
 the
 provision
 at
 once
 negates
  The
failure
of
the
Union
to
comply
strictly
with
the

the
 notion
 that
 the
 assent
 of
 30%
 of
 all
 the
 requirements
 set
 out
 by
 the
 law
 invalidates
 the

members
 is
 mandatory.
 More
 decisive
 is
 the
 fact
 questioned
 special
 assessment.
 Substantial

that
 the
 provision
 expressly
 declares
 that
 the
 compliance
is
not
enough
in
view
of
the
fact
that
the

report
may
be
made,
alternatively
by
“any
member
 special
assessment
will
diminish
the
compensation
of

or
members
specially
concerned”
 the
 union
 members.
 Their
 express
 consent
 is

10. Visitorial
power
 required,
 and
 this
 consent
 must
 be
 obtained
 in

• Article
 274
 authorizes
 the
 Secretary
 of
 DOLE
 or
 his
 duly
 authorized
 accordance
 with
 the
 steps
 outlined
 by
 law,
 which

representative
 to
 inquire
 into
 the
 financial
 activities
 of
 any
 labor
 must
be
followed
to
the
letter.

organization
 on
 the
 basis
 of
 a
 complaint
 under
 oath,
 supported
 by
  There
 is
 nothing
 in
 the
 law
 which
 requires
 that
 the

20%
 of
 the
 membership
 in
 order
 to
 determine
 compliance
 or
 disauthorizations
must
be
in
individual
form.

noncompliance
 with
 the
 laws
 and
 to
 aid
 in
 the
 prosecution
 of
 any
 • Three
 requisites
 to
 collect
 special
 assessment
 (incidental

violation
thereof
 expenses,
attorney’s
fees
and
representation
expenses)

11. Check­offs
and
assessments
 o Authorization
 by
 a
 written
 resolution
 of
 the
 majority
 of
 all

• Check‐off
 is
 a
 method
 of
 deducting
 from
 an
 employee’s
 pay
 at
 the
members
at
the
general
membership
meeting
duly
called

prescribed
 period,
 the
 amounts
 due
 the
 union
 for
 fees,
 fines
 or
 for
the
purpose

assessments
 o Secretary’s
record
of
the
minutes
of
the
meeting

• Article
113
–
one
of
the
lawful
deductions
from
employee’s
wage
is
for
 o Individual
written
authorization
for
check‐off
duly
signed
by

union
 dues,
 in
 cases
 where
 the
 right
 of
 the
 worker
 or
 his
 union
 to
 the
employee
concerned

check‐off
 has
 been
 recognized
 by
 the
 employer
 or
 authorized
 in
 • Article
 241
 (n
 and
 o):
 Authorization
 should
 proceed
 from
 free

writing
by
the
individual
worker
concerned
 consent

• Amount
of
union
dues
should
be
reasonable
 • Check­off
of
agency
fee

• Amount
 and
 collection
 of
 union
 dues
 are
 questions
 that
 affect
 the
 o Another
 allowable
 deduction
 from
 employee’s
 wage
 is

entire
membership,
hence,
they
have
to
be
approved
by
the
members
 agency
 fee.
 This
 is
 an
 amount,
 equivalent
 to
 union
 dues,

themselves
 which
 a
 nonunion
 member
 pays
 to
 the
 union
 because
 he

• Assessments,
like
dues,
may
also
be
checked
off
 benefits
from
the
CBA
negotiated
by
the
union

o Dues
are
payments
to
meet
the
union’s
general
and
current
 • Illegal
check­off
ground
for
cancellation

obligations.
 The
 payment
 must
 be
 regular,
 periodic,
 and
 o Violation
of
the
law
on
check‐off
of
special
assessments
was

uniform.
 one
of
the
grounds
for
cancellation
of
union
registration

o Payments
 for
 a
 special
 purpose,
 especially
 if
 required
 only
 o On
the
part
of
the
employer,
illegal
check‐off
may
give
rise
to

for
a
limited
time,
are
regarded
as
an
assessment
 a
charge
of
illegal
deduction

o Attorney’s
fees
may
not
be
deducted
or
checked
off
from
any
 • Employer’s
liability
in
check­off
arrangement

amount
 due
 to
 an
 employee
 without
 his
 written
 consent,
 o No
 provision
 of
 law
 makes
 the
 employer
 directly
 liable
 for

except
for
mandatory
activities
under
the
Code
 the
 payment
 to
 the
 labor
 organization
 of
 union
 dues
 and

o Mandatory
 activity
 is
 a
 judicial
 process
 of
 settling
 dispute
 assessments
 that
 the
 former
 fails
 to
 deduct
 from
 its

laid
down
by
the
law.
 employee’s
 salaries
 and
 wages
 pursuant
 to
 a
 check‐off

 Amicable
 settlement
 entered
 into
 by
 management
 stipulation

and
union
is
NOT
a
mandatory
activity
  Employer’s
 failure
 to
 make
 the
 requisite

o Deductions
 for
 union
 service
 fee
 are
 authorized
 by
 law
 and
 deductions
 may
 constitute
 a
 violation
 of
 a

do
not
require
individual
check‐off
authorizations
 contractual
 commitment
 for
 which
 it
 may
 incur

o Palacolv.
Pura
Ferrer­Calleja
 liability
for
unfair
labor
practice.
But
the
employer,

 Union
 president
 submitted
 to
 the
 company
 the
 by
 that
 omission,
 does
 not
 incur
 liability
 to
 the

ratification
 by
 the
 union
 members
 of
 the
 newly
 union
 for
 the
 aggregate
 of
 dues
 or
 assessments

concluded
CBA.
He
also
submitted
an
authorization
 uncollected
 from
 the
 union
 members,
 or
 agency

for
the
company
to
deduct
union
dues
and
10%
as
 fees
for
non‐union
employees

special
 assessment
 from
 the
 CBA
 lump
 sum.
 528
 o Obligation
to
pay
union
dues
and
agency
fees
obviously
does

members
 submitted
 documents
 to
 the
 company
 not
devolve
upon
the
employer,
but
the
individual
employee.

stating
that
although
they
had
ratified
the
new
CBA,
 It
 is
 a
 personal
 obligation
 not
 demandable
 from
 the

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 46

 employer
upon
default
or
refusal
of
the
employee
to
consent
 the
 individual
 claims
 of
 members
 who
 did
 not
 consent
 to
 such

to
 a
 check‐off.
 The
 only
 obligation
 of
 the
 employer
 under
 a
 settlement.
 Not
 having
 authorized
 their
 union
 to
 enter
 into
 such

check‐off
is
to
effect
the
deductions
and
remit
the
collections
 compromise,
 those
 members
 are
 not
 bound
 by
 the
 terms
 of
 the

to
the
union
 settlement

• Jurisdiction
over
check­off
disputes
 4. Compromise
of
money
claims

o Regional
 Director
 of
 DOLE
 has
 jurisdiction
 over
 check‐off
 • Money
 claims
 due
 to
 laborers
 cannot
 be
 the
 object
 of
 settlement
 or

disputes
 compromise
 effected
 by
 a
 union
 or
 counsel
 without
 the
 specific

o BLR
 has
 jurisdiction
 over
 cases
 of
 violations
 thereof
 and
 to
 individual
consent
of
each
laborer
concerned

mete
the
appropriate
penalty
 • Union
 officers’
 authority
 to
 compromise
 must
 be
 presented
 in

evidence


 • Judgment
 based
 on
 a
 compromise
 agreement
 authorized
 by
 the

members
does
not
bind
the
individual
members
or
complainants
who

Chapter
III:
Rights
of
legitimate
labor
organizations
 are
not
parties
thereto
nor
signatories
therein

• Complainant
 union
 members
 had
 not
 ratified
 the
 Return‐to‐Work

Article
242.
Rights
of
legitimate
labor
organizations.
 Agreement.
It
follows
that
they
can’t
be
held
bound
by
that
agreement

• Waiver
of
money
claims
by
workers
and
employees
must
be
regarded

1. Not
any
LLO
 as
a
personal
right.
For
a
waiver
to
be
effective,
the
individual
consent

• First
three
rights
in
this
article
do
not
pertain
to
just
about
any
union
 or
ratification
of
the
workers
or
employees
involved
must
be
shown

but
 ONLY
 to
 the
 union
 that
 has
 been
 selected
 as
 the
 bargaining
 5. Right
to
be
furnished
with
financial
statement

representative
of
the
employees
in
the
bargaining
unit
 • Union
 has
 the
 right
 to
 be
 furnished
 with
 the
 employer’s
 audited

o Union
whose
demand
for
collective
bargaining
was
rebuffed
 financial
statements.

by
 the
 employer,
 because
 the
 union
 was
 not
 the
 certified
 • 4
points
in
time
when
union
may
ask
in
writing
for
these
statements
–

bargaining
agent,
has
no
right
to
stage
a
strike
 o After
the
union
has
been
recognized
by
the
employer
as
sole

2. Right
of
union
to
represent
its
members
 bargaining
representative
of
the
employees
in
the
bargaining

• It
is
the
function
of
a
labor
union
to
represent
its
members
against
the
 unit;
or

employer’s
 ULP.
 It
 can
 file
 an
 action
 in
 their
 behalf
 without
 the
 o After
the
union
is
certified
by
DOLE
as
such
sole
bargaining

procedure
of
joining
each
and
every
member
as
a
separate
party
 representative;
or

• Labor
 union
 has
 the
 requisite
 personality
 to
 sue
 on
 behalf
 of
 its
 o Within
the
last
60
days
of
the
life
of
a
CBA;
or

members
for
their
individual
money
claims
 o During
the
collective
bargaining
negotiation

• Members
doubting
their
union
 • Audited
 financial
 statements,
 including
 balance
 sheet
 and
 profit
 and

o When
a
union
files
a
case
“for
and
in
behalf
of
its
members”,
 loss
 statement,
 should
 be
 provided
 by
 the
 employer
 within
 30

a
 member
 or
 several
 members
 of
 that
 union
 will
 not
 be
 calendar
days
after
receipt
of
the
union’s
request

permitted
 to
 file
 in
 the
 same
 case
 a
 complaint‐in‐ 6. Right
to
collect
dues

intervention
 even
 if
 it
 alleges
 that
 the
 union
 was
 not

pursuing
the
case
diligently
 

o The
intervention
may
be
allowed
when
there
is
a
suggestion

of
fraud
or
collusion
or
that
the
representative
will
not
act
in
 Article
242­A.
Reportorial
requirements.

good
 faith
 for
 the
 protection
 of
 all
 interests
 represented
 by

the
union
 • Before:
 failure
 to
 submit
 the
 periodic
 documentary
 requirements
 was
 reason

3. Compromise
binding
upon
minority
members
of
union;
exception
 enough
to
cancel
the
registration
of
the
delinquent
labor
organization

• Compromise
 agreement
 between
 union
 and
 company,
 pursuant
 to
 • NOW:
such
cancellation
is
no
longer
allowed

which
 the
 complaint
 in
 an
 ULP
 case
 had
 been
 withdrawn
 and
 • IRR:
procedure
to
“delist”
a
labor
organization
that
does
not
comply
for
5
years

dismissed,
is
binding
upon
the
minority
members
of
the
union.
Action
 with
the
reportorial
duty

taken
 by
 minority
 members
 in
 disauthorizing
 counsel
 of
 record
 and
 o Apparently,
 IRR
 considers
 delisting
 as
 different
 from
 cancellation

filing
another
ULP
case
is
contrary
to
the
policy
of
the
Magna
Carta
of
 even
if
they
both
lead
to
loss
of
the
union’s
legal
personality

Labor,
 which
 promotes
 the
 settlement
 of
 differences
 between

management
and
labor
by
mutual
agreement
 Title
V:
Coverage

• BUT
court
had
reached
a
different
conclusion
in
a
case
where
257
out

of
 262
 complainants
 agreed
 to
 drop
 their
 criminal
 and
 ULP
 Article
243.
Coverage
and
employees’
right
to
self­organization.

complaints.
The
union,
said
the
court,
had
no
authority
to
compromise

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 47

 1. Organizing
in
general
 o A
 cooperative’s
 owners
 and/or
 members
 are
 the
 ones
 who

• Rights
 to
 organize
 and
 to
 bargain
 are
 given
 not
 exclusively
 to
 run
 and
 operate
 the
 business
 while
 the
 others
 are
 its

employees.
 Even
 workers
 who
 are
 not
 employees
 of
 any
 particular
 employees.


employer
may
form
their
organizations
to
protect
their
interests
 o An
 employee
 of
 such
 a
 cooperative
 who
 is
 a
 member
 and
 co­
• The
 right
 to
 organize
 refers
 also
 to
 forming,
 joining,
 or
 assisting
 a
 owner
 thereof
 can’t
 invoke
 the
 right
 to
 collective
 bargaining,

labor
organization
 for
 certainly
 an
 owner
 can’t
 bargain
 with
 himself
 or
 his
 co­
o This
right
carries
with
it
the
right
to
engage
in
group
action,
 owners.
 However,
 insofar
 as
 it
 involves
 cooperatives
 with

provided
 it
 is
 peaceful,
 to
 support
 the
 organization’s
 employees
 who
 are
 not
 members
 or
 co­owners
 thereof,
 such

objective
which
is
not
necessarily
collective
bargaining,
but,
 employees
are
entitled
to
exercise
the
rights
of
all
workers
to

simply,
 to
 aid
 and
 protect
 its
 members.
 But
 this
 might
 be
 organization,
collective
bargaining
negotiations
and
others.

differentiated
from
strike,
because
it
is
work
stoppage
 • In
 another
 case,
 the
 court
 clarified
 that
 it
 is
 the
 fact
 of
 ownership
 of

• Coverage
of
the
right
to
organize;
exceptions
 the
 cooperative,
 and
 not
 involvement
 in
 the
 management
 thereof,

o Right
to
form,
join
or
assist
a
labor
organization
is
granted
to
 which
 disqualifies
 a
 member
 from
 joining
 any
 labor
 organization

all
 kinds
 of
 employees
 of
 all
 kinds
 of
 employers
 –
 public
 or
 within
 the
 cooperative.
 Thus,
 irrespective
 of
 the
 degree
 of
 their

private,
profit
or
nonprofit,
commercial
or
religious
 participation
 in
 the
 actual
 management
 of
 the
 cooperative,
 all

o This
 right
 is
 extended
 even
 to
 those
 employed
 in
 members
thereof
can’t
form,
assist
or
join
a
labor
organization
for
the

traditionally
 nonprofit
 organizations
 like
 religious,
 purpose
of
collective
bargaining

charitable,
medical
or
educational
institutions
 • But
 member‐employees
 of
 a
 cooperative
 may
 withdraw
 as
 members

o But
this
all‐inclusive
coverage
admits
of
exceptions
–
 of
 the
 cooperative
 in
 order
 to
 join
 a
 labor
 union.
 Membership
 in
 a

 Under
 Article
 245,
 managerial
 employees,
 cooperative
is
voluntary;
inherent
in
it
is
the
right
not
to
join.

regardless
 of
 the
 kind
 of
 organization
 where
 they
 • Exception
to
exception:
association,
not
union

are
 employed,
 may
 not
 join,
 assist
 or
 form
 any
 o While
 the
 members
 of
 a
 cooperative
 who
 are
 also
 its

labor
organization,
meaning
a
labor
union
 employees
 can’t
 unionize
 for
 bargaining
 purposes,
 the
 law

 Accordingly,
 managerial
 employees
 cannot,
 in
 the
 does
not
prohibit
them
from
forming
an
association
for
their

absence
 of
 an
 agreement
 to
 the
 contrary,
 be
 mutual
aid
and
protection
as
employees

allowed
to
share
in
the
concessions
obtained
by
the
 o DO
40‐03:
worker’s
association

organized
for
the
mutual

labor
 union
 through
 collective
 negotiation.
 aid
 and
 protection
 of
 its
 members
 or
 for
 an
 legitimate

However,
there
is
nothing
to
prevent
the
employer
 purpose
other
than
collective
bargaining

from
 granting
 benefits
 to
 managerial
 employees
 5. Exception:
international
organizations

equal
 to
 or
 higher
 than
 those
 afforded
 to
 union
 • A
 certification
 election
 can’t
 be
 conducted
 in
 an
 international

members
 organization
which
the
Philippine
government
has
granted
immunity

o Supervisors
are
allowed
to
organize,
but
they
can’t
form,
join
 from
 local
 jurisdiction,
 such
 as
 IRRI
 and
 the
 Int’l
 Catholic
 Migration

or
assist
a
rank‐and‐file
union
 Commission
(ICMC)

2. Right
to
organize
cannot
be
bargained
away
 • ICMC
v.
Calleja

• Southern
Philippines
Federation
of
Labor
v.
Calleja
 o An
 international
 organization
 is
 one
 set
 up
 by
 agreement

o Although
 we
 have
 upheld
 the
 validity
 of
 the
 CBA
 as
 the
 law
 between
 2
 or
 more
 states.
 It
 is
 endowed
 with
 some
 degree
 of

among
 the
 parties,
 its
 provisions
 can’t
 override
 what
 is
 international
 legal
 personality
 such
 that
 they
 are
 capable

expressly
provided
by
law
that
only
managerial
employees
are
 exercising
specific
rights,
duties
and
powers

ineligible
to
join,
assist
or
form
any
labor
organization.
Hence,
 o 3
 propositions
 underlying
 the
 grant
 of
 international

whether
 they
 are
 employed
 as
 supervisors
 or
 in
 the
 immunities
to
international
organizations
–

confidential
 payrolls,
 if
 the
 nature
 of
 their
 job
 does
 not
 fall
  International
institutions
should
have
a
status
which

under
 the
 definition
 of
 managerial
 as
 defined
 in
 the
 Labor
 protects
them
against
control
or
interference
by
any

Code,
 they
 are
 eligible
 to
 be
 members
 of
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 one
government
in
the
performance
of
functions
for

and
to
vote
in
the
certification
election
 the
effective
discharge
of
which
they
are
responsible

3. Employees
of
nonprofit
institutions
 to
democratically
constituted
international
bodies
in

• Rank‐and‐file
 employees
 of
 nonprofit
 medical
 institutions
 are
 which
all
the
nations
concerned
are
represented

permitted
 to
 form,
 organize
 or
 join
 labor
 unions
 of
 their
 choice
 for
  No
 country
 should
 derive
 any
 national
 financial

purposes
of
collective
bargaining
 advantage
 by
 levying
 fiscal
 charges
 on
 common

4. Exception:
employee­members
of
a
cooperative
 international
funds

• San
Jose
Electric
Service
Cooperative,
Inc.
v.
Ministry
of
Labor

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 48

  The
 international
 organization
 should,
 as
 a
  Decision
in
Victoriano
v.
Elizalde
was
promulgated

collectivity
 of
 States
 members,
 be
 accorded
 the
 in
 1974
 and
 at
 the
 time
 the
 new
 Labor
 Code
 was

facilities
for
the
conduct
of
its
official
business
 already
issued,
and
although
the
Code
did
not
carry

o The
 raison
 d’etre
 for
 these
 immunities
 is
 the
 assurance
 of
 the
exemption
under
RA
3350,
the
Court
cited
“the

unimpeded
 performance
 of
 their
 functions
 by
 the
 agencies
 new
 Labor
 Code”
 in
 rejecting
 the
 arguments

concerned
 assailing
the
validity
of
RA
3350.
The
sense
is
that

o The
 immunity
 from
 local
 jurisdiction
 by
 no
 means
 deprive
 the
 Labor
 Code
 and
 RA
 3350
 do
 not
 repel
 each

labor
 of
 its
 basic
 rights.
 So,
 certification
 election
 is
 barred
 by
 other

immunity
  Fr.
 B:
 cited
 the
 Victoriano
 ruling
 as
 an
 illustration

• Waiver
of
immunity
 of
the
right
to
free
exercise
of
one’s
religion.
Even
if

o Waiver
of
its
immunity
is
discretionary
to
IRRI.
Without
such
 the
 exemption
 under
 RA
 3350
 is
 not
 found
 in
 the

express
 waiver,
 the
 NLRC
 or
 its
 labor
 arbiters
 have
 no
 Labor
 Code,
 still
 the
 exemption
 can
 be
 invoked

jurisdiction
 under
the
freedom
of
religion
clause
in
the
present

• Foreign
workers
 Constitution’s
Bill
of
Rights

o Foreigners,
 whether
 natural
 or
 juridical,
 as
 well
 as
 foreign
  Kapatiran
 v.
 Calleja
 –
 court
 refused
 to
 compel
 the

corporations,
 are
 strictly
 prohibited
 from
 engaging
 directly
 INK
members
to
join
the
incumbent
union

or
indirectly
in
all
forms
of
trade
union
activities
  Ebralinag
 v.
 Division
 Superintendent
 of
 Cebu
 –
 in

o But
 aliens
 working
 in
 the
 country
 with
 valid
 work
 permits
 exempting
 Jehovah’s
 Witnesses
 from
 compulsory

may
 exercise
 the
 right
 of
 self‐organization
 if
 they
 are
 participation
in
flag
ceremonies,
cited
the
religious

nationals
of
a
country
that
grants
the
same
or
similar
right
to
 objectors’
 similar
 exemption
 from
 compulsory

Filipino
workers
 union
 membership.
 Hence,
 the
 SC
 acknowledges

6. Exception:
religious
objectors;
Iglesia
ni
Cristo
members
 the
existence
or
justification
of
the
exemption

• Industrial
Peace
Act
(1953):
employer
and
the
union
could
enter
into
 • Iglesia
ni
Kristo
Members
may
form
and
join
own
union

a
“closed
shop”
agreement
which
would
compel
employees
to
become
 o Kapatiran
sa
Meat
and
Canning
Division
v.
Calleja

union
workers
as
a
condition
of
continued
employment
  This
 Court’s
 decision
 in
 Victoriano
 v.
 Elizalde
 Rope

• Exemption:
 exempted
 from
 such
 compulsory
 union
 membership
 the
 upholding
 the
 right
 of
 members
 of
 the
 Iglesia
 ni

followers
 of
 any
 religious
 sect
 (such
 as
 the
 Iglesia
 ni
 Cristo)
 whose
 Kristo
 sect
 not
 to
 join
 a
 labor
 union
 for
 being

teachings
forbid
membership
in
labor
unions
 contrary
 to
 their
 religious
 beliefs,
 do
 not
 bar
 the

• Victoriano
v.
Elizalde
Rope
Workers’
Union
 members
of
that
sect
from
forming
their
own
union.

o Members
of
said
religious
sects
can’t
be
compelled
or
coerced
 The
 recognition
 of
 the
 tenets
 of
 the
 sect
 should
 not

to
 join
 labor
 unions
 even
 when
 said
 unions
 have
 closed
 shop
 infringe
 on
 the
 basic
 right
 of
 self­organization

agreements
 with
 the
 employers;
 that
 in
 spite
 of
 any
 closed
 granted
by
the
Constitution
to
workers,
regardless
of

shop
 agreement,
 members
 of
 said
 religious
 sectors
 can’t
 be
 religious
affiliation

refused
 employment
 or
 dismissed
 from
 their
 jobs
 on
 the
 sole

ground
that
they
are
not
members
of
the
collective
bargaining
 Article
244.
Right
of
employees
in
the
public
service.


union

o Free
 exercise
 of
 religious
 profession
 or
 belief
 is
 superior
 to
 1. Government
employees’
right
to
organize;
limitations

contract
rights
 • Law
guarantees
to
government
employees
the
right
to
organize
and
to

o Appellant
 claims
 that
 unless
 the
 Act
 is
 declared
 negotiate,
but
not
the
right
to
strike

unconstitutional,
employers
will
prefer
employing
members
of
 • Arizala
v.
CA

religious
sects
that
prohibit
their
members
from
joining
labor
 o PD
807

unions,
and
thus
be
a
fatal
blow
to
unionism.
The
SC
does
not
  Civil
 Service
 as
 embracing
 every
 branch,
 agency,

agree.
 The
 threat
 to
 unionism
 will
 depend
 on
 the
 number
 of
 supervision,
 and
 instrumentality
 of
 the

employees
who
are
members
of
the
religious
sects
that
control
 government,
 including
 every
 GOCC
 whether

the
demands
of
the
labor
market
 performing
governmental
or
proprietary
function.

• Does
the
exemption
still
stand?
  The
 effect
 was
 seemingly
 to
 prohibit
 government

o Does
 the
 exemption
 of
 religious
 objectors
 from
 compulsory
 employees
 to
 strike
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 securing

union
 membership
 still
 union?
 The
 question
 has
 not
 been
 changes
 of
 their
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of

squarely
answered,
but
four
points
must
be
noted
–
 employment,
 something
 which
 they
 were
 allowed

to
do
under
the
Civil
Service
Act
of
1959

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 49

 o 1987
Constitution
 recognized
 employees’
 organizations
 and
 appropriate

 Right
 to
 self‐organization
 shall
 not
 be
 denied
 to
 government
authorities

government
employees
 o Not
 negotiable
 are
 matters
 that
 require
 appropriation
 of

 The
 State
 shall
 guarantee
 the
 rights
 of
 all
 workers
 funds
 and
 those
 that
 involve
 the
 exercise
 of
 management

to
 self‐organization,
 collective
 bargaining
 and
 prerogatives

negotiations,
 and
 peaceful
 concerted
 activities,
 o Considered
 negotiable
 are
 such
 matters
 as
 schedule
 of

including
the
right
to
strike
in
accordance
with
law
 vacation
 and
 other
 leaves,
 work
 assignment
 of
 pregnant

 Workers
 shall
 be
 entitled
 to
 security
 of
 tenure,
 women;
 recreational,
 social,
 athletic,
 and
 cultural
 activities

humane
conditions
of
work,
and
a
living
wage
and
 and
facilities

also
 participate
 in
 policy
 and
 decision‐making
 • No
signing
bonus

processes
affecting
their
rights
and
benefits
as
may
 o Employees
and
officers
of
SSS
are
not
entitled
to
the
signing

be
provided
by
law
 bonus
 provided
 for
 in
 collective
 negotiation
 agreement

o CSC
Memorandum
Circular
No.
6
 because
 the
 process
 of
 collective
 negotiations
 in
 the
 public

 The
 Commission
 enjoins,
 under
 pain
 of
 sector
 does
 not
 encompass
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of

administrative
 sanctions,
 all
 government
 officers
 employment
requiring
the
appropriation
of
public
funds

and
 employees
 from
 staging
 strikes,
 • Excepted
employees

demonstrations,
 mass
 leaves,
 walk‐outs
 and
 other
 o Excepted
 from
 EO
 180
 are
 members
 of
 the
 AFP,
 including

forms
of
mass
action
which
will
result
in
temporary
 police
 officers,
 policemen,
 firemen
 and
 jail
 guards.
 For

stoppage
or
disruption
of
public
services.
To
allow
 reasons
 of
 security
 and
 safety,
 they
 are
 not
 allowed
 to

otherwise
 is
 to
 undermine
 or
 prejudice
 the
 unionize

government
system
 o High
 level
 employees
 whose
 functions
 are
 normally

o EO
180
 considered
as
policy
making
or
managerial,
or
whose
duties

 The
 right
 of
 self‐organization
 does
 indeed
 pertain
 are
of
a
highly
confidential
nature
shall
not
be
eligible
to
join

to
 all
 employees
 of
 all
 branches,
 subdivisions,
 the
organization
of
rank‐and‐file
government
employees

instrumentalities
 and
 agencies
 of
 the
 government,
  High
 level
 employee
 is
 one
 whose
 functions
 are

including
 GOCC
 with
 original
 charters;
 such
 normally
 considered
 policy
 determining,

employees
 shall
 not
 be
 discriminated
 against
 in
 managerial
 or
 one
 whose
 duties
 are
 highly

respect
 of
 their
 employment
 by
 reason
 of
 their
 confidential
in
nature

membership
 in
 employees’
 organizations
 or
  A
 managerial
 function
 refers
 to
 the
 exercise
 of

participation
 in
 the
 normal
 activities
 of
 their
 powers
such
as
–

organization
 and
 their
 employment
 shall
 not
 be
  To
 effectively
 recommend
 such

subject
 to
 the
 condition
 that
 they
 shall
 not
 join
 or
 managerial
actions

shall
 relinquish
 their
 membership
 in
 their
  To
 formulate
 or
 execute
 management

employees’
organizations
 policies
and
decisions

 This
 EO
 established
 the
 Public
 Sector
 Labor‐  To
 hire,
 transfer,
 suspend,
 lay‐off,
 recall,

Management
Council
(PSLMC)
 dismiss,
assign
or
discipline
employees

• Limited
purpose
 • Professors
as
rank­and­file
employees

o The
 right
 of
 government
 employees
 to
 form,
 join
 or
 assist
 o Professors
at
UP
who
are
not
exercising
managerial
or
highly

employees’
 organizations
 of
 their
 own
 choosing
 is
 not
 confidential
 functions
 are
 rank‐and‐file
 employees
 and
 may

regarded
 as
 existing
 or
 available
 for
 purposes
 of
 collective
 unionize
separately
from
the
non‐academic
personnel

bargaining,
but
simply,
for
the
furtherance
and
protection
of
 o UP
v.
Ferrer­Calleja

their
interests
  W/N
professors,
associate
professors
and
assistant

o The
 right
 of
 government
 employees
 to
 deal
 and
 negotiate
 professors
 are
 high‐level
 or
 rank
 and
 file

with
 their
 respective
 employers
 is
 not
 quite
 as
 extensive
 as
 employees?
NO.

that
of
private
employees
  They
 can’t
 be
 considered
 as
 exercising
 such

o Excluded
 from
 negotiation
 by
 government
 employees
 are
 managerial
or
highly
confidential
functions
as
would

terms
and
conditions
of
employment
that
are
fixed
by
law,
it
 justify
 their
 being
 categorized
 as
 high­level

being
only
those
terms
and
conditions
not
otherwise
fixed
by
 employees
 of
 the
 institution.
 They
 do
 not
 formulate

law
 that
 may
 be
 subject
 of
 negotiation
 between
 the
 duly
 policies,
rules,
and
standards.


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 50

  W/N
 they
 and
 other
 employees
 performing
 NHC
is
a
corporation
organized
under
EO
399
or
the
Uniform

o
academic
 functions,
 should
 compromise
 a
 Charter
of
Government
Corporations

bargaining
 unit
 distinct
 from
 that
 of
 the
 non‐ o The
 Civil
 service
 now
 covers
 only
 GOCCs
 with
 original
 or

academic
employees?
YES.
 legislative
 charters.
 There
 is,
 therefore,
 no
 impediment
 to
 the

 The
 community
 or
 mutuality
 of
 interests
 test
 has
 holding
 of
 a
 certification
 election
 among
 the
 workers
 of
 NHC

provided
 the
 standard
 in
 determining
 the
 proper
 for
it
is
clear
that
they
are
covered
by
the
Labor
Code,
the
NHC

constituency
of
a
collective
bargaining
unit.
In
short,
 being
a
GOCC
without
an
original
charter.


the
 professors,
 associate
 and
 assistant
 professors
 of
 o Whether
the
employees
of
NHC
are
covered
by
the
Labor
Code

UP
 are
 rank­and­file
 employees.
 The
 full
 professors,
 or
 by
 the
 civil
 service
 laws,
 a
 certification
 election
 may
 be

associate
professors,
assistant
professors,
instructors
 conducted.

and
 the
 research,
 extension
 and
 professional
 staff
 • Election
of
officers
in
government
unions

may,
 if
 so
 minded,
 organize
 themselves
 into
 a
 o Does
 the
 BLR
 have
 jurisdiction
 to
 call
 for
 and
 conduct
 the

separate
collective
bargaining
unit.
 election
of
officers
of
an
employee’s
association
in
the
public

• Right
to
strike
 sector
such
as
that
at
the
MWSS?


o EO
 180
 concedes
 to
 government
 employees
 the
 right
 to
  Yes.
 BLR
 has
 original
 and
 exclusive
 jurisdiction
 on

engage
 in
 concerted
 activities,
 including
 the
 right
 to
 strike.
 all
inter‐union
and
intra‐union
conflicts.

But
 those
 activities
 must
 be
 exercised
 in
 accordance
 with
 4. When
PSLMC
may
rule
on
legality
of
dismissal

law
 • Public
 Sector
 Labor‐Management
 Council
 has
 jurisdiction
 to
 hear

o Resolution
 of
 complaints,
 grievances
 and
 cases
 involving
 charges
 of
 unfair
 labor
 practices
 filed
 by
 government
 employees

government
 employees
 is
 not
 ordinarily
 left
 to
 collective
 against
their
employer.
PSLMC
may
rule
on
ULP
and
dismissal

bargaining
 or
 other
 related
 concerted
 activities,
 but
 to
 Civil
 • CSC
may
adopt
the
findings
of
the
PSLMC
and
order
the
employer
to

Service
 Law
 and
 labor
 laws
 and
 procedures
 whenever
 reinstate
the
dismissed
employees

applicable
 5. Union­busting
in
a
government
agency,
ULP

o In
 case
 any
 dispute
 remains
 unresolved
 after
 exhausting
 all
 • [Case
 regarding
 PLM
 
 fired
 faculty
 members;
 PLM
 v.
 CSC]
 had

available
 remedies
 under
 existing
 laws
 and
 procedures,
 the
 complainants
 not
 been
 among
 those
 active
 officers
 and/or
 members

parties
 may
 jointly
 refer
 the
 dispute
 to
 the
 Public
 Sector
 of
the
PLM
Faculty
Organization,
and
had
their
qualifications,
training,

Labor‐Management
Council
for
appropriate
action
 experience
 and
 performance
 rating
 not
 been
 impressive,
 the
 CSC

o Terms
and
conditions
of
employment
in
the
government
are
 would
 have
 agreed
 that
 the
 termination
 or
 nonrenewal
 of
 the

governed
 by
 law,
 the
 employees
 therein
 shall
 not
 strike
 for
 contracts
of
complainants
does
not
constitute
ULP

the
purpose
of
securing
changes
thereof
 • Even
temporary
employees
may
organize

2. Registration
 o Article
 277
 (C)
 –
 any
 employee,
 whether
 employed
 for
 a

• Government
 employees’
 organizations
 shall
 register
 with
 the
 Civil
 definite
 period
 or
 not,
 shall
 beginning
 on
 his
 first
 day
 of

Service
Commission
and
the
DOLE
 service,
 be
 considered
 an
 employee
 for
 purposes
 of

• Application
shall
be
filed
with
the
BLR
 membership
in
any
labor
union

• Applications
 may
 also
 be
 filed
 with
 the
 Regional
 Offices
 of
 the
 DOLE
 o Even
 temporary
 employees
 enjoy
 the
 basic
 right
 to
 form

which
 shall
 immediately
 transmit
 the
 said
 applications
 to
 the
 BLR
 organization
or
association
for
purposes
not
contrary
to
law

within
3
days
from
receipt
therefrom

• Upon
 approval
 of
 the
 application,
 a
 registration
 certificate
 shall
 be
 Article
 245.
 Ineligibility
 of
 managerial
 employees
 to
 join
 any
 labor
 organization;
 right
 of

issued
 to
 the
 organization
 recognizing
 it
 as
 a
 legitimate
 employees’
 supervisory
employees.

organization

• Certificates
of
registration
shall
be
jointly
approved
by
the
Chairman
 Article
245­A.
Effect
of
inclusion
as
members
of
employees
outside
the
bargaining
unit.

of
the
CSC
and
Secretary
of
DOLE

3. Certification
election
in
government
corporation
 1. Categories
of
employees

• Certification
 election
 to
 choose
 the
 union
 that
 will
 represent
 the
 • Managerial

employees
 may
 be
 conducted
 by
 the
 BLR
 in
 a
 government
 • Supervisory

corporation,
whether
governed
by
the
Labor
Code
or
the
Civil
Service
 o Although
 supervisory
 employees
 shall
 not
 be
 eligible
 for

rules
 membership
 in
 a
 labor
 organization
 of
 the
 rank‐and‐file

• Trade
Unions
of
the
Philippines
and
Allied
Services
v.
National
Housing
 employees,
they
may,
however,
join,
assist,
or
form
separate

Corporation
(NHC)
 labor
organizations
of
their
own

• Rank‐and‐file

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 51

 2. Ineligibility
of
managers
 United
Pepsi­cola
Supervisory
Union
v.
Laguesma

o
• Types
of
managerial
employees
  The
 right
 guaranteed
 by
 Article
 III,
 Section
 8
 of
 the

o Manager
 refers
 to
 anyone
 who
 is
 responsible
 for
 Constitution
 is
 subject
 to
 the
 condition
 that
 its

subordinates
and
other
organizational
resources.
 exercise
 should
 be
 for
 purposes
 “not
 contrary
 to

o As
a
class,
they
constitute
3
levels
of
pyramid
–
 law”.
 There
 is
 a
 rational
 basis
 for
 prohibiting

 First‐line
 managers
 –
 lowest
 level
 in
 an
 managerial
employees
from
forming
or
joining
labor

organization
 at
 which
 individuals
 are
 responsible
 organizations:
if
these
managerial
employees
would

for
the
work
of
others
 belong
 to
 or
 be
 affiliated
 with
 a
 Union,
 the
 latter

 They
 direct
 operating
 employees
 only;
 might
not
be
assured
of
their
loyalty
to
the
union
in

they
do
not
supervise
other
managers
 view
 of
 evident
 conflict
 of
 interests.
 The
 Union
 can

 Often
called
supervisors
 also
 become
 company­dominated
 with
 the
 presence

 Example:
foreman
 of
managerial
employees
in
Union
membership.


 Middle
managers
–
refer
to
more
than
one
level
in
 o After
 all,
 those
 who
 qualify
 as
 top
 or
 middle
 managers
 are

an
organization
 executives
 who
 receive
 from
 their
 employers
 information

 They
 direct
 the
 activities
 of
 other
 that
 not
 only
 is
 confidential
 but
 also
 is
 not
 generally

managers
 and
 sometimes
 also
 those
 of
 available
 to
 the
 public,
 or
 to
 their
 competitors,
 or
 to
 other

operating
employees
 employees

 Principal
responsibilities
are
to
direct
the
 • Other
opinions

activities
 that
 implement
 their
 o Chief
 Justice
 Davide:
 while
 he
 agrees
 that
 the
 route

organizations’
policies
and
to
balance
the
 managers
 are
 managerial
 employees,
 he
 believes,
 citing

demands
 of
 their
 superiors
 with
 the
 Concom
deliberations,
that
Article
245
is
unconstitutional

capacities
of
their
subordinates
 o Justice
 Puno:
 debates
 and
 proceedings
 of
 the
 Constitutional

 Top
 managers
 –
 comparatively
 small
 group
 of
 Convention
are
never
of
binding
force.
They
may
be
valuable

executives,
 top
 management
 is
 responsible
 for
 the
 but
are
not
necessarily
decisive

overall
management
of
the
organization
  Article
 245
 does
 not
 absolutely
 disqualify

 Establishes
 operating
 policies
 and
 guides
 managerial
 employees
 from
 exercising
 their
 right

the
 organization’s
 interactions
 with
 its
 of
association.
What
it
prohibits
is
merely
the
right

environment
 to
join
labor
organizations

 Example:
CEO,
President
  Managerial
 employees
 may
 form
 associations
 or

o A
distinction
exists
between
–
 organizations
 so
 long
 as
 they
 are
 not
 labor

 Those
who
have
the
authority
to
devise,
implement
 organizations

and
 control
 strategic
 and
 operational
 policies
 (top
 o Justice
 Vitug:
 partially
 agrees
 with
 Puno
 that
 it’s
 not

and
middle
managers)
 unconstitutional.
But
to
his
mind,
the
route
managers
are
not

 Those
 whose
 task
 is
 simply
 to
 ensure
 that
 such
 managerial
employees;
they
are
supervisors

policies
 are
 carried
 out
 by
 the
 rank‐and‐file
 o Azucena:
 problem
 of
 drawing
 the
 line
 between
 a
 manager

employees
 of
 an
 organization
 (first‐level
 and
 a
 supervisor
 will
 persist.
 The
 dividing
 line
 is
 still
 too

managers/supervisors);
 what
 distinguishes
 them
 unshapen
 and
 too
 situational
 to
 serve
 as
 an
 effective

from
 the
 rank‐and‐file
 is
 that
 they
 act
 in
 the
 standing
formula
to
avert
disputes

interest
 of
 the
 employer
 in
 supervising
 such
 rank‐ 3. Evolution
of
supervisors’
right
to
organize

and‐file
employees
 • Unlike
managers,
supervisors
can
unionize

o Managerial
 employees
 may
 be
 said
 to
 fall
 into
 2
 distinct
 • First
period:
under
the
Industrial
Peace
Act

categories:
the
managers
per
se
and
the
supervisors
 o Supervisors
 could
 unionize
 separately
 from
 rank‐and‐file

o (Pepsi‐Cola
case:
Route
managers
are
managerial
employees
 workers

because
 they
 are
 responsible
 for
 the
 success
 of
 the
 o Supervisor
 was
 defined
 as
 any
 person
 having
 authority
 in

company’s
 main
 line
 of
 business
 through
 management
 of
 the
interest
of
an
employer,
to
hire,
transfer,
suspend,
lay‐off,

their
respective
sales
teams)
 recall,
 discharge,
 assign,
 recommend,
 or
 discipline
 other

• Constitutionality
of
the
prohibition
 employees,
or
responsibly
to
direct
them,
and
to
adjust
their

o Whether
 or
 not
 the
 provision
 prohibiting
 managerial
 grievances
 or
 effectively
 to
 recommend
 such
 acts
 if,
 in

employees
 from
 forming,
 assisting
 or
 joining
 any
 labor
 connection
with
the
foregoing,
the
exercise
of
such
authority

organization
is
constitutional?
Yes.

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 52

 is
 not
 of
 a
 merely
 routinary
 or
 clerical
 nature
 but
 requires
 whether
 such
 authority
 is
 not
 merely
 routinary
 or
 clerical
 in
 nature,

the
use
of
independent
judgment
 but
requires
the
use
of
independent
judgment

o While
 Industrial
 Peace
 Act
 defined
 a
 supervisor,
 it
 failed
 to
 • The
 fact
 alone
 that
 a
 supervisor
 makes
 recommendations
 as
 to
 what

define
 a
 manager
 or
 managerial
 employee.
 So
 the
 
 question
 managerial
 actions
 to
 take
 in
 disciplinary
 cases
 by
 itself
 does
 not

arose:
 did
 the
 word
 supervisor
 include
 manager?
 Could
 make
 one
 a
 managerial
 employee.
 It
 is
 more
 a
 question
 of
 how

managers
unionize?
 effective
the
recommendation
is

 Yes.
 Managers
 are
 effectively
 included
 in
 the
 term
 • It
is
the
nature
of
an
employee’s
functions
and
not
the
nomenclature

supervisor.
 or
title
given
to
his
job
which
determines
whether
he
has
a
rank‐and‐
• Second
period:
under
the
Labor
Code
before
amendment
 file
or
managerial
rank.

o Term
 supervisor
 was
 replaced
 with
 term
 managerial
 • Among
the
characteristics
of
managerial
rank
are
–

employee
 o He
 is
 not
 subject
 to
 the
 rigid
 observance
 of
 regular
 office

o Managerial
employees
were
not
allowed
to
unionize
 hours

o Did
 managerial
 employee
 include
 supervisor?
 Were
 o His
 work
 requires
 the
 consistent
 exercise
 of
 discretion
 and

supervisors
also
banned
from
unionizing?
 judgment
in
its
performance

 Yes.
 Supervisors
 are
 among
 the
 managerial
 o Output
 produced
 or
 the
 result
 accomplished
 can’t
 be

employees
who
could
not
unionize.
 standardized
in
relation
to
a
given
period
of
time

• Third
period:
under
Labor
Code,
as
amended
 o He
 manages
 and
 customarily
 recognized
 department
 or

o Compromise
 formula:
 retain
 the
 ineligibility
 of
 managerial
 subdivision
 of
 the
 establishment,
 customarily
 and
 regularly

employees
but
revive
the
right
of
supervisory
employees
to
 directing
the
work
of
other
employees
there

unionize
 o He
 either
 has
 the
 authority
 to
 hire
 or
 discharge
 other

o Thus,
 the
 right
 of
 supervisory
 employees
 to
 organize
 under
 employees
 or
 his
 suggestions
 and
 recommendations
 as
 to

the
 Industrial
 Peace
 Act
 is
 once
 more
 recognized
 under
 the
 hiring
 and
 discharging,
 advancement
 and
 promotion
 or

present
amendments
to
the
Labor
Code
 other
 change
 of
 status
 of
 other
 employees
 are
 given

4. Definitions
of
manager
and
supervisor
 particular
weight

• The
 power
 to
 decide
 on
 managerial
 acts
 is
 now
 separated
 from
 the
 o He
 is
 not
 paid
 hourly
 wages
 nor
 subjected
 to
 maximum

power
 to
 recommend
 those
 managerial
 acts,
 such
 as
 laying
 down
 hours
of
work

policy,
 hiring
 or
 dismissing
 employees.
 A
 supervisor
 has
 the
 power
 • The
power
to
recommend

only
 to
 recommend
 while
 a
 managerial
 employee
 has
 the
 power
 to
 o The
power
to
recommend,
in
order
to
qualify
an
employee
as

decide
and
do
those
acts
 a
 supervisor,
 must
 not
 only
 be
 effective
 but
 should
 require

• To
 make
 one
 a
 supervisor,
 the
 power
 to
 recommend
 must
 not
 be
 the
use
of
independent
judgment.
It
should
not
be
merely
of

merely
 routinary
 or
 clerical
 in
 nature,
 but
 requires
 the
 use
 of
 a
 routinary
 or
 clerical
 nature.
 (bakit
 paulit­ulit
 yung
 libro?!

independent
judgment.
The
recommendation
is
–
 Haha.
Lol.
Hi.
)

o Discretionary
or
judgmental
(not
clerical)
 • Examples
of
ineffective
or
clerical
recommendation

o Independent
(not
a
dictation
of
someone
else)
 • Managers
or
supervisors:
under
the
ILO
Convention

o Effective
 (given
 particular
 weight
 in
 making
 the
 o It
is
not
necessarily
incompatible
with
the
ILO
Convention
on

management
decision)
 Freedom
 of
 Association
 to
 deny
 managerial
 or
 supervisory

• Similarly,
a
so‐called
manager,
no
matter
how
his
position
is
titled,
is
 employees
 the
 right
 to
 belong
 to
 the
 same
 trade
 union
 as

not
 really
 a
 manager
 in
 the
 eyes
 of
 the
 law
 if
 he
 does
 not
 possess
 other
workers,
provided
that
2
conditions
are
met
–

managerial
 powers
 (to
 lay
 down
 and
 execute
 management
 policies
  Such
 workers
 have
 the
 right
 to
 form
 their
 own

and/or
 to
 hire,
 transfer,
 suspend,
 lay‐off,
 recall,
 discharge,
 assign
 or
 association
to
defend
their
interest

discipline
employees)
  Categories
 of
 such
 staff
 are
 not
 defined
 so
 broadly

o An
 employee
 is
 not
 managerial
 if
 he
 does
 not
 take
 part
 in
 as
 to
 weaken
 the
 organization
 of
 other
 workers
 in

policy
 making
 but
 is
 given
 ready
 policies
 to
 execute
 and
 the
 enterprise
 or
 branch
 of
 activity
 by
 depriving

standard
 practices
 to
 observe,
 thus
 having
 little
 freedom
 of
 them
 of
 a
 substantial
 portion
 of
 their
 present
 or

action
 potential
membership

• In
 short,
 a
 manager
 makes
 policy
 decisions
 or
 people
 decisions
 or
 6. Segregation
of
rank­and­file
and
supervisors

both;
a
supervisor
recommends
those
decisions.

 • Supervisory
 employees
 may
 form,
 join
 or
 assist
 separate
 labor

5. Test
of
supervisory
status
 organizations
of
their
own,
but
they
are
not
eligible
for
membership
in

• Test
 of
 supervisory
 or
 managerial
 status
 depends
 on
 whether
 a
 a
 labor
 organization
 of
 the
 rank‐and‐file
 employees.
 Neither
 may
 a

person
possesses
authority
to
act
in
the
interest
of
his
employer
and
 rank‐and‐file
join
a
union
of
supervisors

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 53

 • The
 above
 policy
 is
 founded
 on
 fairness
 to
 the
 employer
 and
 o Confidential
 employees
 were
 allowed
 to
 be
 included
 in
 the

employees.
 It
 will
 be
 doubly
 detrimental
 to
 the
 employer
 if
 the
 union
of
the
monthly‐paid
rank‐and‐filers

supervisors
 and
 rank‐and‐file,
 as
 members
 of
 only
 one
 union,
 could
 • Limited
exclusion;
doctrine
of
necessary
implication

take
a
common
stand
against
the
employer
 o National
Association
of
Trade
Unions
v.
Torres

• Effects
of
having
mixed
membership
  Bank
 branch
 managers/cashiers/etc
 are
 not

o Jurisprudence:
 to
 enforce
 the
 segregation,
 a
 union
 with
 managers
 but
 only
 supervisors.
 At
 the
 same
 time,

commingled
 membership
 was
 not
 a
 legitimate
 labor
 they
 are
 confidential
 employees.
 A
 confidential

organization
 employee
 is
 one
 entrusted
 with
 confidence
 on

o Nevertheless:
 Article
 245‐A,
 as
 amended,
 states
 that
 delicate
 matters,
 or
 with
 the
 custody,
 handling
 or

employees
 that
 should
 not
 have
 been
 included
 in
 care
 and
 protection
 of
 the
 employer’s
 property.

membership
 are
 automatically
 deemed
 removed
 from
 the
 Under
 the
 doctrine
 of
 necessary
 implication,

list
of
membership
 confidential
employees
are
similarly
disqualified
as

• Affiliation
of
supervisors
and
rank­and­file
unions
 managerial
employees
(Article
245)

o Before,
unions
in
the
same
enterprise
could
not
affiliate
with
 o The
 doctrine
 of
 necessary
 implication
 means
 that
 what
 is

the
same
federation
because
to
allow
it
would
be
an
indirect
 implied
in
a
statute
is
as
much
a
part
thereof
as
that
which
is

violation
of
the
segregation
rule
 expressed.

o Now,
they
can.
 o Conclusion
 that:
 confidential
 employees,
 like
 managers,
 are

7. Confidential
employees
 not
eligible
to
form,
join,
or
assist
labor
organizations

• Article
245
does
not
mention
confidential
employees
at
all;
under
said
 • The
 Metrolab
 and
 Meralco
 Summations:
 exclusion
 from

article,
 therefore,
 confidential
 employees
 do
 not
 constitute
 a
 distinct
 bargaining
unit
and
closed­shop
clause

category
of
employees
for
purposes
of
the
right
to
self‐organize
 o Confidential
 employees
 should
 be
 exempted
 not
 only
 from

• Confidentiality
 is
 not
 a
 matter
 of
 official
 rank,
 it
 is
 a
 matter
 of
 job
 the
 closed‐shop
 provision
 of
 the
 CBA
 but
 also
 from

content
and
authority
 membership
in
the
rank‐and‐file
bargaining
unit

• In
principle,
every
managerial
position
is
confidential
–
one
does
not
 o Metrolab
v.
Roldan­Confesor

become
 a
 manager
 without
 having
 gained
 the
 confidence
 of
 the
  Metrolab
 argues
 that
 executive
 secretaries
 of
 the

appointing
 authority.
 BUT
 not
 every
 confidential
 employee
 is
 general
 manager,
 and
 other
 managers
 and

managerial;
he
may
be
a
supervisory
or
even
a
rank‐and‐file
employee
 directors,
who
were
all
members
of
the
company’s

• Hence,
 the
 confidential
 employees’
 inclusion
 in
 or
 exclusion
 from
 a
 management
 committee,
 should
 not
 only
 be

union,
 either
 of
 supervisors
 or
 rank‐and‐file,
 is
 a
 recurrent
 exempted
 from
 the
 closed‐shop
 provision
 but

contentious
issue
 should
 also
 be
 excluded
 from
 membership
 in
 the

• First
swing:
inclusion
among
rank­and­file
 bargaining
unit
of
rank‐and‐file
employees
because

o Confidential
 rank‐and‐file
 employees
 should
 be
 included
 in
 those
 executive
 secretaries
 were
 confidential

the
 bargaining
 unit.
 If
 the
 confidential
 employees
 are
 not
 employees,
having
access
to
vital
labor
information

managers,
they
can
unionize
and
no
CBA
provision
can
take
  SC
sided
with
Metrolab.
Jurisprudence
has
extended

away
that
right
 the
 prohibition
 to
 confidential
 employees
 or
 those

• Second
swing:
exclusion
from
rank­and­file
 who
 by
 reason
 of
 their
 positions
 or
 nature
 of
 work

o Court
 then
 upheld
 the
 validity
 of
 the
 agreement
 of
 the
 are
required
to
assist
or
act
in
a
fiduciary
manner
to

parties
 excluding
 confidential
 employees
 from
 the
 CBA
 managerial
 employees,
 hence,
 are
 likewise
 privy
 to

coverage
 because
 they
 may
 become
 the
 source
 of
 undue
 sensitive
and
highly
confidential
records


advantage
  Confidential
 employees
 can’t
 be
 classified
 as
 rank­
o By
 the
 nature
 of
 their
 functions,
 they
 assist
 and
 act
 in
 a
 and­file.
 The
 nature
 of
 employment
 of
 confidential

confidential
 capacity
 to,
 or
 have
 access
 to
 confidential
 employees
 is
 quite
 distinct
 from
 the
 rank­and­file,

matters
of
persons
who
exercise
managerial
functions
in
the
 thus,
warranting
a
separate
category

field
 of
 labor
 relations.
 As
 such,
 the
 rationale
 behind
 the
 • Who
are
confidential
employees?

ineligibility
of
managerial
employees
equally
applies
to
them
 o They
 assist
 and
 act
 in
 a
 confidential
 capacity
 to,
 or
 have

• Third
swing:
inclusion
among
supervisors
 access
 to
 confidential
 matters
 of,
 persons
 who
 exercise

o Court
allowed
the
confidentials,
if
they
are
not
managers
or
 managerial
functions
in
the
field
of
labor
relations

rank‐and‐file,
to
join
the
supervisor’s
union
 o Those
who
by
reason
of
their
positions
or
nature
of
work
are

• Fourth
swing:
inclusion
among
monthly
paid
rank­and­file
 required
to
assist
or
act
in
a
fiduciary
manner
to
managerial


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 54

 employees,
 and
 hence,
 are
 likewise
 privy
 to
 sensitive
 and
 o The
right
to
form,
join
or
assist
labor
organizations

highly
confidential
records.

 o Right
to
engage
in
lawful
concerted
activities

• The
labor
nexus
 • Right
 to
 form
 labor
 organization
 is
 twin
 to
 the
 right
 to
 engage
 in

o “In
the
field
of
labor
relations”
is
important!
It
stresses
labor
 concerted
 activity.
 Such
 group
 action
 can
 similarly
 be
 for
 collective

nexus
–
confidentiality
of
the
position
should
relate
to
labor
 bargaining
purpose,
but
it
can
simply
be
for
aid
and
protection
of
the

relations
matters
 members
(protest
action;
kilos
protesta)

o San
 Miguel
 Corp.
 Supervisors
 and
 Exempt
 Union,
 et
 al
 v.
 • Group
 action
 is
 not
 necessarily
 a
 work
 stoppage
 or
 strike
 because
 it

Laguesma
 may
be
done
during
off‐hours.
If
it
is
a
strike,
the
restrictions
in
Article

 Confidential
employees
are
those
–
 264
should
be
observed

 Who
assist
or
act
in
a
confidential
capacity
 • Labor
 organization
 entitled
 to
 protection
 does
 not
 have
 to
 be
 a

 To
 persons
 who
 formulate,
 determine,
 and
 registered
 organization.
 And
 it
 does
 not
 have
 to
 be
 the
 bargaining

effectuate
management
policies
in
the
filed
 union

of
labor
relations
 • If
 unregistered,
 it
 does
 not
 have
 a
 right
 to
 represent
 its
 members

 These
two
criteria
are
cumulative
and
both
must
be
 because
it
is
not
a
legal
person

met
if
an
employee
is
to
be
considered
a
confidential
 • Note
 that
 the
 right
 to
 S.O.
 is
 granted
 not
 only
 to
 employees
 but
 to

employee
 workers,
whether
employed
or
not

 Exclusion
 from
 bargaining
 units
 
 broad
 rationale
 • No
 person
 –
 inside
 or
 outside
 government,
 employer
 or
 non‐
behind
 this
 rule
 is
 that
 employees
 should
 not
 be
 employer,
 unionist
 or
 non‐unionist
 –
 may
 abridge
 these
 rights.
 If

placed
 in
 a
 position
 involving
 a
 potential
 conflict
 of
 abridged
in
the
workplace

ULP

interest

 Granting
 arguendo
 that
 an
 employee
 has
 access
 to
 

confidential
 labor
 information
 but
 such
 is
 merely

incidental
to
his
duties
and
knowledge
thereof
is
not
 

necessary
 in
 the
 performance
 of
 his
 duties,
 said

access
 does
 not
 render
 the
 employee
 a
 confidential
 Title
VI:
ULP

employee.

• New
CBA
may
include
employees
excluded
from
old
CBA;
expired
 Chapter
I:
Concept

CBA
may
be
modified,
not
just
renewed

o Regardless
 of
 the
 swinging
 rulings,
 the
 employer
 and
 the
 Article
247.
Concept
of
unfair
labor
practice
and
procedure
for
prosecution
thereof.

union
 in
 an
 enterprise
 may
 negotiate
 and
 agree
 whom
 to

cover
 in
 their
 CBA.
 And
 they
 are
 free
 to
 change
 their
 1. Concept
of
unfair
labor
practice

agreement:
people
excluded
before
may
be
included
now,
or
 • ULP
–
does
not
mean
an
unfair
practice
by
labor
but
a
practice
unfair

vice‐versa
 to
labor,
although
the
offender
may
either
be
an
employer
or
a
labor

8. Security
guards
may
join
rank­and­file
or
supervisors
union
 organization

• Old
 rules:
 security
 guards
 were
 barred
 from
 joining
 a
 labor
 • Article
 246
 –
 it
 is
 unlawful
 for
 any
 person
 to
 restrain,
 coerce,

organization
of
the
rank‐and‐file
 discriminate
against
or
unduly
interfere
with
the
exercise
of
the
right

• Now:
they
may
freely
join
a
labor
organization
of
the
rank‐and‐file
or
 to
S.O.

that
of
the
supervisory
union,
depending
on
their
rank
 • The
 victim
 of
 the
 offense
 is
 not
 just
 the
 workers
 as
 a
 body
 and
 the

9. Workers
in
export
processing
zones
 well‐meaning
employers
who
value
industrial
peace,
but
the
State
as

• Export
processing
zones
are
part
of
PHL
territory.
To
them
therefore,
 well

applies
with
undiminished
force
the
Constitution
that
guarantees
the
 o Hence,
 ULP
 is
 a
 crime
 which
 carries
 civil
 and
 criminal

workers
 rights
 to
 organize,
 to
 strike
 and
 so
 forth.
 The
 zone
 workers
 liabilities

cannot
be
denied
these
constitutional
rights
 • ULP,
 when
 committed
 by
 the
 employer,
 commonly
 connotes
 anti‐
unionism


 • Elements

o Employer‐employee
 relationship
 between
 the
 offender
 and

Article
246.
Non­abridgment
of
right
to
self­organization
 the
offended

 ULP
 is
 negation
 of,
 a
 counteraction
 to
 the
 right
 to

1. Concept
of
the
right
to
self­organization
 organize
 which
 is
 available
 only
 to
 employees
 in

• Self‐organization
(S.O.)
includes
–
 relation
to
their
employer

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 55

 Act
done
is
expressly
defined
in
the
Code
as
an
act
of
ULP

o employer
 still
 retains
 his
 inherent
 right
 to
 discipline
 his

 Prohibited
 acts
 are
 all
 related
 to
 the
 workers
 S.O.
 employees,
his
normal
prerogative
to
hire
or
dismiss
them

right
 and
 to
 the
 observance
 of
 the
 CBA,
 except
 o Nevertheless,
 the
 dismissal
 was
 without
 case
 because
 her

dismissal
 or
 prejudicing
 an
 employee
 for
 giving
 inefficiency
 is
 belied
 by
 the
 successive
 increases
 of
 her

testimony
 compensation

 As
such,
not
every
unfair
act
is
ULP
 • Historical
evidence
of
the
link

• Prejudice
to
public
interest
not
an
element
of
ULP
 • The
 enumeration
 of
 ULP
 in
 the
 Code
 does
 not
 mean
 an
 exhaustive

o Showing
of
prejudice
to
public
interest
is
not
a
requisite
for
 listing
 of
 ULP
 incidents.
 The
 code
 leaves
 to
 the
 court
 the
 work
 of

ULP
charges
to
prosper
 applying
 the
 law’s
 general
 prohibitory
 language
 in
 light
 of
 infinite

2. Prosecution
of
ULP
 combinations
of
events
which
may
be
charged
as
violative
of
its
terms

• ULP
has
civil
and
criminal
aspect
 2. ILO
Convention
No.
98

o Civil
 may
 include
 liability
 for
 damages
 and
 these
 may
 be
 • Said
 convention
 frowns
 upon
 anti‐union
 discrimination
 and

passed
upon
by
a
labor
arbiter
 interference

o To
 prosecute
 ULP
 as
 criminal
 offense
 is
 not
 possible
 until
 3. No
ULP:
illustrative
instances
of
valid
exercise
of
management
rights

after
 finality
 of
 judgment
 in
 the
 labor
 case,
 finding
 that
 the
 • The
 law
 on
 ULP
 is
 not
 intended
 to
 deprive
 the
 employer
 of
 his

respondent
 indeed
 committed
 ULP.
 But
 such
 judgment
 will
 fundamental
right
to
prescribe
and
enforce
such
rules
as
he
honestly

not
 serve
 as
 evidence
 of
 ULP
 in
 the
 criminal
 case;
 the
 believes
 to
 be
 necessary
 to
 the
 proper,
 productive
 and
 profitable

criminal
 charge
 must
 be
 proved
 independently
 from
 the
 operation
of
his
business

labor
case
 • Where,
however,
an
employer
does
violate
the
Act
and
is
found
guilty

o Criminal
 charge
 falls
 under
 concurrent
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 of
 the
 commission
 of
 an
 “ULP”,
 it
 is
 no
 excuse
 that
 his
 conduct
 was

Municipal
or
Regional
Trial
Court
 unintentional
and
innocent

o Penalty
 imposed
 upon
 guilty
 officers
 of
 a
 corporation,
 • Personnel
movements

partnership,
 association
 or
 entity.
 If
 committed
 by
 a
 labor
 o As
 a
 rule,
 it
 is
 the
 prerogative
 of
 the
 company
 to
 promote,

organization,
 the
 parties
 liable
 are
 those
 mentioned
 in
 transfer
 or
 even
 demote
 its
 employees
 to
 other
 positions

Article
249.
 when
 the
 interests
 of
 the
 company
 reasonably
 demand
 it.

o ULP
prescribes
in
one
year
 Unless
 there
 are
 instances
 which
 directly
 point
 to

interference
 by
 the
 company
 with
 the
 employee’s
 rights
 to


 S.O.,
 the
 transfer
 of
 an
 employee
 should
 be
 considered
 as

within
the
bounds
allowed
by
law

Chapter
II:
Unfair
Labor
Practices
of
Employers
 • Acceptance
of
mass
resignation

o Acceptance
of
a
voluntary
resignation
is
not
ULP

Article
248.
Unfair
labor
practices
of
employers.
 o A
 protest
 retirement/resignation
 is
 not
 a
 concerted
 activity

which
is
protected
by
law

1. Conditions
precedent
to
ULP
charge
 o Neither
 employers
 nor
 employees
 should
 be
 allowed
 to

• Before
an
employee
may
be
considered
aggrieved
by
an
alleged
unfair
 make
 of
 judicial
 authority
 a
 now‐you’ve‐got‐it‐now‐you‐
labor
practice
(ULP)
by
an
employer,
it
must
be
demonstrated,
 don’t
(lol
)
affair.

o That
 the
 injured
 party
 comes
 within
 the
 definition
 of
 • Grant
of
profit­sharing
benefits
to
non­union
members

“employee”

 o Management
has
the
prerogative
to
regulate,
according
to
its

o The
 act
 charged
 as
 ULP
 must
 fall
 under
 the
 prohibitions
 of
 discretion
 and
 judgment,
 all
 aspects
 of
 employment.
 Such

Article
248
(acts
of
the
employer)
or
249
(acts
of
the
union)
 management
 prerogative
 may
 be
 availed
 of
 without
 fear
 of

• Mariano
v.
Royal
Interocean
Lines
 any
 liability
 so
 long
 as
 it
 is
 exercised
 in
 good
 faith
 for
 the

o Mariano,
a
stenographer‐typist,
sent
a
letter
to
the
managing
 advancement
 of
 the
 employers’
 interest
 and
 not
 for
 the

directors
 of
 the
 company
 complaining
 about
 the
 PHL
 purpose
 of
 defeating
 or
 circumventing
 the
 rights
 of

manager’s
 inconsiderate
 and
 untactful
 attitude
 towards
 the
 employees
 under
 special
 laws
 or
 valid
 agreement
 and
 are

employees
and
clients
of
the
company.
Company
sided
with
 not
exercised
in
a
malicious,
harsh
manner

the
manager.
Mariano
was
dismissed
 o Wise
and
Co,
Inc.
v.
Wise
and
Co.,
Inc.
Employees
Union

o Considering
that
the
employee’s
dismissal,
because
of
charges
  When
the
management
introduced
a
profit‐sharing

against
 the
 manager
 is
 not
 connected
 with
 or
 necessarily
 scheme
 for
 its
 managers
 and
 supervisors,
 Union

arising
 from
 union
 activities,
 the
 dismissal
 did
 not
 constitute
 wrote
management
to
ask
that
the
union
members

ULP.
 Despite
 the
 employees’
 right
 to
 self­organization,
 the
 be
 allowed
 to
 participate.
 Management
 denied

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 56

 because
that
wasn’t
in
the
CBA.
Later,
management
 beer
 products
 were
 offered
 for
 sale
 directly
 to

distributed
 profit‐sharing
 benefit
 not
 only
 to
 wholesalers
through
SMC’s
sales
offices.
Union
filed

managers
and
supervisors
but
also
to
all
rank‐and‐ for
 ULP
 claiming
 that
 the
 CDS
 was
 contrary
 to
 the

file
 employees
 not
 covered
 by
 the
 CBA
 because
 existing
 marketing
 scheme
 where
 route
 salesmen

they
were
excluded
from
their
agreed
definition
of
 sold
 their
 stocks
 of
 beer.
 They
 allege
 that
 the
 CDS

bargaining
unit
 violated
the
CBA
because
the
CDS
would
reduce
the

 Whether
 the
 grant
 by
 management
 of
 profit‐ take
home
pay
of
the
salesmen

sharing
 benefits
 to
 its
 employees
 who
 are
 non‐  No
 ULP.
 The
 plan
 was
 to
 improve
 efficiency
 and

union
members
is
discriminatory
against
the
union
 economy
 and
 at
 the
 same
 time
 gain
 profit
 to
 the

members?
 Is
 the
 act
 discriminatory
 amounting
 to
 highest.
 Every
 business
 enterprise
 endeavors
 to

ULP?
No.
 increase
 its
 profits.
 In
 the
 process,
 it
 may
 adopt
 or

 There
 can
 be
 no
 discrimination
 committed
 by
 the
 devise
means
designed
towards
that
goal.

employer
 as
 the
 situation
 of
 the
 union
 employees
 is
 • Taking
action
against
slowdown

different
 from
 that
 of
 the
 nonunion
 employees.
 o Employees
have
the
right
to
strike,
but
they
have
no
right
to

Discrimination
 per
 se
 is
 not
 unlawful.
 There
 can
 be
 continue
 working
 on
 their
 own
 terms
 while
 rejecting
 the

no
 discrimination
 where
 the
 employees
 concerned
 standards
 desired
 by
 their
 employer.
 Hence,
 an
 employer

are
not
similarly
situated.
 does
 not
 commit
 an
 ULP
 by
 discharging
 employees
 who

 The
 grant
 of
 the
 employer
 of
 profit­sharing
 benefits
 engage
in
a
slowdown,
even
if
their
object
is
a
pay
increase

to
 the
 employees
 outside
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 falls
 which
is
lawful

under
 the
 ambit
 of
 its
 managerial
 prerogative.
 It’s
 4. Determination
of
validity

provided
in
the
CBA
even.
 • Determining
the
validity
of
an
employer’s
act
involves
an
appraisal
of

 However,
 the
 Court
 serves
 notice
 that
 it
 will
 not
 his
motives

hesitate
to
strike
down
any
act
of
the
employer
that
 • It
 is
 for
 the
 NLRC,
 in
 the
 first
 instance,
 to
 weigh
 the
 employer’s

tends
to
be
discriminatory
against
union
members
 expressed
 motive
 in
 determining
 the
 effect
 on
 the
 employees
 of

• Forced
vacation
leave
 management’s
otherwise
equivocal
act

o Where
 the
 vacation
 leave
 without
 pay,
 which
 the
 employer
 5. First
ULP:
interference
(Article
248[a])

requires
employees
to
take
in
view
of
the
economic
crisis,
is
 • [In
summarized
form,
the
9
ULP
acts
of
an
employer
are:

neither
 malicious,
 oppressive
 or
 vindictive,
 ULP
 is
 not
 o Interference

committed
 o “Yellow
dog”
condition

o Philippine
Graphic
Arts,
Inc.
v.
NLRC
 o Contracting
out

 Petitioner
 corporation
 was
 forced
 by
 economic
 o Company
unionism

circumstances
 to
 require
 its
 workers
 to
 go
 on
 o Discrimination
for
or
against
union
membership

mandatory
 vacation
 leave
 in
 batches.
 The
 workers
 o Discrimination
because
of
testimony

were
paid
while
on
leave
but
the
pay
was
charged
 o Violation
of
duty
to
bargain

against
 their
 respective
 earned
 leaves.
 Employees
 o Paid
negotiation

filed
complaint
for
ULP
 o Violation
of
CBA]

 No
 ULP.
 There
 is
 basis
 for
 the
 petitioner’s
 • Outright
 and
 unconcealed
 intimidation
 is
 the
 most
 obvious
 form
 of

contentions
that
the
reduction
of
work
schedule
was
 “interference”.
 But
 in
 the
 great
 preponderance
 of
 cases,
 the

temporary,
 that
 it
 was
 taken
 only
 after
 notice
 and
 employer’s
efforts
are
much
more
covert
and
are
generally
disguised

consultation
with
the
workers,
that
a
consensus
was
 to
escape
detection

reached
on
how
to
deal
with
deteriorating
economic
 • Interference
with
employee
organization
rights
was
found
where
the

conditions.
 Likewise,
 the
 forced
 leave
 was
 enforced
 superintendent
 of
 the
 employer
 threatened
 the
 employees
 with

neither
in
a
malicious,
harsh,
oppressive,
vindicative
 cutting
 their
 pay,
 increasing
 rent,
 or
 closing
 the
 plant
 if
 they

nor
 wanton
 manner,
 or
 out
 of
 malice
 or
 spite.
 The
 supported
 the
 union
 and
 where
 the
 employer
 encouraged
 the

decision
 to
 resort
 to
 forced
 leaves
 was
 a
 employees
to
sign
a
petition
repudiating
the
union

management
prerogative.
 • Dabuet,
et
al.
v.
Roche
Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.


• Issuance
of
rules
or
policy
 o Petitioners‐officers
 of
 Roche
 Products
 Labor
 Union,
 wrote

o San
Miguel
Brewery
Sales
Force
Union
v.
Ople
and
SMC
 the
 company
 expressing
 the
 grievances
 of
 the
 union
 and

 SMC
introduced
a
marketing
scheme
(CDS)
known
 seeking
a
formal
conference
with
management
regarding
the

as
 Complementary
 distribution
 system
 where
 its
 previous
 dismissal
 of
 the
 union’s
 president
 and
 VP.
 At
 a

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 57

 meeting,
 the
 company’s
 GM,
 instead
 of
 discussing
 the
 organization,
 contrary
 to
 the
 prohibition
 of
 the

problems
 affecting
 the
 labor
 union
 and
 management,
 Labor
Code
against
ULP.

allegedly
 berated
 the
 petitioners
 for
 writing
 that
 letter
 and
 • Violence
or
intimidation

called
 the
 letter
 and
 the
 person
 who
 prepared
 it
 “stupid”.
 o Violations
 have
 been
 found
 where
 the
 employer
 threatened

Union
filed
case
for
grave
slander
 employees
favoring
the
union
with
force
or
violence

o Company
 had
 committed
 ULP
 in
 dismissing
 the
 petitioners
 • Espionage
and
surveillance

without
 just
 and
 valid
 cause.
 Their
 dismissal,
 under
 the
 o Employees
 come
 under
 threat
 of
 economic
 coercion
 or

circumstances,
 amounted
 to
 interference
 with,
 and
 restraint
 retaliation

or
 coercion
 of,
 the
 petitioners
 in
 the
 exercise
 of
 their
 right
 to
 • Economic
inducements

engage
 in
 concerted
 activities
 for
 their
 mutual
 aid
 and
 o It
is
a
well‐settled
rule
that
while
a
representation
election
is

protection.
 pending,
the
conferral
of
employee
benefits
for
the
purpose

• Interrogation
 of
inducing
the
employees
to
vote
against
a
union
is
unlawful

o In
order
that
the
questioning
of
an
employee
concerning
his
 • Employer’s
expression
of
opinion;
totality
of
conduct
doctrine

union
activities
would
not
be
deemed
coercive,
 o Doctrine
 holds
 that
 the
 culpability
 of
 employer’s
 remarks

 The
 employer
 must
 communicate
 to
 the
 employee
 was
 to
 be
 evaluated
 not
 only
 on
 the
 basis
 of
 their

the
purpose
of
the
questioning,
 implications,
 but
 against
 the
 background
 of
 and
 in

 Assure
him
that
no
reprisal
would
take
place,
 conjunction
with
collateral
circumstances

 And
obtain
his
participation
on
a
voluntary
basis.

 o The
 Insular
 Life
 Assurance
 Co.,
 Ltd.,
 Employees
 Association
 v.

 Questioning
must
also
occur
in
a
context
free
from
 Insular
Life
Assurance
Co.

employer
 hostility
 to
 union
 organization
 and
 must
  Company
 president
 sent
 individual
 letters
 to

not
itself
be
coercive
in
nature
 striking
 employees
 urging
 them
 to
 abandon
 their

• ULP
even
before
union
is
registered
 strike
 with
 a
 promise
 of
 free
 coffee,
 and
 movies,

o Management
contended
that
it
could
not
commit
ULP
while
 and
 paid
 overtime.
 He
 said
 that
 if
 they
 failed
 to

there
was
no
union
yet.
This
contention,
according
to
the
SC,
 return
 to
 their
 jobs,
 they
 might
 be
 replaced.

is
without
merit.
The
Labor
Code
considers
it
an
unfair
labor
 Company‐hired
 men,
 in
 addition,
 broke
 into
 the

practice
 for
 an
 employer
 to
 initiate,
 dominate,
 assist
 or
 picket
 line,
 resulting
 in
 violence.
 When
 the
 strike

otherwise
 interfere
 with
 the
 formation
 or
 administration
 of
 was
 over,
 company
 refused
 to
 readmit
 unionists

any
 labor
 organization,
 including
 the
 giving
 of
 financial
 or
 facing
criminal
charges

other
 support
 to
 it.
 In
 short,
 an
 employer
 who
 interfered
  Individual
soliciting
urging
employees
to
cease
union

with
 the
 right
 to
 self‐organization
 before
 the
 union
 is
 activity
 or
 cease
 striking
 constitutes
 ULP.
 Company

registered
can
be
held
guilty
of
ULP
 was
 also
 guilty
 of
 strike­breaking
 and/or
 union

• Prohibiting
organizing
activities
 busting
 (by
 attempting
 to
 bribe
 with
 coffee,
 etc)
 is

o The
 following
 are
 examples
 of
 unlawful
 acts
 to
 discourage
 ULP.


membership
in
a
labor
organization
  The
 letters
 of
 the
 company
 president
 to
 the

 Dismissal
 of
 union
 members
 upon
 their
 refusal
 to
 individual
 strikers
 should
 not
 be
 considered
 by

give
 up
 their
 membership,
 under
 the
 pretext
 of
 themselves
 alone
 but
 should
 be
 read
 in
 the
 light
 of

retrenchment
due
to
reduced
dollar
allocations
 the
 preceding
 and
 subsequent
 circumstances.
 The

 Refusal
 over
 a
 period
 of
 years
 to
 give
 salary
 letter
 should
 be
 interpreted
 according
 to
 the

adjustments
 according
 to
 the
 improved
 salary
 “totality
 of
 conduct
 doctrine,”
 whereby
 the

scales
in
the
CBA
 culpability
 of
 an
 employer’s
 remarks
 has
 to
 be

 Dismissal
 of
 an
 old
 employee
 allegedly
 for
 evaluated
 not
 only
 on
 the
 basis
 of
 their
 implicit

inefficiency,
 on
 account
 of
 her
 having
 joined
 a
 implications,
 but
 in
 conjunction
 with
 collateral

union
and
engaging
in
union
activities
 circumstances.

o CLLG
EG
Gochango
Workers
Unionv.
NLRC
 • Mass
layoff
amounting
to
ULP

 The
 respondent
 company
 deserves
 our
 strongest
 o Madrigal
&
Company,
Inc.
v.
Zamora

condemnation
 for
 ignoring
 the
 petitioners’
 request
  Madrigal
 Central
 Office
 Employees
 Union
 sought

for
 permission
 for
 some
 time
 out
 to
 attend
 to
 the
 renewal
of
its
CBA.
It
proposed
a
wage
increase
of

hearing
of
their
petition
before
the
med­arbiter.
It
is
 P200
 a
 month,
 an
 allowance
 of
 P100
 a
 month
 and

not
 only
 an
 act
 of
 arrogance,
 but
 a
 brazen
 other
 economic
 benefits.
 Then,
 company
 reduced

interference
as
well,
with
the
employees’
right
to
self­ its
capital
stock.

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 58

  The
 petitioner’s
 capital
 reduction
 efforts
 were,
 to
  While
 case
 was
 pending,
 Sy
 Indong
 sold
 its
 assets

begin
 with,
 a
 subterfuge,
 a
 deception
 as
 it
 were,
 to
 to
 Sen
 Chiong
 Rice
 and
 Corn
 Mill
 which
 was

camouflage
the
fact
that
it
had
been
making
profits,
 organized
on
the
very
same
day
of
the
sale

and
 consequently,
 to
 justify
 the
 mass
 layoff
 in
 its
  The
 allegations
 of
 Sy
 Indong
 of
 bankruptcy
 is

employee
ranks.
 untenable.
These
 circumstances,
when
considered
in

• Lockout
or
closure
amounting
to
ULP
 relation
 to
 the
 fact
 that
 the
 ULP
 case
 had
 been

o A
lockout,
actual
or
threatened,
as
a
means
of
dissuading
the
 pending
in
the
CIR,
lead
to
no
other
conclusion
than

employees
from
exercising
their
rights
is
clearly
an
ULP
 that
the
organizers
of
Sen
Chiong
were
aware
of
said

o However,
 to
 hold
 an
 employer
 who
 actually
 or
 who
 case
 when
 they
 established
 the
 company
 and

threatens
to
lock
out
his
employees
guilty
of
a
violation,
the
 acquired
 the
 assets,
 and
 that
 they
 either
 organized

evidence
 must
 establish
 that
 the
 purpose
 thereof
 was
 to
 Sen
Chiong
in
an
attempt
to
relieve
Sy
Indong
of
the

interfere
with
the
employees’
exercise
of
their
rights
 consequences
 or
 effects
 of
 the
 present
 litigation
 or

• Sale
in
bad
faith
 acquired
 such
 assets
 assuming
 the
 risk
 of
 having
 to

o Moncada
 Bijon
 Factory
 v.
 CIR
 and
 Moncada
 United
 Workers’
 bear
the
liabilities
or
part
thereof
that
said
litigation

Union
 may
eventually
entail.

 Kim,
 the
 owner
 of
 the
 factory,
 called
 the
 union
 • Successor
employer;
piercing
the
corporate
veil

members
 to
 a
 meeting.
 He
 requested
 them
 to
 o Legal
 fiction
 that
 a
 corporation
 is
 an
 entity
 with
 a
 juridical

resign
 from
 the
 union,
 revert
 to
 their
 working
 personality
 separate
 and
 distinct
 from
 its
 members
 may
 be

hours
 and
 withdraw
 overtime
 claims.
 This
 was
 disregarded.
The
doctrine
applies
when
the
corporate
fiction

rejected.
 11
 days
 later,
 Kim
 executed
 a
 deed
 is
 used
 to
 defeat
 public
 convenience,
 justify
 wrong,
 protect

purporting
 to
 convey
 the
 factory
 to
 Yu
 Guat.
 fraud,
or
defend
crime,
etc.

Members
of
the
union
were
not
readmitted.
 o H.
Aronson
Co.,
Inc
v.
Associated
Labor
Union

 Sale
 of
 the
 factory
 was
 simulated
 and
 a
 device
  Labor
union
proposed
a
CBA.
Management
refused.

resorted
merely
to
get
rid
of
the
employees
who
were
 Union
 staged
 a
 strike.
 Management
 decided
 to

members
of
the
union.
 dissolve
 the
 corporation,
 thereby
 terminating
 the

o Cruz
v.
PAFLU
 employment
 of
 all
 the
 employees.
 Management

 Workers
 in
 the
 factory
 formed
 a
 union,
 PAFLU.
 formed
some
other
corporation

Company
 claimed
 to
 have
 an
 existing
 CBA
 with
  Dissolution
 of
 the
 corporation
 and
 the
 subsequent

another
 union,
 PTGWO.
 PAFLU
 won
 the
 incorporation
of
new
ones
were
part
and
parcel
of
a

certification
 election.
 Factory
 was
 sold
 to
 Cruz,
 plan
 to
 accomplish
 the
 dismissal
 of
 the
 individual

employee
members
of
PAFLU
were
dismissed
 respondents.

 The
 sale
 of
 a
 business
 enterprise
 to
 avoid
 the
 legal
 6. Second
ULP:
“yellow
dog”
condition
(Article
248[b])

consequences
of
an
ULP
is
necessarily
attended
with
 • Yellow
dog
contract
is
a
promise
exacted
from
workers
as
a
condition

bad
 faith
 and
 both
 the
 vendor
 and
 the
 vendee
 of
 employment
 that
 they
 are
 not
 to
 belong
 to,
 or
 attempt
 to
 foster,
 a

continue
to
be
liable
to
the
affected
workers
 union
during
their
period
of
employment

o It
 is
 irrational
 to
 suppose
 that
 a
 purchaser
 of
 a
 • Typical
 yellow
 dog
 contract
 is
 an
 at‐will
 employment
 agreement

manufacturing
 enterprise
 is
 not
 aware
 of
 the
 labor‐ which
 contains,
 in
 addition
 to
 the
 usual
 provisions
 for
 employment

management
situation
in
the
firm
he
bought
 the
following
provisions
–


• Assumption
of
obligations
by
new
company
 o A
representation
by
the
employee
that
he
is
not
a
member
of

o Philippine
 Land­Air­Sea­Labor
 Union
 (Plaslu)
 v.
 Sy
 Indiong
 a
labor
union

Rice
and
Corn
Mill
 o A
promise
by
the
employee
not
to
join
a
labor
union

 PLASLU
 and
 7
 other
 persons
 filed
 a
 ULP
 case
 o A
promise
by
the
employee
that,
upon
joining
a
labor
union,

against
 Sy
 Indong
 and
 Tubod
 Labor
 Union
 (TLU).
 he
will
quit
his
employment

Complainants
 allege
 that
 TLU
 threatened
 them
 • “Only
a
yellow
dog,
cried
the
unionists,
would
sign
such
a
contract”

with
bodily
harm
unless
they
gave
up
their
jobs
as
 • Such
a
contract
is
an
ULP
by
express
provision
of
the
law

workers
 of
 Sy
 Indiong.
 They
 also
 alleged
 that
 Sy
 7. Third
ULP:
contracting
out
(Article
248[c])

Indiong
 discriminated
 against
 them
 by
 refusing
 to
 • ULP
 for
 an
 employer
 to
 contract
 out
 services
 or
 functions
 being

admit
them
to
work.
 performed
 by
 union
 members
 when
 such
 act
 will
 interfere
 with,

restrain
or
coerce
employees
in
the
exercise
of
their
right
to
S.O.



Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 59

 • Note
that
contracting
out,
itself,
is
NOT
ULP;
BUT
it
is
the
ill
intention
 contract
 schedules
 or
 transferring
 work
 from
 one
 plant
 to

that
makes
it
so
 another,
 even
 though
 he
 thereby
 makes
 himself
 virtually

o Contracting
 out
 is
 ULP
 where
 motivated
 by
 a
 desire
 to
 strikeproof

prevent
 his
 employees
 from
 organizing
 and
 selecting
 a
 o Sameness
of
business
is
not
reason
enough
to
show
runaway

collective
 bargaining
 representative,
 rid
 himself
 of
 union
 shop
to
pierce
the
veil
of
separate
corporate
entity

men,
or
escape
his
statutory
duty
to
bargain
collectively
with
 o Complex
Electronics
Employees
Association
v.
NLRC

his
employees’
bargaining
representative
  Complex
 Electronics
 Corporation
 was

o BUT
 an
 employer
 is
 NOT
 guilty
 of
 an
 ULP
 in
 contracting
 subcontractor
of
electronic
products.
Rank‐and‐file

work
out
for
BUSINESS
REASONS
 workers
 make
 up
 the
 union‐petitioner.
 Complex

• In
 Manila
 Electric
 Company
 v.
 Quisumbing
 and
 MEWA,
 Secretary
 of
 had
 to
 close
 down
 the
 operations
 of
 the
 Lite‐On

Labor
 imposed
 upon
 management
 the
 duty
 to
 consult
 the
 union
 Line.
 Company
 promised
 that
 it
 would
 follow
 the

before
 implementing
 a
 job
 contracting
 out
 that
 would
 last
 for
 6
 law
 by
 giving
 one
 month
 notice
 and
 retrenchment

months
or
more.
Court
invalidated
such,
while
noting
that
contracting
 pay
 of
 half‐month
 pay
 for
 every
 year
 of
 service.

out
is
subject
to
legal
limitations
 Union
 demanded
 retrenchment
 pay
 of
 1
 month

o Company
can
determine
in
its
best
business
judgment
whether
 salary
 for
 every
 year
 of
 service.
 Complex
 refused.

it
should
contract
out
the
performance
of
some
of
its
work
for
 Union
 conducted
 a
 strike.
 In
 the
 evening,
 the

as
 long
 as
 the
 employer
 is
 motivated
 by
 good
 faith,
 and
 the
 machinery,
 equipment
 and
 materials
 used
 for

contracting
out
must
not
have
been
resorted
to
to
circumvent
 production
 were
 pulled
 out
 from
 the
 company

the
 law
 or
 must
 not
 have
 been
 the
 result
 of
 malicious
 or
 premises
and
transferred
to
the
premises
of
Ionics

arbitrary
action
 Circuit,
 Inc.
 The
 next
 day,
 Complex
 closed

• Contracting
out
restricted
by
CBA
 operations.
 Union
 claimed
 that
 pull‐out
 of
 the

o Shell
Oil
Workers’
Union
v.
Shell
Company
of
the
Philippines
 machinery,
equipment,
materials,
which
resulted
to

 Shell
 dissolved
 its
 security
 guard
 section
 and
 the
 sudden
 closure
 of
 the
 company
 =
 ULP.
 Union

replaced
 it
 with
 an
 outside
 agency,
 claiming
 that
 claims
 that
 Complex
 and
 Ionics
 have
 the
 same

such
 act
 was
 a
 valid
 exercise
 management
 president
 and
 Board
 of
 Directors.
 It
 claims
 that

prerogative
 business
has
not
ceased
at
Complex
but
was
merely

 Issue:
 Whether
 the
 then
 existing
 CBA
 running
 for
 transferred
to
Ionics.

three
 years
 constituted
 a
 bar
 to
 such
 decision
  No
 runaway
 shop
 in
 this
 case.
 A
 runaway
 shop
 is

reached
by
management?
YES.
 one
 wherein
 the
 employer
 moves
 its
 business
 to

 There
was
specific
coverage
concerning
the
security
 another
location
or
it
temporarily
closes
its
business

guard
section
in
the
CBA.
It
was
thus
an
assurance
of
 for
 anti­union
 purposes.
 A
 runaway
 shop
 in
 this

security
of
tenure,
at
least,
during
the
lifetime
of
the
 sense,
is
a
relocation
motivated
by
anti­union
animus

agreement.
The
Shell
Company
did
not
have
to
agree
 rather
 than
 for
 business
 reasons.
 Here,
 Ionics
 was

to
 such
 a
 stipulation.
 There
 can
 be
 no
 justification
 not
merely
set
up
for
the
purpose
of
transferring
the

for
 Shell’s
 insistence
 on
 pushing
 through
 its
 project
 business
 of
 Complex.
 At
 the
 time
 the
 labor
 dispute

of
 such
 dissolution
 without
 thereby
 incurring
 a
 arose,
Ionics
was
already
in
business.
The
union
filed

violation
of
the
CBA.
 to
 show
 that
 the
 primary
 reason
 for
 the
 closure
 of

• Runaway
shop
 the
 establishment
 was
 due
 to
 the
 union
 activities
 of

o Runaway
 shop
 is
 an
 industrial
 plant
 moved
 by
 its
 owners
 the
 employees.
 The
 mere
 fact
 that
 one
 or
 more

from
 one
 location
 to
 another
 to
 escape
 union
 labor
 corporations
are
owned
or
controlled
by
the
same
or

regulations
or
state
laws
 single
 stockholder
 is
 not
 sufficient
 ground
 for

 Term
is
also
used
to
describe
a
plant
removed
to
a
 disregarding
 separate
 corporate
 personalities.
 The

new
 location
 in
 order
 to
 discriminate
 against
 closure
 was
 not
 motivated
by
 the
 union
 activities
 of

employees
 at
 the
 old
 plant
 because
 of
 their
 union
 the
employees,
but
rather
by
necessity
since
it
can
no

activities
 longer
 engage
 in
 production
 without
 the
 much

 Where
a
plant
removal
is
for
business
reasons
but
 needed
materials,
equipment,
machinery.

the
 relocation
 is
 hastened
 by
 anti‐union
 8. Fourth
ULP:
company­domination
of
union
(Article
248[d])

motivation,
the
early
removal
is
an
ULP
 • Domination
of
a
labor
union
usually
manifests
in
the
following
forms
–

o Employer
 may
 legitimately
 blunt
 the
 effectiveness
 of
 an
 o Initiation
of
the
company
union
idea

anticipated
 strike
 by
 stockpiling
 inventories,
 readjusting

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 60

  Outright
 formation
 by
 the
 employer
 or
 his
  Management
 paid
 the
 employees
 of
 the
 unionized

representatives
 branch

 Employee
 formation
 an
 outright
 demand
 or
  Where
 salary
 adjustments
 were
 granted
 to

influence
by
employer
 employees
 of
 one
 of
 its
 nonunionized
 branches

 Managerially
motivated
formation
by
employees
 although
it
was
losing
in
its
operations

o Financial
support
to
the
union
  Total
 salary
 adjustments
 given
 every
 ten
 of
 its

o Employer
encouragement
and
assistance
 unionized
 employees
 would
 not
 even
 equal
 the

o Supervisory
assistance
 salary
 adjustments
 given
 one
 employee
 in
 the

• Progressive
Development
Corp
v.
CIR
 nonunionized
branch

o Araneta
 Coliseum
 Employees
 Association
 filed
 a
 ULP
 case
 • Discrimination
in
layoff
or
dismissal

against
Progressive
Development
Corporation
(PDC)
and
the
 o Even
 where
 business
 conditions
 justified
 a
 layoff
 of

Progressive
 Employees
 Union
 (PEU).
 Complainants
 allege
 employees,
ULP
in
the
form
of
discriminatory
dismissal
were

that
 they
 were
 dismissed
 because
 they
 refused
 to
 resign
 found
 where
 only
 unionists
 were
 permanently
 dismissed

from
the
ACEA
and
to
affiliate
with
the
PEU
which
was
being
 while
nonunionists
were
not.

aided
and
abetted
by
PDC.
 o Bataan
Shipyard
and
Engineering
Co.
v.
NLRC

o Dismissal
 because
 of
 union
 activities
 and
 not
 because
 of
 the
  National
 Federation
 of
 Labor
 Unions
 is
 union
 of

company’s
 alleged
 losses
 was
 adequately
 proven.
 The
 petitioner‐BASECO’s
 employees.
 Company
 filed
 for

employer’s
 act
 constituted
 ULP.
 Apparently,
 PEU
 never
 retrenchment
 with
 the
 NLRC.
 All
 of
 those
 so

collected
dues
from
its
members
and
all
members
were
made
 retrenched
 happened
 to
 be
 officers
 and
 members

regular
employees
and
were
retained
in
the
construction
unit
 of
the
NAFLU

of
PDC.
PE
was
organized
to
camouflage
the
PDC’s
dislike
for
  It
 is
 not
 disputed
 that
 retrenchment
 undertaken
 by

the
ACEA
and
to
stave
of
the
latter’s
recognition.
 the
Company
is
valid.
BUT,
the
manner
in
which
the

9. Fifth
ULP:
discrimination
(Article
248[e])
 prerogative
 is
 exercised
 should
 not
 be
 tainted
 with

• What
 the
 law
 prohibits
 is
 discrimination
 to
 encourage
 or
 discourage
 abuse
 of
 discretion.
 Company
 had
 indeed
 been

membership
 in
 a
 labor
 organization.
 Where
 the
 purpose
 is
 to
 discriminatory
 in
 selecting
 the
 employees
 who
 were

influence
 the
 union
 activity
 of
 employees,
 the
 discrimination
 is
 to
be
retrenched.
Company
had
no
valid
explanation

unlawful.

 as
to
the
matter.


• Discrimination
is
not
the
same
as
differentiation
or
classification
–
it
is
 • Discrimination
in
regularization

common
 for
 management
 to
 classify
 jobs
 and
 grant
 them
 varying
 o Only
 reason
 for
 such
 is
 the
 fact
 that
 the
 employees
 were

levels
of
pay
or
benefits
package.
These
are
valid
differentiations
that
 affiliated
with
the
union
which
apparently
does
not
have
the

recognize
differences
in
job
requirements
or
contributions
 sympathy
of
their
employer

• To
 constitute
 a
 ULP,
 the
 discrimination
 committed
 by
 the
 employer
 • Discrimination
by
blacklisting

must
be
in
the
regard
to
the
hire
or
tenure
of
employment
or
any
term
 o Blacklist
 is
 a
 list
 of
 persons
 marked
 out
 for
 special

or
condition
of
employment
to
encourage
or
discourage
membership
 avoidance,
 antagonism
 or
 enmity
 on
 the
 part
 of
 those
 who

in
any
labor
organization
 prepare
 the
 list,
 or
 those
 among
 whom
 it
 is
 intended
 to

• Discouraging
 membership
 in
 a
 labor
 organization
 include
 not
 only
 circulate,
 as
 where
 a
 trade
 union
 ‘blacklists’
 workmen
 who

discouraging
 adhesion
 to
 union
 membership
 but
 also
 discouraging
 refuse
to
conform
to
its
rules,
or
where
a
list
of
insolvent
or

participation
in
union
activities
such
as
a
legitimate
strike
 untrustworthy
persons
is
published
by
a
commercial
agency

• Discrimination
in
work
quota
 or
mercantile
association

 Pharmaceutical
 company
 increased
 sales
 quota
 of
 o In
its
broad
sense,
in
the
sense
of
the
employer’s
circulating

union
 president
 and
 VP
 to
 400
 and
 300%
 a
 list
 of
 former
 employees
 of
 notorious
 laziness
 or

respectively.
 No
 valid
 explanation
 for
 marked
 negligence
 in
 performance
 of
 duties,
 it
 may
 be
 a
 proper

difference
 from
 other
 quotas.
 Company
 displayed
 measure
for
the
protection
of
employers.
Unless
the
action
of

anti‐union
 attitude.
 The
 uneven
 application
 of
 the
 the
 employers
 in
 passing
 communications
 among

marketing
plan
by
the
company
is
patently
an
act
of
 themselves
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 excluding
 unwanted
 workers

discrimination
 from
 employment,
 constitutes
 a
 libel
 or
 a
 slander,
 the

• Discrimination
in
bonus
allocation
or
salary
adjustments
 excluded
employee
possesses
no
right
of
action
because
the

o There
 is
 unfair
 and
 unjust
 discrimination
 in
 the
 granting
 of
 employers
 community
 of
 interest
 acts
 both
 to
 justify
 the

salary
adjustments
where
the
evidence
shows
that
–
 combination
and
to
privilege
the
communication

• Indirect
discrimination

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 61

 o ULP
 for
 an
 employer
 to
 dismiss
 or
 discriminate
 against
 an
 o A
union
security
clause
requires
membership
in
the
union
so

employee
 for
 having
 filed
 charges
 or
 for
 having
 given
 or
 that
 an
 employee
 may
 retain
 his
 job
 and
 the
 union’s

being
about
to
give
testimony
 existence
is
assured

 This
 is
 to
 assure
 absolute
 freedom
 of
 the
 o Union
 security
 is
 a
 generic
 term
 which
 is
 applied
 to
 and

employees
 to
 establish
 to
 establish
 labor
 comprehends
 “closed
 shop,”
 “union
 shop,”
 “maintenance
 of

organizations
 and
 unions,
 as
 well
 as
 to
 proper
 membership”
or
any
other
form
of
agreement
which
imposes

charges
for
violations
of
the
labor
laws
 upon
 employees
 the
 obligation
 to
 acquire
 or
 retain
 union

o What
is
prohibited
to
be
done
directly
shall
not
be
allowed
to
 membership
as
a
condition
affecting
employment

be
accomplished
indirectly
  It
 is
 indeed
 compulsory
 union
 membership
 whose

o The
following
have
been
held
ULP
–
 objective
 is
 to
 assure
 continued
 existence
 of
 the

 Dismissal
of
a
laborer
on
account
of
union
activities
 union

of
his
brother
 o In
 a
 sense,
 there
 is
 discrimination
 when
 certain
 employees

 Discharge
 of
 an
 employee
 due
 to
 the
 union
 are
obliged
to
join
a
particular
union.
But
it
is
discrimination

activities
of
the
wife
 favoring
unionism.
It
is
a
valid
kind
of
“discrimination”

 Discharge
of
a
wife
due
to
the
union
activities
of
the
 • Kinds
of
union
security
agreements

husband
 o Closed‐shop:
 only
 union
 members
 can
 be
 hired
 by
 the

• Test
of
discrimination
 company
and
they
must
remain
as
union
members
to
retain

o For
the
purpose
of
determining
whether
or
not
a
discharge
is
 employment
in
the
company

discriminatory,
it
is
necessary
that
the
underlying
reason
for
 o Union
 shop:
 nonmembers
 may
 be
 hired,
 but
 to
 retain

the
discharge
be
established
 employment
 must
 become
 union
 members
 after
 a
 certain

o The
fact
that
a
lawful
cause
for
discharge
is
available
is
not
a
 period.
 The
 requirement
 applies
 to
 present
 and
 future

defense
 where
 the
 employee
 is
 actually
 discharged
 because
 employees

of
 his
 union
activities.
 If
 the
discharge
is
 actually
 motivated
 o Modified
 union
 shop:
 employees
 who
 are
 not
 union

by
a
lawful
reason,
the
fact
that
the
employee
is
engaged
in
 members
at
the
time
of
signing
the
contract
need
not
join
the

union
activities
at
the
time
will
not
lie
against
the
employer
 union,
but
all
workers
hired
thereafter
must
join

and
prevent
him
from
the
exercise
of
his
business
judgment
 o Maintenance
of
membership
shop:
no
employee
is
compelled

to
discharge
an
employee
for
cause
 to
join
the
union,
but
all
present
or
future
members
must,
as

o Where
 circumstances
 establish
 a
 discriminatory
 motive
 on
 a
 condition
 of
 employment,
 remain
 in
 good
 standing
 in
 the

the
part
of
the
employer,
the
assignment
of
a
just
cause
will
 union

be
unavailing
if
it
can
be
established
that
the
true
and
basic
 o Exclusive
 bargaining
 shop:
 union
 is
 recognized
 as
 the

inspiration
 for
 the
 employer’s
 act
 is
 derived
 from
 the
 exclusive
 bargaining
 agent
 for
 all
 employees
 in
 the

employees’
union
affiliations
or
activities,
the
assignment
by
 bargaining
unit,
whether
union
members
or
not

the
 employer
 of
 another
 reason,
 whatever
 its
 semblance
 of
 o Bargaining
 for
 members
 only:
 union
 is
 recognized
 as
 the

validity,
is
unavailing
 bargaining
 agent
 only
 for
 its
 own
 members
 (But
 see

• Constructive
discharge
 Philippine
Diamond
Hotel
case
cited
under
Article
242)

o Where
 the
 employer
 prohibits
 employees
 from
 exercising
 o Agency
 shop:
 agreement
 whereby
 employees
 must
 either

their
rights,
on
pain
of
discharge,
and
the
employee
quits
as
 join
 the
 union
 or
 pay
 to
 the
 union
 as
 exclusive
 bargaining

a
 result
 of
 the
 prohibition,
 a
 constructive
 discharge
 occurs,
 agent
a
sum
equal
to
that
paid
by
the
members

which
may
be
remedied
in
an
ULP
proceeding
  Directed
 against
 “free
 rider”
 employees
 who

o Employee
 was
 held
 to
 be
 constructively
 discharged
 when
 benefit
 from
 union
 activities
 without
 contributing

she
 quit
 her
 job
 because
 of
 discriminatory
 assignment
 financially
to
union
support

requiring
 heavy
 lifting
 work
 which
 the
 employer
 knew
 she
  Prevents
 a
 situation
 where
 nonunion
 members

was
physically
unable
to
perform
 enrich
 themselves
 as
 the
 expense
 of
 union

• Discharge
due
to
union
activity,
a
question
of
fact
 members

o Question
of
whether
an
employee
was
discharged
because
of
  Other
term
is
maintenance
of
treasury
shop

his
union
activities
is
essentially
a
question
of
fact
 • Validity
of
closed­shop
agreement

• Valid
discrimination:
union
security
clause
 o Closed
 shop
 is
 a
 valid
 form
 of
 union
 security,
 and
 such

o There
 is
 a
 form
 of
 encouragement
 of
 union
 membership
 provision
in
a
CBA
is
not
a
restriction
of
the
right
of
freedom

which
 is
 not
 considered
 ULP
 –
 where
 management
 and
 of
association

union
enter
into
a
CBA
containing
a
union
security
clause

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 62

 oPurposes
of
unionism/self‐organization
could
be
thwarted
if
  Enables
 union
 to
 charge
 exorbitant
 dues
 and

every
 worker
 were
 to
 choose
 to
 go
 his
 own
 separate
 way
 initiation
fees

instead
 of
 joining
 his
 co‐employees
 in
 planning
 collective
 • Valid
dismissal
because
of
application
of
union
security
clause

action
 and
 presenting
 a
 united
 front
 when
 they
 sit
 down
 to
 o Union
 security
 clauses
 in
 CBA,
 if
 freely
 and
 voluntarily

bargain
with
their
employers
 entered
into,
are
valid
and
binding.
Thus,
the
dismissal
of
an

o As
 such,
 the
 law
 has
 sanctioned
 stipulations
 for
 the
 union
 employee
 by
 the
 company
 pursuant
 to
 a
 labor
 union’s

shop
 and
 the
 closed‐shop
 as
 a
 means
 of
 encouraging
 the
 demand
in
accordance
with
a
union
security
agreement
does

workers
 to
 join
 and
 support
 the
 labor
 union
 of
 their
 own
 not
constitute
ULP

choice
 as
 their
 representative
 in
 the
 negotiation
 of
 their
 o Even
if
the
union
members
were
unaware
of
the
closed‐shop

demands
 and
 the
 protection
 of
 their
 interests
 vis‐à‐vis
 the
 stipulation
in
the
CBA,
they
are
bound
by
it

employer
 o Union
 members,
 although
 entitled
 to
 disaffiliate
 from
 their

o Another
 reason
 for
 enforcing
 the
 closed‐shop
 agreement
 is
 union
 and
 to
 form
 a
 new
 organization
 of
 their
 own,
 must

the
 principle
 of
 sanctity
 or
 inviolability
 of
 contracts
 suffer
 the
 consequences
 of
 their
 separation
 from
 the
 union

guaranteed
 by
 the
 Constitution.
 Freedom
 of
 employees
 to
 under
the
security
clause
of
a
CBA

organize
 themselves
 and
 select
 their
 representative
 for
 o Tanduay
Distillery
Labor
Union
v.
NLRC

entering
 into
 bargaining
 agreements,
 should
 be
  Tanduay
 Distillery
 Inc
 and
 Tanduay
 Distillery

subordinated
 to
 the
 constitutional
 provision
 protecting
 the
 Labor
 Union
 (TDLU)
 entered
 into
 a
 CBA
 which

sanctity
 of
 contracts.
 SC
 said
 that
 it
 cannot
 conceive
 how
 contained
 a
 union
 security
 clause.
 Thereafter,
 a

freedom
 to
 contract,
 which
 should
 be
 allowed
 to
 be
 number
 of
 TDLU
 members
 joined
 another
 union,

exercised
 without
 limitation,
 may
 be
 subordinated
 to
 the
 KAMPIL.
TDLU
expelled
the
disaffiliating
members

freedom
 of
 laborers
 to
 choose
 the
 organization
 they
 desire
 from
TDLU
and
demanded
that
Tanduay
terminate

to
represent
them
 their
 employment
 since
 they
 had
 lost
 their

• Advantages
and
disadvantages
of
closed­shop
agreement
 membership
 with
 TDLU.
 Employer
 terminated

o Advantages
–
 employees.

 Increases
 the
 strength
 and
 bargaining
 power
 of
  Employer
 did
 nothing
 but
 to
 put
 in
 force
 their

labor
organizations
 agreement.
 Such
 a
 stipulation
 is
 not
 only
 necessary

 Prevents
 non‐union
 workers
 from
 sharing
 in
 the
 to
maintain
loyalty
and
preserve
the
integrity
of
the

benefits
 of
 the
 union’s
 activities
 without
 also
 union
 but
 is
 allowed
 by
 the
 Magna
 Carta
 of
 Labor

sharing
its
obligations
 when
 it
 provided
 that
 while
 it
 is
 recognized
 that
 an

 Prevents
 the
 weakening
 of
 labor
 organizations
 by
 employee
shall
have
the
right
to
self­organization,
it

discrimination
against
union
members
 is
at
the
same
time
postulated
that
such
rights
shall

 Eliminates
 the
 lowering
 of
 standards
 caused
 by
 not
 injure
 the
 right
 of
 the
 labor
 organization
 to

competition
with
nonunion
workers
 prescribe
 its
 own
 rules
 with
 respect
 to
 the

 Enables
 labor
 organizations
 effectively
 to
 enforce
 acquisition
or
retention
of
membership
therein.
It
is

collective
agreements
 a
 solemn
 pronouncement
 of
 a
 policy
 that
 while
 an

 Facilitates
 the
 collection
 of
 dues
 and
 the
 employee
 is
 given
 the
 right
 to
 join
 a
 labor

enforcement
of
union
rules
 organization,
such
right
should
only
be
asserted
in
a

o Disadvantages
–
 manner
 that
 will
 not
 spell
 the
 destruction
 of
 the

 Results
in
monopolistic
domination
of
employment
 same
organization.

by
labor
organizations
 • Dismissal
 pursuant
 to
 closed­shop
 cause
 must
 clearly
 appear
 in

 Interferes
 with
 the
 freedom
 of
 contract
 and
 contract

personal
liberty
of
the
individual
worker
 o In
order
to
validly
dismiss
an
employee
by
force
of
the
union

 Compels
 employers
 to
 discharge
 all
 nonunion
 security
 clause,
 there
 should
 be
 a
 CLEAR
 AND

workers
 regardless
 of
 efficiency,
 length
 of
 service,
 UNEQUIVOCAL
 statement
 that
 the
 loss
 of
 the
 status
 of
 a

etc.
 member
 of
 good
 standing
 in
 the
 union
 shall
 be
 a
 cause
 for

 Facilitates
 the
 use
 of
 labor
 organizations
 by
 dismissal

unscrupulous
 union
 leaders
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 o Union
 shop,
 as
 with
 closed‐shop
 provisions,
 should
 be

extortion,
restraint
of
trade,
etc.
 strictly
construed
against
the
existence
of
union
shop

 Denies
to
nonunion
workers
equal
opportunity
for
 • Due
 process
 required
 in
 enforcing
 union
 security
 clause;
 intra­
employment
 union
matter
becomes
termination
dispute
with
employer

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 63

 o Although
 a
 union
 security
 clause
 in
 a
 CBA
 may
 be
 validly
 oNon‐union
employees
may
not
unjustly
enrich
themselves
by

enforced
 and
 dismissal
 pursuant
 thereto
 may
 likewise
 be
 benefiting
 from
 employment
 conditions
 negotiated
 by
 the

valid,
 this
 does
 not
 erode
 the
 fundamental
 requirement
 of
 bargaining
union

due
process.

 o Under
 the
 agency‐shop
 clause
 of
 a
 CBA,
 an
 employee
 is
 not

o Enforcement
 of
 union
 security
 clauses
 which
 is
 the
 sanctity
 required
 to
 join
 the
 union
 as
 a
 condition
 of
 continued

and
 inviolability
 of
 contracts
 cannot
 override
 one’s
 right
 to
 employment,
but
must
pay
the
union
a
service
fee

due
process
 10. Sixth
ULP:
discrimination
because
of
testimony
(Article
248[f])

o While
it
is
true
that
the
issue
of
expulsion
of
the
local
union
 • By
 protecting
 the
 employee’s
 right
 to
 testify,
 the
 law
 shields
 the

officers
 is
 originally
 between
 the
 local
 union
 and
 the
 workers’
 right
 to
 self‐organization
 from
 indirect
 assault
 by
 the

federation,
 hence
 intra‐union
 in
 character,
 the
 issue
 was
 employer

later
 on
 converted
 into
 a
 termination
 dispute
 when
 the
 • Employer’s
 reprisal
 against
 a
 testifying
 employee
 is
 ULP
 because
 it

company
 dismissed
 the
 petitioners
 from
 work
 without
 the
 violates
 the
 right
 to
 engage
 in
 concerted
 activity,
 a
 right
 included
 in

benefit
of
a
separate
notice
and
hearing
 the
right
to
self‐organize

• Liability
 of
 union
 to
 pay
 wages
 and
 fringe
 benefits
 of
 illegally
 • Refusal
to
testify

dismissed
employee
 o Mabeza
v.
NLRC

o Where
the
employer
compelled
the
employee
to
go
on
forced
  Employer
made
employee
sign
a
statement
that
she

leave
 upon
 recommendation
 of
 the
 union
 for
 alleged
 and
the
other
employees
were
receiving
minimum

violation
 by
 the
 employee
 of
 the
 closed‐shop
 agreement,
 wage
 and
 other
 labor
 standards.
 Employee
 signed

NLRC
 correctly
 ordered
 the
 reinstatement
 of
 the
 employee
 but
refused
to
swear
to
the
truth
of
her
statement.

and
directed
the
union
to
pay
the
wages
and
fringe
benefits
 Employer
 then
 was
 ordered
 to
 turn
 over
 her
 keys

which
the
employee
failed
to
receive
as
a
result
of
her
forced
 to
 her
 living
 quarters,
 charged
 with
 abandonment

leave.
 Moreover,
 under
 the
 CBA
 between
 the
 union
 and
 of
job,
eventually
dismissed.
It
does
not
appear
that

employer,
 the
 union
 holds
 the
 company
 free
 and
 blameless
 she
was
organizing
a
union
at
the
time
of
dismissal

from
 any
 liabilities
 that
 may
 arise
 should
 the
 employee
  Without
 doubt,
 the
 act
 of
 compelling
 employees
 to

question
the
dismissal
 sign
 an
 instrument
 indicating
 that
 the
 employer

• Employer
in
good
faith
not
liable
 observed
 labor
 standards
 provisions
 when
 he
 might

o Where
the
employer
dismissed
his
employees
in
the
belief
in
 have
 not,
 together
 with
 the
 act
 of
 terminating
 or

good
 faith
 that
 such
 dismissal
 was
 required
 by
 the
 closed‐ coercing
 those
 who
 refuse
 to
 cooperate
 with
 the

shop
 provisions
 of
 the
 CBA
 with
 the
 union,
 he
 may
 not
 be
 employer’s
scheme,
constitutes
ULP.
This
actuation
is

ordered
 to
 pay
 back
 compensations
 to
 such
 employees
 analogous
 to
 the
 situation
 where
 employer

although
their
dismissal
is
found
to
be
illegal
 dismisses/discriminates
 against
 an
 employee
 for

• Closed­shop,
to
whom
not
applicable
 having
given
or
being
about
to
give
testimony.

o Employee
who
at
the
time
the
closed
shop
agreement
takes
 • Labor
standards
violations
may
lead
to
a
strike

effect
is
a
bona
fide
member
of
religious
organization
which
 o Article
 118
 –
 unlawful
 for
 employer
 to
 refuse
 to
 pay
 or

prohibits
its
members
from
joining
labor
unions
on
religious
 reduce
 wages
 and
 benefits,
 discharge
 or
 in
 any
 manner

grounds
 discriminate
 against
 any
 employee
 who
 has
 filed
 any

o Employees
already
in
the
service
and
already
members
of
a
 complaint
or
instituted
any
proceedings
or
has
testified
or
is

labor
 union
 or
 unions
 other
 than
 the
 majority
 union
 at
 the
 about
to
testify
in
such
proceedings

time
the
closed‐shop
agreement
took
effect
 o Article
118
is
limited
to
matters
about
wages

o Confidential
 employees
 who
 are
 excluded
 from
 the
 rank‐ o Article
 248,
 the
 subject
 testified
 to
 is
 any
 issue
 covered
 by

and‐file
bargaining
unit
 the
Code

o Employees
 excluded
 from
 the
 closed
 shop
 by
 express
 o If
 labor
 standards
 are
 violated
 and
 the
 employer
 does
 not

agreement
 retaliate
against
the
employees
who
reported
the
violations,

• Agency
fee
instead
of
union
membership
 there
 are
 no
 ULP
 and
 no
 strikeable
 situation.
 In
 that
 case,

o Employees
who
are
benefitting
from
the
CBA,
without
being
 enforcement‐visitorial
 function
 of
 DOLE
 Regional
 Office
 or

members
of
the
bargaining
union
may
be
required
to
pay
an
 adjudicatory
power
of
that
off
or
of
the
NLRC
will
operate

agency
fee
 o BUT
 if
 employer
 retaliates,
 there
 is
 ULP,
 which
 creates
 a

o Written
 authorization
 from
 non‐union
 employee
 is
 not
 strikeable
situation

required.
 Employee’s
 acceptance
 of
 benefits
 from
 a
 CBA
 11. Seventh
ULP:
Violation
of
the
duty
to
bargain
(Article
248[g])

justified
the
deduction
of
agency
fees
from
his
pay
 12. Eight
ULP:
paid
negotiation
(Article
248[h])

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 64

 • ULP
for
the
employer
to
pay
the
union
or
any
of
its
officers
or
agents
 15. ULP
not
subject
to
compromise

any
negotiation
fee
or
attorney’s
fee
as
part
of
settlement
in
collective
 • But
in
a
1997
case,
SC
allowed
compromise
settling
a
ULP‐based
strike

bargaining
or
any
labor
dispute
 o While
 we
 do
 not
 abandon
 the
 rule
 that
 ULP
 acts
 are
 beyond

13. Ninth
ULP:
violation
of
the
CBA
(Article
248[i])
 and
 outside
 sphere
 of
 compromises;
 the
 agreement
 was

• Implementation
is
still
part
of
the
bargaining
process.
 voluntarily
 entered
 into
 and
 represents
 a
 reasonable

• Duty
to
bargain
requires
good
faith
 settlement;
this,
it
binds
the
parties.

• Noncompliance
with
the
agreement
is
non‐observance
of
good
faith
in
 16. ULP
in
a
given
period
should
be
included
in
single
charge

bargaining
=
ULP
 • Union
should
not
be
allowed
to
split
the
cause
of
action
and
harass
the

• But
 such
 violation,
 to
 constitute
 ULP,
 must
 be
 gross
 according
 to
 employer

Article
261
 17. Employer’s
responsibility
for
ULP
acts
by
subordinate
officials

14. Relief
in
ULP
cases
 • If
 violations
 were
 traceable
 back
 to
 the
 employer,
 either
 by
 way
 of

• Cease
and
desist
order
 authorization
or
ratification,
employer,
despite
the
fact
that
he
himself

o To
support
a
cease
and
desist
order,
the
record
must
show
–
 was
not
the
actual
actor,
was
held
to
be
responsible
for
such
violations

 Restrained
misconduct
was
an
issue
in
the
case
 • But
 there
 is
 difficulty
 in
 cases
 where
 it
 is
 impossible
 to
 prove

 Finding
of
fact
of
said
misconduct
 authorization/participation
of
the
employer

 Such
finding
of
fact
was
supported
by
evidence
 o Circumstances
of
each
case
were
considered
as
controlling

o Court
 is
 not
 authorized
 to
 issue
 blank
 cease
 and
 desist
 o Where
 the
 facts
 in
 the
 case
 made
 doubtful
 the
 propriety
 or

orders,
but
must
confine
its
injunction
to
specific
acts
which
 equity
of
imputing
to
the
employer
responsibility
for
the
acts

are
related
to
past
misconduct
 of
a
particular
employee,
the
following
were
often
employed

o Such
order
is
not
invalidated
because
act
complained
of
was
 in
deciding
the
issue
–

voluntarily
discontinued
prior
to
or
during
the
course
of
the
  Knowledge
 by
 the
 employer
 of
 the
 employee’s

proceedings
 improper
acts

o But
if
act
complained
of
happened
so
long
a
time
that
there
is
 a. Employer’s
 failure
 to
 prevent
 the
 act
 of

no
longer
any
threat
or
probability
of
recurrence,
cease
and
 the
 employee
 invited
 the
 imputation
 of

desist
order
will
not
be
justified
 fault
and
responsibility
of
the
employer

• Affirmative
order
  Continuity
of
improper
conduct
by
employee

o Order
 may
 usually
 direct
 the
 full
 reinstatement
 of
 the
  Employer’s
past
policy
and
attitude

discharged
 employees
 to
 their
 substantially
 equivalent
 a. Similarity
 between
 attitude
 or
 policy
 of

position
 the
 employer
 and
 that
 of
 offending

o If
other
laborers
have
been
hired,
the
affirmative
order
shall
 supervisory
employee
might
be
indicative

direct
 the
 respondent
 to
 dismiss
 these
 hired
 laborers
 to
 of
a
concert
of
effort
between
the
two

make
room
for
the
returning
employee

• Order
to
bargain;
mandated
CBA
 

o Court
 may
 issue
 an
 affirmative
 order
 to
 compel
 to
 bargain

with
the
bargaining
agent
 Chapter
III:
ULP
of
labor
organizations

• Disestablishment

o Where
 employer
 had
 initiated
 or
 interfered
 with
 the
 Article
249.
ULP
of
labor
organizations.

formation
 or
 establishment
 of
 any
 labor
 organization
 or

contributed
 to
 it,
 Court
 may
 issue,
 in
 addition
 to
 cease
 and
 1. Restraint
or
coercion
by
labor
organization;
interference
by
union
is
not

desist
order,
an
order
directing
the
employer
to
withdraw
all
 ULP

recognition
 from
 the
 dominated
 labor
 union
 and
 to
 • Interference
by
a
labor
organization
is
not
ULP

disestablish
the
same
 • A
 labor
 organization
 may
 interfere
 in
 the
 employees’
 right
 to
 self‐
o Order
 for
 disestablishment
 comprehends
 and
 ordains
 the
 organization
as
long
as
the
interference
does
not
amount
to
restraint

withdrawal
 of
 recognition
 of
 such
 labor
 organization
 as
 the
 or
coercion

employees’
 bargaining
 agent
 and
 a
 bona
 fide
 and
 sufficient
 • Interference
by
a
labor
organization
is
not
a
ULP
because
interfering

communication
 to
 the
 employees
 of
 such
 withdrawal
 of
 in
 the
 exercise
 of
 the
 right
 to
 organize
 is
 itself
 a
 function
 of
 self‐
recognition
of
such
organization
by
the
employer
 organizing

o Technical
form
of
disestablishment
is
not
important.
Rather,
 • Example:
persuades
non‐striking
employees
to
join
a
strike

that
 employees
 are
 publicly
 assured
 by
 the
 employer
 in
 • Coercing
participation
in
strike

giving
good
faith
or
his
neutrality
and
impartiality

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 65

 oUnion
 violates
 the
 law
 when,
 to
 restrain
 or
 coerce
 or
 for
 causes
 foreign
 to
 the
 closed­shop
 agreement
 and
 in
 a

nonstrikers
 from
 working
 during
 a
 strike,
 it
 assaults
 or
 manner
characterized
by
arbitrariness
and
whimsicality

threatens
 to
 assault
 them,
 threatens
 them
 with
 loss
 of
 their
 • Not
disloyalty
to
ask
help
from
another
union

jobs,
etc
 o Rance,
et
al.
v.
NLRC

2. Union­induced
discrimination
  Petitioners
were
members
of
the
Polybag
Worker’s

• ULP
 =
 union
 attempts
 to
 cause
 an
 employer
 to
 grant
 advantages
 for
 Union
 who
 were
 expelled
 by
 the
 latter
 for

union
 members
 over
 nonmembers,
 for
 union
 members
 in
 good
 disloyalty
because
they
allegedly
joined
the
NAFLU,

standing
 over
 suspended
 or
 expelled
 members,
 for
 union
 members
 another
 federation.
 Employees
 dismissed.

over
 permit
 holders,
 for
 members
 of
 the
 union
 executive
 board
 over
 Employees
claim
that
they
never
affiliated
with
the

more
 senior
 employees,
 for
 members
 of
 one
 union
 over
 members
 of
 NAFLU

another,
 or
 of
 members
 of
 one
 local
 union
 over
 members
 of
 another
  Mere
 act
 of
 seeking
 help
 from
 NAFLU
 can’t

local
 constitute
 disloyalty
 as
 contemplated
 in
 the
 CBA.
 It

• Arbitrary
use
of
union
security
clause
 was
an
act
of
self­preservation
of
workers
who
found

o Union
 has
 right
 to
 determine
 its
 membership
 and
 to
 shelter
in
the
NAFLU
who
took
the
cudgels
for
them.

prescribe
 the
 conditions
 for
 the
 acquisition
 and
 retention
 Petitioners
were
denied
due
process
as
well

thereof.
Consequently,
admission
to
membership
may
not
be
 3. Refusal
to
bargain

compelled
 • ULP
 under
 Article
 249(c)
 is
 intended
 to
 insure
 that
 unions
 approach

o Such
 rule
 is
 qualified
 in
 the
 case
 of
 labor
 unions
 holding
 a
 the
bargaining
table
with
the
same
attitude
of
willingness
to
agree
as

monopoly
 in
 the
 supply
 of
 labor.
 In
 such
 case,
 qualified
 the
Act
requires
of
management

applicants
may
not
be
arbitrarily
excluded
from
membership
 • Union
 violates
 duty
 to
 bargain
 collectively
 by
 entering
 negotiations

and
 their
 admission
 may
 not
 be
 barred
 by
 unreasonable
 with
 a
 fixed
 purpose
 of
 not
 reaching
 an
 agreement
 or
 signing
 a

rules
 contract

• Salunga
v.
CIR
 4. Featherbedding
and
make­work
arrangements

o Salunga
resigned
from
the
union
out
of
disappointment
over
 • Featherbedding
is
a
term
given
to
employee
practices
which
create
or

the
 inaction
 of
 union
 officials
 on
 his
 grievances.
 Union
 spread
employment
by
“unnecessarily”
maintaining
or
increasing
the

requested
 the
 company
 to
 dismiss
 Salunga
 pursuant
 to
 number
of
employees
used,
or
the
amount
of
time
consumed,
to
work

closed‐shop
 provision
 in
 the
 CBA.
 Salunga
 was
 informed
 by
 on
a
particular
job

the
 company
 of
 his
 possible
 dismissal.
 He
 then
 tried
 to
 • Most
of
these
practices
stem
from
a
desire
on
the
part
of
employees
of

revoke
 or
 withdraw
 his
 resignation.
 Union
 denied
 the
 job
 security
 in
 the
 face
 of
 technological
 improvements
 or

withdrawal.
Salunga
was
dismissed.
 subcontracting

o Labor
 unions
 are
 not
 entitled
 to
 arbitrarily
 exclude
 qualified
 • These
practices
are
economically
wasteful
and
without
any
legitimate

applicants
for
membership,
and
a
closed­shop
provision
would
 employee
justification

not
justify
the
employer
in
discharging,
or
a
union
in
insisting
 5. CBA
deal
with
employer

upon
 the
 discharge
 of,
 an
 employee
 whom
 the
 union
 thus
 • Asking
for
or
accepting
some
fee
from
the
employer
as
part
of
CBA
or

refuses
 to
 admit
 to
 membership,
 without
 any
 reasonable
 dispute
settlement
=
ULP

ground
therefore.

o The
company
was
reluctant,
if
not,
unwilling,
to
discharge
the
 Title
VII:
Collective
bargaining
and
administration
of
agreement
[Part
1.
Collective

petitioner.
Company
was
not
guilty
of
ULP
 bargaining
concept
and
procedure]

o Right
of
employee
dismissed
from
service
due
to
ULP
of
union

who
 is
 at
 fault,
 it
 is
 the
 union
 who
 should
 shoulder
 the
 Article
250.
Procedure
in
collective
bargaining.

backwages

• Manila
mandarin
Employees
Union
v.
NLRC
 Article
251.
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
in
the
absence
of
collective
bargaining
agreements.

o Beloncio,
 assistant
 head
 waitress,
 was
 expelled
 from
 the

Manila
 Mandarin
 Employees
 Union
 for
 acts
 allegedly
 1. Nature
of
collective
bargaining

inimical
 to
 the
 interests
 of
 the
 union.
 Apparently,
 she
 said
 • Collective
bargaining
or
negotiations
towards
collective
agreement
is

“wala
akong
tiwala
sa
union
niyo”
when
she
urged
a
waiter
 a
 democratic
 framework
 to
 stabilize
 the
 relation
 between
 labor
 and

to
 adopt
 a
 better
 attitude
 toward
 his
 work.
 Eventually,
 she
 management
to
create
a
climate
of
sound
ands
table
industrial
peace

was
put
on
forced
leave.
Union
asked
for
her
dismissal.
 • Four
related
but
distinguishable
processes

o A
 union
 member
 may
 not
 be
 expelled
 from
 her
 union,
 and

consequently
from
her
job,
for
personal
or
impetuous
reasons

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 66

 o Negotiation
 between
 representatives
 of
 the
 management
 o Provides
an
orderly
procedure
by
which
each
side
can
seek

and
 the
 union
 over
 wages,
 hours,
 and
 other
 terms
 of
 to
 present
 to
 the
 other
 the
 best
 possible
 case
 for
 the

employment
 satisfaction
 of
 its
 particular
 demands
 
 process
 of

o Execution
of
a
written
contract
embodying
the
terms
agreed
 negotiation
that
creates
at
least
the
possibility
that
each
side

upon
 may
 move
 closer
 to
 the
 attainment
 of
 its
 own
 separate

o Negotiation
 of
 any
 question
 arising
 as
 to
 the
 interpretation
 objectives
while
contributing
to
the
attainment
of
those
that

or
application
of
the
contract
 are
shared
with
the
other
side

o Negotiation
 over
 the
 terms
 of
 a
 new
 contract
 or
 proposed
 o Elicits
 the
 consent
 of
 those
 who
 will
 have
 to
 live
 under
 the

modifications,
when
an
existing
agreement
is
validly
opened
 terms
 of
 element
 in
 employment,
 and
 consent
 assures

for
negotiations
 stability
 because
 parties
 who
 have
 accepted
 an
 agreement

• Continuous
 processes;
 does
 not
 end
 with
 the
 execution
 of
 an
 will
live
by
its
terms

agreement
–

 o Potential
 usefulness
 for
 solving
 problems
 
 integrative
 or

o Negotiation
of
contracts
–
the
legislative
phase
of
the
union‐ creative
process
from
which
both
parties
can
derive
benefit

employer
relationship
 2. Emergence
of
collective
bargaining

o Administration
of
contracts
–
executive
phase
 • Originator

o Interpretation
or
application
of
contracts
–
judicial
phase
 o Coining
 the
 term
 collective
 bargaining
 
 Beatrice
 Webb,

• CBA
defined
 “The
Cooperative
Movement
in
Great
Britain”

o It
is
a
contract
executed
upon
request
of
either
the
employer
 • Adoption
in
the
Philippines

or
the
exclusive
bargaining
representative
of
the
employees
 o CA
 213
 –
 An
 Act
 to
 Define
 and
 Regulate
 Legitimate
 Labor

incorporating
the
agreement
reached
after
negotiations
with
 Organization

respect
 to
 wages,
 hours
 of
 work
 and
 all
 other
 terms
 and
 o But
 it
 is
 the
 Industrial
 Peace
 Act
 that
 defined
 collective

conditions
of
employment,
including
proposals
for
adjusting
 bargaining
and
outlined
its
procedure

any
grievances
or
questions
under
such
agreement
  Modeled
 after
 the
 Taft‐Hartley
 Act
 or
 the
 Labor‐
o It
is
more
than
a
contract;
it
is
a
generalized
code
to
govern
a
 Management
Relations
Act
of
1947
of
the
US

myriad
of
cases
which
the
draftsmen
can’t
wholly
anticipate
  Popularly
called
the
magna
carta
of
labor

o Covers
 whole
 employment
 relationship
 and
 prescribes
 the
 o Administrative
 Code
 of
 1987
 mandates
 the
 DOLE
 to
 uphold

rights
and
duties
of
the
parties
 the
 right
 of
 workers
 and
 employers
 to
 organize
 and
 to

o A
 system
 of
 industrial
 self‐government
 with
 the
 grievance
 promote
 free
 collective
 bargaining
 as
 the
 foundation
 fo
 the

machinery
at
the
heart
of
the
system
 labor
relations
system

• Rationale
 3. Parties
to
collective
bargaining

o The
 rules
 which
 most
 vitally
 affect
 workers
 in
 their
 daily
 • Duty
to
bargain
collectively
arises
ONLY
between
the
employer
and
its

lives
 remain
 to
 be
 made
 for
 each
 industrial
 establishment
 employees.
 Where
 neither
 party
 is
 an
 employer
 nor
 an
 employee
 of

either
 by
 the
 employer’s
 fiat
 or
 by
 collective
 agreements
 the
other,
no
such
duty
would
exist

negotiated
and
administered
jointly
by
the
employer
and
its
 • Both
parties
negotiate
through
their
representatives

employees
as
a
group
 • The
employees’
bargaining
representative
refers
to
a
legitimate
labor

o With
 labor
 unions,
 workers
 have
 secured
 a
 more
 effective
 organization
or
any
officer
or
agent
of
such
organization,
whether
or

voice
 in
 arranging
 the
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 their
 not
employed
by
the
employer
(Article
212[j])

employment
 and
 have
 been
 enabled
 to
 participate
 o Under
this
definition,
officer
or
agent
may
be
a
total
stranger

increasingly
in
the
government
of
their
industrial
work
 to
the
employer,
may
be
a
counsel
or
president
of
a
mother

• Strength
of
the
collective
bargaining
method
 union

o Collective
 bargaining
 represents
 a
 diminution
 of
 absolute
 • BUT
under
the
implementing
rules,
as
amended,
exclusive
bargaining

management
 power
 in
 fields
 which
 employers
 in
 the
 past
 representative
is
any
legitimate
labor
organization
duly
recognized
or

considered
to
be
exclusively
within
their
own
domain
 certified
 as
 the
 sole
 and
 exclusive
 bargaining
 agent
 of
 all
 the

o Collective
 bargaining
 introduces
 democratic
 practices
 into
 employees
in
a
bargaining
unit

paid
 employment,
 virtually
 all
 forms
 of
 which
 used
 to
 be
 o Bargaining
representative
of
the
employees
is
an
entity
–
the

organized
along
authoritarian
lines
 union
–
not
the
officers
of
the
union

o Provides
 an
 opportunity
 for
 the
 exchange
 of
 information
 4. Jurisdictional
preconditions
of
collective
bargaining

tending
to
enhance
the
understanding
of
the
parties
for
each
 • The
 employer
 is
 not
 under
 any
 legal
 duty
 to
 initiate
 contract

other
 problems
 and
 objectives,
 both
 where
 they
 differ
 and
 negotiation

where
they
are
identical

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 67

 • Mechanics
 of
 collective
 bargaining
 are
 set
 in
 motion
 only
 when
 the
 • Collective
 bargaining
 may
 take
 place
 at
 the
 national,
 industry
 or

following
jurisdictional
preconditions
are
present
–
 enterprise
level

o Possession
 of
 the
 status
 of
 majority
 representation
 of
 the
 • PHL

enterprise‐level
or
decentralized
bargaining

employees’
 representative
 in
 accordance
 with
 any
 of
 the
 • Rationale
of
multi­employer
bargaining

means
 of
 selection
 or
 designated
 provided
 for
 by
 the
 Labor
 o When
 a
 number
 of
 employer
 join
 forces
 for
 purposes
 of

Code
 collective
 bargaining,
 the
 unit
 structure
 is
 described
 as
 a

o Proof
of
majority
representation
 multi‐employer
bargaining
unit

o A
demand
to
bargain
under
Article
250(a)
 o Structure
 may
 consist
 of
 an
 association
 representing

• Employer’s
duty
to
recognize
and
bargain
collectively
with
a
union
as
 employers,
or
even
a
whole
industry,
or
it
may
be
composed

the
 collective
 bargaining
 representative
 of
 his
 employees
 does
 not
 of
only
a
few
employers
who
bargain
as
a
group,
or
through

arise
until
after
the
union
requests
the
employer
to
bargain
 an
association

• Employer
 has
 the
 right
 to
 demand
 of
 the
 asserted
 bargaining
 agent
 o Some
 of
 these
 arrangements
 may
 embrace
 the
 whole

proof
 of
 its
 representation
 of
 its
 employees.
 Having
 the
 right
 to
 industry
 within
 a
 particular
 geographical
 area,
 others
 may

demonstration
of
this
fact,
it
is
not
an
ULP
for
an
employer
to
refuse
to
 cover
only
a
portion
of
such
an
industry

negotiate
 until
 the
 asserted
 bargaining
 agent
 has
 presented
 o Competitive
 pressures
 are
 the
 dominant
 forces
 that

reasonable
proof
of
majority
representation
 encourage
 both
 unions
 and
 employers
 to
 enter
 into
 multi‐
• Bargaining
with
minority
union,
ULP
 employer
or
industry‐wide
bargaining
relationships


o Where
 a
 majority
 representative
 has
 been
 designated,
 it
 is
 o Multi‐employer
 unit
 is
 particularly
 advantageous
 to
 both

an
ULP
for
the
employer
as
a
refusal
of
collective
bargaining,
 sides
in
industries
composed
of
many
small,
financially
weak

to
deal
and
negotiate
with
the
minority
representative
to
the
 employers

exclusion
 of
 the
 majority
 representative;
 even
 though
 no
 o Multi‐employer
 bargaining
 provides
 both
 management
 and

majority
representative
has
been
designated
 unions
 with
 significant
 cost
 savings
 in
 negotiation
 of
 labor

o Lakas
ng
Manggagawang
Makabayan
v.
Marcelo
Enterprises
 agreements.
 It
 is
 cheaper
 to
 negotiate
 one
 master
 multi‐
 On
 the
 union
 side,
 where
 there
 exists
 a
 legitimate
 employer
 agreement
 than
 a
 number
 of
 single‐employer

issue
as
to
which
of
several
unions
is
the
legitimate
 agreements

representative
of
employees,
it
is
ULP
for
one
of
the
 o However,
multi‐employer
bargaining
may
not
only
overlook

unions
 to
 stage
 a
 strike
 and
 demand
 that
 the
 the
 needs
 of
 various
 employee
 groups,
 but
 also
 ignore

employer
sit
down
with
it
for
collective
bargaining
 particular
requirements
of
individual
employers

5. When
bargaining
should
begin
 o To
 arrive
 at
 multi‐employer
 agreements
 is
 much
 more

• If
 the
 3
 jurisdictional
 preconditions
 are
 present,
 the
 collective
 difficult
 than
 to
 arrive
 at
 single‐employer
 contracts.
 The

bargaining
 should
 begin
 within
 the
 12
 months
 following
 the
 expanded
size
of
the
unit
composed
of
many
heterogeneous

determination
and
certification
of
the
employees’
exclusive
bargaining
 groups
 leads
 to
 intensive
 intraorganizational
 bargaining

representative

certification
year
 both
on
the
union’s
and
on
the
employer’s
side

• Absent
 unusual
 circumstances,
 an
 employer
 commits
 an
 ULP
 by
 • Multi­employer
bargaining
procedure

refusing
to
bargain
with
the
union
during
its
certification
year
 o A
 legitimate
 labor
 union(s)
 and
 employers
 may
 agree
 in

o Rule
 is
 the
 same
 whether
 the
 union
 lost
 its
 majority
 as
 a
 writing
 to
 come
 together
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 collective

result
 of
 the
 employer’s
 ULP
 or
 through
 no
 fault
 of
 the
 bargaining,
provided

employer
  Only
 legitimate
 labor
 unions
 who
 are
 incumbent

• Following
 the
 expiration
 of
 the
 year
 period,
 there
 continues
 to
 be
 a
 exclusive
 bargaining
 agents
 may
 participate
 and

presumption
in
favor
of
a
union
majority,
though
the
presumption
is
 negotiate
in
multi‐employer
bargaining;

rebuttable
  Only
 employers
 with
 counterpart
 legitimate
 labor

6. Single
enterprise
bargaining
procedure
broadly
described
 unions
 who
 are
 incumbent
 bargaining
 agents
 may

• Law
gives
primacy
to
free
collective
bargaining
and
allows
the
parties
 participate
 and
 negotiate
 in
 multi‐employer

to
devise
their
bargaining
rules
 bargaining;
and

o This
is
why
the
bargaining
procedure
is
governed
primarily
  Only
 those
 legitimate
 labor
 unions
 who
 pertain
 to

by
agreement
of
the
parties
 employer
 units
 who
 consent
 to
 multi‐employer

• Parties
meet
to
set
the
ground
rules
before
tackling
CBA
proposals
 bargaining
 may
 participate
 in
 multi‐employer

• In
 the
 presence
 of
 validly
 agreed
 procedure,
 the
 Labor
 Code
 bargaining

procedure
applies
suppletorily
only
 o Multi‐employer
 bargaining
 may
 be
 initiated
 by
 the
 labor

7. Multi­employer
bargaining
 unions
or
by
the
employers.


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 68

  Legitimate
 labor
 unions
 who
 desire
 to
 negotiate
 who
 consent
 to
 participate
 in
 multi‐employer

with
 their
 employers
 collectively
 shall
 execute
 a
 bargaining

written
 agreement
 among
 themselves,
 which
 shall
  During
 the
 course
 of
 negotiations,
 consenting

contain
the
following:
 employers
 and
 the
 corresponding
 legitimate
 labor

 The
names
of
the
labor
unions
who
desire
 unions
shall
discuss
and
agree
on
the
following:

to
avail
of
multi‐employer
bargaining;

  The
 manner
 by
 which
 negotiations
 shall

 Each
labor
union
in
the
employer
unit;

 proceed;


 The
fact
that
each
of
the
labor
unions
are
  The
 scope
 and
 coverage
 of
 the

the
 incumbent
 exclusive
 bargaining
 negotiations
and
the
agreement;
and


agents
 for
 their
 respective
 employer
  Where
 appropriate,
 the
 effect
 of
 the

units;

 negotiations
 on
 current
 agreements
 or

 The
 duration
 of
 the
 collective
 bargaining
 conditions
 of
 employment
 among
 the

agreements,
 if
 any,
 entered
 into
 by
 each
 parties.

labor
 union
 with
 their
 respective
 o Two
 (2)
 signed
 copies
 of
 collective
 bargaining
 agreement

employers.
 [Legitimate
 labor
 unions
 who
 reached
 through
 multi‐employer
 bargaining
 shall
 be
 posted

are
 members
 of
 the
 same
 registered
 for
 at
 least
 five
 (
 5)
 days
 in
 two
 conspicuous
 areas
 in
 each

federation,
national,
or
industry
union
are
 workplace
 of
 the
 employer
 units
 concerned.
 Said
 collective

exempt
 from
 execution
 of
 this
 written
 bargaining
 agreement
 shall
 affect
 only
 those
 employees
 in

agreement.]

 the
bargaining
units
who
have
ratified
it.
The
same
collective

 The
 legitimate
 labor
 unions
 who
 desire
 to
 bargain
 bargaining
 agreement
 shall
 be
 registered
 with
 the

with
multi‐employers
shall
send
a
written
notice
to
 Department
in
accordance
with
the
following
Rule.


this
effect
to
each
employer
concerned.
The
written
 • Unfavorable
to
consumers?

agreement
 stated
 in
 the
 preceding
 paragraph,
 or
 o One
of
the
consequences
of
multi‐employer
bargaining
is
the

the
 certificates
 of
 registration
 of
 the
 federation,
 uniformity
 of
 contract
 terms
 that
 accompany
 such

national,
 or
 industry
 union,
 shall
 accompany
 said
 frameworks.


notice.
 Employers
 who
 agree
 to
 group
 themselves
 o There
 is
 opposition
 to
 such
 structures
 on
 the
 grounds
 that

or
 use
 their
 existing
 associations
 to
 engage
 in
 such
standardization
may
be
detrimental
to
public
interest

multiemployer
 bargaining
 shall
 send
 a
 written
 o Some
 claim
 that
 it
 could
 strengthen
 monopolistic
 forces
 in

notice
to
each
of
their
counterpart
legitimate
labor
 the
 economy
 and
 lessen
 competition
 
 lower
 levels
 of

unions
 indicating
 their
 desire
 to
 engage
 in
 multi‐ output
and
higher
prices,
easier
to
pass
on
to
the
consumer

employer
bargaining.
Said
notice
shall
indicate
the
 • Optional

following:
 o Multi‐employer
 bargaining
 is
 purely
 optional
 for
 employers

 The
 names
 of
 the
 employers
 who
 desire
 and
unions

to
avail
of
multi‐employer
bargaining;


 Their
 corresponding
 legitimate
 labor
 Article
252.
Meaning
of
duty
to
bargain
collectively.

organizations;


 The
 fact
 that
 each
 corresponding
 Article
253.
Duty
to
bargain
collectively
when
there
exists
a
CBA.

legitimate
 union
 is
 any
 incumbent

exclusive
bargaining
agent;

 1. Duty
to
bargain
defined

 The
 duration
 of
 the
 current
 collective
 • Two
situations
when
the
duty
to
bargain
exists
–

bargaining
agreement,
if
any,
entered
into
 o Where
there
is
yet
no
CBA

by
 each
 employer
 with
 the
 counterpart
  Mutual
 obligation
 of
 the
 employer
 and
 the

legitimate
labor
union.
 employees’
majority
union
to
meet
and
convene

 Each
 employer
 or
 concerned
 labor
 union
 shall
  Purposes
of
the
meeting
and
convening
are
–

express
 its
 willingness
 or
 refusal
 to
 participate
 in
  To
negotiate
an
agreement
on
the
subject

multi‐employer
bargaining
in
writing,
addressed
to
 of
(a)
wages,
(b)
hours
of
work,
(c)
other

its
 corresponding
 exclusive
 bargaining
 agent
 or
 terms
and
conditions
of
employment

employer.
 Negotiations
 may
 commence
 only
 with
  To
 execute
 a
 contract
 incorporating
 such

regard
 to
 respective
 employers
 and
 labor
 unions
 agreement
if
requested
by
either
party


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 69

  Kind
of
compliance
required
is
prompt,
expeditious
 bargaining,
 he
 certainly
 should
 not
 be
 allowed
 to
 evade

and
in
good
faith
 responsibility
if
he
indirectly
causes
that
discharge
by
selling

 Limitations
 or
 reservations
 of
 the
 duty
 are
 that
 it
 to
 a
 company
 that
 he
 knows
 is
 unwilling
 to
 accept
 his

does
not
compel
any
party
to
agree
to
a
proposal
or
 employees

to
make
a
concession
 o Basic
rule
is
that
if
the
transfer
of
assets
and
employees
from

o Where
a
CBA
exists
 one
 employer
 to
 another
 leaves
 intact
 the
 identity
 of
 the

 The
duty
to
bargain
means
all
of
the
above,
and
the
 employing
enterprise,
the
transferor’s
duty
to
recognize
and

obligation
 not
 to
 terminate
 or
 modify
 the
 CBA
 bargain
 with
 an
 incumbent
 union
 devolves
 upon
 the

during
its
lifetime
 transferee
as
“successor
employer”

 But
 60
 days
 before
 the
 CBA
 expires,
 either
 party
 o A
 mere
 change
 in
 ownership
 of
 a
 business
 is
 insufficient
 to

may
 notify
 the
 other
 in
 writing
 that
 it
 desires
 to
 alter
a
union’s
status
as
bargaining
representative

terminate
or
modify
the
agreement.

 • Successor
employer:
continuity
and
identity

 During
 the
 60
 day
 period
 and
 until
 a
 new
 o In
 making
 the
 determination
 as
 to
 whether
 an
 employer
 is

agreement
is
reached,
the
CBA
remains
in
full
force
 successor,
the
NLRB
looks
to
the
totality
of
circumstances
to

and
 effect;
 the
 parties
 are
 duty‐bound
 to
 keep
 the
 determine
 whether
 there
 has
 been
 a
 substantial
 and

status
 quo.
 The
 law
 therefore
 provides
 for
 material
alteration
in
the
employing
enterprise

automatic
renewal
or
extension
of
the
CBA
  NLRB
 will
 consider
 whether
 there
 has
 been
 a

 The
 60
 day
 period
 does
 not
 always
 coincide
 with
 substantial
 continuity
 of
 the
 same
 operations;
 the

the
 freedom
 period.
 60
 day
 period
 refers
 to
 new
 employer
 uses
 the
 same
 plant;
 same

submission
 of
 proposal
 to
 renegotiate
 the
 workforce;
 same
 job
 exists
 under
 same
 working

nonrepresentational
provisions
of
the
CBA
 conditions

• Four
forms
of
ULP
in
bargaining
 o If
 there
 is
 a
 substantial
 and
 material
 alteration
 in
 the

o Failure
or
refusal
to
meet
and
convene
 employing
 enterprise,
 the
 new
 employer
 need
 not
 bargain

o Evading
the
mandatory
subjects
of
bargaining
 with
the
incumbent
union

o Bad
 faith
 in
 bargaining,
 including
 failure
 or
 refusal
 to
 o The
 rule
 is
 different
 where
 the
 buyer
 makes
 substantial

execute
the
collective
agreement,
if
requested
 nondiscriminatory
 personnel
 changes
 and
 changes
 in
 the

o Gross
violation
of
the
CBA
 operation
structure
of
the
business.
In
such
a
case,
he
is
not
a

2. First
ULP
in
bargaining:
failure
or
refusal
to
meet
and
convene
 successor
employer
and
need
not
recognize
or
bargain
with

• To
bargain
in
good
faith,
an
employer
must
not
only
meet
and
confer
 the
incumbent
union

with
 the
 union
 which
 represents
 his
 employees,
 but
 also
 must
 • Conversion
to
independent
franchise
or
operation

recognize
the
union
for
the
purpose
of
collective
bargaining
 o A
 decision
 to
 withdraw
 capital
 from
 a
 company‐operated

• Employer
 must
 recognize
 the
 union
 as
 the
 bargaining
 representative
 facility
 and
 relinquish
 the
 operating
 control
 to
 an

of
 all
 the
 employees
 in
 the
 appropriate
 bargaining
 unit,
 even
 if
 they
 independent
 dealership
 lies
 very
 much
 at
 the
 core
 of

are
not
all
members
of
the
union
 entrepreneurial
 control,
 and
 hence
 is
 not
 a
 mandatory

• Duty
 to
 bargain
 extends
 beyond
 the
 period
 of
 contract
 negotiations,
 subject
of
bargaining

and
 applies
 to
 labor‐management
 relations
 during
 the
 term
 of
 the
 • Do
economic
exigencies
justify
refusal
to
bargain?

agreement
 o An
employer
has
been
held
not
guilty
of
a
refusal
to
bargain

• Unresolved
petition
for
union
cancellation
 by
 adamantly
 rejecting
 the
 union’s
 economic
 demands

o Capitol
Medical
Center
v.
Trajano
 where
he
is
operating
at
a
loss,
on
a
low
profit
margin,
or
in
a

 Employer
 maintains
 that
 its
 petition
 for
 depressed
 industry,
 AS
 LONG
 AS
 HE
 CONTINUES
 TO

cancellation
of
the
registration
of
respondent
union
 NEGOTIATE

which
 has
 been
 certified
 as
 the
 bargaining
 o Financial
 hardship
 constitutes
 no
 excuse
 for
 refusing
 to

representative
 of
 the
 employees,
 involves
 a
 bargain
collectively

prejudicial
 question
 that
 should
 first
 be
 settled
 • Acts
not
deemed
refusal
to
bargain

before
parties
could
bargain
 o Adoption
 of
 an
 adamant
 bargaining
 position
 in
 good
 faith,

 Petition
 for
 cancellation
 of
 union
 registration
 does
 particularly
where
the
company
is
operating
at
a
loss

not
preclude
collective
bargaining.

 o Refusal
to
bargain
over
demands
for
commission
of
ULP

• Selling
the
company
 o Refusal
to
bargain
during
period
of
illegal
strike

o If
an
employee
is
guilty
of
ULP
when
he
directly
discharged

his
 employees
 to
 forestall
 a
 demand
 for
 collective

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 70

  If
 union
 engages
 in
 illegal
 strike,
 employer
 has
 no
 bargaining.
 NLRC
 held
 company
 guilty
 of

obligation
 to
 bargain
 until
 he
 is
 notified
 that
 the
 unjustified
refusal
to
bargain

illegal
strike
has
been
terminated
  The
 union
 complied
 with
 the
 jurisdictional

o There
is
no
request
for
bargaining
 preconditions
 of
 collective
 bargaining.
 From
 the

o The
union
seeks
recognition
for
an
inappropriately
large
unit
 overall
 conduct
 of
 the
 company,
 it
 is
 indubitably

o The
 union
 seeks
 to
 represent
 some
 persons
 who
 are
 shown
 that
 it
 disregarded
 its
 obligation
 to
 bargain

excluded
 in
good
fait.
It
is
not
obligatory
upon
either
side
of
a

o The
rank‐and‐file
unit
includes
supervisors
or
inappropriate
 labor
controversy
to
precipitately
accept
or
agree
to

otherwise
 the
 proposals
 of
 the
 other.
 But
 an
 erring
 party

o Demand
for
recognition
and
bargaining
is
made
within
they
 should
 not
 be
 tolerated
 and
 allowed
 with
 impunity

ear
 following
 a
 certification
 election
 in
 which
 the
 clear
 to
 resort
 to
 schemes
 feigning
 negotiations
 by
 going

choice
 was
 no
 union
 and
 no
 ad
 interim
 significant
 change
 through
empty
gestures

has
taken
place
in
the
unit
 • Repetition
in
Divine
Word
University

o The
union
makes
unlawful
bargaining
demands
 o The
SC
overruled
the
University’s
contention
that
the
union’s

• Alleged
 interference
 in
 the
 selection
 of
 the
 union’s
 negotiating
 proposals
 may
 not
 be
 unilaterally
 imposed
 on
 it
 on
 the

panel
 ground
that
a
CBA
is
a
contract
wherein
the
consent
of
both

o Standard
 Chartered
 Bank
 Employees
 Union
 v.
 Hon
 Nieves
 parties
is
indispensable

Confesor
 3. Second
ULP
in
bargaining:
evading
the
mandatory
subjects

 Union
claims
that
employer
committed
ULP
when
it
 • It
is
the
obligation
of
the
employer
and
the
employees’
representative

suggested
 that
 the
 president
 of
 the
 federation
 be
 to
 bargain
 with
 each
 other
 with
 respect
 to
 wages,
 hours,
 and
 other

excluded
from
the
union’s
negotiating
panel
 terms.
They
are
statutory
or
mandatory
proposals

 SC
 disagrees.
 If
 an
 employer
 interferes
 in
 the
 • An
employer’s
refusal
to
negotiate
a
mandatory
subject
of
bargaining

selection
 of
 union
 negotiators
 or
 coerces
 the
 Union
 is
an
ULP
although
the
employer
has
every
desire
to
reach
agreement

to
 exclude
 from
 its
 panel
 of
 negotiators
 a
 and
earnestly
and
in
all
good
faith
bargains
to
that
end

representative,
 and
 if
 it
 can
 be
 inferred
 that
 the
 • An
employer’s
duty
to
bargain
is
limited
to
the
mandatory
bargaining

employer
 adopted
 the
 said
 act
 to
 yield
 adverse
 subjects;
as
to
other
matters,
he
is
free
to
bargain
or
not
to
bargain

effects
 on
 the
 free
 exercise
 of
 the
 right
 to
 self­ • A
mere
remote,
direct
or
incidental
impact
is
insufficient
to
render
a

organization
or
on
the
right
to
collective
bargaining
 subject
a
mandatory
subject
of
bargaining;
in
order
for
a
matter
to
be

of
the
employees,
ULP
is
committed.
In
order
to
show
 subject
 to
 mandatory
 collective
 bargaining,
 it
 must
 materially
 or

that
 the
 employer
 committed
 ULP
 under
 the
 Labor
 significantly
affect
the
terms
or
conditions
of
employment

Code,
substantial
evidence
is
required
to
support
the
 • Conditions
 of
 employment
 include
 not
 only
 what
 an
 employer
 has

claim.
 already
granted,
but
also
what
it
has
announced
it
intends
to
grant

 Here,
 the
 circumstances
 that
 occurred
 during
 the
 • Whether
 the
 agreement
 concerns
 a
 mandatory
 subject
 of
 bargaining

negotiating
do
not
show
that
the
suggestion
made
is
 depends
not
on
its
form,
but
on
its
practical
effect

an
 anti­union
 conduct
 on
 the
 part
 of
 the
 employer.
 • Wages
and
employment
conditions

The
 suggestion
 was
 made
 previous
 to
 the
 o Wages
 under
 29
 USCS
 Sec.
 158(d)
 includes
 not
 only

commencement
 of
 the
 negotiation
 and
 compensation
but
also
other
emoluments
of
value
furnished

simultaneously
with
the
union
president’s
suggestion
 by
the
employer
to
his
employees

that
 the
 bank
 lawyers
 be
 excluded.
 If
 at
 all,
 the
 o Wages
 under
 our
 Labor
 Code
 refers
 to
 remuneration
 or

suggestion
should
be
construed
as
part
of
the
normal
 earnings,
however
designated,
capable
of
being
expressed
in

relations
and
innocent
communication
 terms
of
money,
etc.

• Non­reply
to
proposal;
CBA
imposed
on
employer
 o Mandatory
subjects
of
bargaining
are
–

o Kiok
Loy
v.
NLRC
and
Kilusan
  Effect
of
automation
on
a
bargaining
unit

 The
 union
 was
 certified
 as
 sole
 and
 exclusive
  Pension
 and
 insurance
 benefits
 for
 active

bargaining
 agent
 of
 employees
 of
 Sweden
 Ice
 employees
(but
NOT
benefits
accorded
retirees)

Cream
 (Kiok
 Loy).
 Union
 furnished
 company
 with
  Wages
 and
 other
 types
 of
 compensation,
 including

copies
 of
 its
 proposed
 CBA
 and
 requested
 the
 merit
increases

company
 for
 its
 counterproposals.
 Company
 did
  Working
 hours
 and
 working
 days,
 including
 work

not
reply.
Union
filed
notice
of
strike
on
the
ground
 shifts

of
 unresolved
 economic
 issues
 in
 collective
  Vacations
and
holidays

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 71

  Bonuses
 • Arbitration,
strike­vote
or
no­strike
clauses

 Seniority
 o An
 employer
 may
 lawfully
 bargain
 to
 an
 impasse
 over
 his

 Transfer
 proposal
that
the
collective
bargaining
agreement
include
an

 Lay‐offs
 arbitration
 clause
 or
 a
 no‐strike
 clause
 which
 prohibits
 the

 Employee
workloads
 employees
from
striking
during
the
life
of
the
agreement

 Work
rules
and
regulations
 • No­lockout
clause;
clause
fixing
contractual
term

 Rent
of
company
houses
 o An
 employer’s
 statutory
 duty
 to
 bargain
 requires
 him
 to

 Union
security
arrangements
 negotiate
 over
 the
 union’s
 proposal
 that
 their
 agreement

o Note
 that
 the
 law
 specifies
 “terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 include
a
clause
binding
him
not
to
lock
out
the
employees

employment”
 not
 “working
 conditions”
 since
 “terms
 and
 o An
 employer’s
 refusal
 to
 bargain
 over
 the
 duration
 of
 the

conditions”
is
clearly
much
more
inclusive
 contract
to
be
entered
into
is
also
a
ULP

• Wage
Factors;
“Solomonic”
Approach
 o But
 an
 employer’s
 obligation
 to
 enter
 into
 a
 CBA
 does
 not

o Court
notes
the
“middle
ground”
approach
employed
by
the
 require
 that
 the
 employer
 enter
 into
 an
 unalterable

Secretary
 in
 this
 case
 which
 the
 Court
 does
 not
 necessarily
 obligation
for
an
extended
period
of
time

find
 to
 be
 the
 best
 method
 of
 resolving
 a
 wage
 dispute.
 • Signing
bonus

Merely
 finding
 the
 midway
 point
 between
 the
 demands
 of
 o Is
a
grant
motivated
by
the
goodwill
created
when
a
CBA
is

the
company
and
the
union,
and
“splitting
the
difference”
is
a
 successfully
 negotiated
 and
 signed
 between
 the
 employer

simplistic
 solution
 that
 fails
 to
 recognize
 that
 parties
 may
 and
the
union

already
be
at
the
limits
of
the
wage
levels
they
can
afford.
It
 o In
contractual
terms,
a
signing
bonus
is
justified
by
and
is
the

may
 lead
 to
 the
 danger
 too
 that
 neither
 of
 the
 parties
 will
 consideration
 paid
 for
 the
 goodwill
 that
 existed
 in
 the

engage
 in
 principled
 bargaining;
 the
 company
 may
 keep
 its
 negotiations
that
culminated
in
the
singing
of
a
CBA.
Without

position
 artificially
 low
 while
 the
 union
 presents
 an
 the
 goodwill,
 the
 payment
 of
 a
 signing
 bonus
 can’t
 be

artificially
 high
 position,
 on
 the
 fear
 that
 a
 “Solomonic”
 justified
 and
 any
 order
 for
 such
 payment
 constitutes
 grave

solution
 cannot
 be
 avoided.
 Thus,
 rather
 than
 encourage
 abuse
of
discretion

agreement,
a
“middle
ground
approach”
instead
promotes
a
 o In
 short,
 if
 the
 reason
 behind
 a
 signing
 bonus
 is
 absent,
 no

“play
 safe”
 attitude
 that
 leads
 to
 more
 deadlocks
 than
 to
 signing
bonus
need
be
given

successfully
negotiated
CBAs
 o Besides,
 a
 signing
 bonus
 is
 not
 a
 benefit
 which
 may
 be

• Workloads
and
work
rules
 demanded
 under
 the
 law;
 it
 may
 not
 be
 demanded
 as
 a

o Employee
workloads
are
a
mandatory
subject
of
bargaining
 matter
of
right

o Employer
 rules
 concerning
 coffee
 breaks,
 lunch
 periods,
 • Voluntary
benefits

smoking,
employee
discipline,
and
dress
are
also
mandatory
 o Voluntary
if
granted
by
the
employer
although
not
required

subjects
 of
 bargaining,
 as
 are
 plant
 safety
 rules
 and
 general
 by
law

regulations
  Vacation
leave

o Company
 rules
 relating
 to
 safety
 and
 work
 practices
 come
  Bonus

within
 the
 meaning
 of
 the
 phrase
 “other
 terms
 and
  14th
month
pay

conditions
 of
 employment”
 and,
 therefore,
 constitute
 a
 o In
negotiating
a
CBA,
may
the
union
demand
that
an
existing

mandatory
subject
of
collective
bargaining
 voluntary
benefit
be
discussed
and
included
in
the
CBA?

• Code
of
conduct
  Not
necessarily.
Not
ULP
if
employer
wants
to
keep

o Form
 part
 of
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 employment,
 that
 are
 it
 under
 management’s
 exclusive
 control.
 But
 the

proper
subjects
of
collective
bargaining
 Court
upheld
the
inclusion
of
the
voluntary
benefit

• Management
prerogatives
clause
 as
a
proper
subject
of
bargaining

o An
 employer
 does
 not
 commit
 an
 ULP
 by
 insisting,
 to
 the
 • No
duty
to
agree
even
on
mandatory
subjects

point
 of
 a
 bargaining
 impasse,
 on
 the
 inclusion
 in
 the
 o Neither
 party
 is
 obligated
 to
 yield
 even
 on
 a
 mandatory

contract
 of
 a
 management
 prerogatives
 clause,
 even
 though
 bargaining
subject

some
of
the
matters
covered
by
the
clause
are
“conditions
of
 o Either
 party
 may
 bargain
 to
 an
 impasse
 as
 long
 as
 he

employment”
which
are
mandatory
subjects
of
bargaining
 bargains
in
good
faith

• Union
discipline
clause
 • Non­mandatory
subjects

o Right
 not
 to
 withdraw
 fines
 is
 an
 internal
 union
 affair,
 a
 o An
employer
can’t
insist,
to
the
point
of
creating
a
bargaining

matter
 involving
 relations
 between
 employees
 and
 their
 impasse,
on
the
inclusion
of
a
provision
outside
the
scope
of

unions,
and
therefore
not
a
mandatory
bargaining
item

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 72

 the
 statutory
 bargaining
 subjects,
 even
 if
 he
 acts
 in
 good
  Contemporaneous
 understanding
 of
 the
 parties
 as

faith
 to
the
state
of
negotiations

o However,
it
has
been
held
that
a
bargaining
impasse
may
be
 o Whether
 the
 subject
 is
 mandatory
 or
 non‐mandatory
 that

reached
 over
 a
 non‐mandatory
 bargaining
 subject
 although
 caused
a
bargaining
deadlock,
the
union
may
fail
a
notice
of

that
 subject
 is
 not
 the
 sole
 cause
 for
 the
 parties’
 failure
 to
 strike
or
the
employer
a
notice
of
lockout

agree.
When
a
subject
under
discussion
is
not
mandatory,
it
 o A
substantial
change
in
the
bargaining
position
of
one
party

may
 be
 discussed
 if
 both
 parties
 agree,
 but
 a
 strike
 or
 is
 necessary
 to
 break
 an
 existing
 impasse
 so
 as
 to
 render

lockout
may
not
be
used
to
compel
negotiation
or
agreement
 unlawful
 the
 other
 party’s
 subsequent
 refusal
 to
 meet
 and

• Bargaining
to
the
point
of
impasse:
not
necessarily
bad
faith
 bargain

o The
adamant
insistence
on
a
bargaining
position
to
the
point
 o No
 valid
 bargaining
 impasse
 can
 be
 said
 to
 occur
 when
 the

where
the
negotiations
reach
an
impasse
does
not
establish
 bargaining
 deadlock
 is
 caused
 by
 the
 failure
 of
 one
 of
 the

bad
faith.

 parties
to
bargain
in
good
faith

o Neither
can
bad
faith
be
inferred
from
a
party’s
insistence
on
 • Duty
to
bargain
when
there
is
deadlock
or
impasse

the
 inclusion
 of
 a
 particular
 substantive
 provision
 unless
 it
 o Deadlock
 does
 not
 mean
 the
 end
 of
 bargaining;
 rather,
 it

concerns
trivial
matters
or
is
obviously
intolerable
 signals
 the
 need
 to
 continue
 the
 bargaining
 with
 the

o Bargaining
to
the
point
of
deadlock
may
or
may
not
amount
 assistance
 of
 a
 third
 party
 as
 a
 conciliator
 or
 arbitrator

to
 bargaining
 in
 bad
 faith
 depending
 on
 whether
 the
 whose
 first
 aim
 is
 to
 get
 the
 parties
 back
 to
 the
 negotiating

insistence
refers
to
a
mandatory
or
a
non‐mandatory
subject
 table
and
help
them
craft
a
win‐win
solution

of
bargaining
 o Although
 negotiations
 reach
 a
 deadlock,
 the
 employer
 must

 Mandatory

may
insist
on
bargaining,
even
to
the
 resume
negotiations
where
changed
conditions
indicate
that

point
 of
 deadlock,
 and
 his
 insistence
 will
 not
 be
 an
agreement
may
be
possible

construed
 as
 bargaining
 in
 bad
 faith
 because
 duty
 o Even
after
reaching
genuine
impasse,
the
employer
commits

to
 bargain
 requires
 meeting
 and
 convening
 on
 an
 ULP
 by
 cancelling
 a
 scheduled
 bargaining
 meeting

terms
and
conditions
of
employment,
but
does
not
 because
the
union
filed
ULP
charges
against
the
employer

require
assent
to
the
other
party’s
proposals
 o BUT
 an
 employer
 can’t
 be
 held
 to
 have
 violated
 the

 Non‐mandatory

may
not
insist
on
bargaining
to
 obligation
 to
 bargain
 collectively
 where
 the
 negotiations

the
 point
 of
 impasse,
 otherwise
 will
 be
 construed
 resulted
 in
 a
 deadlock,
 causing
 the
 employer
 to
 shut
 down

as
 bargaining
 in
 bad
 faith;
 may
 be
 construed
 as
 the
 plant,
 and
 the
 union
 made
 no
 request
 for
 further

evasion
 of
 the
 duty
 to
 bargain
 and
 such
 evasion
 is
 negotiations
 until
 after
 the
 plant
 had
 reopened
 with
 a
 new

ULP
 set
 of
 employees
 operating
 under
 an
 agreement
 with

 Insistence
on
non‐mandatory
subject
as
a
 another
labor
organization

condition
 to
 bargaining
 on
 mandatory
 • Strike
or
lockout
in
case
of
deadlock

subject
 indicates
 absence
 of
 good
 faith
 in
 o The
 law
 (Article
 263)
 recognizes
 bargaining
 deadlock
 as
 a

bargaining
 valid
reason
to
declare
a
strike
or
lockout

• When
is
there
deadlock
or
impasse?
 o At
 this
 point
 of
 the
 bargaining
 scenario,
 strike/lockout
 is

o Bargaining
 impasse
 over
 an
 issue
 exists
 where
 good
 faith
 supposed
to
be
a
method
of
resolving
an
impasse,
a
device
to

bargaining
on
the
part
of
the
parties
has
failed
to
resolve
the
 constrain
 the
 parties
 to
 end
 an
 impasse
 and
 go
 back
 to
 the

issue
 and
 there
 are
 no
 definite
 plans
 for
 further
 efforts
 to
 negotiation
 table.
 While
 its
 meant
 to
 be
 a
 solution,

break
the
deadlock
 strike/lockout
frequently
become
a
problem
in
itself

o Impasse
 presupposes
 a
 reasonable
 effort
 at
 good‐faith
 o Well‐intentioned
bargaining
usually
avoids
a
deadlock
and
if

bargaining
 which,
 despite
 noble
 intentions,
 does
 not
 it
 does
 occur,
 a
 third‐party
 intercession
 may
 become

conclude
in
an
agreement
between
the
parties
 necessary
to
avert
a
strike
or
lockout

o In
the
NLRB’s
view,
whether
a
bargaining
impasse
exists
is
a
 o Manila
Central
Line
Corp
v.
Manila
Central
Line
Free
Workers

matter
of
judgment
dependent
on
such
factors
 Union­NFL

 Bargaining
history
  After
 the
 NCMB
 failed
 to
 resolve
 the
 bargaining

 Parties’
good
faith
in
negotiations
 deadlock
between
the
parties,
union
filed
a
petition

 Length
of
negotiations
 for
 compulsory
 arbitration
 in
 the
 Arbitration

 Importance
 of
 issues
 as
 to
 which
 there
 is
 a
 Branch
of
the
NLRC.
Employer
joined
the
petition

disagreement
  May
 a
 bargaining
 deadlock
 be
 resolved
 through

arbitration
by
a
Labor
Arbiter?

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 73

  Hence,
 it
 ended
 up
 as
 a
 voluntary
 arbitration.
 The
 • When
can
bargaining
in
bad
faith
occur?

essence
of
voluntary
arbitration,
after
all,
is
that
it
is
 o If
 one
 will
 be
 charged
 with
 bargaining
 in
 bad
 faith,
 the

by
 agreement
 of
 the
 parties
 that
 a
 matter
 is
 charge
should
be
raised
while
the
bargaining
is
in
progress.

submitted
for
arbitration.
It
does
not
matter
that
the
 When
 the
 bargaining
 is
 finished
 and
 the
 CBA
 has
 been

person
 chose
 as
 arbitrator
 is
 a
 labor
 arbiter
 who
 is
 executed
voluntarily
by
the
parties,
a
charge
of
bargaining
in

charged
 with
 the
 compulsory
 arbitration
 of
 certain
 bad
faith
is
too
late
and
untenable

labor
 cases.
 There
 is
 nothing
 in
 the
 law
 that
 o Samahang
 Manggagawa
 v.
 NLRC:
 With
 the
 execution
 of
 the

prohibits
 these
 labor
 arbiters
 from
 also
 acting
 as
 CBA,
 bad
 faith
 bargaining
 can
 no
 longer
 be
 imputed
 upon

voluntary
arbitrators
as
long
as
the
parties
agree
to
 any
 of
 the
 parties
 thereto.
 All
 provisions
 in
 the
 CBA
 are

have
him
hear
and
deiced
their
dispute
 supposed
 to
 have
 been
 jointly
 and
 voluntarily
 incorporated

4. Third
ULP
in
bargaining:
bad
faith
 therein
 by
 the
 parties.
 The
 CBA
 is
 proof
 enough
 that
 the

• Bargaining
 deadlock
 may
 also
 arise
 because
 of
 lack
 of
 good
 faith
 in
 employer
exerted
reasonable
effort
of
good
faith
bargining

bargaining
 • Instances
 of
 bad
 faith:
 delay
 of,
 or
 imposing
 time
 limit
 on,

• Good
 faith
 bargaining
 demands
 more
 than
 sterile
 and
 repetitive
 negotiations

discussion
of
formalities
precluding
actual
negotiation,
etc.
It
requires
 o An
 unwarranted
 delay
 in
 the
 negotiations
 may
 be
 evidence

a
 sincere
 effort
 to
 reach
 agreement,
 although
 it
 does
 not
 require
 of
bad
faith
on
the
part
of
the
employer

agreement
itself
 o Clearly,
an
employer’s
refusal
to
bargain
with
a
union
is
not

• Duty
to
bargain
does
not
end
with
the
negotiation
of
the
agreement
 in
good
faith,
if
motivated
by
a
desire
to
gain
time
so
as
to
be

• Inviting
 employees
 to
 disregard
 and
 by‐pass
 the
 union
 in
 seeking
 able
to
undermine
the
union

redress
 of
 their
 grievances,
 notwithstanding
 the
 establishment
 of
 a
 o Where
an
employer
refused
to
bind
himself
contractually
as

grievance
procedure
in
the
CBA,
has
been
held
a
violation
of
the
duty
 to
 wage
 rates,
 hours
 of
 work,
 holidays,
 vacations
 and

to
bargain
in
good
faith
 bonuses,
insisting
upon
the
right
to
grant
such
conditions
of

• Employer
 cannot
 be
 guilty
 of
 a
 refusal
 to
 bargain
 if
 the
 union
 is
 not
 employment
 as
 gratuities,
 and
 rejected
 a
 clause
 against

itself
bargaining
in
good
faith
 lockouts,
he
has
demonstrated
his
bad
faith
and
his
refusal
to

• There
 is
 no
 occasion
 to
 consider
 the
 issue
 of
 good
 faith
 if
 a
 party
 bargain.
 The
 employer
 can’t
 insist
 upon
 withdrawing
 these

refuses
even
to
negotiate
in
fact
about
any
of
the
mandatory
subjects
 matters
from
the
sphere
of
collective
bargaining.
Nor
can
he

• Determination
in
good
faith
 insist
 upon
 reserving
 to
 himself
 the
 right
 to
 alter,
 at
 his

o Question
 whether
 a
 party
 has
 met
 his
 statutory
 duty
 to
 discretion,
 existing
 practices
 with
 respect
 to
 these
 matters

bargain
in
good
faith
turns
on
the
facts
of
the
individual
case.
 for
collective
bargaining

There
is
no
per
se
test
of
good
faith
in
bargaining
 o Lack
of
good
faith
is
 indicated
where
the
employer
engages

o Good/bad
 faith
 is
 an
 inference
 to
 be
 drawn
 from
 the
 facts
 in
ULP
while
bargaining
with
the
union;
where
it
engages
in

and
is
largely
a
matter
for
the
NLRB’s
expertise
 dilatory
 tactics
 during
 negotiations;
 or
 where
 it
 institutes
 a

o Nestle
 case:
 union
 charged
 the
 employer
 with
 bargaining
 in
 wage
 cut
 by
 unilateral
 action
 and
 without
 consulting
 the

bad
 faith
 because
 it
 refused
 to
 negotiate
 the
 retirement
 majority
representative

program,
court
did
not
see
the
company’s
refusal
as
bad
faith
 o Employer
commits
ULP
by
failing
to
vest
its
negotiators
with

in
bargaining.
The
court
reiterates
that
there
is
no
per
se
test
 sufficient
 authority
 to
 make
 agreements
 on
 their
 own

of
good
faith
in
bargaining
 initiative,
or
to
accept
tentatively
commitments
which
would

o Finding
 of
 bad
 faith
 must
 be
 based
 entirely
 upon
 a
 have
any
reasonable
likelihood
of
final
acceptance

consideration
of
the
negotiations
as
a
whole
 o Employer’s
 duty
 to
 accept
 in
 good
 faith
 the
 procedure
 of

 An
 employer’s
 entire
 course
 of
 conduct
 or
 the
 collective
 bargaining
 includes
 an
 obligation
 to
 have
 his

totality
 of
 circumstances
 may
 show
 a
 lack
 of
 good
 representatives
 available
 for
 conferences
 with
 the
 union
 at

faith,
 although
 none
 of
 its
 specific
 acts
 amount
 to
 reasonable
times
and
places

the
prescribed
conduct
 o There
 is
 also
 refusal
 to
 bargain
 when
 the
 employer

o A
fair
criterion
of
good
faith
in
collective
bargaining
requires
 conducted
the
negotiations
through
a
succession
of
company

that
the
parties
involved
deal
with
each
other
with
open
and
 officials,
 each
 of
 whom
 in
 turn
 disclaimed
 authority
 to

fair
 mind
 and
 sincerely
 endeavor
 to
 overcome
 obstacles
 or
 conclude
a
CBA

difficulties
 existing
 between
 them
 to
 the
 end
 that
 o Nonetheless,
the
prior
adjudication
of
bad
faith
on
an
earlier

employment
relations
may
be
established
and
obstruction
to
 occasion
 is
 not
 itself
 substantial
 evidence
 of
 present
 bad

the
 free
 flow
 of
 commerce
 prevented.
 Mere
 pretended
 faith

bargaining
will
not
suffice!!

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 74

 o Company’s
 refusal
 to
 make
 counter‐proposal
 to
 the
 union’s
 compel
either
party
to
agree
to
a
proposal
or
require

proposed
CBA
is
an
indication
of
bad
faith
(Kiok
Loy)
 the
making
of
a
concession

o Mere
 filing
 of
 a
 petition
 for
 certification
 election
 does
 not
  Likewise,
 the
 employer
 is
 not
 guilty
 of
 blue­sky

ipso
 facto
 justify
 the
 suspension
 of
 negotiation
 by
 the
 bargaining
or
making
exaggerated
or
unreasonable

employer
 proposals.
 Hence,
 union
 is
 also
 not
 guilty
 of
 ULP

• Bad
faith:
surface
bargaining;
shifting
bargaining
positions;
blue
 because
 the
 employer
 failed
 to
 show
 that
 the

sky
bargaining
 economic
 demands
 made
 by
 the
 union
 were

o Surface
 bargaining,
 a
 sophisticated
 pretense
 in
 the
 form
 of
 exaggerated
or
unreasonable

apparent
 bargaining,
 does
 not
 satisfy
 the
 statutory
 duty
 to
 o Repeated
 shifts
 in
 position
 and
 attitude
 on
 the
 part
 of
 an

bargain
 employer
 whenever
 a
 tentative
 agreement
 is
 reached
 are

 Collective
 bargaining
 is
 not
 simply
 an
 occasion
 for
 evidence
of
a
refusal
to
bargain
collectively
in
good
faith

purely
 formal
 meetings
 between
 management
 and
 o Where
 the
 employer
 completely
 repudiated
 the
 agreement

labor
while
each
maintains
an
attitude
of
“take
it
or
 reached
 by
 its
 negotiators
 at
 the
 bargaining
 table
 and

leave
 it”,
 but
 presupposes
 a
 desire
 to
 reach
 an
 subsequently
 made
 an
 offer
 which
 was
 inferior
 to
 its
 initial

ultimate
 agreement
 to
 enter
 into
 a
 collective
 proposals
 to
 the
 union,
 the
 company
 was
 held
 guilty
 of
 bad

bargaining
contract
 faith
bargaining

 An
 employer’s
 proposals
 which
 could
 not
 be
 • Bad
faith:
inflexible
demands;
strike
amid
negotiation

offered
 with
 any
 reasonable
 expectation
 that
 they
 o Lakas
ng
Manggagawang
Makabayan
v.
Marcelo
Enterprises

would
be
accepted
by
the
union
constitute
surface
  Union
 is
 guilty
 of
 bargaining
 in
 bad
 faith,
 not
 the

bargaining

 employer.
 The
 parties
 had
 a
 total
 of
 5
 conferences

 Surface
 bargaining
 is
 not
 easy
 to
 determine.
 It
 for
collective
bargaining.
It
is
worth
considering
that

hovers
 between
 bargaining
 in
 bad
 faith
 (ULP)
 and
 the
first
strike
was
staged
less
than
a
week
after
the

mere
hard
bargaining
(NOT
ULP)
 4th
 CBA
 conference
 and
 without
 any
 benefit
 of
 any

o Standard
 Chartered
 Bank
 Employees
 Union
 (NUBE)
 v.
 previous
 strike
 notice.
 The
 first
 strike
 was
 thus
 held

Confesor
 while
the
parties
were
in
the
process
of
negotiating.

 The
Union
alleged
that
the
Bank
violated
its
duty
to
 There
 is
 reason
 to
 believe
 that
 the
 first
 strike
 was

bargain
 when
 it
 engaged
 in
 surface
 bargaining
 staged
 only
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 compelling
 the

without
 any
 intent
 of
 reaching
 an
 agreement,
 as
 company
 to
 accede
 to
 the
 inflexible
 demands
 of
 the

evident
 in
 the
 Bank’s
 counter‐proposals.
 Union
 complainant
LAKAS.

claims
 that
 out
 of
 the
 34
 economic
 provisions
  The
 companies’
 refusal
 to
 accede
 to
 the
 demands
 of

presented,
 Bank
 made
 only
 6
 economic
 LAKAS
 appears
 to
 be
 justified
 since
 there
 is
 no

counterproposals
 showing
that
these
companies
were
in
the
same
state

 Surface
 bargaining
 is
 defined
 as
 going
 through
 the
 of
financial
and
economic
affairs

motions
 of
 negotiating
 without
 any
 legal
 intent
 to
 • Bad
faith:
boulwarism;
take­it­or­leave­it
bargaining

reach
an
agreement.
The
determination
of
whether
a
 o NLRB
v.
General
Electric
Co.
United
States
CA­Second
Circuit

party
has
engaged
in
unlawful
surface
bargaining
is
  After
a
strike
which
resulted
in
a
settlement
which

usually
a
difficult
one
because
it
involves,
at
bottom,
 the
 company
 regarded
 as
 extremely
 costly,
 it

a
question
of
the
intent
of
the
party
in
question,
and
 developed
 a
 new
 bargaining
 policy
 referred
 to
 as

usually
 such
 intent
 can
 only
 be
 inferred
 from
 the
 Boulwarism
 (named
 after
 a
 VP
 for
 personnel

totality
of
the
challenged
party’s
conduct
both
at
and
 relations).
 The
 new
 plan
 was
 threefold
 –
 company

away
 from
 the
 bargaining
 table.
 It
 involves
 the
 would
 use
 its
 local
 management
 personnel
 to
 help

question
 of
 whether
 an
 employer’s
 conduct
 determine
the
desires
of
the
workforce
on
the
type

demonstrates
 an
 unwillingness
 to
 bargain
 in
 good
 and
 level
 of
 economic
 benefits;
 these
 were

faith
or
is
merely
hard
bargaining.
 translated
 by
 company
 into
 proposals;
 company

 Here,
 the
 union
 was
 not
 been
 able
 to
 show
 that
 the
 then
 attempted
 to
 “sell”
 its
 proposals
 to
 its

Bank
 had
 done
 acts,
 both
 at
 and
 away
 from
 the
 employees
 and
 the
 general
 public
 through
 a

bargaining
 table.
 Admittedly,
 the
 parties
 were
 not
 publicity
 campaign
 in
 plant
 newspapers,
 bulletins,

able
to
agree
and
reached
a
deadlock.
However,
it
is
 letters,
 TV
 and
 radio
 and
 personal
 contact.

emphasized
 that
 the
 duty
 to
 bargain
 does
 not
 Company
 announced
 in
 negotiations
 that
 it

rejected
 the
 usual
 “horse
 trading”
 approach
 to

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 75

 bargaining,
 with
 each
 side
 eventually
 o An
employer
is
under
a
duty,
upon
request
of
the
bargaining

compromising
 initial
 unreasonable
 positions;
 it
 representative,
to
provide
information
relevant
to
the
issues

advertised
its
initial
proposals
as
“fair”
and
“firm”
 at
the
bargaining
table

 Then,
 the
 Board
 found
 an
 overall
 failure
 of
 good
 o Refusal
 to
 provide
 relevant
 information
 after
 the
 same
 ahs

faith
 bargaining
 in
 GE’s
 conduct.
 The
 Board
 found
 been
 requested
 constitutes
 per
 se
 violation
 of
 the
 duty
 to

that
 GE’s
 stance
 and
 conduct
 were
 designed
 to
 bargain

derogate
the
union
in
the
eyes
of
its
members
and
 o Info
 such
 as
 company’s
 financial
 statements,
 data
 of

the
 public
 at
 large.
 This
 plan
 had
 2
 major
 facets:
 employees
 in
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 such
 as
 names,
 addresses,

first,
a
take‐it‐or‐leave‐it
approach
(firm,
fair
offer)
 and
seniority
standing

to
 negotiations
 in
 general
 which
 emphasized
 both
 o In
order
to
assure
that
financial
statements
submitted
by
the

the
powerlessness
and
uselessness
of
the
Union
to
 employer
 may
 be
 deemed
 to
 fairly
 reflect
 the
 company’s

its
 members,
 and
 second,
 a
 communications
 financial
 condition,
 the
 company
 accountant
 may
 be

program
 that
 pictured
 the
 company
 as
 the
 true
 required
 to
 disclose
 the
 existence
 of
 factors
 that
 would

defender
 of
 the
 employees’
 interests,
 further
 distort
 the
 accuracy
 of
 the
 statements
 as
 well
 as
 their
 net

denigrating
 the
 union,
 and
 sharply
 curbing
 the
 effect
 upon
 the
 financial
 statements.
 Such
 disclosure
 would

company’s
ability
to
change
its
own
position
 not
 require
 the
 employer
 to
 sacrifice
 the
 confidentiality
 of

 The
Boulware
approach
is
that
the
product
or
“firm,
 his
records

fair
 offer”
 must
 be
 marketed
 vigorously
 to
 the
 o Employer’s
 duty
 to
 supply
 the
 bargaining
 representative

“consumers”
or
employees,
to
convince
them
that
the
 with
info
does
not
arise
until
the
union
makes
a
request
or
a

Company,
and
not
the
Union,
is
their
representative.
 demand
that
the
info
be
furnished

The
 command
 of
 the
 Boulware
 approach
 was
 clear:
 o Duty
 to
 furnish
 info
 is
 not
 an
 obligation
 imposed
 on

employees
and
the
general
public
must
be
barraged
 employers
alone;
a
similar
duty
is
owed
by
unions

with
 communications
 that
 emphasized
 the
 5. Fourth
ULP
in
bargaining:
gross
violation
of
the
contract

generosity
 of
 the
 offer,
 and
 restated
 the
 firmness
 of
 • Occurs
when
the
collective
contract
is
already
in
place

GE’s
 position.
 A
 genuine
 desire
 to
 reach
 a
 mutual
 • Implementation
stage
–
at
this
stage,
the
collective
bargaining
process

accommodation
 might,
 on
 the
 other
 hand,
 have
 is
not
yet
over,
and
the
duty
to
bargain
is
still
operative
because
such

called
for
GE
to
wait
Union
comments
before
taking
 duty
further
requires
faithful
adherence
to
the
contractual
provisions

a
stand
from
which
it
would
be
difficult
to
retreat.
 • Violation
of
the
contract
amounts
to
ULP,
if
the
violation
is
gross

• Not
bad
faith
to
propose
modifications
to
the
expiring
CBA
 6. Ratification
by
the
CBU;
mandatory
requirements

o “To
terminate
or
modify”
(Article
253)
 • Agreement
 negotiated
 by
 the
 employees’
 bargaining
 agent
 should
 be

o Modification
 may
 mean
 addition
 to,
 subtraction
 from,
 or
 ratified
 or
 approved
 by
 the
 majority
 of
 all
 the
 workers
 (not
 just

other
 ways
 of
 changing
 the
 contents
 of
 phraseology
 of
 majority
of
the
union)
in
the
bargaining
unit

contents
of
the
expiring
CBA
 • Ratification
and
the
manner
of
doing
it
are
mandatory

o But
 whichever
 way
 it
 is
 proposed
 to
 go,
 the
 proposed
 o Requirement
 to
 post
 the
 CBA
 in
 2
 conspicuous
 places
 for
 5

changes
require
honest
justification
 days

o Since
 the
 modification
 is
 to
 be
 done
 through
 negotiation
 • Invalid
ratification

rather
 than
 by
 management’s
 sole
 decision,
 the
 prohibition
 o Associated
Labor
Union
(ALU)
v.
Ferrer­Calleja

under
 Article
 100
 on
 nondiminution
 of
 benefits
 does
 not
  There
 was
 failure
 to
 post
 the
 CBA,
 with
 the

apply
 petitioner
 claiming
 that
 the
 existence
 of
 the
 illegal

o Note,
 incidentally,
 that
 the
 modification
 or
 renegotiation
 of
 strike
 staged
 by
 SPFL
 had
 become
 impossible
 to

the
 CBA
 is
 covered
 in
 Article
 253.
 The
 renegotiation
 is
 comply
with
the
posting
requirement.

preceded
 by
 a
 60‐day
 notice.
 This
 period
 should
 not
 be
  This
 justification
 is
 unacceptable.
 In
 the
 first
 place,

mistaken
 for
 the
 60‐day
 period
 to
 file
 a
 petition
 for
 the
posting
of
copies
of
the
CBA
is
the
responsibility

certification
election
under
Article
256.
 of
 the
 employer
 which
 can
 easily
 comply
 with
 the

• Giving
of
information
 requirement
 through
 a
 mere
 mechanical
 act.
 The

o Part
 of
 good
 faith
 bargaining,
 and
 a
 method
 to
 expedite
 the
 purpose
of
the
requirement
is
precisely
to
inform
the

process,
 is
 supplying
 information
 to
 the
 other
 party,
 as
 employees
 in
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 of
 the
 contents
 of

required
by
law
 said
 agreements
 so
 that
 they
 intelligently
 decide

whether
to
accept
the
same
or
not.

 Besides
181/281
who
ratified
deny
doing
so

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 76

 • When
ratification
not
needed
 discussion
 of
 provisions
 prior
 to
 a
 signing
 are
 merely
 preliminary

o Not
needed
when
the
CBA
is
a
product
of
an
arbitral
award
 expressions
 not
 constituting
 a
 contract
 and
 that
 the
 parties
 do
 not

by
 appropriate
 government
 authority
 or
 by
 a
 voluntary
 intend
the
agreement
to
be
operative
before
the
execution
of
writing

arbitrator.
 The
 arbitral
 award
 may
 result
 from
 voluntary
 • Unwritten
or
unsigned
agreement

arbitration
 under
 Article
 262
 or
 from
 the
 secretary’s
 o CBA
 is
 valid
 though
 not
 reduced
 to
 writing
 or
 signed,
 if

assumption
 of
 jurisdiction
 or
 certification
 of
 the
 dispute
 to
 neither
party
requests
a
written
instrument

the
NLRC,
under
Article
263
(g)
 o Even
if
it
was
originally
contemplated
that
signature
of
both

 To
 require
 ratification
 of
 CBA
 in
 case
 of
 arbitral
 parties
 would
 be
 required
 for
 there
 to
 be
 an
 effective

awards
 will
 be
 inconsistent
 with
 the
 nature
 of
 contract,
this
requirement
can
be
waived

arbitration
as
a
dispute‐settlement
device
 o “Executing
 a
 contract
 incorporating
 such
 agreements
 if

 But
 note
 that
 the
 arbitral
 award
 is
 not
 beyond
 requested
by
either
party”
(Article
252

question.
Certiorari
on
proper
grounds
is
available
 • Effects
of
signing
on
other
disputes

o In
any
of
those
situations
the
CBA
still
needs
to
be
posted
in
 o Considering
 that
 the
 evident
 purpose
 of
 the
 collective

2
conspicuous
places
in
the
workplace,
but
the
posting
is
for
 agreement
 is
 to
 restore
 industrial
 peace
 by
 settling
 all

the
info
of,
and
not
ratification
by,
the
employees
affected
 previous
 controversies
 and
 that
 such
 purpose
 would
 be

o CBA
has
to
be
registered
with
the
DOLE
regional
office
 aborted
if
the
union
were
allowed
to
preserve
the
dispute
on

• Ratified
but
unsigned
 accrued
 vacation
 leaves
 and
 considering
 that
 the
 right
 to

o A
 CBA
 was
 held
effective
 on
ratification
 by
 union
members,
 payment
 of
 accrued
 vacation
 leaves
 is
 waivable,
 the
 union

even
 without
 signature
 by
 the
 union
 president
 or
 union
 claim
for
such
payment
of
accrued
vacation
leaves
should
be

secretary‐treasurer,
notwithstanding
a
contractual
provision
 deemed
validly
and
actually
renounced
by
it
under
its
CBA

that
 the
 agreement
 is
 not
 valid
 unless
 so
 countersigned,
 o Zipper
Clause

because
 lack
 of
 the
 purely
 ministerial
 act
 of
 signing
 the
 8. Registration
of
CBA

formal
 contract
 did
 not
 obviate
 the
 fact
 that
 there
 was
 a
 • Collective
 agreement,
 having
 been
 properly
 ratified,
 should
 be

binding
contract
 registered
with
the
DOLE
Regional
Office
where
the
bargaining
union

• Unratified
but
implemented
 is
registered
or
where
it
principally
operates

o Parties
to
a
CBA
are
required
to
furnish
copy
the
appropriate
 • Article
 231
 –
 registration
 within
 30
 calendar
 days
 from
 execution
 of

Regional
 Office
 with
 accompanying
 proof
 of
 ratification
 by
 the
agreement.
Multi‐employer
CBA
shall
be
filed
with
the
Bureau


the
majority
of
all
the
workers
in
the
bargaining
unit
 • Failure
to
register
the
CBA
does
not
make
it
invalid
or
unenforceable.

o But
 it
 is
 iniquitous
 to
 receive
 benefits
 from
 a
 CBA
 and
 later
 • Non‐registration,
however,
renders
the
contract‐bar
rule
inoperative

on
disclaim
its
validity
 • Once
it
is
duly
entered
into
and
signed
by
the
parties,
a
CBA
becomes

7. Execution
of
contract
 effective
 as
 between
 the
 parties
 regardless
 of
 whether
 the
 same
 has

• Article
231
is
not
clear
on
whether
the
ratification
or
execution
comes
 been
certified
by
the
BLR

first
 • Registration
requirements

• In
practice,
sequence
usually
depends
on
the
likelihood
of
ratification
 o The
application
for
CBA
registration
shall
be
accompanied
by

as
judged
by
the
union
 the
 original
 and
 two
 (2)
 duplicate
 copies
 of
 the
 following

o If
 union
 strongly
 feels
 there
 will
 be
 no
 problem,
 CBA
 is
 documents
 which
 must
 be
 certified
 under
 oath
 by
 the

finalized,
signed
by
the
parties,
and
posted.
 representative(s)
 of
 the
 employer(s)
 and
 labor
 union(s)

o If
 there
 is
 no
 such
 certainty,
 CBA
 is
 drafted,
 initialed
 by
 the
 concerned

parties,
and
this
“clean
draft”
is
posted
  The
collective
bargaining
agreement;

• If
 and
 when
 ratified,
 the
 CBA
 is
 finalized
 and
 formal
 signing
 follows.
  A
 statement
 that
 the
 collective
 bargaining

Parties
indicate
date
of
execution
and
effectivity
date.

 agreement
 was
 posted
 in
 at
 least
 two
 (2)

• In
any
case,
the
important
thing
is
the
ratification,
not
the
sequence
of
 conspicuous
 places
 in
 the
 establishment
 or

steps
 establishments
concerned
for
at
least
five
(5)
days

• A
 party
 to
 collective
 bargaining
 may
 be
 required
 to
 sign
 a
 contract
 before
its
ratification;
and

where
 the
 agreement
 has
 been
 reached
 by
 the
 parties
 and
 only
 one
  A
 statement
 that
 the
 collective
 bargaining

party’s
 refusal
 to
 execute
 a
 contract
 is
 preventing
 its
 being
 carried
 agreement
 was
 ratified
 by
 the
 majority
 of
 the

into
effect.
Such
refusal
is
an
ULP
 employees
 in
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 of
 the
 employer

• While
an
employer
may
be
required
to
sign
a
written
contract
once
he
 or
employers
concerned.

reaches
 an
 agreement
 with
 the
 labor
 organization,
 no
 signing
 would
 o No
 other
 document
 shall
 be
 required
 in
 the
 registration
 of

be
 required
 nor
 any
 contract
 be
 enforced,
 if
 the
 facts
 reveal
 that
 the
 collective
bargaining
agreements.

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 77

 Application
 may
 be
 denied
 if
 the
 supporting
 documents
 are

o new
one
is
reached
by
the
parties.
To
rule
otherwise
would
be

incomplete
 or
 not
 verified
 under
 oath.
 The
 denial,
 if
 by
 the
 to
create
a
gap
during
which
no
agreement
would
govern.

Regional
office,
is
appealable
to
the
Bureau
within
10
days
or

to
the
Secretary
if
the
denial
is
by
the
Bureau
 Article
253­A.
Terms
of
CBA.

9. Implementation,
then
renegotiation

• Implementation
follows
execution
and
registration
 1. Effectivity
and
retroactivity

• Frequently,
 implementation
 starts
 even
 before
 the
 contract
 is
 • Effectivity
 date
 depends
 on
 whether
 the
 CBA
 is
 the
 first
 CBA
 or
 a

registered
indicating
that
registration
is
a
formal
step
in
the
collective
 renegotiated
CBA

bargaining
 process
 but
 not
 a
 prerequisite
 to
 its
 validity
 and
 o If
 first
 ever
 CBA,
 effectivity
 is
 whatever
 the
 date
 the

enforceability
 parties
agree
on

• Article
 253
 emphasizes
 faithful
 adherence
 to
 the
 contract
 as
 a
 o The
 date
 is
 important
 particularly
 in
 relation
 to
 wage

continuation
of
the
duty
to
bargain
 increase
 (if
 any)
 because
 a
 long
 retroaction
 period
 will

• Neglecting,
 deviating
 from
 or
 violating
 the
 terms
 of
 the
 CBA
 is
 mean
sizeable
backpay
to
employees

considered
an
ULP
under
Article
248
in
relation
to
Article
261
 o If
the
CBA
is
renegotiated
CBA
to
replace
the
expired
one
–

• Renegotiation
applies
only
to
the
renegotiable
provisions
–
those
that
  If
 renegotiation
 is
 finished
 and
 the
 new
 CBA
 is

do
 not
 pertain
 to
 the
 identity
 and
 political
 status
 of
 the
 bargaining
 concluded
within
6
months
from
the
expiry
date
of

union
 (because
 this
 is
 taken
 up
 with
 the
 union
 membership);
 non‐ the
 old
 one
 
 new
 CBA
 takes
 effect
 on
 the
 date

political
and
non‐representational
issues
 following
such
expiry
date

10. Automatic
renewal
of
CBA
  If
NO
new
CBA
was
completed
within
that
6‐month

• “Automatic
renewal”
–
parties
shall
continue
the
CBA
in
“full
force
and
 period

new
CBA
will
NOT
automatically
retroact.

effect”
until
they
reach
a
new
agreement
  If
 it
 will
 retroact
 at
 all,
 the
 retroaction

• New
Pacific
Timber
v.
NLRC
 date
 will
 have
 to
 be
 agreed
 upon
 by
 the

o National
Federation
of
Labor
(NFL)
was
bargaining
rep.
NFL
 negotiating
panels

filed
a
complaint
for
ULP
on
the
ground
of
refusal
to
bargain.
  The
 determining
 point
 is
 the
 date
 the

Arbiter
 found
 company
 guilty
 of
 ULP.
 NLRC
 dismissed
 parties
agreed,
not
the
date
they
signed

company’s
appeal.
  Even
without
any
written
evidence
of
the

o So
labor
arbiter
directed
the
company
to
pay
the
employees
 CBA,
 valid
 agreement
 may
 exist
 from
 the

the
 benefits
 under
 the
 CBA.
 They
 were
 paid.
 But
 then
 moment
 the
 minds
 of
 the
 parties
 met
 on

another
 group
 of
 employees
 filed
 a
 petition
 for
 relief,
 all
matters
they
set
out
to
discuss

claiming
 that
 they
 were
 wrongfully
 excluded
 from
 enjoying
 • Duration
 depends
 on
 whether
 the
 subject
 provision
 is

the
 benefits
 under
 the
 CBA.
 So
 NLRC
 ordered
 that
 they
 be
 representational
or
non‐representational

paid
also.
Company
claims
that
they
are
not
entitled
because
 • Effectivity
 of
 CBA
 concluded
 after
 six
 months
 from
 expiration
 of

employees
 hired
 after
 the
 term
 of
 a
 CBA
 are
 not
 parties
 to
 old
CBA

the
 agreement,
 and
 therefore,
 may
 not
 claim
 benefits
 o The
 law
 does
 not
 specifically
 cover
 the
 situation
 where
 6

thereunder,
 even
 if
 they
 subsequently
 become
 members
 of
 months
 have
 passed
 but
 the
 parties
 have
 reached
 no

the
bargaining
unit
 agreement
with
respect
to
effectivity

o (CBA
 expired
 in
 1984)
 Company
 claims
 that
 since
 the
 o One
 such
 provision
 is
 the
 principle
 of
 hold
 over
 –
 that
 in

provisions
 for
 yearly
 wage
 increase
 ended
 in
 1984,
 there
 is
 the
 absence
 of
 a
 new
 CBA,
 the
 parties
 must
 maintain
 the

no
 contractual
 basis
 for
 the
 grant
 of
 CBA
 benefits
 such
 as
 status
 quo
 and
 must
 continue
 in
 full
 force
 and
 effect
 the

wage
increase
in
1985
and
subsequent
years.
Company
also
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 the
 existing
 agreement
 until
 a

claims
 that
 it
 wasn’t
 their
 fault
 that
 no
 CBA
 was
 entered
 new
agreement
is
reached

pending
appeal
  The
 law
 prevents
 the
 existence
 of
 a
 gap
 in
 the

o Petitioners
contention
is
untenable.
It
is
clear
that
until
a
new
 relationship
 between
 the
 collective
 bargaining

CBA
 has
 been
 executed,
 parties
 are
 duty­bound
 to
 keep
 the
 parties

status
 quo
 and
 to
 continue
 in
 full
 force
 and
 effect
 the
 terms
 o In
the
absence
of
an
agreement
between
the
parties,
then,

and
conditions
of
the
existing
agreement.
No
exceptions.
 an
 arbitrated
 CBA
 takes
 on
 the
 nature
 of
 any
 judicial
 or

o It
 is
 duty
 of
 parties
 to
 the
 CBA
 to
 keep
 the
 status
 quo
 and
 to
 quasi‐judicial
award
–
operates
and
may
be
executed
only

continue
in
full
force
and
effect
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
 prospectively
 unless
 there
 are
 legal
 justifications
 for
 its

existing
 agreement
 during
 the
 60
 day
 period
 and/or
 until
 a
 retroactive
application


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 78

  Yet,
 different
 rulings.
 In
 Manila
 Electric,
 it
 was
 are
 encouraged
 to
 eneter
 into
 a
 renegotiated
 CBA
 with
 a


applied
 retroactively
 (to
 the
 first
 day
 after
 the
 term
 which
 would
 coincide
 with
 the
 aforesaid
 5­year
 term

6month
 period
 following
 the
 expiration
 of
 the
 last
 of
the
bargaining
representative.

day
of
CBA).
In
Union
of
Filipro
v.
NLRC,
the
NLRC
 o In
 the
 event
 however,
 that
 the
 parties,
 by
 mutual

gave
the
CBA
a
prospective
effect.
 agreement,
enter
into
a
renegotiated
contract
with
a

term

2. Duration
of
CBA
 of
 3
 years
 or
 one
 which
 does
 not
 coincide
 with
 the
 5
 year

• Representation
aspect
–
5
years
 term,
 and
 said
 agreement
 is
 ratified
 by
 majority
 of
 the

o Refers
 to
 identity
 and
 majority
 status
 of
 the
 union
 that
 members
in
the
bargaining
unit,
the
subject
contract
is
valid

negotiated
 the
 CBA
 as
 the
 exclusive
 representative
 of
 the
 and
 legal
 and
 therefore
 binds
 the
 contracting
 parties.
 The

bargaining
unit
 same
will
however
not
adversely
affect
the
right
of
another

• All
other
provisions
–
3
years
 union
 to
 challenge
 the
 majority
 status
 of
 the
 incumbent

o The
 rest
 of
 the
 CBA,
 economic
 as
 well
 as
 non‐economic
 bargaining
 agent
 within
 60
 days
 before
 the
 lapse
 of
 the

other
than
representational
 original
5
year
term
of
the
CBA.

o 3
years
as
to
protect
the
economic
gains
of
the
workers
 o No
grave
abuse
of
discretion
on
the
part
of
the
Secretary
of

• Upon
 expiry
 of
 the
 3
 year
 economic
 provisions,
 for
 how
 many
 years
 Labor
in
ruling
that
the
effectivity
of
the
renegotiated
terms

should
 the
 renegotiated
 provisions
 be?
 What
 is
 the
 term
 of
 the
 new
 shall
 be
 for
 3
 years.
 BUT
 the
 memorandum
 does
 not

economic
provisions
–
is
it
2
years
or
3?
 require
either
two
or
three
years;
rather,
it
recognizes
the

o If
upon
expiration
of
the
5‐year
representation
provision,
 primacy
 of
 “mutual
 agreement”
 between
 the
 parties.
 The

a
 new
 union
 wins,
 then
 the
 new
 union
 will
 have
 to
 parties
 have
 to
 agree
 clearly
 whether
 those
 renegotiated

administer
the
CBA
for
its
remaining
one
year,
after
which
 provisions
are
to
last
for
2
years
or
3.

the
new
union
may
negotiate
with
the
employer
for
a
new
 3. Extension
of
effectivity
of
CBA,
when
valid

CBA
 • One
year
extension

valid
because
it
was
approved
by
the
Union
in
a

o There
 is
 no
 mandate,
 although
 there
 is
 the
 expectation,
 referendum
which
was
properly
supervised
by
the
DOLE.

that
 the
 renegotiated
 economic
 provisions
 should
 again
 • Ten­year
suspension
of
CBA

last
for
3
years.
 o Rivera
v.
Espiritu

o Neither
 is
 there
 a
 prohibition
 to
 make
 it
 good
 only
 for
 2
  PAL
 pilots
 affiliated
 with
 the
 Airline
 Pilots

years
 to
 make
 it
 coincide
 with
 the
 expiration
 on
 the
 fifth
 Association
 of
 the
 Philippines
 went
 on
 a
 3‐week

year
of
the
representation
provision
 strike.
PAL
adopted
a
rehab
plan
and
downsized
its

o Choice
 between
 2
 or
 3
 years
 will
 be
 influenced
 by
 labor
 force
 by
 more
 than
 1/3rd.
 PALEA,
 another

situational
factors
including
economic
and
political
factors
 union,
went
on
strike
to
protest
the
retrenchment.

affecting
the
parties
  PALEA
 proposed
 terms
 and
 conditions,
 subject
 to

• San
Miguel
Corp.
Employees
Union­PTGWO
v.
Confesor,
SMC
 ratification
by
the
general
membership,
including
a

o Union
 concluded
 a
 CBA
 with
 SMC
 to
 take
 effect
 upon
 the
 10‐year
 suspension
 of
 the
 CBA
 and
 entitlement
 to

expiration
of
the
previous
CBA.
SMC
then
restructured
the
 three
seats
in
the
PAL
board.
It
was
approved.

company.
 The
 Magnolia
 spin‐off
 was
 created.
  Issue:
 Is
 the
 10‐year
 suspension
 of
 the
 CBA

Notwithstanding
 the
 spin‐offs,
 the
 CBA
 remained
 in
 force
 unconstitutional
and
contrary
to
public
policy?
NO

and
effect.
  The
agreement
was
the
result
of
voluntary
collective

o CBA
renegotiation.
Union
insisted
that
the
bargaining
unit
 bargaining
 negotiations
 undertaken
 in
 the
 light
 of

of
 SMC
 should
 include
 the
 employees
 of
 the
 spun‐off
 the
severe
financial
situations
faced
by
the
employer.

corporations
 and
 that
 the
 renegotiated
 terms
 shall
 be
 Article
 253­A
 has
 a
 two­fold
 purpose.
 One
 is
 to

effective
 only
 for
 the
 remaining
 period
 of
 2
 years.
 SMC
 promote
 industrial
 stability
 and
 predictability.

contended
 that
 the
 members
 of
 Magnolia
 and
 SMFI
 Another
 is
 to
 assign
 specific
 timetables
 wherein

automatically
ceased
to
be
part
of
the
bargaining
unit
and
 negotiations
 become
 a
 matter
 of
 right
 and

that
the
CBA
should
be
effective
for
three
years
 requirement.
 Nothing
 in
 the
 article
 prohibits
 the

o Issue:
 W/N
 the
 duration
 of
 the
 renegotiated
 terms
 of
 the
 parties
 from
 waiving
 or
 suspending
 the
 mandatory

CBA
is
3
years
or
2?
 timetables
 and
 agreeing
 on
 the
 remedies
 to
 enforce

o The
 framers
 of
 the
 law
 did
 not
 give
 a
 fixed
 term
 as
 to
 the
 the
 same.
 The
 right
 to
 free
 collective
 bargaining,

effectivity
of
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment.
It
can
 after
all,
includes
the
right
to
suspend
it.

be
 gleaned
 from
 their
 discussions
 that
 it
 was
 left
 to
 the
  The
 SC
 does
 not
 agree
 that
 the
 agreement
 violates

parties
 to
 fix
 the
 period.
 As
 a
 matter
 of
 policy,
 the
 parties
 the
5­year
representation
limit.
Under
the
article,
the

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 79

 representation
 limit
 for
 the
 exclusive
 bargaining
 employer
or
a
sister
company
of
the
strike‐bound
employer,

agent
applies
only
when
there
is
an
extant
CBA
in
full
 whose
premises
were
picketed
by
strikers

force
 and
 effect.
 In
 the
 instant
 case,
 the
 parties
 o Where
 the
 issue
 in
 an
 action
 filed
 in
 the
 RTC
 was
 tied
 up

agreed
 to
suspend
 the
CBA
and
put
 in
abeyance
the
 with
 an
 ULP
 case
 pending
 in
 the
 NLRC,
 the
 action
 was

limit
on
the
representation
period.
 outside
 the
 jurisdiction
 of
 the
 regular
 courts
 even
 if
 acts
 of

violence,
 intimdation
 and
 coercion
 were
 imputed
 to
 the


 Union.
 It
 should
 have
 been
 obtained
 from
 the
 court
 which

was
 empowered
 to
 restrain
 such
 acts.
 (Such
 rule
 prevents

Article
254.
Injunction
prohibited.
 multiplicity
of
suits)

 BUT
a
regulat
court
may
issue
injunction
to
protect

1. No­injunction
policy
 the
 interest
 of
 neutral
 employers
 in
 common
 situs

• An
injunction
may
require
or
restrain
the
doing
of
an
act
 picketing

• Labor
disputes
are
generally
not
subject
to
injunction.
If
the
rule
were
 o Republic
Flour
Mill
Workers
Association
v.
Reyes

otherwise,
 it
 would
 contradict
 the
 declared
 policy
 under
 Article
  Union
declared
a
strike
against
their
employers
and

211(a)
 “to
 promote
 and
 emphasize
 the
 primacy
 of
 free
 collective
 picketed
 the
 premises,
 preventing
 the
 peaceful

bargaining
 and
 negotiations,
 including
 voluntary
 arbitration,
 passing
 of
 other
 persons
 not
 connected
 with
 their

mediation
 and
 conciliation,
 as
 modes
 of
 settling
 labor
 or
 industrial
 employers,
 one
 of
 which
 was
 the
 respondent

disputes”
 company,
a
lessee
of
a
parcel
of
land
owned
by
the

• The
policy,
basically,
is
freedom
at
the
workplace
 strike‐bound
 employer.
 CFI
 issued
 an
 injunction,

o If
there
is
a
dispute
between
the
parties,
the
responsibility
to
 ordering
 the
 union
 to
 desist
 from
 preventing
 the

solve
 it
 devolves
 upon
 them
 primarily,
 not
 upon
 the
 employees
 of
 respondent
 Company
 from
 entering

government
 its
premises

• Government
intervention
is
the
exception;
rather
than
the
rule
  SC
 upheld
 the
 validity
 of
 the
 injunction.
 The

• Any
 injunctive
 order
 in
 “non‐national
 interest”
 disputes
 can
 be
 Company,
AIA
Flour
Mills,
is
a
separate
and
distinct

directed
 only
 against
 the
 illegal
 acts
 being
 committed
 in
 connection
 entity
 from
 the
 Republic
 Flour
 Mills,
 Inc.
 including

with
the
labor
dispute;
it
cannot
be
directed
against
the
dispute
itself.

 the
business
in
which
it
engaged
and
the
picketing
by

• If
 an
 injunction
 is
 called
 for,
 the
 issuance
 has
 to
 pass
 through
 a
 the
petitioner
Unions
has
no
connection
whatsoever

rigorous
route
defined
in
Article
218(e)
 with
 respondent
 AIA
 Flour
 Mills.
 There
 is
 no
 labor

• Article
 254
 itself
 indicates
 that
 where
 Article
 264,
 regarding
 dispute
between
the
AIA
and
the
union
and
neither
is

prohibited
 acts,
 is
 being
 violated,
 the
 anti‐injunction
 policy
 will
 be
 there
an
employer­employee
relation
between
them.

brushed
aside
and
a
writ
of
injunction
or
restraining
order
will
issue

 Hence,
 the
 CFI
 did
 not
 issue
 a
 labor
 injunction.
 The

• Reason
of
the
no­injunction
policy
 court
may
issue
an
injunction,
whether
temporary
or

o The
 issuance
 of
 an
 injunction
 for
 any
 purpose
 in
 a
 labor
 permanent.
 The
 preliminary
 injunction
 issued
 by

dispute
will
generally
tip
the
scales
of
the
controversy
 respondent
judge
was,
therefore,
one
that
was
within

o Issuance
 of
 an
 injunction
 in
 early
 phases
 of
 a
 strike
 can
 its
jurisdiction
to
issue
pursuant
to
the
provisions
of

critically
 sway
 the
 balance
 of
 the
 economic
 struggle
 against
 the
Rules
of
Court.

the
union
  Besides,
the
writ
of
preliminary
injunction
issued
by

o Even
 preliminary
 injunction
 is
 an
 effectual
 strike‐breaking
 the
 CFI
 did
 not
 in
 any
 way
 curtail
 the
 right
 of
 the

weapon
because
so
much
time
elapses
between
the
issuance
 union
 to
 picket
 because
 the
 writ
 simply
 and
 clearly

of
a
preliminary
injunction
and
the
time
when
a
final
decree
 commanded
 the
 petitioner
 unions
 to
 desist
 from

can
be
reviewed
on
appeal
 preventing
 petitioners
 employees
 from
 entering
 the

o Injunctions
 have
 generally
 not
 proved
 to
 be
 an
 effective
 premises

means
of
settling
labor
disputes

• Injunction
issued
by
regular
court,
when
proper
 

o Regular
 courts
 are
 WITHOUT
 authority
 to
 issue
 injunction

orders
in
cases
involving
or
originating
from
labor
disputes
 Title
 VII:
 Collective
 bargaining
 and
 administration
 of
 agreement
 (cont’d.)
 [Part
 2.

even
 if
 the
 complaint
 was
 filed
 by
 nonstriking
 employees
 Employee
participation
and
representation]

and
the
employer
was
also
made
a
respondent
to
the
action

or
even
if
the
complainant
is
a
customer
of
the
strike‐bound
 Article
 255.
 Exclusive
 bargaining
 representation
 and
 workers’
 participation
 in
 policy
 and

decision­making

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 80

 1. Workers’
participatory
rights:
its
constitutional
meaning
  But
 what
 level
 of
 participation?
 SC

• What
 is
 the
 meaning
 or
 extent
 of
 the
 workers’
 right
 to
 participate
 in
 declared
 that
 employees
 possess
 the

policy
and
decision
making?
 “right
to
participate
in
the
deliberation
of

o 1986
Constitutional
Commission:
to
refer
to
participation
in
 matters
which
may
affect
their
rights
and

grievance
 procedures
 and
 voluntary
 modes
 of
 settling
 the
 formulation
 of
 policies
 relative

disputes
 and
 not
 to
 formulation
 of
 corporate
 programs
 or
 thereto

policies
 • Employees’
participation
in
formulating
the
Code
of
Discipline

 European
 Work
 Councils:
 highly
 successful
 work
 o PAL
v.
NLRC

councils
 established
 at
 the
 level
 of
 the
 enterprise
  PAL
 completely
 revised
 its
 Code
 of
 Discipline.

where
 largely
 non‐adversarial
 issues
 are
 taken
 up
 Subsequently,
 some
 employees
 were
 subjected
 to

so
 that
 before
 they
 can
 mature
 into
 adversarial
 disciplinary
 measures
 for
 alleged
 violations
 of
 the

issues,
 labor
 and
 management,
 in
 that
 atmosphere
 revised
 code.
 PALE
 filed
 for
 ULP
 with
 arbitrary

of
 cooperation
 through
 a
 work
 council,
 are
 able
 to
 implementation
of
PAL’s
Code
of
Discipline
without

come
 to
 an
early
 agreement,
 which
both
 sides
 and
 notice
 and
 prior
 discussion
 with
 union
 by

consider
 helpful
 not
 only
 for
 industrial
 peace
 but
 management

also
 for
 productivity
 
 fora
 within
 companies
 or
  Issue:
 W/N
 employees
 should
 be
 consulted
 in
 the

work
councils
will
precisely
give
both
workers
and
 making
of
a
new
Code
of
Discipline?
YES

employers
 the
 opportunity
 to
 consider
 matters
 of
  The
exercise
of
management
prerogatives
was
never

mutual
interest
 considered
 boundless.
 It
 must
 be
 without
 abuse
 of

 Three
 levels
 of
 employee
 participation
 [in
 which
 discretion.
 A
 close
 scrutiny
 of
 the
 Code
 of
 Conduct

employees
 could
 influence
 management
 in
 their
 reveals
that
the
provisions
are
not
all
purely
business

decision‐making]
–

 oriented
 nor
 do
 they
 concern
 the
 management

 Corporate
 level:
 strategic
 policies
 aspect
of
the
business
of
the
company.

pertaining
 to
 the
 mergers,
 acquisitions,
  Verily,
 a
 line
 must
 be
 drawn
 between
 management

pricing
 and
 marketing
 policies,
 prerogatives
 regarding
 business
 operations
 per
 se

disposition
of
profits
and
the
like
 and
those
which
affect
the
rights
of
the
employees.
In

 Plant
or
department
level:
administrative
 treating
the
latter,
management
should
see
to
it
that

decisions
 are
 made
 (hiring,
 firing,
 and
 its
 employees
 are
 at
 least
 properly
 informed
 of
 its

promotion
of
employees,
cost
and
quality
 decisions
or
modes
of
actions.

control,
resource
allocations,
etc)
  The
 CBA
 may
 not
 be
 interpreted
 as
 cession
 of

 Shop‐floor
 level:
 operating
 decisions
 are
 employees’
right
to
participate
in
the
deliberation
of

made
 (scheduling
 of
 work,
 safety
 matters
 which
 may
 affect
 their
 rights
 and
 the

regulations,
 work
 methods,
 training
 of
 formulation
of
policies
relative
thereto.
And
one
such

new
employees)
 matter
is
the
formulation
of
a
code
of
discipline

 Intended
 meaning
 of
 the
 provision:
 barest
 o But
in
San
Miguel
Brewery
v.
OPLE
and
GTE
Directories
Corp.

minimum,
 the
 workers
 are
 consulted
 on
 matters
 v.
Sanchez,
the
authority
and
power
of
the
employer
to
make

pertaining
 to
 their
 interests
 and
 the
 parameters
 policy,
 without
 employees’
 participation,
 is
 recognized
 and

would
 be
 references
 to
 the
 negotiations
 in
 the
 upheld.

collective
bargaining
agreement
and
its
terms
  Note
 that
 in
 these
 two
 cases,
 the
 subject
 of
 the

o In
sum,
constitutional
commissioners:
that
workers’
right
to
 policy
is
sales
and
operation
while
in
the
PAL
case,

participate
 does
 not
 mean
 participation
 in
 charting
 the
 subject
 is
 employees’
 conduct
 and
 discipline.

corporate
programs
and
policies
 The
 subject
 affects
 the
 employees’
 tenure;
 hence,

o But,
the
SC
said
that
employees
may
demand
participation
in
 employees’
participation
is
required
in
shaping
the

making
the
company’s
code
of
discipline.
 policy

 The
 SC
 differentiated
 management
 prerogatives
 o Participation
does
not
mean
co‐management
of
the
business

regarding
 business
 operations
 and
 those
 which
 2. Workers’
participation
as
the
real
objective;
the
LMC

affect
 the
 employees’
 rights
 (includes
 making
 of
 a
 • The
 law,
 while
 promoting
 collective
 bargaining,
 really
 aims
 at

code
of
conduct
in
which
employees
have
the
right
 employee
participation
in
policy
and
decision‐making.
The
real
aim
is

to
participate)
 participation
in
whatever
form
it
may
appear.
Collective
bargaining
is

just
one
of
the
forms
of
employee
participation

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 81

 • Hence,
 it
 is
 incorrect
 to
 say
 that
 the
 device
 which
 secures
 industrial
 grievances.
 Each
 employee
 retains
 the
 right
 to
 deal
 with
 his
 or
 her

democracy
 is
 collective
 bargaining
 and
 no
 other.
 It
 is
 equally
 employer,
and
vice
versa

misleading
 to
 say
 that
 collective
 bargaining
 is
 the
 end‐goal
 of
 • Article
255
explicitly
preserves
and
respects
the
right
of
an
individual

employee
representation
 employee
or
any
group
of
employees
to
directly
present
grievances
to

• This
is
why
Article
255
reserves
the
right
of
an
individual
employee
or
 their
 employers
 at
 any
 time.
 Such
 individual
 rights
 cannot
 be
 taken

group
 of
 employees
 (un/unionized
 or
 inside
 or
 outside
 a
 union)
 to
 away
even
by
a
union’s
constitution
and
by‐laws

present
 grievances
 to
 their
 employer
 at
 any
 time,
 even
 without
 • American
 jurisprudence:
 however,
 the
 adjustment
 of
 the
 grievances

collective
bargaining
 must
be
consistent
with
the
terms
of
the
current
collective
bargaining

• But
 an
 individual
 representation
 in
 dealing
 or
 bargaining
 with
 the
 contract.
 Moreover,
 the
 bargaining
 representative
 must
 be
 given
 the

employer
 is
 weak.
 Hence,
 the
 law
 provides
 for
 another
 forum
 –
 the
 opportunity
 to
 be
 present
 at
 the
 meeting
 between
 the
 employer
 and

labor‐management
council
(LMC)
aside
from
or
instead
of
a
union
 employee

o LMC
 can
 exist
 where
 there
 is
 no
 union
 or
 co‐exist
 with
 a
 4. CBU
defined

union
 • At
 the
 enterprise
 level,
 there
 are
 3
 democratic
 devices
 provided
 by

o It
cannot
and
must
not
replace
a
union
 law

o While
a
labor
union
is
hamstrung
by
such
legal
prescriptions
 o Airing
of
grievance
even
by
an
individual
employee
directly

such
as
formal
registration,
an
LMC
need
not
be
held
back
by
 to
the
employer
anytime

any
of
these.
 o Participation
 in
 policy
 and
 decision‐making
 by
 employees,

o It
 can
 represent
 employees
 across
 the
 enterprise,
 present
 whether
unionized
or
not

grievances
 regardless
 of
 the
 grievant’s
 rank,
 and
 proffer
 o Collective
 bargaining
 with
 the
 employer
 by
 unionized

proposals
unhindered
by
formalities.
 employees

o The
 LMC,
 in
 short,
 can
 deal
 with
 the
 employer
 on
 matters
 • Collective
 bargaining
 that
 the
 law
 envisions
 occurs
 between
 the

affecting
the
employees’
rights,
benefits
and
welfare.
 employer
 and
 employees
 comprised
 in
 an
 appropriate
 collective

o An
LMC
is
a
challenge
at
maturity,
conviction,
and
vigilance
–
 bargaining
unit
(CBU)
represented
by
a
union

maturity
in
understanding
and
respecting
the
rights
not
only
 • CBU
is
group
of
jobs
and
jobholders
represented
by
the
recognized
or

of
the
workers
but
also
of
the
employer.
 certified
union
when
it
bargains
with
the
employer.
The
“group”
may

• Department’s
promotion
of
LMC
and
other
councils
 comprise
 all
 the
 supervisors
 or,
 separately,
 all
 the
 rank‐and‐file

o The
 Department
 shall
 promote
 the
 formation
 of
 labor‐ population
in
the
company

management
 councils
 in
 organized
 and
 unorganized
 • But
 if
 a
 single
 unit
 (only
 one
 for
 all
 supervisors
 or
 only
 one
 for
 all

establishments
to
enable
the
workers
to
participate
in
policy
 rank‐and‐file)
is
not
feasible,
the
law
allows
subgroups
as
bargaining

and
decision‐making
processes
in
the
establishment,
insofar
 units,
provided
only
that
each
sub‐group
is
appropriate.


as
said
processes
will
directly
affect
their
rights,
benefits
and
 o Appropriate
 if
 its
 members
 share
 substantially
 common

welfare,
 except
 those
 which
 are
 covered
 by
 CBA
 or
 are
 concerns
and
interests

traditional
areas
of
bargaining
 • According
to
DO
40‐03,
bargaining
unit
refers
to
group
of
employees

o Department
 should
 also
 promote
 other
 labor‐management
 sharing
 mutual
 interests
 within
 a
 given
 employer
 unit,
 comprised
 of

cooperation
 schemes
 and,
 upon
 its
 own
 initiative
 or
 upon
 all
or
less
than
all
of
the
entire
body
of
employees
in
the
employer
unit

the
request
of
both
parties,
may
assist
in
the
formulation
and
 or
 any
 specific
 occupational
 or
 geographical
 grouping
 within
 such

development
 of
 programs
 and
 projects
 on
 productivity,
 employer
unit

occupational
 safety
 and
 health,
 improvement
 of
 quality
 of
 o Within
one
unit
there
may
be
one
or
more
unions

work
 life,
 product
 quality
 improvement
 and
 other
 similar
 o The
 bargaining
 unit
 is
 not
 the
 same
 as,
 and
 usually
 is
 a

scheme
 bigger
group
than,
a
union

o Organized
 establishment

 worker’s
representatives
 to
the
 • But
 only
 one
 union
 should
 represent
 the
 whole
 CBU
 in
 bargaining

council
 shall
 be
 nominated
 by
 the
 exclusive
 bargaining
 with
the
employer.
The
chosen
union
is
called
the
bargaining
agent,
its

representative
 principal
being
the
CBU
members
themselves

o No
 legitimate
 labor
 organization
 exists
 
 workers
 • Bargaining
union
has
to
be
the
majority
union,
the
one
where
majority

representative
shall
be
elected
directly
by
the
employees
at
 of
the
CBU
members
belong

large
 o Majority
 status
 is
 determined
 through
 a
 union
 selection

3. Individual
grievance
 process

• Presence
 of
 an
 employees’
 organization
 –
 a
 union,
 an
 LMC
 or
 other
 • Representative
union
=
bargaining
union;
majority
union;
bargaining

forum
 –
 does
 not
 replace
 the
 individual
 employee’s
 right
 to
 pursue
 agent;
bargaining
representative

5. Appropriateness
of
bargaining
unit;
factors
considered

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 82

 • The
 determination
 of
 what
 constitutes
 a
 proper
 bargaining
 unit
 lies
  As
 such,
 there
 is
 a
 mutuality
 of
 interest
 among
 the

primarily
in
the
discretion
of
the
Bureau,
since
no
individual
factor
is
 employees
 of
 the
 Sawmill
 and
 Logging
 Division.

given
by
law
decisive
weight.

 There
 may
 be
 differences
 as
 to
 the
 nature
 of
 their

• The
basic
test
of
a
bargaining
unit’s
acceptability
(or
appropriateness)
 individual
 assignments
 but
 the
 distinctions
 are
 not

is
 whether
 it
 will
 best
 assure
 to
 all
 employees
 the
 exercise
 of
 their
 enough
 to
 warrant
 the
 formation
 of
 a
 separate

collective
bargaining
rights
 bargaining
unit

o The
 most
 efficacious
 bargaining
 unit
 is
 one
 which
 is
 • Exclusion
of
confidential
employees

comprised
of
constituents
enjoying
a
community
of
interest,
 o Philips
 Industrial
 Development
 Inc.
 v.
 NLRC
 and
 Philips

which
may
be
determined
by
–
 Employees
Organization

 Similarity
 in
 the
 scale
 and
 manner
 of
 determining
  NLRC
 committed
 grave
 abuse
 of
 discretion
 in

earnings
 decreeing
 that
 PIDI’s
 service
 engineers,
 sales
 force,

 Similarity
 in
 employment
 benefits,
 hours
 of
 work
 division
secretaries,
all
staff
of
general
management

and
other
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
 personnel
 and
 industrial
 relations
 department,

 Similarity
in
the
kinds
of
work
performed
 secretaries
 of
 audit,
 EDP
 and
 financial
 systems
 are

 Similarity
in
qualifications,
skills
and
training
of
the
 included
within
the
rank­and­file
bargaining
unit.
All

employees
 these
 employees,
 with
 the
 exception
 of
 the
 service

 Frequency
 of
 contact
 or
 interchange
 among
 the
 engineers
 and
 the
 sales
 force
 personnel,
 are

employees
 confidential
employees.
As
such,
the
rationale
behind

 Geographic
proximity
 the
 ineligibility
 of
 managerial
 employees
 to
 form,

 Geographical
 location
 can
 be
 completely
 assist
or
join
a
labor
union
equally
applies
to
them.

disregarded
 if
 the
 communal
 or
 mutual
 • Temporary
or
part­time
employees

interests
 of
 the
 employees
 are
 not
 o Temporary
employees
are
excluded
from
bargaining
units
of

sacrificed
 workers
in
certain
jobs.


 Continuity
or
integration
of
production
processes
 o In
 determining
 whether
 temporary
 or
 part‐time
 employees

 Common
 supervision
 and
 determination
 of
 labor‐ are
sufficiently
identified
with
the
regular
employees
to
have

relations
policy
 a
 community
 of
 interest
 so
 as
 to
 be
 included
 in
 the

 History
of
collective
bargaining
 bargaining
 unit,
 the
 NLRB
 considers
 the
 reasonable

 Desires
of
the
affected
employees
 likelihood
 that
 the
 temporary
 or
 part‐time
 employees
 will

 Extent
of
union
organization
 eventually
 become
 adequately
 identified
 in
 employment

• Bargaining
history
not
decisive
factor
 with
the
other
members
of
the
bargaining
unit

o NAFLU
 v.
 Mainit
 Lumber
 Development
 Company
 Workers
 o Regular
part‐time
employees
are
included
in
the
bargaining

Union­United
Lumber
and
General
Workers
of
the
Philippines
 unit
 even
 if
 they
 are
 students
 or
 work
 less
 than
 20
 hours
 a

 Petitioner
 union
 allege
 that
 employer
 MALDECO
 week,
 or
 are
 regularly
 employed
 elsewhere
 unless
 their

was
 composed
 of
 2
 bargaining
 units.
 Ministry
 of
 work
 schedules
 are
 so
 arranged
 as
 not
 to
 conflict
 with
 full‐
Labor
and
Employment
recognized
the
existence
of
 time
employment
elsewhere

2
 separate
 bargaining
 units
 (Sawmill
 Division
 and
 • Seasonal
employees

Logging
 Division).
 Employees
 wanted
 to
 have
 a
 o Full‐time
 seasonal
 employees
 who
 have
 a
 reasonable

certification
 election,
 in
 order
 to
 have
 just
 one
 expectation
of
substantial
seasonal
employment
from
year
to

bargaining
representative
 year
have
been
held
properly
includible
in
the
unit

 While
 the
 existence
 of
 a
 bargaining
 history
 is
 a
 o Part‐time
seasonal
employees
who
receive
none
of
the
fringe

factor
that
may
be
reckoned
with
in
determining
the
 benefits
 enjoyed
 by
 full‐time
 employees
 have
 insufficient

appropriate
bargaining
unit,
the
same
is
not
decisive
 common
interest
with
the
other
employees

or
conclusive.
Other
factors
must
be
considered.
The
 o In
 retail
 stores,
 part‐time
 employees
 who
 regularly
 average

test
 of
 grouping
 is
 community
 or
 mutuality
 of
 4
 hours
 or
 more
 per
 week
 for
 the
 last
 quarter
 before
 the

interests.
 This
 is
 so
 because
 “the
 basic
 test
 of
 an
 eligibility
date
have
been
held
includible
in
the
unit.


asserted
 bargaining
 unit’s
 acceptability
 is
 whether
 o Casual
 employees
 are
 excluded.
 BUT,
 casual
 laborers

or
not
it
is
fundamentally
the
combination
which
will
 working
for
an
employer
who
operates
a
referral
system
for

best
 assure
 to
 all
 employees
 the
 exercise
 of
 their
 unskilled
labor
have
been
held
an
appropriate
unit

collective
bargaining
rights.”
 • Probationary
employees


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 83

 oFact
 that
 an
 employee
 is
 given
 a
 classification
 such
 as
 • The
 more
 solid
 the
 employees
 are,
 the
 stronger
 is
 their
 bargaining

beginner,
 trainee,
 or
 probationary
 employee,
 and
 the
 fact
 capacity

that
 contemplation
 of
 permanent
 tenure
 is
 subject
 to
 • Policy
 of
 the
 BLR
 to
 encourage
 the
 formation
 of
 an
 employer
 unit

satisfactory
 completion
 of
 an
 initial
 trial
 period,
 are
 unless
circumstances
otherwise
require

insufficient
 to
 warrant
 such
 employee’s
 exclusion
 from
 a
 • Proliferation
of
unions
in
an
employer
unit
is
discouraged
as
a
matter

bargaining
unit
 of
 policy
 unless
 there
 are
 compelling
 reasons
 which
 would
 deny
 a

o Eligibility
 of
 probationary
 employees
 does
 not
 turn
 on
 the
 certain
class
of
employees
the
right
to
self‐organization
for
purposes

proportion
 of
 such
 employees
 who,
 willingly
 or
 not,
 fail
 to
 of
collective
bargaining

continue
 to
 work
 for
 the
 employer
 throughout
 the
 trial
 • Pagkakaisa
 ng
 mga
 Manggagawa
 sa
 Triumph
 International
 Lumber
 v.

period
 Ferrer­Calleja

6. Referendum
where
interests
are
dissimilar
 o There
is
no
dispute
that
the
union
is
the
exclusive
bargaining

• Desire
of
the
employees;
the
Globe
Doctrine
 representative
of
the
rank‐and‐file
employees.

o Relevancy
 of
 the
 wishes
 of
 the
 employees
 concerning
 their
 o Instead
 of
 forming
 another
 bargaining
 unit,
 the
 law
 requires

inclusion
 or
 exclusion
 from
 a
 proposed
 bargaining
 unit
 is
 them
to
be
members
of
the
existing
one.
The
ends
of
unionism

inherent
in
the
basic
right
to
self‐organization
 are
 better
 served
 if
 all
 the
 rank­and­file
 employees
 with

o Globe
doctrine:
while
the
desires
of
employees
with
respect
 substantially
the
same
interests
and
who
invoke
their
right
to

to
their
inclusion
in
bargaining
unit
is
not
controlling,
it
is
a
 self­organization
are
part
of
a
single
unit
so
that
they
can
deal

factor
which
would
be
taken
into
consideration
in
reaching
a
 with
 their
 employer
 with
 just
 one
 and
 yet
 potent
 voice.
 The

decision
 employees’
 bargaining
 power
 with
 management
 is

o Globe
Machine
&
Stamping
Co.
 strengthened
thereby.

 3
unions
(metal
polishers
union,
machinists
union,
 • Exceptions
to
one­unit
policy

federal
 labor
 union)
 filed
 representation
 petitions
 o For
instance,
exclusion
of
the
employees
from
the
rank‐and‐
with
 the
 NLRB.
 UAW‐CIO
 intervened,
 claiming
 to
 file
bargaining
unit
and
the
CBA
is
a
compelling
reason,
for
it

represent
 all
 the
 production
 and
 maintenance
 completely
 deprived
 them
 of
 the
 chance
 to
 bargain

workers
 collectively
 with
 petitioner
 and
 are
 thus
 left
 with
 no

 Board
found
that
the
polishing
and
the
punch
press
 recourse
 but
 to
 group
 themselves
 into
 a
 separate
 and

work
 at
 the
 plant
 was
 done
 in
 separate
 areas,
 but
 distinct
bargaining
unit
and
form
their
own
organization

that
 the
 actual
 production
 at
 the
 plant
 was
 highly
 o Recognition
 of
 exceptions
 takes
 into
 account
 the
 policy
 to

integrated.
 In
 addition,
 it
 found
 that
 the
 history
 of
 assure
 employees
 of
 the
 fullest
 freedom
 in
 exercising
 their

bargaining
 in
 the
 plant
 was
 inconclusive
 to
 show
 rights

any
 clear
 pattern
 of
 preference
 or
 clear
 o One
 company‐one
 union
 policy
 must
 yield
 to
 the
 right
 of

appropriateness
 of
 either
 plant‐wide
 or
 separate
 employees
 to
 form
 unions
 or
 associations
 for
 purposes
 not

units.
 contrary
 to
 law,
 to
 self‐organization
 and
 to
 enter
 into

 In
 view
 of
 the
 facts
 described,
 it
 appears
 that
 the
 collective
bargaining
negotiations

Company’s
 production
 workers
 can
 be
 considered
 8. Two
companies
with
related
business

either
 as
 a
 single
 unit
 appropriate
 for
 the
 purposes
 • Two
corporations
cannot
be
treated
as
a
single
bargaining
unit
even
if

of
collective
bargaining
or
as
three
such
units.
Hence,
 their
businesses
are
related

in
such
a
case,
as
this
one,
where
the
considerations
 • Indophil
Textile
Mill
Workers
Union
v.
Calica

are
so
evenly
balanced,
the
determining
factor
is
the
 o Issue:
 W/N
 Indophil
 Acrylic
 Corporation
 is
 an
 extension
 of

desire
 of
 the
 men
 themselves.
 Board
 ordered
 Indophil
 Textile
 Mills,
 and,
 if
 so,
 whether
 the
 rank‐and‐file

elections
 to
 be
 held
 separately
 for
 the
 men
 engaged
 employees
 of
 Indophil
 Acrylic
 should
 be
 recognized
 as
 part

in
polishing
and
those
engaged
in
punch
press
work.
 of
the
bargaining
unit
of
Indophil
Textile

Board
 also
ordered
 an
 election
 for
 the
 employees
of
 o The
 fact
 that
 the
 business
 of
 Indophil
 Textile
 and
 Indophil

the
 Company
 engaged
 in
 production
 and
 Acrylic
 are
 related,
 that
 some
 of
 the
 employees
 of
 Textile
 are

maintenance,
 exclusive
 of
 the
 polishers
 and
 punch
 the
same
persons
manning
and
providing
auxiliary
services
to

press
 workers
 and
 of
 clerical
 and
 supervisory
 the
 units
 of
 Acrylic,
 and
 that
 the
 physical
 plants,
 offices
 and

employees.
 facilities
are
situated
in
the
same
compound
are
not
sufficient

7. Single
or
“employer
unit”
is
preferred
 to
justify
piercing
the
corporate
veil
of
Acrylic

• One
employer
enterprise
constitutes
only
one
bargaining
unit


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 84

 It
 is
 grave
 abuse
 of
 discretion
 to
 treat
 two
 companies
 as
 a

o • Determining
 the
 scope
 or
 membership
 of
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 is

single
 bargaining
 unit
 when
 these
 companies
 are
 indubitably
 significant
and
far‐reaching
because
it
leads
to
the
determination
also

distinct
entities
with
separate
juridical
personalities.
 of
–

o Hence,
Acrylic
not
being
an
extension
or
expansion
of
Textile,
 o Employees
who
can
vote
in
the
certification
election

rank­and­file
employees
at
Acrylic
should
not
be
recognized
as
 o Employees
 to
 be
 represented
 in
 bargaining
 with
 the

part
of
the
petitioner
union.
 employer

• DLSU
 v.
 DLSUEA
 –
 SC
 affirms
 the
 findings
 of
 the
 voluntary
 arbitrator
 o Employees
who
will
be
covered
by
the
resulting
CBA

that
 employees
 of
 CSB
 should
 be
 excluded
 from
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 of
 • Distinguishing
the
CBU
from
the
union
is
important
because
–

the
 rank­and­file
 of
 DLSU,
 because
 the
 2
 educational
 institutions
 have
 o In
a
CE,
the
voters
are
the
CBU,
whether
union
or
nonunion

their
own
separate
juridical
personality
 members

• Subsidiaries
and
spun­off
corporations
 o In
CBA
ratification
the
voters
are
the
unit,
not
just
the
union

o Subsidiaries
or
corporations
formed
out
of
former
divisions
 members

of
 a
 mother
 company
 following
 a
 bona
 fide
 reorganization
 o In
 strike
 voting,
 the
 voters
 themselves
 are
 the
 members
 of

may
constitute
a
separate
bargaining
unit
 the
union,
not
all
of
the
unit

o San
Miguel
Corp.
Employees
Union
v.
SMC,
Magnolia
Corp.
and

San
Miguel
Foods,
Inc
 Article
256.
Representation
issue
in
organized
establishments.

 Magnolia
 and
 SMFI
 were
 spun‐off
 to
 operate
 as

distinct
companies.
Undeniably,
the
transformation
 Article
257.
Petitions
in
unorganized
establishments.

of
 the
 companies
 was
 a
 management
 prerogative

and
business
judgment.
As
a
result
of
the
spin‐offs,
 Article
258.
When
an
employer
may
file
petition.

each
 of
 the
 companies
 are
 run
 by
 different

management
 teams
 including
 separate
 human
 Article
258­A.
Employer
as
bystander.

resources/personnel
 managers,
 each
 company

enforces
 its
 own
 administrative
 and
 operational
 Article
259.
Appeal
from
certification
election
orders.

rules
 and
 policies,
 and
 each
 entity
 maintains

separate
 financial
 statements
 and
 are
 audited
 1. Determining
the
bargaining
union:
overview
of
the
methods

separately
 from
 each
 other.
 Thus,
 Magnolia
 and
 • To
 bargain
 with
 the
 employer,
 the
 employees
 in
 the
 CBU
 can
 be

SMFI
 became
 distinct
 personalities
 with
 separate
 represented
 by
 one
 and
 only
 one
 union
 which
 has
 to
 be
 a
 legitimate

juridical
personalities.
Thus,
they
cannot
belong
to
a
 labor
organization.

single
bargaining
unit
 • Three
methods
to
determine
the
bargaining
union

 In
 determining
 an
 appropriate
 bargaining
 unit,
 the
 o Voluntary
recognition

test
 of
 grouping
 is
 mutuality
 or
 commonality
 of
 o Certification
election
with
or
without
run‐off

interests.
 Considering
 the
 spin­offs,
 the
 companies
 o Consent
election

would
 consequently
 have
 their
 respective
 and
 • The
selection
of
the
bargaining
agent
may
take
place
in
an
–

distinctive
 concerns
 in
 terms
 of
 the
 nature
 of
 work,
 o Organized
establishment

wages,
 hours
 of
 work,
 etc.
 Interests
 of
 employees
 in
  Enterprise
 where
 there
 exists
 a
 recognized
 or

the
different
companies
perforce
differ.
(SMC
=
beer;
 certified
sole
and
exclusive
bargaining
agent

Magnolia
 =
 dairy
 products;
 SMFI
 =
 production
 of
  Voluntary
recognition
is
NOT
possible

feeds
 and
 processing
 of
 chicken)
 The
 different
  Petition
 to
 hold
 CE
 has
 to
 be
 filed
 within
 the

companies
 may
 have
 different
 volumes
 of
 work
 and
 freedom
 period,
 which
 means
 the
 last
 60
 days
 of

different
working
conditions.
It
would
then
be
best
to
 the
5th
year
of
the
expiring
CBA

in
other
words,

have
 separate
 bargaining
 units
 for
 the
 different
 the
 contest
 between
 unions
 comes
 at
 intervals
 of

companies
 where
 the
 employees
 can
 bargain
 roughly
4
years
and
10
months

separately
according
to
their
needs
and
according
to
  Petition
 may
 be
 filed
 by
 any
 LLO,
 but
 the
 petition

their
own
work
conditions
 must
 have
 the
 written
 support
 of
 at
 least
 25%
 of

9. Summation
of
significance
 the
employees
in
the
bargaining
unit

• Bargaining
 unit
 is
 not
 the
 same
 as
 the
 union;
 there
 may
 be
 several
 o Unorganized
establishment

unions
in
one
bargaining
unit
  Where
 no
 union
 has
 yet
 been
 duly
 recognized
 or

certified
as
bargaining
representative


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 85

  Employer
may
voluntarily
recognize
the
bargaining
 establishment
 or
 bargaining
 unit
 where
 the
 union

agent
 seeks
to
operate;

 If
 voluntary
 recognition
 not
 possible,
  The
 approximate
 number
 of
 employees
 in
 the

petition
 to
 hold
 an
 election
 may
 be
 filed
 bargaining
 unit,
 accompanied
 by
 the
 names
 of

anytime
 by
 any
 LLO,
 except
 within
 12
 those
 who
 support
 the
 voluntary
 recognition

months
 from
 a
 previous
 CE,
 run‐off,
 or
 comprising
 at
 least
 a
 majority
 of
 the
 members
 of

consent
election
 the
bargaining
unit;
and

o Rarely,
an
employer
may
also
file
a
petition
for
CE
  A
 statement
 that
 the
 labor
 union
 is
 the
 only

• Election
 is
 conducted
 under
 the
 supervision
 and
 control
 of
 DOLE
 legitimate
 labor
 organization
 operating
 within
 the

officials.
 It
 ends
 up
 with
 a
 formal
 and
 official
 statements
 of
 results,
 bargaining
unit.

certifying
which
union
won,
if
any.
 o All
 accompanying
 documents
 of
 the
 notice
 for
 voluntary

• Where
one
casting
of
votes
is
not
enough
to
elect
a
union,
the
election
 recognition
 shall
 be
 certified
 under
 oath
 by
 the
 employer

officials
may
require
a
run‐off
election
if
certain
conditions
exist
 representative
and
president
of
the
recognized
labor
union.

• Note
that
certification
election,
run‐off
election
or
consent
election
is
 o Where
 the
 notice
 of
 voluntary
 recognition
 is
 sufficient
 in

needed
 only
 when
 two
 or
 more
 unions
 are
 vying
 for
 exclusive
 form,
 number
 and
 substance
 and
 where
 there
 is
 no
 other

bargaining
representative
(EBR)
 registered
 labor
 union
 operating
 within
 the
 bargaining
 unit

• Where
there
is
but
one
union
and
there
is
ample
proof
that
that
union
 concerned,
 the
 Regional
 Office,
 through
 the
 Labor
 Relations

carries
 the
 majority
 of
 the
 employees,
 law
 allows
 employer
 to
 Division
 shall,
 within
 10
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 notice,

voluntarily
recognize
such
union
 record
 the
 fact
 of
 voluntary
 recognition
 in
 its
 roster
 of

2. First
method:
voluntary
recognition
(VR)
 legitimate
 labor
 unions
 and
 notify
 the
 labor
 union

• Three
conditions
–
 concerned.

o Possible
only
in
an
unorganized
establishment
 o Where
 the
 notice
 of
 voluntary
 recognition
 is
 insufficient
 in

 In
 an
 organized
 setting,
 the
 employer
 cannot
 form,
 number
 and
 substance,
 the
 Regional
 Office
 shall,

voluntarily
 recognize
 any
 new
 union
 because
 the
 within
the
same
period,
notify
the
labor
union
of
its
findings

law
 requires
 him
 to
 continue
 recognizing
 and
 and
advise
it
to
comply
with
the
necessary
requirements.

dealing
with
the
incumbent
union
as
long
as
it
has
 o Where
 neither
 the
 employer
 nor
 the
 labor
 union
 failed
 to

not
been
properly
replaced
by
another
union
 complete
the
requirements
for
voluntary
recognition
within

o Only
one
union
is
asking
for
recognition
 the
30
days
from
receipt
of
the
advisory,
the
Regional
Office

 If
two
or
more,
there
must
be
an
election
 shall
 return
 the
 notice
 for
 voluntary
 recognition
 together

o Union
 voluntarily
 recognized
 should
 be
 the
 majority
 union
 with
all
its
accompanying
documents
without
prejudice
to
its

as
indicated
by
the
fact
that
members
of
the
bargaining
unit
 resubmission.

did
not
object
to
the
projected
recognition
 o From
 the
 time
 of
 recording
 of
 voluntary
 recognition,
 the

 If
 there
 is
 an
 objection
 raised,
 the
 recognition
 is
 recognized
labor
union
shall
enjoy
the
rights,
privileges
and

barred,
 and
 a
 certification
 election
 or
 consent
 obligations
 of
 an
 existing
 bargaining
 agent
 of
 all
 the

election
will
have
to
take
place
 employees
in
the
bargaining
unit.

• VR
under
DO
40­03
 o Entry
 of
 voluntary
 recognition
 shall
 bar
 the
 filing
 of
 a

o Within
 30
 days
 from
 such
 recognition,
 the
 employer
 and
 petition
 for
 certification
 election
 by
 any
 labor
 organization

union
shall
submit
a
notice
of
voluntary
recognition
with
the
 for
 a
 period
 of
 1
 year
 from
 the
 date
 of
 entry
 of
 voluntary

Regional
 Office
 which
 issued
 the
 recognized
 labor
 union's
 recognition.
 Upon
 expiration
 of
 this
 one‐year
 period,
 any

certificate
 of
 registration
 or
 certificate
 of
 creation
 of
 a
 legitimate
 labor
 organization
 may
 file
 a
 petition
 for

chartered
local.
 certification
 election
 in
 the
 same
 bargaining
 unit

o The
notice
of
voluntary
recognition
shall
beaccompanied
by
 represented
 by
 the
 voluntarily
 recognized
 union,
 unless
 a

the
 original
 copy
 and
 two
 (2)
 duplicate
 copies
 of
 the
 collective
 bargaining
 agreement
 between
 the
 employer
 and

following
documents
–

 voluntarily
 recognized
 labor
 union
 was
 executed
 and

 A
 joint
 statement
 under
 oath
 of
 voluntary
 registered
with
the
Regional
Office.

recognition
 attesting
 to
 the
 fact
 of
 voluntary
 3. Second
method:
certification
election
(CE)

recognition;
 • CE
 should
 be
 given
 every
 encouragement
 under
 the
 law
 so
 that
 the

 Certificate
 of
 posting
 of
 the
 joint
 statement
 of
 will
 of
 the
 workers
 may
 be
 discovered
 and,
 through
 their
 freely

voluntary
recognition
for
15
consecutive
days
in
at
 chosen
representatives,
pursued
and
realized

least
 two
 (2)
 conspicuous
 places
 in
 the

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 86

 • Process
 is
 called
 CE
 because
 it
 serves
 as
 the
 official,
 reliable
 and
 o Both
 in
 CE
 and
 union
 elections,
 prescribed
 procedures

democratic
 basis
 for
 the
 Bureau
 to
 determine
 and
 certify
 the
 union
 should
be
followed

that
 shall
 be
 the
 exclusive
 representative
 of
 the
 employees
 (in
 the
 • Direct
certification
no
longer
allowed

bargaining
unit)
for
the
purpose
of
bargaining
with
the
employer
 o Even
in
a
case
where
a
union
has
filed
a
petition
for
CE,
the

• As
 defined
 in
 the
 IRR,
 certification
 election
 means
 the
 process
 of
 mere
 fact
 that
 there
 was
 no
 opposition
 does
 not
 warrant
 a

determining
 through
 secret
 ballot
 the
 sole
 and
 exclusive
 direct
certification

representative
of
the
employees
in
an
appropriate
bargaining
unit,
for
 o Holding
 of
 a
 CE
 is
 not
 necessarily
 a
 mere
 formality
 where

purposes
of
collective
bargaining
or
negotiation
 there
 is
 a
 compelling
 legal
 reason
 not
 to
 directly
 and

• Fact­finding
 unilaterally
certify
a
union
whose
legitimacy
is
precisely
the

o In
 labor
 legislation,
 certification
 proceedings
 is
 not
 a
 object
of
litigation

litigation,
 but
 an
 investigation
 of
 non‐adversary
 and
 fact‐ • Who
files
petition
for
CE
(PCE)

finding
character.
Hence,
it
is
not
bound
by
technical
rules
of
 o May
be
filed
by
–

evidence
  A
registered
union

o The
law
does
not
contemplate
the
holding
of
a
CE
unless
the
  Employer

preliminary
inquiry
shows
a
reasonable
doubt
as
to
which
of
  When
requested
to
bargain
collectively
in

the
 contending
 unions
 represents
 a
 majority
 (evidence
 is
 a
 bargaining
 unit
 where
 no
 registered

adduced
by
rival
unions)
 CBA
exists

o Involve
only
2
issues
–
  Usually,
 employer
 lets
 the
 unions

 Proper
 composition
 and
 constituency
 of
 the
 interplead
to
determine
who
among
them

bargaining
unit
 will
bargain

 Veracity
 of
 majority
 membership
 claims
 of
 the
  Any
 LLO,
 including
 a
 national
 union
 or
 federation

competing
 unions
 so
 as
 to
 identify
 the
 one
 union
 that
 has
 issued
 a
 charter
 certificate
 to
 its

that
 will
 serve
 as
 the
 bargaining
 representative
 of
 local/chapter
or
the
local/chapter
itself

the
entire
bargaining
unit
  National
 union
 or
 federation
 filing
 in

o “No
Union”
is
also
one
of
the
choices
named
in
the
ballot.
 behalf
 of
 local/chapter
 shall
 not
 be

 If
 this
 wins,
 the
 company
 or
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 required
 to
 disclose
 the
 names
 of
 the

remains
 unionized
 for
 at
 least
 12
 months,
 the
 local/chapter’s
 officers
 and
 members
 but

period
 known
 as
 the
 12‐month
 bar.
 After
 that
 shall
 attach
 to
 the
 petition
 the
 charter

period,
a
petition
for
a
CE
may
be
filed
again.
 certificate
it
issued
to
its
local/chapter

• Certification
election
differentiated
from
union
election
 o In
all
cases,
employer
shall
not
be
considered
a
party
thereto

with
 a
 right
 to
 oppose
 a
 petition
 for
 certification
 election.

Union
Election
 Certification
Election
 Employer’s
participation
is
limited
to
–

Held
 pursuant
 to
 the
 union’s
 constitution
 Process
ordered
and
supervised
by
DOLE
  Being
 notified
 or
 informed
 of
 petitions
 of
 such

and
bylaws
 nature

Object
is
to
elect
officers
of
the
union
 Object
 is
 to
 determine,
 through
 secret
  Submitting
 the
 list
 of
 employees
 during
 pre‐
ballot,
 whether
 or
 not
 a
 majority
 of
 the
 election
 conference
 should
 the
 Med‐Arbiter
 act

employees
 wish
 to
 be
 represented
 by
 a
 favorably
on
the
petition

labor
 organization
 and,
 in
 the
 affirmative
 o An
employee
has
the
right
to
intervene
for
the
protection
of

case,
 by
 which
 particular
 labor
 his
individual
right

organization
 o In
an
unorganized
establishment,
once
a
petition
is
filed
by
a

Right
 to
 vote
 enjoyed
 only
 by
 union
 All
 employees
 whether
 union
 member
 or
 LLO,
the
Med‐arbiter
shall
automatically
order
a
CE

members
 not,
 who
 belong
 to
 the
 appropriate
 o Order
of
Med‐Arbiter
is
not
appealable

bargaining
 unit
 can
 vote.
 Reverse
 is
 not
 • Intervention

always
 true,
 unless
 otherwise
 authorized
 o Other
unions
which
are
interested
in
joining
a
CE
may
file
a

by
union
constitution
and
bylaws
 motion
for
intervention

Winners
 become
 officers
 and
 Winner
 is
 an
 entity,
 a
 union,
 which
 o In
an
organized
establishment,
the
filer
will
most
likely
be
a

representatives
of
the
union
only
 becomes
 the
 representative
 of
 the
 whole
 union
that
was
defeated
in
the
CE
some
five
years
before.
In

bargaining
 unit
 that
 includes
 even
 the
 such
case,
the
incumbent
union
is
a
necessary
part,
a
forced

members
of
the
defeated
unions
 intervenor.
 But
 it
 does
 not
 lose
 its
 representative
 status.
 It


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 87

 remains
 the
 sole
 bargaining
 representative
 until
 it
 is
 collective
 bargaining
 agreement
 is
 registered,
 the

replaced
by
another
 petition
 may
 be
 filed
 only
 within
 sixty
 (60)
 days

o Whether
petitioner
or
intervenor,
the
union
has
to
be
an
LLO
 prior
to
its
expiry.

 If
 petition
 was
 filed
 by
 the
 federation
 which
 is
 • Form
and
contents
of
petition

merely
an
agent,
the
petition
is
deemed
to
be
filed
 o The
 petition
 shall
 be
 in
 writing,
 verified
 under
 oath
 by
 the

by
the
chapter,
the
principal,
which
must
be
a
LLO.
 president
of
petitioning
labor
organization.

It
cannot
rely
on
the
legitimate
status
of
the
mother
 o Where
 a
 federation
 or
 national
 union
 files
 a
 petition
 in

union
 behalf
 of
 its
 local
 or
 affiliate,
 the
 petition
 shall
 be
 verified

• Where
to
file
the
PCE
 under
 oath
 by
 the
 president
 or
 duly
 authorized

o With
the
Regional
Office
which
issued
the
petitioning
union’s
 representative
 of
 the
 federation
 or
 national
 union
 with
 a

certificate
 of
 registration
 or
 certificate
 of
 creation
 of
 certification
 under
 oath
 as
 to
 the
 existence
 of
 its

chartered
 local.
 Petition
 shall
 be
 heard
 and
 resolved
 by
 the
 local/chapter
in
the
establishment
and
attaching
thereto
the

Med‐Arbiter
 charter
certificate
or
a
certified
true
copy.

o When
2
or
more
petitions
involving
same
bargaining
unit
are
 o If
 the
 petition
 is
 filed
 by
 a
 local/chapter
 it
 shall
 attach
 its

filed
 in
 one
 Regional
 Office
 
 automatically
 consolidated
 character
certificate
or
a
certified
true
copy.

with
the
Med‐Arbiter
who
first
acquired
jurisdiction
 o In
 case
 the
 employer
 filed,
 the
 owner,
 president
 or
 any

o 2
 or
 more
 petitions
 filed
 in
 different
 Regional
 Offices,
 the
 corporate
 officer,
 who
 is
 authorized
 by
 the
 board
 of

Office
 in
 which
 the
 petition
 was
 first
 filed
 shall
 exclude
 all
 directors
shall
verify
the
petition.

others;
in
which
case,
the
latter
shall
indorse
the
petition
to
 o The
 petition
 should
 also
 state
 any
 of
 the
 following

the
former
for
consolidation
 circumstances
–

• When
to
file
the
PCE
  That
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 is
 unorganized
 or
 that

o No
CBA

anytime
outside
the
12‐month
bar
 there
 is
 no
 registered
 collective
 bargaining

o Has
a
CBA

filed
only
within
the
last
60
days
of
the
5th
year
 agreement
 covering
 the
 employees
 in
 the

of
the
CBA
 bargaining
unit;

o The
 IRR
 states:
 A
 petition
 for
 CE
 may
 be
 filed
 anytime,
  If
 there
 exists
 a
 duly
 registered
 collective

EXCEPT
–
 bargaining
 agreement,
 that
 the
 petition
 is
 filed

 When
 a
 fact
 of
 voluntary
 recognition
 has
 been
 within
 the
 sixty‐day
 freedom
 period
 of
 such

entered
 or
 a
 valid
 certification,
 consent
 or
 run‐off
 agreement;
or

election
has
been
conducted
within
the
bargaining
  If
 another
 union
 had
 been
 previously
 recognized

unit
 within
 one
 (1)
 year
 prior
 to
 the
 filing
 of
 the
 voluntarily
 or
 certified
 in
 a
 valid
 certification,

petition
 for
 certification
 election.
 Where
 an
appeal
 consent
or
run‐off
election,
that
the
petition
is
filed

has
 been
 filed
 from
 the
 order
 of
 the
 Med‐Arbiter
 outside
 the
 one‐year
 period
 from
 entry
 of

certifying
the
results
of
the
election,
the
running
of
 voluntary
recognition
or
conduct
of
certification
or

the
 one
 year
 period
 shall
 be
 suspended
 until
 the
 run‐off
election
and
no
appeal
is
pending
thereon.

decision
 on
 the
 appeal
 has
 become
 final
 and
 o In
 an
 organized
 establishment,
 signature
 of
 at
 least
 25%
 of

executory;
 all
 employees
 in
 the
 appropriate
 bargaining
 unit
 shall
 be

 When
the
duly
certified
union
has
commenced
and
 attached
to
the
petition
at
the
time
of
its
filing

sustained
 negotiations
 in
 good
 faith
 with
 the
 • Action
on
the
petition:
preliminary
conference
(pre­con)

employer
 in
 accordance
 with
 Article
 250
 of
 the
 o Pre‐con
 is
 meant
 to
 determine
 whether
 the
 PCE
 should
 be

Labor
Code
within
the
one
year
period
referred
to
 processed
 further
 or
 be
 dismissed.
 It
 is
 the
 means
 also
 to

in
the
immediately
preceding
paragraph;
 determine
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 that
 will
 participate
 in
 the

 When
 a
 bargaining
 deadlock
 to
 which
 an
 election,
 the
 identity
 of
 the
 contending
 unions,
 and
 the

incumbent
 or
 certified
 bargaining
 agent
 is
 a
 party
 possibility
 of
 holding
 a
 consent
 election
 instead
 of
 a

had
been
submitted
to
conciliation
or
arbitration
or
 certification
election.

had
become
the
subject
of
a
valid
notice
of
strike
or
 o If
 at
 the
 pre‐con,
 unions
 agree
 to
 hold
 a
 consent
 election,

lockout;
 then
 the
 PCE
 will
 no
 longer
 be
 heard
 and
 the
 unions
 will

 When
 a
 collective
 bargaining
 agreement
 between
 instead
prepare
for
the
consent
elections.

the
 employer
 and
 a
 duly
 recognized
 or
 certified
 o If
the
unions
fail
to
agree
to
hold
a
consent
election,
the
med‐
bargaining
agent
has
been
registered
in
accordance
 arbiter
proceeds
to
consider
the
petition

with
 Article
 231
 of
 the
 Labor
 Code.
 Where
 such

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 88

 o Denial
 or
 grant
 of
 the
 petition
 is
 always
 appealable
 to
 the
 exchange
 for
 “something”
 they
 will
 not
 pursue
 the

secretary
of
the
DOLE.
 petition
 for
 CE
 so
 that
 the
 company
 may
 remain

 Never
 appealable
 is
 the
 approval
 of
 a
 PCE
 in
 an
 unionized

unorganized
bargaining
unit
 o Illegitimacy
–
unregistered
union

o After
raffle,
petition
shall
immediately
be
transmitted
to
the
  Petitioner
 is
 not
 listed
 in
 the
 DOLE’s
 registry
 of

assigned
 Mediator‐Arbiter
 who
 shall
 prepare
 and
 serve
 a
 legitimate
 labor
 unions
 or
 that
 its
 registration

notice
of
pre‐con
to
be
held
within
10
working
days
from
the
 certificate

med‐arbiter’s
receipt
of
the
petition
  Even
if
the
union
is
listed
as
LLO,
its
legitimacy
may

o Service
 of
 the
 petition
 to
 employer
 and
 of
 the
 notice
 of
 still
 be
 questioned
 in
 a
 separate
 and
 independent

preliminary
conference
to
the
petitioner
and
the
incumbent
 petition
for
cancellation
to
be
heard
and
decided
by

bargaining
agent,
if
any,
shall
be
made
within
3
working
days
 the
BLR
Director
or
the
Regional
Director
himself

from
the
med‐arbiter’s
receipt
of
the
petition
  Mere
 filing
 of
 a
 petition
 to
 cancel
 the
 petitioner’s

o Copy
 of
 the
 petition
 and
 of
 the
 notice
 of
 pre‐con
 shall
 be
 registration
 does
 not
 cause
 the
 suspension
 or

posted
 within
 the
 same
 3
 day
 period
 in
 at
 least
 2
 dismissal
 of
 the
 PCE.
 To
 serve
 as
 a
 ground
 for

conspicuous
places
in
the
establishment
(if
multiple‐location
 dismissal
 of
 a
 PCE,
 the
 legal
 personality
 of
 the

workplace,
 posting
 shall
 be
 made
 in
 at
 least
 2
 conspicuous
 petitioner
 should
 have
 been
 revoked
 or
 cancelled

places
in
every
location)
 with
finality

• Action
on
the
petition;
hearings
and
pleadings
  Suspension
 of
 proceedings:
 “company
 union”

o If
 the
 unions
 fail
 to
 agree
 to
 a
 consent
 election
 during
 the
 charge”

pre‐con,
 the
 med‐arbiter
 may
 conduct
 as
 many
 hearings
 as
  Before:
 formal
 charge
 of
 company

he
may
deem
necessary
 domination
 or
 company
 unionism
 is
 a

 Conduct
 of
 the
 hearings
 cannot
 exceed
 15
 days
 prejudicial
 question
 that,
 until
 decided,

from
the
date
of
the
scheduled
pre‐con/hearing
 bars
 proceedings
 for
 a
 certification

 After
 that
 time,
 the
 petition
 shall
 be
 considered
 election,
the
reason
being
that
the
votes
of

submitted
for
decision
 the
 members
 of
 the
 dominated
 union

 Extension
of
time
shall
not
be
entertained
 would
not
be
free

o Med‐arbiter
 shall
 have
 control
 of
 the
 proceedings
 and
  Now:
DO
40‐03
does
not
favor
prejudicial

postponements
or
continuances
are
discouraged
 questions
 that
 block
 certification

o Failure
 of
 any
 party
 to
 appear
 in
 the
 hearing(s)
 when
 proceedings.
 Neither
 may
 a
 certification

notified
 or
 to
 file
 its
 pleadings
 shall
 be
 deemed
 a
 waiver
 of
 election
 be
 stayed
 during
 pendency
 of

its
right
to
be
heard
 ULP
 charge
 against
 a
 union
 filed
 by
 the

o Med‐arbiter
 may
 allow
 cancellation
 of
 scheduled
 hearing(s)
 employer.
Even
appeal
to
the
SC
from
the

upon
agreement
of
the
parties
for
meritorious
reasons
 order
 denying
 the
 motion
 for

 Cancellation
 shall
 not
 be
 used
 as
 a
 basis
 for
 reconsideration
 does
 not
 suspend
 the

extending
 the
 15
 day
 period
 within
 which
 to
 effect
of
a
CE.

terminate
the
same
 o Illegitimacy
–
no
charter

o Within
10
days
from
date
of
the
last
hearing,
the
med‐arbiter
  Failure
 of
 local/chapter
 or
 national

shall
issue
a
formal
order
denying
or
granting
the
petition.
 union/federation
 to
 submit
 a
 duly
 issued
 charter

 In
 organized
 establishments,
 order
 or
 decision
 certificate
upon
filing
of
the
petition
for
CE

granting
 the
 petition
 can
 only
 be
 issued
 after
 the
 o Absence
of
employment
relationship

lapse
of
the
freedom
period
  Absence
 of
 employer‐employee
 relationship

• Action
on
the
petition:
denial;
eight
grounds
 between
 all
 members
 of
 the
 petitioning
 union
 and

o Non‐appearance
 the
 establishment
 where
 the
 proposed
 bargaining

 Non‐appearance
 of
 petitioner
 for
 2
 consecutive
 unit
is
sought
to
be
represented

scheduled
 conferences
 before
 the
 med‐arbiter
  Employer,
 notified
 about
 the
 petition,
 may
 invoke

despite
notice
 and
 prove
 the
 absence
 of
 employer‐employee

 This
 ground
 is
 controversial
 because
 it
 legalizes
 a
 relationship.
(Contention
may
be
raised
on
appeal)

racket
 because
 there
 are
 fly‐by‐night
 “union
 o Election
bar
–
the
12‐month
bar

organizers”
who
file
petitions
for
CE,
then
approach
  Filing
 of
 a
 petition
 within
 1
 year
 from
 the
 date
 of

the
 target
 enterprise
 with
 a
 proposition
 that,
 in
 recording
 of
 the
 voluntary
 recognition,
 or
 within

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 89

 the
 same
 period
from
a
valid
certification,
 consent
  The
 Deadlock
 Bar
 rule
 simply
 provides
 that
 a

or
 run‐off
 election
 where
 no
 appeal
 on
 the
 results
 petition
for
CE
can
only
be
entertained
if
there
is
no

of
 the
 certification,
 consent
 or
 run‐off
 election
 is
 pending
 bargaining
 deadlock
 submitted
 to

pending
 conciliation
 or
 arbitration
 or
 had
 become
 the

 Thus,
if
an
election
had
been
held
but
not
one
of
the
 subject
of
a
valid
notice
of
strike
or
lockout.

unions
own,
a
PCE
may
be
filed
again
but
only
after
  Capitol
Medical
Center
Alliance
v.
Laguesma

12
months.

  If
 the
 law
 proscribes
 the
 conduct
 of
 a
 CE

 If
 a
 union
 has
 won,
 such
 union
 and
 the
 employer
 when
 there
 is
 a
 bargaining
 deadlock

must
within
12
months
start
negotiating
a
CBA.
 submitted
 to
 conciliation
 or
 arbitration,

 But
 if
 circumstances
 show
 that
 the
 cause
 of
 not
 with
 more
 reason
 should
 it
 not
 be

having
 concluded
 a
 CBA
 was
 not
 the
 union’s
 fault,
 conducted
 if,
 despite
 attempts
 to
 bring
 an

such
union
should
not
be
blamed,
and
a
CE
should
 employer
 to
 the
 negotiation
 table
 by
 the

not
 be
 authorized
 even
 though
 no
 CBA
 has
 been
 certified
 bargaining
 agent,
 there
 was
 no

concluded
 despite
 passage
 of
 12
 months
 
 reasonable
effort
in
good
faith
on
the
part

deadlock
bar
 of
the
employer
to
bargain
collectively.

 Where
 there
 was
 no
CE
precisely
 because
 the
first
  Deadlock
 bar
 rule
 not
 applicable
 in
 an
 artificial

petition
 was
 dismissed,
 the
 certification
 year
 bar
 deadlock
 –
 deadlock
 prearranged
 or
 preserved
 by

does
 not
 apply.
 Nor
 does
 it
 apply
 if
 there
 was
 a
 collusion
of
the
employer
and
the
majority
union

failure
of
election.
  KAMPIL­KATIPUNAN
v.
Trajano

 A
 radical
 change
 in
 the
 size
 of
 a
 bargaining
 unit
  KAMPIL‐Katipunan
filed
CE,
claiming
that

within
a
short
period
of
time,
raising
a
question
as
 NAFLU,
 the
 existing
 exclusive
 bargaining

to
 the
 majority
 status
 of
 the
 certified
 agent
 failed
 to
 come
 up
 with
 a
 CBA.

representative,
 may
 also
 prompt
 the
 NLRB
 to
 NAFLU
claims
that
at
the
time
the
CE
was

entertain
 a
 petition
 for
 an
 election
 during
 the
 filed,
it
was
in
a
bargaining
deadlock
with

certification
year.
 employer
VIRON.

 Samahang
 Manggagawa
 sa
 Permex
 v.
 Secretary
 of
  The
 records
 do
 not
 show
 that
 there
 was
 a

Labor
 bargaining
 deadlock
 prior
 to
 the
 filing
 of

 “No
 Union”
 choice
 won
 in
 the
 CE.
 But
 the
 petition
 for
 CE.
 The
 strikes
 and

within
 12
 months
 from
 that
 election,
 the
 submission
 to
 compulsory
 arbitration

employer
 recognized
 a
 new
 union
 and
 alleged
 by
 NAFLU
 took
 place
 after
 the

then
concluded
with
it
a
CBA.
 filing
of
the
PCE.
For
a
bargaining
deadlock

 There
 can
 be
 no
 determination
 of
 a
 to
 bar
 a
 PCE,
 such
 deadlock
 must
 have

bargaining
representative
within
a
year
of
 been
 submitted
 to
 conciliation
 or

the
 proclamation
 of
 the
 results
 of
 the
 CE.
 arbitration,
 or
 must
 have
 been
 the
 subject

There
 is
 something
 dubious
 about
 the
 fact
 of
 a
 valid
 strike
 or
 lockout
 notice
 before
 –

that
 just
 10
 months
 after
 the
 employees
 not
after
–
the
filing
of
the
PCE.

had
voted
that
they
did
not
want
any
union
 o Election
bar
–
existing
CBA

to
 represent
 them,
 they
 would
 be
  Filing
 the
 petition
 before
 or
 after
 the
 freedom

expressing
 support
 for
 petitioner.
 The
 period
of
a
duty
registered
CBA;
provided
that
the

court
 strongly
 doubted
 that
 the
 union
 60‐day
 period
 based
 on
 the
 original
 CBA
 shall
 not

voluntarily
 recognized
 was
 really
 the
 be
 affected
 by
 any
 amendment,
 extension
 or

employee’s
choice.
 renewal
of
the
CBA

o Election
bar
–
negotiation
or
deadlock
  The
 PCE
 may
 be
 filed
 within
 this
 60‐day
 period
 –

 Where
 a
 duly
 certified
 union
 has
 commenced
 and
 not
 before,
 not
 after
 –
 otherwise
 the
 PCE
 may
 be

sustained
negotiations
with
the
employer
or
where
 dismissed

there
 exists
 a
 bargaining
 deadlock
 which
 has
 been
  The
freedom
period
is
the
last
60
days
of
the
CBA’s

submitted
 to
 conciliation
 or
 arbitration
 or
 has
 fifth
year
of
the
representational
aspect.

become
 the
 subject
 of
 a
 valid
 notice
 of
 strike
 or
  To
 bar
 a
 CE
 it
 is
 no
 longer
 necessary
 that
 the
 CBA

lockout
where
an
incumbent
or
certified
bargaining
 be
certified;
it
is
enough
that
it
is
registered

agent
is
a
party
  Contract‐bar
rule
applied:

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 90

  Extended
 CBA
 under
 deadlock
 –
 no
 PCE
 as
 the
 supervisors
 are
 concerned,
 the

may
 be
 filed
 before
 the
 onset
 of
 the
 “establishment”
 is
 considered
 unionized.
 In
 other

freedom
period
nor
after
such
period.
The
 words,
 in
 deciding
 whether
 25%
 requirement
 is

old
 CBA
 is
 extended
 until
 a
 new
 one
 is
 applicable
 or
 not,
 the
 law
 considers
 the
 CBU

signed.
 involved,
not
the
whole
enterprise.

 National
 Congress
 of
 Unions
 in
 the
 Sugar
  Compliance
with
the
25%
requirement
need
not
be

Industry
 v.
 Ferrer
 Calleja
 –
 Despite
 the
 established
 with
 absolute
 certainty.
 The

lapse
 of
 the
 formal
 effectivity
 of
 the
 CBA,
 requirement
then
is
relevant
only
when
it
becomes

the
 law
 still
 considers
 the
 same
 as
 mandatory
to
conduct
a
CE.

continuing
 in
 full
 force
 and
 effect
 until
 a
  Effect
 of
 withdrawal
 of
 signatures
 depends
 on

new
one
is
executed.
Thus,
the
contract­bar
 whether
the
it
happened
before
or
after
the
filing
of

rule
still
applies.
 the
petition.

 Even
 if
 the
 existing
 CBA
 is
 registered
  Before
 –
 presumed
 voluntary
 and
 it
 does

surreptitiously,
 as
 alleged
 by
 the
 affect
the
propriety
of
the
petition

petitioner
 union,
 but
 no
 evidence
 is
  After
 –
 deemed
 involuntary
 (perhaps

presented
 proving
 the
 alleged
 pressured
 by
 the
 employer)
 and
 it
 does

surreptitious
 registration,
 the
 PCE
 can’t
 not
necessarily
cause
the
dismissal
of
the

be
granted
 petition

 Contract‐bar
rule
not
applied:
  La
Suerte
Cigar
v.
Director

 Defective
 CBA
 (ALU
 v.
 Ferrer­Calleja:
 To
  The
 distinction
 must
 be
 that
 withdrawals

be
a
bar
to
a
certification
election,
the
CBA
 made
 before
 the
 filing
 of
 the
 petition
 are

must
 be
 adequate
 in
 that
 it
 comprises
 presumed
 voluntary
 unless
 there
 is

substantial
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of
 convincing
 proof
 to
 the
 contrary,
 whereas

employment)
 withdrawals
 made
 after
 the
 filing
 of
 the

 Referendum
 to
 register
 on
 independent
 petition
 are
 deemed
 involuntary.
 The

union

 reason
 for
 such
 distinction
 is
 that
 if
 the

 CBA
 signed
 before
 or
 within
 freedom
 withdrawal
 or
 retraction
 is
 made
 before

period
despite
injunctive
order
 the
 filing
 of
 the
 petition,
 the
 names
 of

 A
CBA
may
be
renegotiated
before,
during,
or
after
 employees
 supporting
 the
 petition
 are

the
 60‐day
 freedom
 period.
 But
 if
 during
 such
 supposed
 to
 be
 held
 secret
 to
 the
 opposite

period
a
PCE
is
filed,
the
Med‐Arbiter
can
order
the
 party.


suspension
 of
 the
 renegotiation
 until
 the
 • Prohibited
grounds
for
the
denial/suspension
of
the
petition

representation
proceedings
finally
end
 o Commingling

 Effect
 on
 the
 renegotiated
 CBA
 if
 a
 union
  Inclusion
 as
 union
 members
 of
 employees
 outside

other
than
the
one
that
executed
it
should
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 shall
 not
 be
 a
 ground
 for
 the

win
 the
 CE
 –
 union
 thus
 certified
 would
 cancellation
 of
 the
 registration
 of
 the
 union.
 Said

have
 to
 respect
 the
 contract,
 but
 that
 it
 employees
 are
 automatically
 deemed
 removed

may
 bargain
 with
 the
 management
 to
 from
the
list
of
membership
of
said
unions

shorten
 the
 life
 of
 the
 contract
 if
 it
 is
 too
 o Validity
of
registration

long
  Issues
pertaining
to
validity
of
union’s
certificate
of

 When
 a
 CBA
 is
 entered
 into
 at
 the
 time
 registration
 or
 legal
 personality,
 validity
 of

when
the
PCE
had
already
been
filed
by
a
 registration
 and
 execution
 of
 CBA
 shall
 be
 heard

union
and
was
the
pending
resolution,
the
 and
 resolved
 by
 the
 Regional
 Director
 in
 an

said
CBA
can’t
be
deemed
permanent.

 independent
 petition
 for
 cancellation
 of
 its

o Election
bar
–
lack
of
support
 registration
and
not
by
the
Med‐Arbiter
in
the
PCE,

 In
an
organized
establishment,
the
failure
to
submit
 unless
 the
 petitioning
 union
 is
 not
 listed
 in
 the

the
 25%
 signature
 requirement
 to
 support
 the
 Department’s
 roster
 of
 LLO,
 or
 an
 existing
 CBA
 is

filing
of
the
petition
for
CE
 not
registered
with
the
Department

 In
 a
 case,
 the
 company’s
 rank‐and‐file
 employees
 o Authority
 to
 decide
 existence
 of
 employer‐employee

are
 unionized
 but
 the
 supervisors
 are
 not.
 Insofar
 relationship;
med‐arbiter’s
order
appealable
to
secretary

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 91

  All
 issues
 pertaining
 to
 the
 existence
 of
 employer‐  After
 the
 CE,
 when
 the
 med‐arbiter
 certifies
 the

employee
 relationship
 or
 to
 eligibility
 to
 union
 election
results

membership
 shall
 be
 resolved
 in
 the
 order
 or
 o Only
 order
 that
 can’t
 be
 appealed
 is
 an
 order
 granting
 the

decision
 granting
 or
 denying
 the
 PCE.
 In
 other
 conduct
of
a
CE
in
an
unorganized
establishment.
Any
issue

words,
 those
 issues
 do
 not
 stall
 the
 PCE
 and
 they
 arising
therefrom
may
be
raised
by
means
of
protest
on
the

are
not
grounds
for
dismissing
a
PCE
 conduct
and
results
of
the
CE

 As
 the
 authority
 to
 determine
 the
 employer‐ o In
 organized
 establishment,
 appeal
 to
 the
 Office
 of
 the

employee
 relationship
 is
 necessary
 and
 Secretary
within
10
days
from
receipt
thereof

indispensable
in
the
exercise
of
 jurisdiction
by
the
 o Memorandum
 of
 appeal
 shall
 be
 filed
 in
 the
 Regional
 Office

Med‐Arbiter,
 his
 finding
 thereon
 may
 only
 be
 where
the
petition
originated.


reviewed
and
reversed
by
the
Secretary
of
Labor.
 o Within
 24
 hours
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 appeal,
 the
 Regional

 Similarly,
 incidental
 to
 the
 power
 of
 the
 med‐ Director
shall
cause
the
transmittal
thereof
together
with
the

arbiter
 to
 hear
 and
 decide
 cases
 is
 the
 power
 to
 entire
records
of
the
case
to
the
Office
of
the
Secretary

determine
eligibility
of
voters.
 o Reply
to
the
appeal
may
be
filed
by
any
party
within
10
days

• Employer
a
bystander;
cannot
oppose
PCE
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 memorandum
 of
 appeal.
 Reply
 shall
 be

o SC,
nevertheless,
has
allowed
an
employer
to
protest
against
 filed
directly
with
the
Office
of
the
Secretary

irregularities
committed
in
the
conduct
of
a
CE.
 o Secretary
 has
 15
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 entire
 records
 of

• Action
on
the
petition;
approval
 the
petition
within
which
to
decide
the
appeal

o If
 there
 exists
 no
 ground
 to
 dismiss
 or
 otherwise
 deny
 the
 o Decision
 of
 the
 secretary
 shall
 become
 final
 and
 executory

PCE,
the
med‐arbiter
has
to
grant
it
 after
10
days
from
receipt
thereof
by
the
parties.
No
MR
shall

o Ruling
for
the
conduct
of
CE
shall
state
the
following:
 be
entertained.

 The
name
of
the
employer
or
establishment;
 • Conducting
the
CE
–
pre­election
conference

 The
description
of
the
bargaining
unit;
 o Section
 1.
 Raffle
 of
 the
 case.
 ‐
 Within
 twenty‐four
 (24)

 A
statement
that
none
of
the
grounds
for
dismissal
 hours
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 notice
 of
 entry
 of
 final
 judgment

enumerated
in
the
succeeding
paragraph
exists;
 granting
the
conduct
of
a
certification
election,
the
Regional

 The
names
 of
contending
labor
unions
which
shall
 Director
 shall
 cause
 the
 raffle
 of
 the
 case
 to
 an
 Election

appear
 as
 follows:
 petitioner
 union/s
 in
 the
 order
 Officer
who
shall
have
control
of
the
pre‐election
conference

in
 which
 their
 petitions
 were
 filed,
 forced
 and
election

intervenor,
and
no
union;
 o proceedings.

 To
 afford
 an
 individual
 employee‐voter
 an
 o Section
 2.
 Pre­election
 conference.
 ‐
 Within
 twenty‐four

informed
choice
where
a
local/chapter
is
one
of
the
 (24)
hours
from
receipt
of
the
assignment
for
the
conduct
of

contending
 unions,
 a
 directive
 to
 an
 unregistered
 a
 certification
 election,
 the
 Election
 Officer
 shall
 cause
 the

local/chapter
 or
 a
 federation/national
 union
 issuance
 of
 notice
 of
 preelection
 conference
 upon
 the

representing
 an
 unregistered
 local/chapter
 to
 contending
 unions
 and
 the
 employer,
 which
 shall
 be

personally
 submit
 to
 the
 election
 officer
 its
 scheduled
 within
 ten
 (10)
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the

certification
 of
 creation
 at
 least
 5
 working
 days
 assignment.
 The
 pre‐election
 conference
 shall
 set
 the

before
 the
 actual
 conduct
 of
 the
 CE.
 Non‐ mechanics
 for
 the
 election
 and
 shall
 determine,
 among

submission
 of
 this
 requirement
 as
 certified
 by
 the
 others,
the
following:

election
 officer
 shall
 disqualify
 the
 local/chapter
  Date,
time
and
place
of
the
election,
which
shall
not

from
participating
in
the
CE
 be
 later
 than
 forty‐five
 (45)
 days
 from
 the
 date
 of

 A
directive
upon
the
employer
and
the
contending
 the
 first
 pre‐election
 conference,
 and
 shall
 be
 on
 a

union(s)
 to
 submit
 within
 ten
 (10)
 days
 from
 regular
 working
 day
 and
 within
 the
 employer's

receipt
of
the
order,
the
certified
list
of
employees
 premises,
unless
circumstances
require
otherwise;

in
 the
 bargaining
 unit,
 or
 where
 necessary,
 the
  List
of
eligible
and
challenged
voters;

payrolls
 covering
 the
 members
 of
 the
 bargaining
  Number
 and
 location
 of
 polling
 places
 or
 booths

unit
 for
 the
 last
 three
 (3)
 months
 prior
 to
 the
 and
 the
 number
 of
 ballots
 to
 be
 prepared
 with

issuance
of
the
order.
 appropriate
translations,
if
necessary;

• Appeal
of
order
granting
or
denying
petition
  Name
 of
 watchers
 or
 representatives
 and
 their

o 2
occasions
of
appeal
to
the
office
of
the
DOLE
secretary
 alternates
for
each
of
the
parties
during
election;

 After
the
med‐arbiter
decides
the
petition
for
CE
  Mechanics
and
guidelines
of
the
election.

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 92

 o Section
 3.
 Waiver
 of
 right
 to
 be
 heard.
 ‐
 Failure
 of
 any
 the
time
of
the
issuance
of
the
order
granting
the
conduct
of

party
 to
 appear
 during
 the
 pre‐election
 conference
 despite
 a
CE
shall
be
eligible
to
vote.

notice
 shall
 be
 considered
 as
 a
 waiver
 to
 be
 present
 and
 to
 o List
 of
 voters
 based
 on
 employer‐certified
 list
 of
 employees

question
or
object
to
any
of
the
agreements
reached
in
said
 in
the
CBU
or
payrolls.
If
employer
does
not
submit
a
list,
the

pre‐election
 conference.
 Nothing
 herein,
 however,
 shall
 union
 may
 submit
 its
 own
 list.
 Even
 the
 list
 of
 employees

deprive
the
non‐appearing
party
or
the
employer
of
its
right
 submitted
to
the
SSS
may
be
used.

to
 be
 furnished
 notices
 of
 subsequent
 pre‐election
 o In
 case
 of
 disagreement
 over
 the
 voters’
 list
 or
 over
 the

conferences
and
to
attend
the
same.
 eligibility
 of
 voters,
 all
 contested
 voters
 shall
 be
 allowed
 to

o Section
 4.
 Minutes
 of
 pre­election
 conference.
 ‐
 The
 vote.
 But
 their
 votes
 shall
 be
 segregated
 and
 sealed
 in

Election
Officer
shall
keep
the
minutes
of
matters
raised
and
 individual
employees

agreed
upon
during
the
pre‐election
conference.
The
parties
 o Employee
 who
 has
 been
 dismissed
 from
 work
 but
 has

shall
 acknowledge
 the
 completeness
 and
 correctness
 of
 the
 contested
 the
 legality
 of
 the
 dismissal
 in
 a
 forum
 of

entries
 in
 the
 minutes
 by
 affixing
 their
 signatures
 thereon.
 appropriate
 jurisdiction
 at
 the
 time
 of
 the
 issuance
 of
 the

Where
 any
 of
 the
 parties
 refuse
 to
 sign
 the
 minutes,
 the
 order
for
the
conduct
of
a
CE
shall
be
considered
a
qualified

Election
Officer
shall
note
such
fact
in
the
minutes,
including
 voter,
 unless
 his/her
 dismissal
 was
 declared
 valid
 in
 a
 final

the
 reason
 for
 refusal
 to
 sign
 the
 same.
 In
 all
 cases,
 the
 judgment
at
the
time
of
the
conduct
of
the
CE.

parties
 shall
 be
 furnished
 a
 copy
 of
 the
 minutes.
 The
 pre‐ o All
 rank‐and‐file
 employees,
 probationary
 or
 permanent,

election
 conference
 shall
 be
 completed
 within
 thirty
 (30)
 have
a
substantial
interests
in
the
selection
of
the
bargaining

days
from
the
date
of
the
first
hearing.
 representative.
 The
 Code
 makes
 no
 distinction
 as
 to
 their

o Section
 5.
 Qualification
 of
 voters;
 inclusion­exclusion.
 ‐
 employment
 status
 as
 basis
 for
 eligibility
 in
 supporting
 the

All
 employees
 who
 are
 members
 of
 the
 appropriate
 PCE.

bargaining
unit
sought
to
be
represented
by
the
petitioner
at
 o Iglesia
Ni
Kristo
members
may
vote
–
In
the
CE
all
members

the
time
of
the
issuance
of
the
order
granting
the
conduct
of
 of
the
unit,
whether
union
members
or
not,
have
the
right
to

a
certification
election
shall
be
eligible
to
vote.
An
employee
 vote.

who
 has
 been
 dismissed
 from
 work
 but
 has
 contested
 the
  Reeys
v.
Trajano

legality
 of
 the
 dismissal
 in
 a
 forum
 of
 appropriate
  Right
 not
 to
 join,
 affiliate
 with,
 or
 assist

jurisdiction
 at
 the
 time
 of
 the
 issuance
 of
 the
 order
 for
 the
 any
union,
and
to
disaffiliate
or
resign
from

conduct
 of
 a
 certification
 election
 shall
 be
 considered
 a
 a
 labor
 organization,
 is
 subsumed
 in
 the

qualified
 voter,
 unless
 his/her
 dismissal
 was
 declared
 valid
 right
 to
 join,
 affiliate
 with,
 or
 assist
 any

in
 a
 final
 judgment
 at
 the
 time
 of
 the
 conduct
 of
 the
 union,
 and
 to
 maintain
 membership

certification
 election.
 In
 case
 of
 disagreement
 over
 the
 therein.


voters'
 list
 or
 over
 the
 eligibility
 of
 voters,
 all
 contested
 • Conducting
the
CE:
the
voting

voters
 shall
 be
 allowed
 to
 vote.
 But
 their
 votes
 shall
 be
 o Voting
 shall
 open
 on
 the
 date
 and
 time
 agreed
 upon
 in
 the

segregated
and
sealed
in
individual
envelopes
in
accordance
 pre‐election
conference

with
Sections
10
and
11
of
this
Rule.
 o Section
 7.
 Secrecy
 and
 sanctity
 of
 the
 ballot.
 ‐
 To
 ensure

o Section
 6.
 Posting
 of
 Notices.
 ‐
 The
 Election
 Officer
 shall
 secrecy
 of
 the
 ballot,
 the
 Election
 Officer,
 together
 with
 the

cause
the
posting
of
notice
of
election
at
least
ten
(10)
days
 authorized
representatives
of
the
contending
unions
and
the

before
 the
 actual
 date
 of
 the
 election
 in
 two
 (2)
 most
 employer,
shall
before
the
start
of
the
actual
voting,
inspect

conspicuous
 places
 in
 the
 company
 premises.
 The
 notice
 the
polling
place,
the
ballot
boxes
and
the
polling
booths.

shall
contain:
 o Section
8.
Preparation
of
ballots.
‐
The
Election
Officer
shall

 The
date
and
time
of
the
election;
 prepare
 the
 ballots
 in
 English
 and
 Filipino
 or
 the
 local

 Names
of
all
contending
unions;
 dialect,
 corresponding
 to
 the
 number
 of
 voters
 and
 a

 The
 description
 of
 the
 bargaining
 unit
 and
 the
 list
 reasonable
 number
 of
 extra
 ballots.
 All
 ballots
 shall
 be

of
eligible
and
challenged
voters.
 signed
 at
 the
 back
 by
 the
 Election
 Officer
 and
 authorized

o The
 posting
 of
 the
 notice
 of
 election,
 the
 information
 representative
 of
 each
 of
 the
 contending
 unions
 and

required
 to
 be
 included
 therein
 and
 the
 duration
 of
 posting
 employer.
 Failure
 or
 refusal
 to
 sign
 the
 ballots
 shall
 be

cannot
be
waived
by
the
contending
unions
or
the
employer.
 considered
 a
 waiver
 thereof
 and
 the
 Election
 Officer
 shall

• Conducting
the
CE:
the
voters
 enter
the
fact
of
such
refusal
or
failure
in
the
records
of
the

o All
 employees
 who
 are
 members
 of
 the
 appropriate
 case
as
well
as
the
reason
for
the
refusal
or
failure
to
sign.

bargaining
unit
sought
to
be
represented
by
the
petitioner
at

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 93

 o Section
9.
Marking
of
votes.
‐
The
voter
must
put
a
cross
or
 o Voting
 shall
 close
 on
 the
 date
 and
 time
 agreed
 upon
 in
 the

check
mark
in
the
square
opposite
the
name
of
the
union
of
 pre‐election
 conference.
 Canvassing
 shall
 immediately

his
 choice
 or
 "No
 Union"
 if
 he/she
 does
 not
 want
 to
 be
 follow.

represented
 by
 any
 union.
 If
 a
 ballot
 is
 torn,
 defaced
 or
 left
 o The
 votes
 shall
 be
 counted
 and
 tabulated
 by
 the
 Election

unfilled
in
such
a
manner
as
to
create
doubt
or
confusion
or
 Officer
 in
 the
 presence
 of
 the
 representatives
 of
 the

to
 identify
 the
 voter,
 it
 shall
 be
 considered
 spoiled.
 If
 the
 contending
 unions.
 Upon
 completion
 of
 the
 canvass,
 the

voter
 inadvertently
 spoils
 a
 ballot,
 he/she
 shall
 return
 it
 to
 Election
 Officer
 shall
 give
 each
 representative
 a
 copy
 of
 the

the
 Election
 Officer
 who
 shall
 destroy
 it
 and
 give
 him/her
 minutes
 of
 the
 election
 proceedings
 and
 results
 of
 the

another
ballot.
 election.
The
ballots
and
the
tally
sheets
shall
be
sealed
in
an

o Section
 11.
 Procedure
 in
 the
 challenge
 of
 votes.
 ‐
 When
 a
 envelope
 and
 signed
 by
 the
 Election
 Officer
 and
 the

vote
 is
 properly
 challenged,
 the
 Election
 Officer
 shall
 place
 representatives
of
the
contending
unions
and
transmitted
to

the
 ballot
 in
 an
 envelope
 which
 shall
 be
 sealed
 in
 the
 the
Med‐Arbiter,
together
with
the
minutes
and
results
of
the

presence
 of
 the
 voter
 and
 the
 representatives
 of
 the
 election,
within
twenty‐four
(24)
hours
from
the
completion

contending
 unions
 and
 employer.
 The
 Election
 Officer
 shall
 of
the
canvass.
Where
the
election
is
conducted
in
more
than

indicate
 on
 the
 envelope
 the
 voter's
 name,
 the
 union
 or
 one
 region,
 consolidation
 of
 results
 shall
 be
 made
 within

employer
 challenging
 the
 voter,
 and
 the
 ground
 for
 the
 fifteen
(15)
days
from
the
conduct
thereof.

challenge.
 The
 sealed
 envelope
 shall
 then
 be
 signed
 by
 the
 o Failure
 of
 the
 representative/s
 of
 the
 contending
 unions
 to

Election
 Officer
 and
 the
 representatives
 of
 the
 contending
 appear
during
the
election
proceedings
and
canvass
of
votes

unions
 and
 employer.
 The
 Election
 Officer
 shall
 note
 all
 shall
be
considered
a
waiver
of
the
right
to
be
present
and
to

challenges
 in
 the
 minutes
 of
 the
 election
 and
 shall
 be
 question
the
conduct
thereof

responsible
 for
 consolidating
 all
 envelopes
 containing
 the
 • Who
wins
in
the
CE;
proclamation
and
certification

challenged
 votes.
 The
 envelopes
 shall
 be
 opened
 and
 the
 o In
 order
 to
 have
 a
 valid
 election,
 at
 least
 a
 majority
 of
 all

question
 of
 eligibility
 shall
 be
 passed
 upon
 only
 if
 the
 eligible
voters
in
the
unit
must
have
cast
their
votes

number
of
segregated
voters
will
materially
alter
the
results
 o Within
 twenty‐four
 (24)
 hours
 from
 final
 canvass
 of
 votes,

of
the
election.
 there
 being
 a
 valid
 election,
 the
 Election
 Officer
 shall

o Section
12.
On‐the‐spot
questions.
‐
The
Election
Officer
shall
 transmit
 the
 records
 of
 the
 case
 to
 the
 Med‐Arbiter
 who

rule
 on
 any
 question
 relating
 to
 and
 raised
 during
 the
 shall,
within
the
same
period
from
receipt
of
the
minutes
and

conduct
 of
 the
 election.
 In
 no
 case,
 however,
 shall
 the
 results
of
election,
issue
an
order
proclaiming
the
results
of

election
 officer
 rule
 on
 any
 of
 the
 grounds
 for
 challenge
 the
 election
 and
 certifying
 the
 union
 which
 obtained
 a

specified
in
the
immediately
preceding
section.
 majority
 of
 the
 valid
 votes
 cast
 as
 the
 sole
 and
 exclusive

o Section
 13.
 Protest;
 when
 perfected.
 ‐
 Any
 party‐in‐interest
 bargaining
agent
in
the
subject
bargaining
unit,
under
any
of

may
file
a
protest
based
on
the
conduct
or
mechanics
of
the
 the
following
conditions:

election.
 Such
 protests
 shall
 be
 recorded
 in
 the
 minutes
 of
  No
 protest
 was
 filed
 or,
 even
 if
 one
 was
 filed,
 the

the
election
proceedings.
Protests
not
so
raised
are
deemed
 same
was
not
perfected
within
the
five‐day
period

waived.
The
protesting
party
must
formalize
its
protest
with
 for
perfection
of
the
protest;

the
 Med‐Arbiter,
 with
 specific
 grounds,
 arguments
 and
  No
challenge
or
eligibility
issue
was
raised
or,
even

evidence,
 within
 five
 (5)
 days
 after
 the
 close
 of
 the
 election
 if
 one
 was
 raised,
 the
 resolution
 of
 the
 same
 will

proceedings.
If
not
recorded
 not
materially
change
the
results
of
the
elections.

o ULP
in
relation
to
election
 o The
 winning
 union
 shall
 have
 the
 rights,
 privileges
 and

 Employer
 deserves
 condemnation
 for
 ignoring
 the
 obligations
 of
 a
 duly
 certified
 collective
 bargaining
 agent

employees’
 request
 for
 permission
 for
 some
 time
 from
 the
 time
 the
 certification
 is
 issued.
 Where
 majority
 of

out
to
attend
to
the
hearing
of
their
petition
before
 the
 valid
 votes
 cast
 results
 in
 "No
 Union"
 obtaining
 the

the
med‐arbiter
 majority,
the
Med‐Arbiter
shall
declare
such
fact
in
the
order.

 It
 is
 ULP
 for
 the
 company
 to
 suspend
 the
 workers
 o Union
which
obtained
a
majority
of
the
valid
votes
cast
shall

on
 the
 ground
 of
 “abandonment
 of
 work”
 on
 the
 be
certified
as
the
sole
and
exclusive
bargaining
agent
of
all

day
on
which
the
pre‐election
conference
had
been
 the
 employees
 in
 the
 appropriate
 bargaining
 unit
 within
 5

scheduled
 days
 from
 the
 day
 of
 the
 election,
 provided
 no
 protest
 is

• Conducting
the
CE:
canvassing
of
votes
 recorded
in
the
minutes
of
the
election

• Failure
of
election;
motion
for
a
remedial
election


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 94

 o Section
17.
Failure
of
election.
‐
Where
the
number
of
votes
 o Decisions
 of
 the
 med‐arbiter
 may
 be
 appealed
 to
 the

cast
 in
 a
 certification
 or
 consent
 election
 is
 less
 than
 the
 Secretary
 within
 10
 days
 from
 receipt
 by
 the
 parties
 of
 a

majority
 of
 the
 number
 of
 eligible
 voters
 and
 there
 are
 no
 copy
 thereof.
 Where
 no
 appeal
 is
 filed
 within
 the
 10‐day

material
challenged
votes,
the
Election
Officer
shall
declare
a
 period,
the
order/decision
shall
become
final
and
executory

failure
of
election
in
the
minutes
of
the
election
proceedings.
 and
 the
 med‐arbiter
 shall
 enter
 this
 fact
 into
 the
 records
 of

o Section
18.
Effect
of
failure
of
election.
‐
A
failure
of
election
 the
case.

shall
not
bar
the
filing
of
a
motion
for
the
immediate
holding
 o Memorandum
 of
 appeal
 shall
 be
 filed
 in
 the
 Regional
 Office

of
 another
 certification
 or
 consent
 election
 within
 six
 (6)
 where
 petition
 originated,
 copy
 furnished
 the
 contending

months
from
date
of
declaration
of
failure
of
election.
 unions
 and
 the
 employer.
 Within
 24
 hours
 from
 receipt,

o Section
19.
Action
on
the
motion.
‐
Within
twenty‐four
(24)
 Regional
 Director
 shall
 transmit
 entire
 records
 to
 Office
 of

hours
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 motion,
 the
 Election
 Officer
 shall
 the
Secretary

immediately
schedule
the
conduct
of
another
certification
or
 o A
 reply
 to
 the
 appeal
 may
 be
 filed
 by
 any
 party
 to
 the

consent
election
within
fifteen
(15)
days
from
receipt
of
the
 petition
within
10
days
from
receipt
of
the
memorandum
of

motion
 and
 cause
 the
 posting
 of
 the
 notice
 of
 certification
 appeal.
 Reply
 shall
 be
 filed
 directly
 with
 the
 Office
 of
 the

election
at
least
ten
(10)
days
prior
to
the
scheduled
date
of
 Secretary.

election
 in
 two
 (2)
 most
 conspicuous
 places
 in
 the
 o Secretary
 shall
 have
 15
 days
 from
 receipt
 of
 the
 entire

establishment.
The
same
guidelines
and
list
of
voters
shall
be
 records
 to
 decide.
 Decision
 of
 secretary
 shall
 be
 final
 and

used
in
the
election.
 executory
after
10
days
from
receipt
by
the
parties.
No
MR
of

• Run­off
election
 the
decision
shall
be
entertained.

o When
 an
 election
 which
 provides
 for
 three
 (3)
 or
 more
 o Within
 48
 hours
 from
 notice
 of
 receipt
 of
 decision
 by
 the

choices
results
in
none
of
the
contending
unions
receiving
a
 parties
and
finality
of
the
decision,
the
entire
records
of
the

majority
of
the
valid
votes
cast,
and
there
are
no
objections
 case
 shall
 be
 remanded
 to
 the
 Regional
 Office
 of
 origin
 for

or
 challenges
 which
 if
 sustained
 can
 materially
 alter
 the
 implementation.

results,
the
Election
Officer
shall
motu
propio
conduct
a
run‐ • Election
irregularities,
protest
by
employer

off
 election
 within
 ten
 (10)
 days
 from
 the
 close
 of
 the
 o National
Federation
of
Labor
v.
Secretary

election
proceedings
between
the
labor
unions
receiving
the
  What
 an
 employer
 is
 prohibited
 from
 doing
 is
 to

two
 highest
 number
 of
 votes;
 provided,
 that
 the
 total
 interfere
with
the
conduct
of
the
CE
for
the
purpose

number
 of
 votes
 for
 all
 contending
 unions
 is
 at
 least
 fifty
 of
 influencing
 its
 outcome.
 But
 certainly
 an

(50%)
percent
of
the
number
of
votes
cast.
"No
Union"
shall
 employer
has
an
abiding
interest
in
seeing
to
it
that

not
be
a
choice
in
the
run‐off
election.
 the
election
is
clean,
peaceful,
orderly
and
credible

o Notice
 of
 run‐off
 elections
 shall
 be
 posted
 by
 the
 Election
 4. Third
method:
consent
election

Officer
at
least
five
(5)
days
before
the
actual
date
of
run‐off
 • Purpose
of
a
consent
election
is
to
find
out
which
union
should
serve

election.
 as
the
bargaining
agent.

o The
 same
 voters'
 list
 used
 in
 the
 certification
 election
 shall
 • Difference
is
that
a
CE
is
ordered
by
the
Department
while
a
consent

be
 used
 in
 the
 run‐off
 election.
 The
 ballots
 in
 the
 run‐off
 election
is
voluntarily
agreed
upon
by
the
parties,
with
or
without
the

election
 shall
 provide
 as
 choices
 the
 unions
 receiving
 the
 intervention
of
the
Department.

highest
and
second
highest
number
of
the
votes
cast.
 • Two
or
more
unions
are
involved

o To
summarize,
a
run‐off
election
is
proper
if
five
concurrent
 • May
take
place
in
an
unorganized
or
organized
establishment

conditions
exist
–
 • In
 hearing
 a
 PCE,
 the
 med‐arbiter
 may
 persuade
 the
 contending

 A
valid
election
took
place
because
majority
of
the
 unions
to
agree
to
a
CE.
If
the
unions
do
agree,
the
med‐arbiter
shall

CBU
members
voted
 not
 issue
 an
 order
 calling
 for
 the
 conduct
 of
 the
 election.
 Instead,
 he

 Election
presented
at
least
three
choices
 shall
enter
in
the
minutes
of
the
hearing
or
preliminary
conference
the

 Not
one
of
the
unions
obtained
the
majority
of
the
 fact
of
the
agreement
and
then
cause
the
immediate
scheduling
of
the

valid
votes
 pre‐election
conference.


 Total
 number
 of
 votes
 for
 all
 the
 unions
 is
 at
 least
 • The
 first
 pre‐election
 conference
 shall
 be
 scheduled
 within
 10
 days

50%
of
the
votes
cast
 from
the
date
of
the
consent
election
agreement.

 There
 is
 no
 unresolved
 challenge
 of
 voter
 or
 • Effect
of
consent
election

election
protest
 o Where
 a
 PCE
 had
 been
 filed,
 and
 parties
 agreed
 to
 hold
 a

• Appeal
to
secretary
as
to
election
result
(DO
No.
40­E­03)
 consent
election,
results
shall
constitute
a
bar
to
the
holding

of
a
CE
for
1
year
from
the
holding
of
such
consent
election.

Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 95

 Where
 an
 appeal
 has
 been
 filed
 from
 the
 results
 of
 the

consent
election,
the
running
of
the
one‐year
period
shall
be

suspended
until
the
decision
on
appeal
has
become
final
and

executory.

o Where
 no
 PCE
 was
 filed
 but
 the
 parties
 agree
 to
 hold
 a

consent
election
with
the
intercession
of
the
Regional
Office,

the
results
shall
constitute
a
bar
to
another
PCE

5. Winner
as
sole
and
exclusive
representative

• Employer
 must
 treat
 with
 the
 representative
 to
 the
 exclusion
 of
 all

other
claiming
bargaining
agents

• Exclusive
bargaining
agent
represents
even
the
minority
union

o Although
the
union
has
every
right
to
represent
its
members

in
 the
 negotiation
 regarding
 the
 terms
 and
 conditions
 of

their
 wishes
 on
 matters
 which
 are
 purely
 personal
 and

individual
to
them

• Protection
 and
 capacity
 of
 the
 loser;
 the
 duty
 of
 fair

representation

o Majority
 union
 is
 obligated
 to
 serve
 the
 interest
 of
 all

members
 of
 the
 whole
 bargaining
 unit
 without
 hostility
 or

discrimination

o Minority
union,
although
a
loser
in
the
election,
does
not
lose

its
character
as
a
lawful
labor
organization

o For
negotiating
and
administering
a
CBA,
the
majority
union

is
 therefore
 the
 sole
 and
 exclusive
 representative,
 but
 for

non‐CBA
 issues
 the
 minority
 union
 may
 act
 as
 a
 group
 of

employees
to
present
grievances
to
the
employer

o If
the
minority
union
or
its
members
are
targets
of
ULP
acts

by
 the
 employer,
 with
 or
 without
 collusion
 with
 a
 majority

union,
 the
 minority
 union
 or
 its
 members,
 faced
 with
 the

majority
union’s
disregard
of
its
duty
of
fair
representation,

can
file
an
individual
or
group
complaint
for
ULP.

• Is
the
bargaining
union
a
majority
union?

o Bargaining
 union
 does
 not
 always
 comprise
 the
 numerical

majority
in
the
bargaining
unit

o Article
 256
 requires,
 for
 a
 union
 to
 win
 in
 a
 CE,
 only
 a

majority
 of
 the
 valid
 votes
 cast.
 The
 majority
 of
 the
 valid

votes
 may
 be
 lesser
 than
 the
 majority
 of
 the
 employees
 in

the
bargaining
unit

• May
the
bargaining
agent
represent
retired
employees?

o In
 pursuing
 their
 claim
 for
 retirement
 benefits
 under
 the

CBA,
 the
 claimant
 retirees
 are
 represented
 by
 the
 union
 of

which
they
were
former
members.


Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 96