SEC 5 FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION those religious sects which ban their members from joining
labor unions
VICTORIANO V. ELIZALDE ROPE WORKER'S UNION
FACTS: Benjamin Victoriano is a member of the religious
sect known as the "Iglesia ni Cristo", had been in the employ
of the Elizalde Rope Factory, Inc.. As such employee, he was
a member of the Elizalde Rope Workers' Union which had
with the Company a collective bargaining agreement
containing a closed shop provision which reads as follows:
Membership in the Union shall be required as a condition of
employment for all permanent employees workers covered by
this Agreement.
Under Republic Act No. 875, the employer was not precluded
"from making an agreement with a labor organization to
require as a condition of employment membership therein, if
such labor organization is the representative of the
employees."
Then Republic Act No. 3350 was enacted, introducing an
amendment to section 4 of Republic Act No. 875, as
follows: ... "but such agreement shall not cover members of
any religious sects which prohibit affiliation of their members
in any such labor organization".
Being a member of a religious sect that prohibits the affiliation
of its members with any labor organization, Victoriano
presented his resignation to Union. The Union wrote a formal
letter to the Company asking the latter to separate him from
the service in view of the fact that he was resigning from the
Union as a member. The management of the Company in
turn notified Victoriano and his counsel that unless Victoriano
could achieve a satisfactory arrangement with the Union, the
Company would be constrained to dismiss him from the
service.
ISSUE: WON Republic Act No. 3350 discriminatorily favors
HELD: NO. The purpose of Republic Act No. 3350 is secular,
worldly, and temporal, not spiritual or religious or holy and
eternal. It was intended to serve the secular purpose of
advancing the constitutional right to the free exercise of
religion, by averting that certain persons be refused work, or
be dismissed from work, or be dispossessed of their right to
work and of being impeded to pursue a modest means of
livelihood, by reason of union security agreements.
Congress acted merely to relieve the exercise of
religion, by certain persons, of a burden that is imposed by
union security agreements. It was Congress itself that
imposed that burden when it enacted the Industrial Peace Act
(Republic Act 875), and, certainly, Congress, if it so deems
advisable, could take away the same burden.
The means adopted by the Act to achieve that purpose
— exempting the members of said religious sects from
coverage of union security agreements — is reasonable.
It may not be amiss to point out here that the free
exercise of religious profession or belief is superior to
contract rights. In case of conflict, the latter must, therefore,
yield to the former. The Supreme Court of the United States
has also declared on several occasions that the rights in the
First Amendment, which include freedom of religion, enjoy a
preferred position in the constitutional system. Religious
freedom, although not unlimited, is a fundamental personal
right and liberty, and has a preferred position in the hierarchy
of values. Contractual rights, therefore, must yield to freedom
of religion. It is only where unavoidably necessary to prevent
an immediate and grave danger to the security and welfare of
the community that infringement of religious freedom may be
justified, and only to the smallest extent necessary to avoid
the danger.
 SEC 8 RIGHT TO FORM ASSOCIATIONS recognizing their right to do so, or regulating the exercise of
the right, they are prohibited from striking.
SSS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION VS CA
The SSS is one such government-controlled corporation with
an original charter, its employees are part of the civil service
and are covered by the Civil Service Commission's
FACTS: SSSEA went on strike after the SSS failed to act on memorandum prohibiting strikes. This being the case, the
the union's demands. SSS filed with the Regional Trial Court strike staged by the employees of the SSS was illegal.
of Quezon City a complaint against petitioners for staging an
illegal strike and baricaded the entrances to the SSS Building,
preventing non-striking employees from reporting for work
and SSS members from transacting business with the SSS.

ISSUE: WON employees of the Social Security System

(SSS) have the right to strike.

HELD: Yes. While there is no question that the Constitution

recognizes the right of government employees to organize, it
is silent as to whether such recognition also includes the right
to strike. The commissioners intended to limit the right to the
formation of unions or associations only, without including the
right to strike.
It will be recalled that the Industrial Peace Act (R.A. No. 875),
which was repealed by the Labor Code , expressly banned
strikes by employees in the Government, including
instrumentalities exercising governmental functions, but
excluding entities entrusted with proprietary functions
No similar provision is found in the Labor Code. To implement
the constitutional guarantee of the right of government
employees to organize, the President issued E.O. No. 180
which provides guidelines for the exercise of the right to
organize of government employees. In the absence of any
legislation allowing government employees to strike,