1.

GRIEVANCES
- a grievance is any question by either the employer or the union regarding the interpretation or
application of the CBA or company personnel policies or any claim by either party that the other
party is violating any provision of the CBA or company personnel policies
- a CBA will not be registered with the DOLE if it does not contain a provision on grievance procedure
or machinery which is a must provision required of all CBAs. In case a CBA is submitted without
such provision, the registrar should advise the parties to include a grievance procedure / machinery
therein before it is considered duly registered
2. By-passing the Grievance Machinery: U.L.P.
- all grievances are compulsorily subject to the grievance machinery. Such requirement being an
extension of the parties duty to bargain, the violation of which amounts to unfair labor practice
(ULP)
- An aggrieved employee must exhaust all the remedies (grievance procedure/machinery) available
to him under the bargaining contract before he can resort to the courts for the enforcement of his
individual rights under such contract
- A strike is illegal if such was carried out notwithstanding the provisions of the existing CBA which
provides for a specific procedure in dealing with grievances of union members or simply stated,
when such procedure was not availed of before the strike was declared
- Procedure for dismissal of employees in the CBA must be observed even if such dismissal is with
cause. Absent such adherence, the purported dismissal for just cause is invalid, particularly when
the company acted post haste and without affording the employee the time and opportunity to
present his side
A grievance may be brought directly to voluntary arbitration without passing through the grievance
machinery, especially when:
o the grievance machinery has been proven to be ineffective in the past, or
o when the parties inadvertently failed to include a grievance machinery provision in
their CBA
3. Waiver of Grievance Machinery Procedure and Submission to VA
- By submission agreement, the EE and ER agreed to submit the case to the VA. VA resolved in favor
of the EE. On the appeal, it was reversed by the CA because it considered the waiver of EE. CA
considered it as relinquishment of EEs right. VA, then, has no jurisdiction
- Ruling: There was no relinquishment of right. Voluntary arbitration as a mode of settling dispute was
not forced upon respondents.
4. Structure and Procedure
- In the absence of applicable provision in CBA:
o A grievance committee shall be created within 10 days.
- GR: Compose of at least 2 representatives from each members of bargaining unit designated by the
union and ER.
- EXC: unless agreed by the parties
5. Procedure in handling Grievances
- In the absence of applicable provision in CBA and company practice:
o Present grievance or complain to shop steward
o Shop steward will verify if the complaint/grievance is valid
o If valid, bring the complain to immediate supervisor of the complainant
o They will exert efforts to settle at their level
o If no settlement is reached, it will be referred to grievance committee
o The GC has 10 days to decide
- Note: applies to interpretation or implementation of CBA, or order from appropriate authority of in
the establishment
6. Voluntary Arbitration
- If the grievance is remained unresolved, EITHER PARTY may serve notice upon the other of its
decision to submit decision to voluntary arbitration.
- Notice shall state the issue or issues to be arbitrated
- Copy of such shall be furnished to:
o Board or
o VA or
o Panel of VAs

o
-

named in the CBA.

If the party upon whom the notice is served fails or refuses to respond w/in 7 days, VA shall
commence the voluntary arbitration
When CBA does not designate, the parties will be called and appoint VA
If parties fails to select, the regional branch of the Board shall designated
The parties are afforded to the latitude to decide for themselves the composition of the GM

Labor Arbitration the reference of labor dispute to the third person for determination on basis of
evidence and arguments presented by the parties who are bound to accept the decision.
Voluntary Arbitration a contractual proceeding whereby the parties to any dispute or controversy, in
order to achieve speedy and inexpensive settlement, select their own judge of their own choice and by
consent submit their controversy to him for determination.
Compulsory arbitration is the process of settlement of labor dispute by a government agency which
has the power to investigate and make an award binding upon the parties.
7.
o
o
8.
o
o
o
9.

Voluntary arbitration: a private judicial system

Voluntary arbitration is a part of a system of self-government created and confined to the parties.
They select their own judge and fix their own procedure.
Voluntary arbitration, a master procedure
Any and all kinds of labor dispute may be submitted to voluntary arbitration.
Voluntary arbitration takes precedence over other dispute settlement devises.
a case filed in LA, SOLE or NLRC can be withdrawn and lodge it instead to VA
Powers and duties of VA or panel of VAs
- Varying degrees of power of VA depends on CBA.

8.3a Power to arbitrate any dispute

8.3b No power to add to or subtract from the contract
VA is empowered only to interpret the contract not to add or modify it.
As a GR, authority of VA:
General authority to investigate and hear case upon notice to the parties and to render an award based on
the contract and record of the case;
Incidental authority to perform all acts, necessary to an adequate discharge of his duties and
responsibilities. Ex setting and conduct of hearing;
Special powers in aid of his general contractual authority like the authority to determine arbitrability of any
particular dispute and to modify any provision of existing agreement upon which a proposed change is
submitted for arbitration;
Authority to issue writ of execution.

Power in General
Under the NCMB guidelines:
To require any person to attend hearing
To subpoena witness and receive documents
To take whatever action to resolve the issue subject to dispute (except ipaduel ang parties hakhak)

To issue writ of execution

Adjudicatory power
Personally hold hearings
Receive evidence
To take whatever action to resolve the issue subject to dispute
Must initiative in reconciling apparent contradictions

Compulsory power
To require any person to attend hearing
To subpoena witness and receive documents

Duty to conciliate and mediate

8.4 Functions of arbitrator

VA performs functions which are not normal to the courts, and the considerations which help him to
fashion his judgment maybe foreign to the competence of the court because dispute ate the plant level
require knowledge of the custom and practices of a particular factory or industry as reflected in particular
agreement.
The VAs power is contractual rather than judiciary in nature because such power is derived from the
agreement of the parties.

8.5 Binding effect

VAs decision is same legal effects as judgement in the court. Res judicata is applicable.

8.6 Period to render the arbitration award

GR: 20 calendar days from the date of submission of the case for resolution
Exc: Unless the parties agreed otherwise
Or 30 days in labor dispute causing or likely to cause strike or lock-out in an industry indispensable to
national interest.
NB:
VAs decision shall be final executory after 10 days from receipt thereof by the parties.

Failure of VA to render judgement within prescribe days is a sufficient ground to discipline the VA upon
filing of complaint to NCMB of a party.
In case the sanction of erring VA is delisting, it shall be unlawful for VA to refuse or fail to turn-over to
NCMB the records of the case within 10 days.

8.7 Rules of procedure governing voluntary arbitration

GR: rules are subject of agreement among the parties to a labor dispute and their chosen arbitrator.
EXC: absence of agreement, NCMB Revised Procedural Guidelines in the Conduct of Voluntary Arbitration
Proceedings, October 15, 2004 and Rules of Court shall apply by analogy, directory or suppletory.

Notes:
Guidelines should be liberally construed.
While the intendment of law is to favor the EE, it no way implies ER is not entitled to due process. ER right
to be heard is a matter of great concern. (Unicraft Industries International Corporation vs CA, GR 134903)

9. Who may be accredited as voluntary arbitrator

Minimum requirements:
Filipino citizen residing in Philippines
Holder of a Bachelors degree
At least 5 years experience in labor-management relations
Completion of a training course on voluntary arbitration conducted by the Board
A person of a good moral character

10. How voluntary arbitrator is chosen

VA is chosen by the parties by mutual agreement. Parties can choose preferably the accredited ones. The
choice is usually influenced by the trust of in the persons fairness and knowledge of the dynamics,
including in law, of labor-management relations.
Temporary or ad hoc arbitrator is selected when a dispute is already at hand. He is to arbitrate specific or
specific group of dispute and there is no commitment to select him again.
Permanent arbitrator is one who is selected before the dispute arises, usually durong the negotiation of
CBA. He is to serve a period of time.

11. Distinguished from a court of law

Voluntary Arbitration

Regular courts

Informal

Formal

Not obliged to follow stare decisis

Follows doctrine of stare decisis

Rules of evidence are not followed.

Decision may be appealed

No comparable appeal recourse

Rules of court applies technically

Not technical and relatively not

expensive procedure

ARTICLE 273 [261]. JURISDICTION OF VOLUNTARY ARBITRATORS OR PANEL OF VOLUNTARY

ARBITRATORS
The Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators shall have original and exclusive
jurisdiction to hear and decide all unresolved grievances arising from the interpretation or
implementation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and those arising from the
interpretation or enforcement of company personnel policies referred to in the immediately
preceding article. Accordingly, violations of a Collective Bargaining Agreement, except those
which are gross in character, shall no longer be treated as unfair labor practice and shall be
resolved as grievances under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. For purposes of this
article, gross violations of Collective Bargaining Agreement shall mean flagrant and/or
malicious refusal to comply with the economic provisions of such agreement.

The Commission, its Regional Offices and the Regional Directors of the Department of Labor
and Employment shall not entertain disputes, grievances or matters under the exclusive and
original jurisdiction of the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators and shall
immediately dispose and refer the same to the Grievance Machinery or Voluntary Arbitration
provided in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

ARTICLE 274 [262]

The Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, upon agreement of the parties,
shall also hear and decide all other labor disputes including unfair labor practices and
bargaining deadlocks.

Arbitrable disputes
2 kinds of disputes:
Contract-negotiation disputes
Disputes as to the terms of a collective bargaining
Example: when impasse or bargaining deadlock has risen
AKA arbitration of interest

Contract interpretation disputes

Disputes arising under existing CBA
Involves interpretation, application of the contract, or alleged violation of its provisions
AKA arbitration of grievance or rights
Note:
Usual CBA arbitration clauses provides interpretation of contract
Few only for arbitration of interest
When terms and agreement are in dispute, they usually submit in a special contract called submission
agreement

Jurisdiction of LA and VA
Contextual and wholistic analysis of LA and VA by Justice Purisima in San Jose vs. NLRC:
Includes money claims in one form or another
LAs original and exclusive Article 224; VA Article 273

24) Miralles 527-541

ART. 274

continuation of Jurisdiction of L.A. and V.A. from page 526

3. The original and exclusive jurisdiction of Labor arbiters is qualified by an exception as indicate3d in the
introductory sentence of Article 224 (a). The phrase Except as otherwise provided under this Code refers
to the following exceptions:

Art. 224 (c)

Cases arising from the interpretation or implementation of collective bargaining agreement and those
arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company procedure/policies shall be disposed of by the
Labor Arbiter by referring the same to the grievance machinery and voluntary arbitrator as may
be provided in said agreement.

Article 273
The Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, upon agreement of the parties, shall also
hear and decide all other labor disputes including unfair labor practices and bargaining deadlocks.

4. A. The original and exclusive jurisdiction of Voluntary Arbitrator or Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators is
limited only to unresolved grievances arising from the interpretation or implementation of the CBA and
those arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company personnel policies Accordingly,
violations of a CBA, except those which are gross in character, shall no longer be treated as unfair labor
practice and shall be resolved as grievances under the CBA

Voluntary arbitrators or Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, however, can exercise jurisdiction over any and all
disputes between an employer and a union and/or individual worker as provided for in Art. 274.

It must be emphasized that the jurisdiction of the VA or Panel of Vas under Article 262 must be
voluntarily conferred by both labor and management. The labor disputes referred to in the same
Article 274 can include any or all of those disputes mentioned in Article 224 which ordinarily are
under LAs original and exclusive jurisdiction.

2.1 Jurisdiction Over Termination Disputes

The preference or bias of the law in favor of voluntary arbitration justifies the view that employment
termination disputes, arising from CBA or personnel policy implementation, are cognizable by a
voluntary arbitrator and not a labor arbiter. Such termination cases, if filed with a labor arbiter, is to be
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and referred to the concerned NCMB Regional Branch for appropriate
action. But this referral by the labor arbiter presupposes that the parties had agreed in unequivocal
language that the termination dispute should be submitted to grievance machinery and voluntary
arbitration. Without such explicit agreement, the labor arbiter may hear and decide the case.
It need not be mentioned that the parties to a CBA are the union and the company. Hence, only
disputes involving the union and the company shall be referred to the grievance machinery or voluntary
arbitrators. In the Sanyo case, the dispute is between the union and the company, on the one hand, and
some union and non-union members who were dismissed, on the other hand. No grievance between the
company and the union exists which could be brought to a grievance machinery. Since there has already
been an actual termination, the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the LA.
It can thus be deduced that only disputes involving the union and the company shall be referred to
the grievance machinery or voluntary arbitrators.

2.1 a Policies, Rules, Procedures

Company personnel policies are guiding principles stated in broad, long-range terms that express the
philosophy or beliefs of an organizations top authority regarding personnel matters. The usual source of
grievances, however, are the rules and regulations governing disciplinary actions.
Company policies must be issued by top management which is responsible for making major policies that
are by their nature company-wide in application.
Minor policies, better known as rules and procedures, are the extension of major policies and are usually
formulated by minor executives or department managers. Rules are specific guides intended to govern
conduct and action of operating supervisors and employees in the performance of their designated
activities.

2.2 Jurisdiction Over CBA Violations

CBA violations not constituting U.L.P are likewise cognizable by a voluntary arbitrator if not resolved
through the grievance machinery. If the violations, however, are gross in character, these are to be
treated as unfair labor practice which, following Art. 224 (a-1), are to be heard and decided by a labor
arbiter. Gross violations refer to flagrant and/or malicious refusal to comply with the economic provisions
of the CBA. Yet, even in gross violation cases, the parties are allowed by Art. 274 to submit the
ULP case to a voluntary arbitrator. In fact, even bargaining deadlocks and all other disputes may,
by agreement of the parties, be submitted to a voluntary arbitrator.
Thus, in Silva vs Philtread, the court says that for a ULP case to be cognizable by the LA, and the
NRLC, to exercise its appellate jurisdiction, the allegations in the complaint should show prima facie the
concurrence of two things, namely: (1) gross violation of the CBA; and (2) the violation pertains to the
economic provisions of the CBA.

2.2a Gross Violation Per Se of the CBA Constitutes U.L.P

Reference to the economic provisions of the CBA is not a necessary element of U.L.P. where the
employer in effect totally disregarded the subsisting CBA. The pronouncement in Silva, should not be
construed to apply to violations of the CBA which can be considered as gross violations per se, such as
utter disregard of the very existence of the CBA itself such as when an employer proceeds to
negotiate with a splinter union despite the existence of its valid CBA with the duly certified and exclusive
bargaining agent, the former indubitably abandons its recoginition of the latter and terminates the entire
CBA. An employer should not be allowed to rescind unilaterally its CBA with the duly certified bargaining
agent.

2.2b Liability for Damages; Union Not Entitled to Moral Damages

A union, like a corporation, is an artificial person that exists only in contemplation of law. It has no
feelings, no emotions, no senses. Hence, it cannot experience physical suffering or mental anguish that
translate to moral damages.

2.3 Other Cases

VAs also have exclusive and original jurisdiction to hear and decide wage distortion issues arising from
the application of any wage orders in organized establishments, as well as unresolved grievances arising
from the interpretations and implementation of the productivity incentive programs under R.A. No.
6971.
Upon agreement of the parties, any other labor dispute may be submitted to a voluntary arbitrator or
panel of voluntary arbitrators. Before or at any stage of the compulsory arbitration process, the
parties may opt to submit their dispute to voluntary arbitrations.
The NLRC, its regional branches and the Regional Directors of the DOLE shall not entertain disputes,
grievances or matters under the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the voluntary arbitrator or panel of
voluntary arbitration provided in the CBA.

2.4 Dispute over Companys Drug Abuse Policy

A unions petition to enjoin implementation of the companys drug policy is a labor dispute beyond
RTCs jurisdiction. It is a personnel policy dispute within the jurisdiction of a VA.

3. HOW VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION IS INITIATED

Voluntary arbitration may be initiated either by:
Submission
-sometimes called a Stipulation or an Agreement to Arbitrate
-used where there is no previous agreement to arbitrate
-more appropriate in interest disputes since collective agreement generally do not provide for the
arbitration of such disputes that may arise in the future
-often entered into after the dispute has materialized and the issues can already be defined

by a Demand or Notice invoking a collective agreement arbitration clause

-more applicable to rights dispute because collective agreements are required under RA 6715 to provide
for a grievance procedure and a voluntary arbitration clause with respect to disputes arising from the
application or interpretation of the agreement
-if a dispute is covered by such an arbitration clause, arbitration may be initiated unilaterally by one party
serving upon the other a written demand or notice of intent to arbitrate

3.1 The Submission Agreement; Extent of Arbitrators Authority

In general, the arbitrator is expected to decide those questions expressly stated and limited in the
submission agreement. However, since arbitration is the final resort for the adjudication of disputes, the
arbitrator will assume that he has the power to make a final settlement.
It is important to note that even if the particular issue is non-contractual or is not arbitrable under the
contract, the parties may stipulate to arbitrate such issue in the submission agreement.
It is thus essential to stress that the VA had plenary jurisdiction and authority to interpret the agreement to
arbitrate and to determine the scope of his own authority subject only, in a proper case, to the certiorari
jurisdiction of this Court.

3.2 Arbitrators Interpretation of CBA

It is said that an arbitral award does not draw its essence from the CBA, hence, there is an
unauthorized amendment or alteration thereof, if:
It is so unfounded in reason and fact;
It is so unconnected with the wording and purpose of the agreement;
It is without factual support in view of its language, its context, and any other indicia of the parties
intention;

It ingnores or abandons the plain language of the contract;

It is mistakenly based on a crucial assumption which concededly is a nonfact;
It is unlawful, arbitrary or capricious; and
It is contrary to public policy

Art. 275 (262-A) PROCEDURES

1. COMPLIANCE WITH DUTY TO ARBITRATE

If a CBA requires settlement of disputes exclusively by the arbitration, then arbitration is needed
before court suits for breach of the contract may be filed. Nonetheless, the parties to a CBA may waive the
arbitration covenants of the agreement, but their conduct must clearly show that intention.

2. ETHICAL STANDARDS OF ARBITRATORS

An arbitrator is obliged to maintain a high level of professional ethics in his relationships with the
parties and the appointing agencies. His conduct should be above reproach. Since in effect, he is a judge,
his ethics must be on the same high level as the code that governs the conduct of judicial tribunals.

3. VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION AWARD, GENERALLY FINAL; EXCEPTIONS

The decisions of voluntary arbitrators must be given the highest respect and as a general rule, must be
accorded a certain measure of finality. It is not correct, however, that this respect precludes the exercise of
judicial review over their decisions.
A voluntary arbitrator by the nature of his functions acts in a quasi-judicial capacity. There is no reason why
his decisions involving interpretation of law should be beyond the Supreme Courts review.
A voluntary arbitral award may be modified and set aside only upon the grounds on which a decision of the
NLRC itself may be modified or set aside by the Supreme Court.
A VA, whether acting solely or in a panel, enjoys in law the status of a quasi-judicial agency but
independent of, and apart from, the NLRC since his decision are not appealable to the latter.

3.2a From VA to CA: Mode of Appeal is Petition for Review under Rule 43, not Special Civil
Action of Certiorari under Rule 65
The mode of appeal from VA to the CA is therefore a petition for review under Rule 43. It is not rule
65 because a petition for certiorari under that rule lies only where there is no appeal and no plain,
speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
Nonetheless, the Court cited situations when petition for certiorari despite availability of appeal,
may be entertained, such as:

When public welfare and advancement of public policy dictates;

When the broader interest of justice so requires;
When the writs issued are null and void;
When the questioned order amounts to an oppressive exercise of judicial authority.

3.3 Findings of Facts of a VA

There is no merit in the contention that only questions of law, and not findings of fact, of a VA may
be reviewed by the Court. While the Court has accorded great respect for, and finality to, findings of fact of
VA and administrative agencies which have acquired expertise in their respective fields, like the Labor
Department and the NLRC, their findings of fact and the conclusions drawn therefrom have to be
supported by substantial evidence.

25) Ochavillo 542-545

Principle of Union-Management Relations
Rationale of Relations
Workers organize into labor union not alone for economic motives but also for equally compelling
psychological and social ones, so that they can participate in making the decisions that vitally affect them
in their work and community life.
Union-management cooperation tends to make management more efficient and unions more costconscious, thereby improving the competitive position of a business enterprise and increasing the earnings
of both workers and owners.
The nature of union-management relations and the administration of a contract are influenced greatly by
pattern of social relationship in any given community.
The future of industrial democracy depends upon the attainment of full production and employment on a
sustained basis during and after the war.
Attitude and Leadership
The leadership requirements and responsibilities of management increase under union-management
relations.
Management should frankly acknowledge the role of the union in bringing about improvements in working
conditions.
The policies and actions of unions are likely to reflect the policies and actions of management.
The attitudes and actions of management largely determine the degree of cooperativeness of union
leadership.
The time lag in the growth of constructive union leadership, after management ceases its opposition,
varies with the extent to which labor assumes responsibility for the development of its leaders.
Collective Bargaining and Contract Administration
The collective bargaining marks the end of individual and the beginning of group relations between
workers and management.

The initial collective-bargaining practices are influenced in varying degrees by the preunion history of the
particular industrial concern and by the fact that genuine union-management relations are initiated by the
union.
Collective bargaining is an instrument for workers and owners, through unions and management, to solve
their problems directly without recourse to the government.
Collective bargaining is the extension of the basic principles and practices of democracy into industry.
A prime objective of collective bargaining is the redistribution of the proceeds of production.
Workers acquire a qualified property interest in their jobs under a collective-bargaining contract.
The successful administration of a contract requires the maintenance of an effective system of
communications for both management and the union, in bringing complaints from the bottom up and
relaying decisions and policies from the top down.
Participation of workers, union representatives, and management at all levels is a prerequisite to the
successful administration of a collective-bargaining contract.
The peaceful administration of a contract requires the confidence of workers that they will get justice
through the collective-bargaining machinery in the settlement of their grievance.
The natural outgrowth of local-plant and individual company collective bargaining is bargaining between
district or industry-wide organizations of management and union.
Grievance Handling
Grievance should be settled speedily and as near their point of origin as possible.
Grievances should be settled on their merits with no logrolling permitted.
Salesmen and purchasing agents usually possess a more natural ability for handling managements
relations with unions than do operating officials.
Participation
Managements assumption of sole responsibility for productive efficiency actually prevents the attainment
of maximum output.
The participation of organized workers in management provides an outlet for their creative desires, as it is
essentially a creative and cooperative undertaking.
Union management cooperation to reduce cost, eliminate wastes, increase productive efficiency, and
improve quality represents a practical program that provides workers with effective direct participation in
the creative phases of management.
Union should participate with management in distributing the proceeds of each firms production between
its owners and workers.
The greater the participation of workers through their unions in setting piecework and tonnage rates, in
making time and motion studies, in determining work standards and job evaluations, the greater are the
earnings and output.
Employee Security and Sharing
Each group of workers strives for the kind of seniority rules which it thinks will provide the greatest amount
of job protection.

Seniority is an instrument designed to eliminate favoritism and discrimination.

The power to discharge should not be lodged in a single individual.
Workers should enjoy full freedom of opportunity for advancement and promotion.
There is no basic conflict between seniority and productive efficiency.
The proceeds of technological changes, labor saving machinery, and other factors contributing to lower
unit costs of production should be shared equitably between owners and workers.
The adjustment of wage-rate inequalities should be exclusively on the basis of the merits of each case.
Union Security
Membership in the union should be a condition of employment.
The union shop is a necessary prerequisite for constructive union-management relations.
The union shop may be an instrument for their constructive or negative union-management relations,
depending chiefly upon managements outlook and the caliber of union leadership.
These principles are not immutable rules of union-management relationships, because they are the
outgrowth of changing conditions and, as a consequence, are themselves constantly subject to change.

26) Velez 550-640

Right to peaceful concerted activities:

Strike or lock out may be caused either by collective bargaining deadlock or an unfair labor practice.

Violations of collective bargaining agreement except flagrant and/or malicious refusal to comply with its
economic, shall not be considered unfair labor practice and not be strike able.

No strike or lickout may be declared on grounds involving inter-union and intra-union disputes or without
first having filed a notice of strike or lockout or without the necessary strike or lockout vote having been
obtained and reported to the borad. Neither will a strike be declared after assumption of jurisdiction by the
secretary or after certification or submission of the dispute to compulsory or voluntary arbitration or during
the pendency of cases involving the same grounds for strike or lockout.

In the course of collective bargaining, a lockout is proper only when the following requisites are met
notice of intention to declare a strike/lockout has been filed with the department of labor.
At least thirty days has elapsed since the filing of the notice before lockout is declared
An impasse has resulted in the negotiations;
The strike/lockout is not discriminatory

*** The notice or cooling off period is 15 days for unfair labor practices (U.L.P) strike/lockout and 30days
for bargaining strike/lockout
***Cooling off period will not apply if it involves union busting.

In defending again an unfair labor practice charge a raising out of such a use of a lockout, an employer
should show that he was merely protecting his bargaining position and not acting out of hostility to the
process of collective bargaining or by way of discriminating against union members.

Lockouts has been held valid in the following situations:

In anticipation of a threatened strike, where the motivated by economic consideration
In response to unprotected strike or walkout
In response to a whipsaw strike

Lockouts have been held unlawful where undertaken for the following purposes:

to discourage and dissipate membership in a labor organization

to aid a particular union by preventing further organizational work of its rival, or to coerce the employees
to join the favored union
to avoid bargaining

Lockout is unlawful where it is declared in order to defeat organizational and bargaining rights of
employees.

Where there is no dispute or the dispute has nothing to do with he terms and conditions of employment in
the establishment, the stoppage of work by its employees has no basis in labor law and the employees
who engage in the work stoppage actually commit an illegal strike and take the risk and consequences of
such an illegal act.

Please see page 560. Case: national union of workers in hotel, etc. vs. NLRC and peninsula hotel, G.R. no.
125561, march 6, 1998

Protection of strike:
The right to strike is given the following protection:
It is generally not subject to labor injunction or restraining order

Employees may not be discriminated against merely because they have exercised the right to strike
The use of strike-breakers is prohibited
Mere participation in a strike does not sever the employment relationship.

Employees who peacefully struck for lawful object were not liable to their employer even though the strike
shut him down, bankrupted him, or put him out of business, and even though it also caused enormous and
irreparable damage to hundreds of thousands of innocent persons not involved in the strike.

Any person who obstructs the free and lawful ingress to and egress from the employers premises or who
obstructs public thoroughfares may be arrested and accordingly charged in court.

The employees status during a strike remains, but the effects of employment are suspended, hence a
striking employee, as a rule, is not entitled to his wage during the strike.

The authoritative Ludwig Teller says that an illegal strike is one which:
Is contrary to a specific prohibition of law
Violates a specific requirement of law
Is declared for an unlawful purpose
Employ unlawful means in the pursuit of its objectives
Is declared in violation of an existing injunction
Is contrary to an existing agreement, such as a no-strike clause or conclusive arbitration clause
*** see page 568(starting)
Second requisite: Procedural requirements
Filing of notice of strike, observance of cooling-off period, taking of strike vote, and observance of sevenday strike vote report period. It bears stressing that these requirements are mandatory; meaning non
compliance therewith makes the strike illegal.

Notice of strike:
File with the department of labor and employment specifically the regional branch of the national
conciliation and mediation board.
Who file: only a legitimate labor organization can legally hold a strike.

If the reason for the intended strike is U.L.P by the employer, the notice should be filed by the duly
recognized or certified bargaining agent. If the bargaining unit involved has yet no bargaining agent, then
the notice may be filed by even an unrecognized labor union, provided the union is duly registered.

If the reason for the intended strike is bargaining deadlock, only the bargaining union ha the legal right to
file a notice of strike.

Cooling off period:

A cooling-off period must be observed, i.e, a time gap is required to cool off tempers between the filing of
notice and the actual execution of strike (or lockout). The cooling-off period is thirty days in case of
bargaining deadlock and fifteen days in case of unfair labor practice. However, in the face of union busting
as defined in article 277, the cooling-off period need not be observed and the union may take action
immediately after the strike vote is conducted and the results thereof submitted to the appropriate
regional branch of the board.

Strike vote:
Secret balloting

In every case, the union or the employer shall furnish the regional branch of the board the notice of
meetings referred to at least twenty-four 24 hours before such meetings as well as the result of the voting
at least seven (7) days before the intended strike or lockout, subject to the cooling-off period. The decision
to declare a strike requires the secret-ballot approval of majority of the total union membership in the
bargaining unit concerned. The needed vote is majority of the total union membership, not just majority of
the members present in the meeting of referenda. And it is majority of the union membership, not of the
bargaining unit. The members of the minority union may or may not be called to strike vote meeting.

Strike vote report:

The result of the strike (or lockout voting) should be reported to the NCMB at least seven (7) days before
the intended strike or lockout, subject to the cooling-off period.

A strike held within seven-day waiting period is plainly illegal. A strike staged without the submission of the
result of the strike-vote is illegal.

The failure of a union to comply with the requirement of the giving of notice to the NCMB at least 24 hours
prior to the holding of a strike vote meeting will render the subsequent strike staged by the union illegal.

The law does not specify, but NCMBs Primer on strike, picketing and lockout states that if the strike vote is
filed within the cooling-off period, the 7-day requirement shall be counted from the day following the
expiration of the cooling-off period. In effect, the seven days. Are added to the 15-day or 30-day cooling off
period.

the submission of the report gives assurance that a strike vote has been taken and that, if the report
concerning it is false, the majority of the members can take appropriate remedy before it is too late.

Declaration of strike or lockout:

If the dispute remains unsettled after the lapse of the cooling-off period and the seventy-day reporting
period, the labor union may strike or the employer may lock out its workers. The regional branch of the
NCMB shall continue mediating and conciliating. The conciliation-mediator, however can only suggest
solutions. He is not an arbitrator or an adjudicator who may impose his decisions upon the parties

In case of Union Busting:

Union busting exists when:

The union officers are being dismissed
Those officers are the ones duly elected in accordance with the union constitution and by-laws
The existence of the union is threatened

If the union is being busted, there is no need to observe the cooling off period. But must the union still file
a notice of strike, and take a strike vote, and submit the strike vote report? It is submitted that those
requirements are still mandatory even in the face of union busting.

What is being excused in case of union busting is only the observance of the 15-day cooling period.

Equally uncompromising is the NCMB primer on strike, Picketing, and lockout which partly states: in case
of ULP due to union busting, the time requirement for filing of the notice of strike shall be dispensed with
but the strike vote requirement being mandatory in character, shall in every case be complied with.

Indeed, in case of alleged union busting, the three remaining requirements- notice, strike vote, and 7day repot period-cannot be dispensed with; in fact, there is greater need for their observance.

Strike during arbitration: Illegal

***read: Filsyn employees chapter vs. Drilon page 581

Personal notes sa case:

-Employees were required to work on weekends and holiday (properly compensated)
-labor dispute

-union filed for notice of strike

-upon employers petition, the minister of labor certified the labor dispute to the NLRC for compulsory
arbitration
-Employees did not work on Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, and black Saturday= strike
-held: the certification of the dispute to the NLRC for compulsory arbitration had the effect of enjoining the
intended strike subject of the notice

Strike despite preventive mediation :

The effect of the declaration (the NCMB had declared the notice of stike as appropriate for preventive
mediation) was to drop the case from the docket of notice of strikes as provided in rule 41 of the NCMB
rules, as if there was no notice of strike. During the pendency of preventive mediation proceedings no
strike could be legally declared.
Filsyn employees chapter vs. drilon, et al., G.R no. 82225, april 5, 1989
(important case) ***page 581

Personal note (still from the book):

-when the NCMB converted IBMs notices into preventive mediation, this had the effect of dismissing the
notices of strike filed by IBM. In the case of PAL vs. Drilon, the court ruled that after the pendency of the
preventive mediation proceedings, no strike could be legally declared
***san Miguel corporation vs. NLRC and IBM page 585 pero makitan sa page 586

Violation of a valid order:

The strikers, through their representatives, had misled, not to say deceived, the industrial court because
despite their assurance that tey would not go on strike just the same. It was held that the strike was
equivalent to a violation or disobedience of an order of the court, hence illegal.

Grievance procedure bypassed:

-Stipulation in the CBA: in case of any alleged unfair labor practice on the part of either party, there will
be no strikes, lockouts, or any prejudicial action xxx. Through a grievance procedure herein outlined.
Rule: the unions argument in support of that contention is vague and unconvincing. No specific statutory
enactment was cited to show the illegality of that stipulation.
-It was stipulated therein that if a laborer had a complaint, the same would first be resolved by a grievance
committee. Then, if the decision was not satisfactory, the same would be referred to the top official of the
union and the company. And if still no settlement was reached, the matter would be submitted to the CIR.
Such stipulation was upheld.

- The main purpose of the parties in entering into a CBA is to adopt a procedure in the settlement of their
disputes so that strikes may be prevented. This procedure must be followed in its entirety if it is to achieve
its objectives.

- Even if the management has failed to do it duty in connection with the formation of the grievance
committee stipulated in the agreement, such failure does not give to labor the right to declare a strike
outright, for its duty under the agreement is to exhaust all available means within its reach before
resorting to force. If labor chooses not to deal with the management either because of distrust or
prejudice, the other way left to achieve a peaceful settlement on grievance is to resort to the court of
Industrial relations. Strikes held in violation of the terms contained in a collective bargaining agreement
are illegal, especially when they provide for conclusive arbitration clauses. These agreements must be
strictly adheres to and respected if their end is to be achieved.

- A strike or walkout on the basis of grievance, which have not been submitted to the grievance committee,
as stipulated in the agreement of the parties sanctioned by the CIR, is premature and illegal.

Case:
Since the CBA contained provisions on grievance and arbitration, obviously the union violated such
provisions when it filed a notice of strike without availing of the remedies therein. Such infringement of the
grievance and arbitration provisions constitutes further justification for the issuance of an injunction
against the strike. As held by the court in the case of IPP and PWU vs. ISRC: strikes held in violation of the
terms contained in collection bargaining agreement are illegal when they provide for conclusive arbitration
clauses. These agreement must be strictly adhere to and respected if their ends have to be achieved.
***San Miguel corporation vs. NLRC and IBM page 585

Dismissal of employees During Conciliation, when legal and enforceable:

When the strike notice was files by the union, the change of events which culminated in the termination of
the 14 salespersons employment was already taking place; the series of defiant refusals by said sales
representatives to comply with GTEs requirement to submit individual reports was already in progress. At
that time, no less than 3 of the ultimate 6 direct orders of the employer for the submission of the reports
had already been disobeyed. The filing of the strike notice, and the commencement of conciliation
activities by the bureau of labor relations did not operate to make GTEs orders illegal and unenforceable
so as to excuse continued noncompliance therewith. It does not follow that just because the employees or
their union are unable to realize or appreciate the desirability of their employers policies or rules, the
latter were laid down to oppress the former and subvert legitimate union activities. Indeed, the overt,
direct, deliberate, and continued defiance and disregard by the employees of the authority of their
employer left the latter with no alternative except to impose sanctions.
***GTE directories corp. vs. Sanchez, et al page 587

Third Factor in legality of strike: purpose; economic and ULP strike

The labor code recognizes only two strikeable grounds or causes that may validly support a strike; 1)
collective bargaining deadlock and 20 employers unfair labor practice. A strike not based on these two
causes is necessarily tainted with illegality.

Accordingly, the following are non-strikeable issues;

Inter-union or intra-union disputes
Violation of labor standard laws, unless art. 258, particularly clause (c ), (F), or (i) is also violated
Any issue involving wage distortion
Case pending at the DOLE regional offices, BLR, NLRC, or its regional branched, NWPC and its regional
wage boards, office of the secretary, voluntary arbitrator, court of appeals, or the supreme court.
Execution and enforcement of final orders, decisions, resolutions or awards in no. 4 above.
Any issue covered by a no- strike commitment in a duly executed CBA.

The Conversion Doctrine

Initiated over bargaining demands but during the course of the strike, the employer commits unfair labor
practices.
The board applied the usual rule that strikes who are permanently replaced during the economic phase of
the strike are not entitled to immediate reinstatement, while strikers replace d after the date of conversion
are.

Legality of Strike not dependent upon the ability of management to grant demands.
-The ability of the company to grant said demands is one thing, and the right of the laborers to make said
demands is another thing.

Lawful purpose; strike against employers unfair labor practice

Union busting, or interference with the formation of a union, constitutes an unfair labor practice act, hence
a valid ground for the declaration of strike. Any U.L.P act under Art. 258 is strikeable.
***Davao free workers front vs. CIR page 592
The rule in this jurisdiction is that subjection by the company of its employees to a series of questioning
regarding their membership in the union or their union activities in such a way as to hamper the exercise
of free choice on their part, constitutes unfair labor practice. PHILSTEAMs aforestated interrogation
squarely falls under this rule. ***Phil. Steam navigational co. vs phil marine officers guild page 593

Lawful purpose: U.L.P strike in Good Faith:

There are two test in determining the existence of an unfair labor practice strike:

Objectively, when the strike is declared in protest of unfair labor practice which is found to have been
actually committed; and
Subjectively, when a strike is declared in protest of what the union believed to be unfair labor practices
committed by management, and the circumstances warranted such belief in good faith, although found
subsequently as not committed.

It is not even required that there be in fact an unfair labor practice committed by the employer. It suffices if
such a belief in good faith is entertained by labor as the inducing factor for staging a strike.

If the management performed acts, which, under the circumstances, the strikers believed were unfair labor
practices on the part of the management, although they were not, the court ruled that the strike cannot be
held illegal. However, the unions belief needs some rational basis.

Case: ***ferrer vs court of industrial relations page 594

Good-faith strike Doctrine applied even to a strike without prior Notice and despite a Nostrike clause

It suffices, if such belief in good faith is entertained by labor as the inducing factors for staging a strike.
The strike staged by the union in this case cannot be considered a violation of the no-strike clause of the
collective bargaining agreement because it was due to unfair labor practices of the employer. Moreover, a
no-strike clause prohibition in a collective bargaining agreement is applicable only to economic strikes.
***Philippine metal foundries, Inc. vs. court of industrial relations page 597

Even Good-faith strike requires rational basis

The notice of strike filed by the union before the NCMB on July 12, 1991 contained general allegations that
RBS management committed unfair labor practices by its gross violation of the economic provisions in
their collective bargaining agreement and by alleged acts of coercion, union interference and
discrimination which amounted to union busting. It is the union, therefore, who had the burden of proof to
present substantial evidence to support these allegations.
It is not enough that the union believed that the employer committed acts of unfair labor practice when
the circumstance clearly negate even prima facie showing to warrant such a belief.
Even assuming arguendo that in the issuance of said guidelines RBS may have violated some provisions in
the collective bargaining agreement, there was no palpable showing that the same was a flagrant and/or
malicious refusal to comply with its economic provisions. Hence, the law mandates that said violation
shall not be considered unfair labor practice and shall not be strikeable. ***tiu and hayuhay vs. NLRC
and republic broadcasting system page 598

Do the procedural requirement apply even to a ULP strike in good faith?

the reliance is misplaced. Peoples industrial did not rule that the procedural steps can be dispensed with
even if the union believed in good faith that the company was committing an unfair labor practice. While it
is true that Philippine metal held that a strike cannot be declared as illegal for lack of notice , however , it
is important to note that said case was decided in 1979. At this juncture, it must be stressed that with the
enactment of R.A no. 6715 which took effect on march 21 1989, the rule given to the department of labor
are mandatory in nature.
Thus, even if the union acted in good faith in the belief that the company was committing an unfair labor
practice, if no notice of strike and a strike vote were conducted, the said strike is illegal. ***national
federation of labor vs NLRC page 600

Lawful purpose: Strike to compel recognition of and bargaining WITH THE MAJORITY UNION
***Caltex filipino managers and supervisors association vs. CIR page 601

Unlawful purpose: strike for union recognition without HAVING PROVEN MAJORITY STATUS
But where the majority status of union is not in doubt, not in dispute, or is certainly established and,
despite this, the employer still refuses to bargain, then the situation is one of refusal to bargain which is
unfair labor practice act by the employer; in this situation the union, if it strikes, will be staging a valid ULP
strike, assuming that the other requirements are complied with. ***lakas ng manggagawang makabayan
vs. marcelo enterprise page 602
***association of independent unions in the Philippines case page 602

May a Minority Union strike?

When a union, after winning in a election, is certified as the exclusive bargaining representative, any other
union who participated in the election thereby becomes a minority union. A minority union cannot demand
collective bargaining with the employer because such right properly belongs to the union that commands
the majority. Moreover; the defeated union cannot lawfully undertake a strike against the employer; if one
is being done, it must come to a halt. Neither can it picket to compel bargaining.
After a union has been certified as the bargaining representative, a strike by a minority union to compel an
employer to bargain with it is unlawful. No labor dispute can exist between a minority union and an
employer in such case.
If a union, after defeat in a certificate election, stages a strike to compel recognition as the bargaining
agent, such strike is clearly unlawful.
But this is not to say the minority union is helpless or an easy prey. Although it cannot strike, it can engage
in peaceful concerted activity short of strike and it can file a ULP complaint.

Strike held to compel recognition while case is unresolved

***Luzon marine department union case page 604

Unlawful purpose: trivial, unjust or unreasonable

Illegal Strike: shaven-head strikers (kalbo) in a tourist-class hotel

Acts calculated to force disruption of operations, thereby violating the no-strike clause in the CBA,
constitute illegal strike.

The unions violation of the Hotels grooming standards was clearly a deliberate and concerted action to
undermine the authority of and to embarrass the hotel and was, therefore, not a protected action.
Obviously, the hotel does not need to advertise its labor problems with its clients.
Thus, we hold that the unions concerted violation of the Hotels grooming standards which resulted in the
temporary cessation and disruption of the hotels operation is an unprotected act and should be
considered as an illegal strike. ***National union of workers in the hotel restaurant and allied industries
page606

Unlawful purpose: strike on non-strikeable issue

Nonstrikeable: Physical rearrangement of office
There is no question that the strike itself was prompted by no actual existing unfair labor practice
committed by the petitioner. In effecting a change in the seating arrangement in the office of the
underwriting department, the employer merely exercise a reasonable prerogative employees could not
validly question, much less assail as an act of unfair labor practice. The court is at loss how rearranging
furniture can justify a four-month-long strike. As to the respondents change of harassment , the
commission found none, abd as a general rule, the supreme court is bound by its findings. ***reliance
surety and insurance case page 608

Nonstrikeable: companys sales evaluation policy

-***GTE directories corporation case page 609* important
Nonstrikeable: salary distortion under the wage rationalization act
-***ilaw at buklod ng manggagawa case page 611

Nonstrikeable: inter-union or intra-union disputes

Bureau of labor relations, uner art 226, exercises original and exclusive authority to act on all inter-union
and intra-union disputes
The dispute does not involve the employer. Since the dispute is not with the employer, the dispute cannot
justify a work stoppage.
no strike or lockout may be declared on grounds involving inter-union or internal union disputes or on
issues brought to voluntary or compulsory arbitration.

Fourth Factor In legality of Strike: Means and Methods

A strike has to be pursuant within the bound of law. A strike does not suspend the binding force of law; it
does not put the strikers above the law or above their fellowmen.
Thus, the law limits to their exercise. These limits are among the prohibited activities that article 264
speaks of, particularly paragraph (e) . it stated that no person engaged in picketing shallCommit any act of violence, coercion or intimidation, or
Obstruct the free ingress to or egress from the employers premises for lawful purpose
Obstruct public thoroughfares

Whoever commits these acts- union officers, or MEMBERS, EMPLOYEES or non-employees-is answerable for
the acts.

Threats, coercion or violence

The use of violence , intimidation, restraint or coercion in carrying out concerted activities, which are
injurious to the right of property, or to particular individuals, makes a strike illegal. Unlawful acts of
preventing nonstrikers from working and the commission of acts of sabotage against the property of the
employee as well as the employment of violence on nonstrikers; infliction of physical injuries, assault,
breaking of truck side and windows, throwing of empty bottles at nonstrikers.
But it must be noted that the mere filing of charges against an employee for alleged illegal acts during a
strike does not by itself justify his dismissal. The charges must be proved at an investigation duly called
where the employee shall be given an opportunity to defend himself. This is true even if the alleged ground
constitutes a criminal offense, as we held in Almira vs. B.F Goodrich phil inc. In that case, we ordered the
reinstatement of employees against whom criminal complaints had been filed but not yet proved

Violence on Both Sides

-Where violence was committed on both sides during a strike, such violence cannot be a ground for
declaring the strike as illegal.
Responsibility of Use of force: individual vs. collective?
To avoid rendering illusory the recognition of the right to strike, responsibilities in such a case should be
individual and not collective. A different conclusion would be called for, of course, if the existence of force
while the strike lasts was pervasive and widespread consistently and deliberately resorted to as a matter
of policy.

Officials inability to leave premises, not illegal detention

-Clearly, there was no kidnapping ; the detention or deprivation of liberty under the circumstance while
certainly not to be justified, was not done with criminal intent.

- Their objective , as clearly observed by the lower court , was not to inflict loss of freedom to the
complainants but to weaken management resistance so that it would give in to their demands. While no
doubt to be deplored, such conduct cannot be made a basis for a finding of probable cause that the crime
penalized by the codal provision in question was committed. ***People vs. Barba page 617

Blockage or obstruction
Obstructions are beyond the valid exercise of the right to strike because they deprive the owner of the
company premises of its right to use them for unlawful purposes and the passers-by the use of public
passage. The illegal obstructions on public thoroughfares, such as streets or sidewalks, are nuisances,
which local government authorities can summarily remove

Fifth Factor in legality of strike: injunction

National interest cases; automatic injuction and return-of-work order

When there is a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a strike affecting national interest, the secretary of
labor and employment may either assume jurisdiction or certify the dispute to the national labor relations
commission for compulsory arbitration. The secretary may so act at his own initiative or upon petition by
any of the parties.
Such assumption or certification has the effect of automatically enjoining the intended or impending strike
or lockout as specified in the assumption or certification order. If one has already taken place at the time of
assumption or certification, all striking or locked out employees shall immediately return to work under the
same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout. This is an example of automatic
injunction. But this is strictly limited to national interest cases, and even in these cases the parties retain
the option to submit the dispute to voluntary arbitration.
The issuance of injunction in national interest cases is an exception to art.254, which, in general, forbids
labor injunctions.

What are considered national interest cases?

The code vests the president of the Philippines and the secretary of labor and employment almost
unlimited discretion to determine what industries may be considered as indispensable to the national
interest.
It is in the nature of a police power measure.

Personal notes:
Examples of industries vested with national interest;
Educational institutions
Inimical to national economy
Banks

Assumption of jurisdiction: prior notice not required

-The discretion to assume jurisdiction may be exercised by the scretaryof labor and employment without
the necessity of prior notice or hearing given to any of the parties disputants.
-the labor minister may immediately take action where strike has effectively paralyzed a vital industry,
e.g., a bus company drivers strike, without waiting the filing of notice of strike

Effects of Defiance
Non-compliance with the certification order of the secretary of labor and employment shall be considered
as an illegal act committed in the course of the strike or lockout, and shall authorize the commission to
enforce the same under pain of immediate disciplinary action, including dismissal or loss of employment
status or payment by the lock-out employer of backwages, damages and/or other affirmative relief, even
criminal prosecution against the liable parties

Case:***grand boulevard hotel case page 623

Assumption or certification order immediately effective even without return to work order;
strike becomes an illegal activity
Regardless therefore of their motives, or the validity of their claims, the striking workers must cease and
or/ desist from any and all acts that tend to, or undermine this authority of the secretary of labor, once an
assumption and/or certification order is issued. They cannot, for instance, ignore return to work orders,
citing unfair labor practice on the part of the company, to justify their actions.
We also wish to point out that an assumption and/or certificate order of the secretary of labor
automatically results in a return to work of all striking workers, whether or not corresponding order has
been issued by the secretary of labor. Thus the striking workers erred when they continued with their strike
alleging absence of a return to work order.***union of filipino employees case page 625
Certification of the dispute to the NLRC makes the continuation of the strike illegal, provided that the
parties are duly notified of the certification order. Notice to the parties is a prerequisite even if the order
states that it is immediately executory
-case:***PNOC dockyard case page 626
Refusal to receive the RTWO (return to work order)
Refusal to receive the AJO ( assumption of jurisdiction order) amounts to defiance of the order, which
defiance makes the continuation of the strike an illegal act, thus subjecting the strikers to loss of
employment statues.
***University of san agustin case page 626 important

Defiance of RTWO, an illegal act

Not only union officers but also union members who defy return to work order are subject to dismissal.
They are deemed to have participated in an illegal act.

Case: ***st. scholastics college case important page 629

Individual Identification of strikers

when the employees slowed down in their work after the DOLE secretary has assumed jurisdiction over the
dispute, the slowdown amounted to a strike in defiance of the assumption order. For that reason, it is
illegal strike. The union officers who participated in the illegal strike may be established. Each of these
officers must be individually identified and the extent or nature of his participation proven with certainty;
otherwise, the termination is invalid.

Abandonment has varying elements

The rule that to constitute abandonment of position there must be occurrence of the intention to abandon
and some overt act from which it may be inferred that the employees has no more interest in working is
available as a defense against dismissals under art. 296. But it cannot be under art.277 (g) or art.278 (a).

Restoration of condition upon issuance of return to work order

An order to return to work, which the labor court may properly issue in the exercise of it power of
arbitration and conciliation, is intended to restore the strikers to their positions in the company under the
last terms and conditions existing before the dispute arose.

The enforcement of a new company policy, requiring the employees to use upt heir earned leaves instead
of accumulating them, without judicial authorization, would indeed constitute a violation of such order for
the maintenance of status quo in relations between the workers and the company.

Where a return to work order is issued, may the employer be compelled to accept back to work
the strikes with pending criminal charges
Thus, to exclude union officers, shop stewards and those with pending criminal charges in the directive to
the company to accept back the striking workers without first determining whether they knowingly
committed illegal acts would be tantamount to dismissal without due process of law.
Actual, Not payroll, readmission
The third sentence of article 277(g) states that the striking or locked out employees shall return to work
and the employer shall readmit them, under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or
lockout. The court interprets this to mean actual, not payroll, readmission to the employees position.
In another case the court recognizes that one of the superseding circumstances that justified payroll
reinstatement is the fact that the subject employees positions were declared confidential in nature by a
panel of voluntary arbitrator.

Neither did the secretarty of labor abuse her discretion when she allowed payrolls reinstatement of the
strikes in a large hotel. She did not insist that the management physically and immediately reinstate them
because as the management pointed out, it would not look nice to have bald staff attending to the hotels
guest.

Voluntary return to work is not waiver of original demand

When the radio officers returned back to work after the strike, such return did not imply the waiver of the
original demands. The fact that the radio operator returned back to work and ended their strike only meant
that they desisted from the strike; such desistance is a personal act of the strikers, and cannot be used
against the union and interpreted as a waiver by it of its original demand for which the strike was adopted
as a weapon.

27) Zayas 641-650

14.7 Assumption Order Regulates Management Prerogatives
When labor dispute has occurred and a general injunction has been issued restraining the commission of
disruptive acts, management prerogatives must be exercised consistently with the statutory objective.
Metrolab Industries, Inc. VS Roldan-Confessor
In this case, the SOLE assumed jurisdiction over the dispute and issued a restraining order. While
the dispute was still unresolved, the company laid off 94 and 73 EEs on ground of redundancy. SC said that
any act committed during the pendency of the dispute that tends to give rise to further contentious issues
or increase the tensions between the parties should be considered an act of exacerbation. The unilateral
action of mgt is blatant violation of the injunction of this Office against committing acts which would result
in exacerbate the dispute.
14.8 Secretarys Arbitral Award
The SOLE can render arbitral award. The arbitral award though not per se categorized as an agreement
voluntarily entered into by the parties, it can be considered as an approximation of a CBA which would
otherwise have been entered into by the parties. Hence, it has force and effect of a valid contract between
the parties.
14.9 Legal Discretion; Judicial Review of SOLEs Award or Order
Legal discretion is not a mental discretion to be exercised ex gratia (given freely), but it is to be exercised
in conformity with the spirit of the law and in a manner to subserve and not to impede or defeat the ends
of substantial justice.
Manila Electric vs Quisimbing
Every legal power of the SOLE under the labor code, or for that matter, any act of the executive,
that is attended by grave abuse of discretion is subject to review by the SC in an appropriate proceeding.
The extent of judicial review must include the substance of the Secretarys award when grave abuse of
discretion is alleged to exist in the award.
14.20 Appeal of Secretarys Order
Involves national interest appeal to the Office of the President
Non-national interest cases file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65

An appeal erroneously presented to the OP does not toll the running of the period to file petition for
certiorari.
14.21 Secretarys Abuse of Discretion, Examples
- imposing a stipulation which even the union did not ask for in a bargaining deadlock over which the SOLE
assumed jurisdiction
- when the SOLE moto proprio changed the maintenance-of-membership clause contained in his earlier
order to a more stringent union shop clause.
- when the SOLE excluded from readmission the employees-strikers whom the ER separated on the ground
of redundancy (see ART 263(g) for justification)
14.22 Withdrawal of Case to Submit to VA
Art 267 (h) allows the parties, at any stage, to withdraw the case from compulsory arbitration and bring it
to voluntary arbitration.
15. Sixth Factor in Legality of Strike: AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES
GOP-CCP Workers Union vs CIR ruling upheld in Liberal Labor Union vs Phil. Can Company:
strikes held in violation of the terms contained in a CBA are illegal, especially when they provide
for conclusive arbitration clauses. These agreements must be strictly adhered to and respected if their
ends have to be achieved.
Master Iron Labor Union vs NLRC:
A no strike clause in a CBA is applicable only to economic strikes. Thus, if the strike is founded on
an unfair labor practice of the employer, a strike declared by the union cannot be considered a violation of
the no-strike clause.
An economic strike is defined as one which is to force wage or other concessions from the employer
which he is not required by law to grant.
15.2 No Strike Clause Binding; Primacy of Voluntary Arbitration Agreement
A no strike-no lockout stipulation generally deserves respect by the parties to the CBA and by the labor
authorities. Such stipulation applies even to a deadlock in renegotiating the economic provisions of the
CBA. Where the CBA stipulations that disputes between the parties should be resolve through a grievance
machinery, including voluntary arbitration, a notice of strike filed by the union violates the agreement. The
NCMB should consider such notice as not duly filed and then direct the union to avail itself of the grievance
machinery and voluntary arbitration. A similar posture should be taken by the SOLE instead of assuming
jurisdiction over the dispute.
Primacy of Voluntary Arbitration over Assumption of Jurisdiction
SOLEs jurisdiction over labor disputes must include and extend to all questions and controversies arising
therefrom, including cases in which the labor arbiter has exclusive jurisdiction. However, the present case
(University of San Agustin EEs Union-FFW vs CA and University of San Agustin) is an exception to that
holding. For, the NCMBs interaction on the universitys motion to refer the dispute to VA veritably forced
the hand of the University to seek and accordingly submit to the jurisdiction of the SOLE. Considering that
the CBA contained no strike, no lockout and grievance machinery and VA clauses, the NCMB under its own
procedure should have declared as not duly filed the Unions Notice of Strike and should have referred the
labor dispute to VA.
15.3 No-Strike Clause Not Binding Upon Newly Certified Bargaining Agent

Benguet Consolidated, Inc vs BCI EEs and Workers Union PAFLU:

Is the new bargaining agent bound by the strike clause of the previous bargaining agent?
The substitutionary doctrine only provides that the employees cannot revoke the validly-executed
collective bargaining contract with their ER by simple expedient of changing their bargaining agent. It
cannot be invoke to support that a newly certified CBA automatically assumes all the personal
undertakings like the no strike stipulation. As the newly certified CBA, it can always voluntarily assume all
personal undertakings made by the displaced agent. But there was no showing that the union formally
adopted the existing contract in this case.
15.4 If Members Disregard a No-Strike Clause
A no-strike clause is binding not only upon the union, but also upon its individual members. An ER
may maintain an action against the union for damages resulting from violation of the no-strike clause,
even though the ER grievances relating to the same work stoppage are arbitrable. However, the union is
entitled a reasonable period of time after inception of the strike in which to take required action, after
which the unions liability commences; where the union knows of the stike at about the time it
commences, the union is properly allowed about 48 hours in which to take action to end the strike, after
which the period of liability runs.
15.6
A court will not imply a no-strike clause in the contract which does not provide for arbitration of
disputes. However, a no-strike pledge is inferable from a collective bargaining agreement establishing
arbitration as a means of settling disputes.
ART. 279 (265) Improved Offer Balloting
Improved offer balloting is a device to end a work stoppage. By this device, the strike or lockout may end
peaceably, silently without anyone losing face because no one will appear defeated. It offers a graceful
exit where there is an improved offer by ER, or reduced demand by the union that will serve as a basis of
secret balloting that will not reveal who retreated from the fight.

28) Ochavillo 651-661

652-661
No-strike pledge inferred from other provisions
A strike during the term of a collective bargaining agreement is not ipso facto a violation of the agreement.
Collective bargaining agreement stating a contractual purpose to prevent lockouts, boycotts, and strikes,
does not constitute waiver of the right to strike.

Article 279 (265) IMPROVED OFFER BALLOTING

In an effort to settle a strike, the Department of Labor and Employment shall conduct a
referendum by secret balloting on the improved offer of the employer on or before the 30 th day
of the strike. When at least a majority of the union members vote to accept the improved offer,
the striking workers shall immediately return to work and the employer shall thereupon
readmit them upon the signing of the agreement.

In case of lockout, the Department of Labor and Employment shall also conduct a referendum
by secret balloting on the reduced offer of the union on or before the 30 th day of the lockout.
When at least a majority of the board of directors or trustee or the partners holding the
controlling interest in the case of a partnership vote to accept the reduced offer, the workers
shall immediately return to work and the employer shall thereupon readmit them upon the
signing of the agreement.
Improved-offer balloting
Improved offer Balloting is a device to end the work stoppage. An improved offer by the
employer, or a reduced demand by the union, will serve as basis for a secret balloting that will not reveal
who retreated from the fight.

PICKETING AND OTHER CONCERTED ACTIONS

Picketing is the presence of striking workers or union brothers standing outside the place of business in
order to persuade peacefully other workers not to work in the establishment. Picketing almost always
accompanies a strike.

Picketing without strike it is established that the constitutional right of free speech is infringed by a
states judicial policy forbidding resort to peaceful picketing where there is no immediate employeremployee relationship, as in the case of organizational or recognitional picketing. Hence, a state cannot
outlaw picketing merely because there is no strike in progress.

Moving picket
The public easement of way and passage permits the pickets to parade in front of or near the picketed
establishment. They have the right of passage but this right does not create the additional rights of
squatting or assembly. Any such squatting or assembly would exceed the scope of the public easement
and would constitute and enjoinable trespass.

Obstruction
Picketing conducted as to amount to a nuisance is unlawful. Picketing may be nuisance if it constitutes an
obstruction to the free use of property. Permissible activities on the part of picketers do not include
obstruction of access of customers.

Phimco vs.Phimco industries Labor Association

While the picket was moving, it was maintained so close to the company gates that it virtually constituted
an obstruction, especially when the strikers joined hands that for all intents and purposes, blocked the free
ingress to and egress from the company premises. Article 264 of the Labor Code tells us that picketing
carried on with violence, coercion or intimidation is unlawful. Words or acts which are calculated and
intended to cause an ordinary person to fear an injury to his person, business or property are equivalent to
threats. The manner in which the respondent union officers and members conducted the picket in the
present case had created such an intimidating atmosphere that non-striking employees and even company
vehicles did not dare cross the picket line.

Picketing of Neutral parties or Innocent Bystanders

Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions vs. Cloribel
Facts: members of the union picketed in front of the building and along the common passageway of the
banking firm office. Two of the other tenants located in the building filed a petition, claiming that the
activities affected their enjoyment of the leased premises as well as their businesses.
Ruling: There is no labor dispute between petitioner union and the complainants, who are innocent
bystanders. A picketing labor union has no right to prevent employees of another company from getting in
and out of its rented premises, otherwise it will be held liable for damages for its act against innocent
bystanders.

Picketing of Home
The picketing of a private home in a residential district is generally held improper, even when the pickets
are domestic servants on the ground that a home is not an industrial or a business enterprise, but rather
an institution used and maintained as a place of abode.

Limitation
Picketing as a concerted activity is subject to the same limitation as strike, particularly as to lawful purpose
and lawful means.

Violence and Intimidation

Picketing carried on with intimidation, threats, coercion, or force is unlawful, however laudable the strikers
motive or purpose, and regardless of whether the intimidated persons are the employers employee or
potential employees or customers. A bona fide labor dispute is not justified in assaulting a police officer.

Untruthful Picketing
Picketing may carry placards and banners truthfully advising the public concerning the dispute, but the
untruthful picketing is unlawful picketing and is enjoinable even though its purpose is valid. Picketing is not
peaceful where there is shouting or the use of loudspeakers in front of the picketed place of business.
Permissible activities on the part of picketers do not include misrepresentation. This is in accord with the
general rule that the means employed in aid of a strike must be free from falsehood or defamation.

OTHER CONCERTED ACTIVITIES

Collective letter
Concerted activities include not only strikes and picketing, but also informal actions, such as voicing their
grievances against the bank president through a letter signed and published by them.

Publicity
Striking employee have a right to acquaint the public with the fact of the existence of a strike setting forth
their claims in a controversy over terms and conditions of employment, by sign, handbill, or newspaper
advertisement as a legitimate means of economic coercion.

Placards and Banners

Strikers having the right to apprise the public of the fact of the strike and solicit its support may inscribe
his grievance upon placards and banners, provided the inscription is not libelous or otherwise unlawful.
The right to banner is subject to limitations provided for by law and ordinance. The display of banners
informing the public that the employer is unfair is not unlawful if the statements made are true in face,
and there is no obstruction to traffic or of access to the plaintiffs place of business.
Wearing of Armbands.
Bascon vs. CA
Wearing armbands and putting up placards to express ones views without violating the rights of third
parties, are legal per se and even constitutionally protected.

29) Rudela 662-676

SPEECHES, MUSIC, AND BROADCASTS
It is not unlawful for a labor organization in a radio broadcast, without employing threat or
intimidation, to express its honest opinion as to the fairness of an employer toward organized labor and to
advise the public and friends of labor not to patronize him. Nor is it unlawful to cause to be driven through
apparatus for broadcasting music. However, the use of loudspeaker in front of a picketed place of
business has been condemned as a form of intimidation. The same is true of the holding of street
meetings near the place of business of the employer with whom a union has a dispute.
EMPLOYEES DEMONSTRATION TO PROTEST POLICE ABUSES
It was the duty of the company to protect the Union and its members from the harassment of local police
officers. It was to the interest of herein private respondent firm to rally to the defense of and to take up the
cudgels for its employees so that they can report for work free from harassment, vexation or peril and as a
consequence perform more efficiently their respective task to enhance its productivity as well as profits.
(Philippine Blooming Mills case)
RALLIES AS ILLEGAL STRIKE
(Toyota Motor Phils) The Union fails to realize one major difference: there was no labor dispute in
Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization. In the present case, there was an on-going labor dispute
arising from Toyotas refusal to recognize and negotiate with the Union, which was the subject of the notice
of strike filed by the Union on January 16, 2001. The court affirmed the dismissal of more than 200 union
officers and members.
BOYCOTT- as applied to labor unions, is generally understood to be a combination to harm one person by
coercing others to harm him- that is, a combination of many to cause a loss to one person by causing
others, against their will, to withdraw from him their beneficial business intercourse through threats that
unless others do so, the many will cause similar loss to him or them. It is an attempt, by arousing a fear of
loss, to coerce others, against their will to withhold from one denominated unfriendly to labor their

beneficial business intercourse. The essential idea of boycotting is a confederation, generally secret, of
many persons whose intent is to injure another by preventing any and all persons from doing business with
him, through fear of incurring the displeasure, persecution, and vengeance of the conspirators.
LAWFULNESS OF THE BOYCOTT
LEGITIMATE- boycott by labor for the purpose of the maintenance or advancement of wages, improvement
of conditions of labor, shortening of periods of labor, engagements of union employees, and reinstatement.
It should be free of violence or malevolence.
ILLEGAL- purpose is to require an employer to coerce his employees to pay their back dues to the union or
discharge them, or to compel the payment by an employee of a fine, or to compel the employee to refrain
from working, to compel to sign contract, or to compel an employer to refrain from issuing new process or
machinery.
The striking employees may appeal for sympathetic aid by a request to withhold patronage or make like
proper measures to induce third persons to withhold their patronage from the employer in order to compel
him to recognize the demands of the employees.
SLOWDOWN
It is a method by which ones employees, without seeking complete stoppage of work, retard production
and distribution in an effort to compel compliance by the employer with the labor demands made upon
him. It may or may not be accompanied by strike. It may be gesture, preliminary to strike, which is
calculated to serve as an admonition or warning to the offending employer; or, alternatively, it may be a
movement in prosecution of a strike which has been declared without a walk-out. In either event, the
movement can be executed only by the employees themselves. In this respect does the slowdown differ
from picketing, secondary boycott, etc. in the latter cases, the project may be executed by employees and
nonemployees alike, in slowdown, it can be executed only by such of the offending employers personnel.
In one case, slowdown is strike on the installment plan, a willful reduction of the rate of work by concerted
action of workers to restrict the output of the employer, in relation to a concerted action of workers to
restrict the output of employer, in relation to a labor dispute; as an activity by which workers, without a
compete stoppage of work, retard production or their performance of duties and functions to compel
management to grant their demands.
CONSEQUENCES OF CONCERTED ACTIONS
STRIKERs RETENTION OF EMPLOYMENT- strikers remain as employees while they are on strike. The
effects of employment, generally, are merely suspended during that time- the workers do not work and do
not get paid. Even if strike is declared as illegal, the strike need not have been attended with such a
drastic consequence as termination of employment relationship. This is because of the security of tenure
provision of the Constitution.
Civil and criminal law are not suspended during a strike, hence anyone who commits an illegal act,
whether a union officer or a member, is civilly or criminally liable no matter whether the strike is legal or
not. Furthermore, the commission of illegal acts, including coercion, grave threats, intimidation is reason
enough to terminate the employment of such striker-employee.
The individual strikers committing the illegal acts must be identified. Simply referring to strikers,
AIU strikers, or complainants in this case is not enough to justify their dismissal. But proof beyond
reasonable doubt is not required; substantial evidence is enough.
SUSPENSION INSTEAD OF DISMISSAL
The penalty imposable does not always have to be dismissal; it may be scaled down to suspension.
Suspension was upheld by the court in a case where both parties, ER and UNION, contributed to the

volatile atmosphere emerging despite the SOLEs status quo order. Both sides were at fault or in pari
delicto.
UNION OFFICERS OR LEADERS?
The codal provision mentions OFFICERS, not LEADERS. There can be leaders who are not
officers.
SHOP STEWARDS ARE UNION OFFICERS
Thus, like the officers and directors of petitioner union who joined the strike, petitioners-shop
stewards also deserve the penalty of dismissal from their employment.
UNION MEMBERS
A union member, who participated in committing illegal acts during a strike, whether legal or illegal,
may also lose his employment status.
WHO DECLARES LOSS OF EMPLOYMENT STATUS?
Gold City Port Service, Inc vs NLRC- the law, in using the word may, grants the employer the
option of declaring a union officer who participated in an illegal strike as having lost his employment.
DECLARATION OF ILLEGALITY OF STRIKE NOT A PREREQUISITE TO DISMISSAL OF ILLEGAL
STRIKERS
Filing a petition to declare a strike illegal is not a prerequisite for the employer to terminate the
employment of employees, whether union officers or members, who commit illegal acts in the course of
the strike. A prior petition to declare the strike illegal is not necessary.
EXCEPTION: PENDING CASE AT THE NLRC
The issues relating to the strike and lockout were already submitted before the NLRC through
corresponding complaints filed by petitioner itself and private respondents. By filing a formal complaint for
illegal strike, it behooved petitioner to desist from undertaking its own investigation on the same matter,
concluding upon the illegality of the union activity and dismissing outright the union officers involved.
EMLOYERS OBSERVANCE OF DUE PROCESS
An employers declaration that a striker has lost his employment status is, technically, not
dismissal although it amounts to the same thing. Dismissing an employee is an act of the employer. But an
employer declaring that an employee has lost his employment is merely confirming the effect of an
(illegal) act initiated by the employee himself. It is as if the employee brought about his own dismissal, and
the employer is merely confirming it. But due process- a valid cause and a valid procedure- must be
observed. In the PHIMCO case, the employer directed the strikers to explain within 24 hours why they
should not be dismissed for committing illegal acts during strike. Three days later, they were informed of
their dismissal. This procedure says the court, is not sufficient compliance with the due process
requirement which applies to every case of employment termination. EE are dismissed but ER has to pay
damages.

30) Tidoso 677-691

Good- Faith Strike

A strike may be justified by belief in good faith that the employer was committing unfair labor practice
(ULP) at the time the strikers went on strike.

ONE INSTANCE OF GOOD FAITH

Ferrer vs. CIR (1996)
...there is no denying the fact that the time chosen by the management therefor, when considered in
relation with the attending circumstances, reasonably justify the belief of the Union that the real or
main purpose of the management was to discourage membership in the Union, to discredit the
officers thereof, to weaken the Union and to induce or compel the same to sign the draft of a
collective bargaining agreement. Said belief was confirmed by the fact that prosecutors of the
Court of Industrial Relations found sufficient grounds to file, and did file against the management, a
complaint for ULP.

TOTAL ABSENCE OF GOOD FAITH

Reliance Surety and Insurance vs. NLRC and Union (1991)
in effecting a change in the seating arrangement in the office of the underwriting department, the
petitioner (employer) merely exercised a reasonable prerogative employees could not validly question,
much less assail as an act of ULP.

In this case, Union invoked that they believed in good faith that there was ULP which was affirmed by the
NLRC. Supreme Court held there was no good faith but merely attended with plain arrogance, pride and
cynicism of certain workers because rearrangement of seats cant justify a four-month long strike.

Effect: Declared illegal. Officers with knowledge forfeited employment.

Forfeiture of Reinstatement
Strikers who fail to report for work when one had the opportunity to do so waived thereby his right to
reinstatement. Because of the apparent lack of interest of the strikers concerned as shown by their failure
to report to work without justifiable reason with the petitioners (employers) therein, we are constrained to
declare them to have forfeited their right to reinstatement.
The mere fact that the striking employee found an employment elsewhere is not necessarily a bar to their
reinstatement.
Reinstatement may render the question of illegality of strike as moot. Where the ER voluntarily
agreed to reinstate the strikers, such agreement on the part of the employer constitutes a waiver of the
defence that the strike is illegal.

Discrimination
To constitute as a ULP, the discrimination by the employer must be in regard to the hire or tenure of
employment or any term or condition of employment to encourage or discourage membership in any labor
organization.

Backwages in Strike

General Rule:
No backwages for strikers on the principle that a fair days wage for a fair days labor. Also base on the
ground that strike is a voluntary and deliberate cessation of work on the part of the workers to
bargain on their demands, the ER should not bear strikers loss of income.
Applies to strike when strike is used as an economic weapon (i.e. bargain for across-the-board wage
increase, additional sick leave with pay, etc.)

For purposes of backwages in strike on the ground of ULP, there is a need to classify ULP into two
classifications, 1.) Discriminatorily dismissed for union activities, and 2.) voluntarily went on strike even if
it is in protest of an ULP.
For the second classification, the stoppage of their work was not the direct consequence of the
companies ULP. Furthermore, the stoppage of work was made voluntarily, hence, there is no backwages
due.

Exceptions to the GR: (backwages are paid)

For the first classification, the EEs on strike will get backwages from the day of their discharge. (see
above classifications)
INVOLUNTARY strikers are paid their backwages. Put in mind that what is generally not subject to
backwages are strikes that are voluntarily made by EEs. Strikes which are done by EEs due to the stern
attitude of the company leaving the EEs no other alternative but to walk out is considered involuntary
strike and subject to backwages.
Voluntary strikers that abandon the strike and apply for reinstatement unconditionally,
meaning in the same condition prior to strike, and are denied reinstatement or are imposed by the
employers new conditions prior to reinstatement, can claim backwages from such denial of reinstatement
or imposition of new conditions for employment.

In illegal strikes, it follows the GR rule on backwages. EEs that are not considered to have lost their
employment status will be reinstated but without backwages.

ERs Right to hire replacement during strikes.

Replacements should not be a bar for reinstatement of strikers in their original positions.
Replacement EEs are deemed to have accepted employment with the knowledge that they are hired as
replacements and their employment is subject to the consequences of the labor dispute between ER and
the strikers.

31) Varga 692-706

RESIGNATION OF STRIKERS DOES NOT PREVENT SIGNING OF CBA
The 20% req. (Art 234 LC) pertains to the REGISTRATION of a Labor Org. & NOT to its election as a
collective bargaining agent

>> Even when a legitimate labor org. could no longer meet the 20% req. after its registration,
it does NOT ipso facto, lose its status as such until after due hearing by the BLR.

CIVIL LIABILITY OF LABOR ORG.

If Lawful actions (Labor Org) = any injury will be considered as merely INCIDENTAL!
If Strike is Lawful = NO LIABILITY for injuries (INCIDENTAL)
If Unlawful Means/ Unlawful Objectives = Liable for resulting damages
*Note/s: PROOF OF ACTUAL AUTHORIZATION OR RATIFICATION OF SUCH ACTS AFTER ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE
= needed to hold a labor org. liable for unlawful acts

LIABILITY FOR ACTS OF OFFICERS

Labor Union are LIABLE for Unlawful Acts of Officers which they have AUTHORIZED
NOT LIABLE if UNAUTHORIZED

LIABILITY OF MEMBERS
MEMBERS NOT LIABLE for MERE MEMBERSHIP in the Union for the wrongful acts of his associates without
his KNOWLEDGE or APPROVAL

Members are NOT subj. to Civil Liability for the acts of the Union or its Officers, UNLESS it is shown that
that they personally authorized/ participated in the PARTICULAR acts.

*Note/s: However, Members are liable for damages from UNLAWFUL ACTS which they participated.

LIABILITY OF LABOR UNIONS

DAMAGES ARISING FROM BOYCOTT

Unlawful Boycott = DAMAGES! provided there is CAUSAL CONNECTION between the acts complained of &
the damage suffered.

DAMAGES FOR INTERFERING WITH RIGHT OF LABORERS TO WORK

If done INTENTIONALLY & WITHOUT LEGAL JUSTIFICATION =DAMAGES!

EXTORTING MONEY FROM EMPLOYERS

ILLEGAL CONSPIRACY TO EXTORT MONEY = money obtained may be RECOVERED back + DAMAGES!

ARISING OUT OF PUBLICATIONS AND CIRCULATIONS OF FALSE STATEMENTS

Whether Lawful or Unlawful = DAMAGES!

DAMAGES
For a Labor Union &/or its officials & members to be held liable, there must be PROOF of ACTUAL
PARTICIPATION in, or AUTHORIZATION or RATIFICATION of, illegal acts.
Illegal Strike = employer is entitled to an award of damages ADEQUATELY proved.
In the Absence of COMPETENT PROOF on the Actual Damages suffered = still entitled to NOMINAL
DAMAGES

*Summary: Union Officers are LIABLE for DAMAGES caused to the business by the ILLEGAL STRIKE. The
Business Owner may recover those damages if he is able to prove them. In addition, the Officers will Lose
their Jobs.

IN PARI DELICTO DOCTRINE

If the employer committed ILLEGAL LOCKOUT & the employees staged an ILLEGAL STRIKE, they are BOTH
AT FAULT. >> The Court will RESTORE their Respective Positions before the Strike. The dismissed strikers
will be ORDERED REINSTATED WITHOUT BACKWAGES.

CHAPTER II- ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORG.

ART 281 [267] ASSISTANCE BY THE DEPT. OF LABOR

The Dept. of Labor, at the initiative of the Secretary of Labor, shall extend special assistance to the
organization, for the purpose of collective bargaining, of the most underprivileged workers who, for

reasons of occupation, organizational structure or insufficient incomes are not normally covered by major
labor organizations or federations.

ART 282 [268] ASSISTANCE BY THE INSTITUTE OF LABOR & MANPOWER STUDIES
The Institute of Labor & Manpower Studies shall render technical & other forms of assistance to labor
organizations & employer organizations in the field of labor education, esp. pertaining to collective
bargaining, arbitration, labor standards and the Labor Code of the Phils. In general.

LABOR EDUCATION (LE)

Labor Unions FAILURE to provide LE to members = ground for CANCELLATION OF UNION REGISTRATION &
EXPULSION of the Union Officers at fault.

CHAPTER III- FOREIGN ACTIVITIES

Gen. Rule: ALL Aliens, natural or juridical as well as Foreign org are STRICTLY PROHIBITED from engaging
DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY in ALL forms of TRADE UNION activities

Excp: Aliens working in the country with VALID PERMITS issued by DOLE = may exercise right to selforganization & join/ assist labor org. of their own choosing for purposes of Collective Bargaining.

REGULATION OF FOREIGN ASSISTANCE

No Foreign individuals, org. or entity may give any donations, grants/ other forms of assistance, in cash or
kind, DIRECTLY/INDIRECTLY to ANY Labor Org., group of workers, or any auxillary thereof, such as
cooperatives, credit unions & institutions engaged in research, education or communication, in relation to
trade union activities, WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION by the SECRETARY OF LABOR.

TRADE UNION ACTIVITIES shall mean:

Organization, formation & administration of labor organizations
Negotiation & administration of collective bargaining agreements
ALL forms of CONCERTED UNION ACTIONS
Organizing, managing, or assisting union conventions, meetings, rallies, referenda, teach-ins,
seminars, conferences & institutes
Any form of participation or involvement in representation elections, consent elections, union
elections
Other activities or actions analogous to the foregoing

*Note/s: 1. Prohibition shall equally apply to Foreign Donations, grants & other forms of assistance. 2.The
Sec. of Labor shall promulgate rules & regulations to regulate & control the giving & receiving of such
donations. 3. Applicable to Farm Tenants & Workers, but instead of Sec of Labor, the Sec. of Agrarian
Reform shall exercise the power & resp. of regulation.

ART 273. STUDY OF LABOR MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

The Sec. of Labor shall have the power & it shall be his duty to inquire into:
The existing relations between employers & employees in the Phils.
The growth of associations of employees & the effect of such associations upon employer-employee
relations
The extent and results of the methods of collective bargaining in the determination of terms and conditions
of employment
The methods which have been tried by employers and associations of employees for maintaining mutually
satisfactory relations
Desirable industria practices which have been developed through collective bargaining and other voluntary
arrangements
The possible ways of increasing the usefulness and efficiency of collective bargaining for settling
differences
The possibilities for the adoption of practical and effective methods of labor management cooperation
Any other aspects of employer-employee relations concerning the promotion of harmony & understanding
between the parties
The relevance of labor laws & labor relations to national development.
The Sec. of labor shall also inquire into the causes of industrial unrest & take all the necessary steps within
his power as may be pprescribed by law to alleviate the same, and shall from time to time recommend the
enactment of such remedial legislation as in his judgement may be desirable for the maintenance &
promotion of industrial peace.

VISITORIAL POWER (See ART. 274)

The SEC. OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT/ his duly recognized REPRESENTATIVE is empowered to INQUIRE into
the financial activities of legitimate labor org. & to examine their book of accounts & other records.

Requirements: Upon filing of a COMPLAINT UNDER OATH & duly supported by the WRITTEN CONSENT
OF 20% OF THE TOTAL MEMBERSHIP OF THE LABOR ORGANIZATION CONCERNED.

Purpose:
To determine compliance/ non-compliance with the law

To prosecute any violations of the laws & of the unions constitution and by laws.

Limitation/s:
That such INQUIRY/ EXAMINATION shall NOT be CONDUCTED during the 60 day FREEDOM
PERIOD nor WITHIN 30 DAYS immediately preceding the date of election of union officials.

*Note/s: (also See D.O. No. 40-03)

The SEC. OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT has jurisdiction over checking the financial records
The power can be delegated by the SOLE to the BLR. (the SOLE or his duly authorized rep. . .)
Request for exam. of books of accounts of INDEPENDENT LABOR UNIONS, CHARTERED LOCAL & WORKERS
ASSOCIATIONS = filed with Regional Office that issued its certificate of registration or certificate of
creation of chartered local.
Request for exam. of books of accounts of FEDERATIONS OR NATIONAL UNIONS & TRADE UNION CENTERS
= filed with the BUREAU.
The Complaint/ Petition for Audit/ examination of funds & books shall prescribe WITHIN 3yrs. FROM THE
DATE OF SUBMISSION OF ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT to the DEPT. or FROM THE DATE THE SAME SHOULD
HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED
The decision granting the conduct of audit shall include the appointment of the AUDIT EXAMINER & a
directive upon him to submit his report & recommendations WITHIN 10days from termination of audit
Decision GRANTING the Conduct of Audit = INTERLOCUTORY; NOT APPEALABLE
Decision DENYING/ DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT/PETITION FOR AUDIT = may be APPEALABLE WITHIN
10DAYS FROM RECEIPT THEREOF.

AUDIT EXAMINER
Shall CONDUCT an INVENTORY of ALL PHYSICAL ASSETS acquired by the Labor Org.
Make report of his findings to the parties involved & the same shall include his findings &
recommendations
*Note/s: The Copy of the Audit report shall be forwarded by the Audit Examiner to the MED-ARBITER or
the BUREAU DIRECTOR WITHIN 10DAYS FROM THE TERMINATION OF THE AUDIT together with
the entire records of the case & ALL documents relative to the conduct of Audit.

TRIPARTISM (See ART 275)

The representation of the 3 sectors- the PUBLIC or the GOVERNMENT, the EMPLOYERS, & the WORKERS in
POLICY-MAKING bodies of the govt.

*Note/s: Such kind of representation is not ordained, not even by the Constitution. What is provided for,
for the PRIVATE SECTOR is WORKERs PARTICIPATION in POLICY & DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES directly
affecting their rights, benefits, & welfare.

REASON/PURPOSE: Relations between capital & labor are NOT merely contractual. They are so impressed
with public interest that representations from the employer and the employee in decision and policymaking bodies of the govt are necessary. This is also in affirmation of the role of the State as the guardian
of the peoples rights & the constitutional provision on protection to labor.

32) Zayas 707-710

ART. 291 (277) Miscellaneous Provisions
Read the Codal Provision