G.

LABOR RELATIONS LAW A: The following enjoy the right to

self‐organization for mutual aid
1.RIGHT TO SELF
and protection:
ORGANIZATION
1. Ambulant workers
a.Who may unionize for purposes
of collective bargaining 2. Intermittent workers

Q: What is the extent of the 3. Itinerant workers

right to self‐organization?
4. Self‐employed people
A: It includes the right:
5. Rural workers
1. To form, join and assist
6. Those without and definite
labor organizations for the purpose
Er’s. (Art. 243)
of collective bargaining (CB)
through representatives of their
own choosing; and
Q: Who are the persons/Ee’s not
2. To engage in lawful and granted the right to self‐
concerted activities for the purpose organization:
of CB or for their mutual aid and
protection. (Art. 246) A:

1. High level or Managerial

Government Ee’s. (Sec. 3, E.O. 180)
Q: Who are the persons/Ee’s
eligible to join a labor 2. Ee’s of International
organization (LO) for purposes of organizations with immunities.
CB? (ICMC v. Calleja, G.R. No. 85750,
Sep. 28, 1990)
A: The entities covered are all
persons employed in: 3. Managerial Employees. (Art.
212 of LC)
1. Commercial industrial, and
agricultural enterprises; and 4. Members of the AFP
including the police officers,
2. In religious, charitable, policemen, firemen, and jail
medical or educational institutions guards. (Sec. 4, E.O. 180)
whether operating for profit or not.
(Art. 243) 5. Confidential Employees.
(Metrolab Industries Inc. v.
Confesor, G.R. No. 108855, Feb. 28,
Q: Who are the persons/Ee’s 1996)
eligible to join a labor 6. Employees of cooperatives
organization for mutual aid and who are its members. (Benguet
protection?
Elec. Coop. v. Ferrer‐Calleja, G.R. A: 1. A group of employees (Ees)
No. 79025, Dec. 29, 1989); However
1. Of a given employer
they may form worker’s
association. (NEECO Ee’s Assoc. v. 2. Comprised of all or less than
NLRC, G.R. No. 16066, Jan. 24, all of the entire body of Ees
2000)
3. Which the collective interest
7. Non‐Ee’s. (Rosario Bros. v. of all the Ees consistent with
Ople, G.R. No. L‐5390, July 31, equity to the Er
1984)
4. Indicate to be best suited to
8. Gov’t Ee’s, including GOCC’s serve the reciprocal rights and
with original charters. (Arizala v. duties of the parties under the
CA, G.R. Nos. 43633‐34, Sep. 14, collective bargaining provisions of
1990) the law.
9. Aliens without a valid
working permit or aliens with
working permits but are nationals (1)Test to determine the
of a country which do not allow constituency of an appropriate
Filipinos to exercise their right of bargaining unit
self‐organization and to join or
Q: What are the factors
assist labor organizations. (Art.
considered in determining the
269 of LC; D.O. No. 9 [1997], Rule
appropriateness of a bargaining
II, Sec. 2)
unit?

A:
b.Bargaining Unit
1. Will of the Ees. (Globe
Q: What is a bargaining unit? Doctrine)

A: It is a group of Ee’s of a given 2. Affinity and unity of the Ees

Er, comprised of all or less than all
of the entire body of the Ee’s which
the collective interest of all the Ee’s
consistent with equity to the
employer, indicate to be best
suited to serve the reciprocal rights
and duties of the parties under the
collective bargaining provisions of
the law.
Q: What is an appropriate
bargaining unit?
interest, such as substantial
similarity of work and duties, or
similarity of compensation and
working conditions. (Substantial
Mutual Interest Rule)
3. Prior collective bargaining
history
4. Similarity of employment
status. (SMC v. Laguesma, G.R. No.
100485, Sep. 21, 1994)
Q: What are the factors the All UP Workers Union
considered in determining the assents that it represents both
substantial mutual interest academic and non‐academic
doctrine? personnel and seeks to unite all
workers in 1 union. Do Ees
A:
performing academic functions
0. Similarity in the scale and need to comprise a bargaining
manner of determining earnings unit distinct from that of the
non‐academic Ees?
1. Similarity in employment
benefits, hours of work, and other A: Yes. The mutuality of interest
terms and conditions of test should be taken into
employment consideration. There are two
classes of rank and file Ees in the
2. Similarity in the kinds of university that is, those who
work performed perform academic functions such
as the professors and instructors,
3. Similarity in the
and those whose function are non‐
qualifications, skills and training
academic who are the janitors,
of Ees
messengers, clerks etc. Thus, not
4. Frequency of contract or much reflection is needed to
interchange among the Ees perceive that the mutuality of
interest which justifies the
5. Geographical proximity formation of a single bargaining
6. Continuity and integration of unit is lacking between the two
production processes classes of Ees. (U.P. v. Ferrer‐
Calleja, G.R. No.96189, July 14,
7. Common supervision and 1992)
determination of labor‐relations
policy Q: Is the bargaining history a
decisive factor in the
8. History of CB determination of
appropriateness of bargaining
9. Desires of the affected Ees or
unit?
10. Extent of union organization
A: No. While the existence of a
bargaining history is a factor that
may be reckoned with in
Q: A registered labor union in determining the appropriate
UP, ONAPUP, filed a petition for bargaining unit, the same is not
certification election (PCE) decisive or conclusive. Other
among the non‐academic Ees. factors must be considered. The
The university did not oppose, test of grouping is community or
however, another labor union, mutuality of interests. This is so
because the basic test of an
asserted bargaining unit’s
acceptability is whether or not it is
fundamentally the combination
which will best assure to all Ees
the exercise of their CB rights.
(Democratic Labor Ass’n v. Cebu
Stevedoring Company, Inc., G.R.
No. L‐10321, Feb. 28, 1958)
Q: What is “one‐union, one‐
company” policy?
A: GR: It is the proliferation of
unions in an Er unit. Such is
discouraged as a matter of policy
unless there are compelling
reasons which would deny a
certain class of Ees to the right to
self‐organization for purposes of
collective bargaining (CB).
XPNs:
1. Supervisory Ees who are
allowed to form their own unions
apart from the rank‐and‐file Ees
and
2. The policy should yield to
the right of Ees to form union for
purposes not contrary to law, self‐
organization and to enter into CB
negotiations.
Note: Two companies cannot be
treated into a single bargaining
unit even if their businesses are
related.
Subsidiaries or corporations
formed out of former divisions of a
mother company following a re‐
organization may constitute a
separate bargaining unit.
Q: Union filed a PCE among the
rank and file Ees of three
security agencies including the
Veterans Security. The latter
opposed alleging that the three
security agencies have separate
and distinct corporate
personalities. May a single PCE
filed by a labor union in the
three corporations instead of
filing 3 separate petitions?
A: Yes. The following are
indications that the 3 agencies do
not exist and operate separately
and distinctly from each other with
different corporate direction and
goals: 1) Veterans Security failed to
rebut the fact that they are
managed through the Utilities
Management Corp with all their
Ees drawing their salaries and
wages from the said entity; 2) that
the agencies have common and
interlocking incorporators and
officers; 3) that they have a single
mutual benefit system and
followed a single system of
compulsory retirement. 4) they
could easily transfer security
guards of one agency to another
and back again by simply filling‐up
a common pro‐forma slip; 5) they
always hold joint yearly
ceremonies such as the PGA
Annual Awards Ceremony; and 6)
they continue to be represented by
one counsel.
Hence, the veil of corporate fiction 1. Joint statement under oath
of the 3 agencies should be lifted of VR
for the purpose of allowing the Ees
2. Certificate of posting of joint
of the 3 agencies to form single
statement for 15 consecutive days
union. As a single bargaining unit,
in at least 2 conspicuous places in
the Ees need not file 3 separate
the establishment of the
PCE. (Philippine Scout Veterans
bargaining unit
Security and Investigation Agency
v. SLE, G.R. No. 92357, July 21, 3. Certificate of posting
1993)

(2)Voluntary Recognition
1. Approximate number of Ees
Q: What are the 3 methods of in the bargaining unit and the
determining the bargaining names of those who supported the
representative? recognition
A:

1. Voluntary recognition 1. Statement that the labor

union is the only LLO operating
2. Certification election with or
within the bargaining unit.
without run‐off

3. Consent election
Note: Where the notice of
voluntary recognition is sufficient
Q: What is voluntary recognition in form, number and substance
(VR)? and where there is no registered
labor union operating within the
A: The process by which a bargaining unit concerned, the
legitimate labor union is Regional Office, through the Labor
recognized by the employer (Er) as Relations Division shall, within 10
the exclusive bargaining days from receipt of the notice,
representative or agent in a record the fact of VR in its roster of
bargaining unit, reported with the legitimate labor unions and notify
Regional Office. (Sec. 1 [bbb], Rule the labor union concerned.
I, Book V, IRR)
Q: What are the three (3)
Q: What are the requirements for
conditions to voluntary
VR?
recognition (VR)?
A: The notice of VR shall be
A: VR requires 3 concurrent
accompanied by the original copy
conditions:
and 2 duplicate copies of the
following req’ts:
1. VR is possible only in an
unorganized establishment.
2. Only one union must ask for
recognition. If there 2 or more
unions asking to be recognized,
the Er cannot recognize any of
them; the rivalry must be resolved
through an election.
3. The union voluntarily
recognized should be the majority
union as indicated by the fact that
members of the bargaining unit
did not object to the projected
recognition. If no objection is
raised, the recognition
proceed, the DOLE will be
informed and CBA recognition will
commence. If objection is raised,
the recognition is barred and a
certification election or consent
election will have to take place.
Office which issued the recognized
labor union’s certificate of
registration or certificate of
creation of a chartered local.
Q: What are the effects of
recording of fact of voluntary
recognition (VR)?
A:
1. The recognized labor union
shall enjoy the rights, privileges
and obligations of an existing
bargaining agent of all the
employees (Ees) in the bargaining
unit.
will
2. It shall also bar the filing of
a petition for certification election
by any labor organization for a
period of 1 year from the date of
entry of VR.
(3)Certification Election

Q: What is certification election

Note: In an organized
establishment, voluntary
recognition is not possible. A
petition to hold a CE has to be filed
within the freedom period which
means the last 60 days of the 5th
year of the expiring CBA. The
petition may be filed by any
Legitimate Labor Organization
(LLO), but the petition must have
written support of at least 25% of
the Ees in the bargaining unit.
Q: Where and when to file the
petition for VR?
A: Within 30 days from such
recognition, Er shall submit a
notice of VR with the Regional
(CE)?
A: It is the process of determining
through secret ballot the sole and
exclusive representative of the Ees
in an appropriate bargaining unit,
for purposes of CB or negotiation.
(Sec. 1 [h], Rule I, Book V, IRR)
Note: The process is called CE
because it serves as the official,
reliable and democratic basis for
the BLR to determine and certify
the union that shall be the
exclusive bargaining representative
of the Ees for the purpose of
bargaining with the Er.
Q: What is the nature of
certification election?
A: A certification election is not a
litigation but merely an
investigation of a non‐adversarial
fact‐finding character in which
BLR plays a part of a disinterested
investigator seeking merely to
ascertain the desire of the
employees as to the matter of their
representation. (Airline Pilots Ass’n
of the Philippines v. CIR, G.R. No. L‐
33705, April 15, 1977)
Q: What is the purpose of a
certification election?
A: It is a means of determining the
worker’s choice of:
2. The veracity of majority
membership claims of the
competing unions so as to identity
the one union that will serve as the
bargaining representative of the
entire bargaining unit.
Note: Some of the Ees may not
want to have a union; hence, “no
union” is one of the choices named
in the ballot. If “no union” wins,
the company or the bargaining
unit remains un‐unionized for at
least 12 months, the period is
known as 12‐month bar. After that
period, a petition for a CE may be
filed again.

1. Whether they want a union

to represent them for collective
bargaining or if they want no
union to represent them at all.

2. And if they choose to have a

union to represent them, they will
choose which among the
contending unions will be the sole
and exclusive bargaining
representative of the employees in
the appropriate bargaining unit.

Q: What are the issues involved

in a certification proceeding?

A: Certification proceedings
directly involve two issues:

1. Proper composition and

constituency of the bargaining
unit; and
Q: Distinguish the requisites for Note: The approval of the PCE in
a petition for certification an unorganized bargaining unit is
election between an organized NEVER appealable, the reason
and an unorganized being that the law wants the
establishment. ununionized to be unionized.

Q: Should the consent

A: Art.256. Art.257.
signatures of at least 25% of the
ORGANIZED UNORGANIZED
Ees in the bargaining unit be
Bargaining agent submitted simultaneously with
the filing of the petition for
Present None certification election (PCE)?
Petition filed A: No, the administrative rule
requiring the simultaneous
Has to be a No need to be
submission of the 25% consent
verified petition verified
signatures upon the filing of PCE
Freedom Period should not be strictly applied to
frustrate the determination of the
No petition for Not applicable. No legitimate representative of the
CE except freedom period. workers. Accordingly, the Court
within 60 days Petition can be filed held that the mere filing of a PCE
before the anytime. within the freedom period is
expiration of sufficient basis for the issuance of
the CBA. (See an order for the holding of a CE,
Art. 253 & 253‐ subject to the submission of the
A) consent signatures within a
reasonable period from such filing.
Substantial support rule
(Port Workers Union of the Phils. v.
Must be duly No substantial Laguesma, G.R. Nos. 94929‐30,
supported by support rule. Mar. 18, 1992)
25% of all the
Why? Intention of Q: Who may file a petition for
members of the
law is to bring in certification election (PCE)?
appropriate
the union, to
bargaining unit A:
implement policy
(ABU).
behind Art. 211(a). 0. Any legitimate labor
Percentage organization (LLO)
base: all
members of an 1. A national union or
ABU. federation which has already
issued a charter certificate to its
local chapter participating in the
CE
2. A local chapter which has A: The proper time to file the PCE
been issued a charter certificate depends on whether the Certified
Bargaining Unit has a CBA or not:
3. An Er only when requested
to bargain collectively in a 1. If it has no CBA, the petition
bargaining unit where no may be filed anytime outside the
registered CBA exists. (Sec. 1, Rule 12‐month bar (certification year).
VIII, Book V, IRR as amended by
2. If it has CBA, it can be filed
D.O. 40‐F‐03)
only within the last 60 days of the
Note: A national union or 5th year of the CBA.
federation filing a petition in behalf
Note: At the expiration of the
of its local/chapter shall not be
freedom period, the Er shall
required to disclose the names of
continue to recognize the majority
the local/chapter’s officers and
status of the incumbent bargaining
members, but shall attach to the
agent where no PCE is filed.
petition the charter certificate it
issued to its local/chapter. (Sec. 1,
Rule VIII, Book V, IRR as amended
by D.O. 40‐F‐03)

Q: May an employee intervene in

the petition for certification
election (PCE)?

A: Yes, for the purpose of

protecting his individual right.
(Sec. 1, Rule VIII, Book V, IRR as
amended by D.O. 40‐03)

Q: Where is PCE filed?

A: It shall be filed with the

Regional Office which issued the
petitioning union's certificate of
registration/certificate of creation
of chartered local. (Implementing
Rules, as amended by D.O. 40‐03)

Q: Who shall hear and resolve

the PCE?

A: The Mediator‐Arbiter.

Q: When to file PCE?

Q: Distinguish union election be represented at all by anyone.
from certification election. Hence, no union is one of the
choices in a CE. (2006 Bar
A:
Question)
UNION CERTIFICATIO Alternative Answer:
ELECTION N ELECTION
No. A no union cannot win in a
Held pursuant The process is CE. The purpose of a CE is to
to the union’s ordered and select an excusive bargaining
constitution and supervised by agent and a no union vote would
by‐laws DOLE precisely mean that the voter is not
choosing any of the contending
Right to vote is All Ees whether
unions. If the no‐union votes
enjoyed only by union or non‐
constitute a majority of the valid
union members union members
votes cast, this fact will all the
who belong to
more mean that no union won in
the appropriate
CE. A one‐year bar will
bargaining unit
consequently stop the holding of
can vote
another CE to allow the Er to enjoy
Winners of The winner in a industrial peace for at least one
union election CE is an entity, year.
become officers a union, which
Q: In what instance may a PCE be
and becomes the
filed outside the freedom period of
representatives representative of
a current CBA?
of the union the whole
only bargaining unit A: As a general rule, in an
that includes establishment where there is a
even the CBA in force and effect, a PCE may
members of the be filed only during the freedom
defeated unions. period of such CBA. But to have
that effect, the CBA should have
been filed and registered with the
Note: Both in CE and union DOLE. (Art. 231, 253‐A and 256,
election, the prescribed procedures LC). (1997 Bar Question)
should be followed.
Thus, a CBA that has not been
Q: Can a "no‐union" win in a filed and registered with the DOLE
certification Election (CE)? cannot be a bar to a CE and such
election can be held outside the
A: Yes. Because the objective in a freedom period of such CBA.
CE is to ascertain the majority
representation of the bargaining Alternative Answer:
representative, if the Ee’s desire to
A PCE may be filed outside the
freedom period of a current CBA if
such CBA is a new CBA that has
been prematurely entered into,
meaning, it was entered into before
the expiry date of the old CBA. The
filing of the PCE shall be within
the freedom period of the old CBA
which is outside the freedom
period of the new CBA that had
been prematurely entered into.
Q: Are probationary employees
(Ees) entitled to vote in a CE?
Why?
A: Yes, in a CE, all rank‐and‐file
Ees in the appropriate bargaining
unit (ABU) are entitled to vote. This
principle is clearly stated in Art.
255 of the LC which states that the
"labor organization designated or
selected by the majority of the Ees
in such unit shall be the exclusive
representative of the Ees in such
unit for the purpose of collective
bargaining (CB)."
CB covers all aspects of the
employment relation and the
resultant CBA negotiated by the
certified union binds all Ees in the
bargaining unit. Hence, all rank‐
and‐file Ees, probationary or
permanent, have a substantial
interest in the selection of the
bargaining representative. The LC
makes no distinction as to their
employment status as basis for
eligibility to vote in the petition for
CE. The law refers to "all" the Ees
in the bargaining unit. All they
need to be eligible to vote is to
belong to the "bargaining unit"
(Airtime Specialists, Inc. v. Ferrer‐
Calleja, G.R. No. 80612‐16, Dec.
29, 1989). (1999 Bar Question)
Q: What is direct certification?
A: It is the process whereby the
Med‐Arbiter directly certifies a
labor organization of an
appropriate bargaining unit (ABU)
of a company after a showing that
such petition is supported by at
least a majority of the Ees in the
bargaining unit.
Q: Does the failure of SAMAFIL (an
independent union) to prove its
affiliation with NAFLU‐KMU
federation affect its right to file a
PCE as an independent union?
A: No, as a LLO, it has the right to
file a PCE on its own beyond
question. Its failure to prove its
affiliation with the NAFLU‐KMU
cannot affect its right to file said
PCE as an independent union. At
the most, its failure will result in
an ineffective affiliation with
NAFLU‐KMU. Despite affiliation,
the local union remains the basic
unit free to serve the common
interest of all its members and
pursue its own interests
independently of the federation.
(Samahan ng mga Manggagawa sa
Filsystems v. SLE, G.R. No.
128067, June 5, 1998)
Q: May illegally dismissed Ees of
the company participate in the
certification election (CE)?
A: Yes, it is now well‐settled that
Ees who have been improperly laid
off but who have at present an
unabandoned right to or
expectation of re‐employment, are
eligible to vote in CE’s. Thus, and
to repeat, if the dismissal is under
question, as in the case now at bar
whereby a case of illegal dismissal
and/or ULP was filed, the Ee’s
concerned could still qualify to
vote in the elections. (Phil. Fruits &
Vegetables Industries v. Torres,
G.R. No. 92391, July 3, 1992)
Q: Is direct certification (DC) still
allowed?
A: No. Even in a case where a
union has filed a petition for CE,
the mere fact that there was no
opposition does not warrant a DC.
More so in a case when the
required proof is not presented in
an appropriate proceeding and the
basis of the DC is the union’s self‐
serving assertion that it enjoys the
support of the majority of the Ees,
without subjecting such assertion
to the test of competing claims.
(Samahang Manggagawa sa
Permex v. Secretary, G.R. No.
107792, Mar. 2, 1998)
Q: What are the grounds for
denying the PCE?
A:
1.
The petitioning union or federation
is not listed in the DOLE’s registry
of legitimate labor unions or that
its registration certificate legal
personality has been revoked or
cancelled with finality
2.
Failure of a local chapter or
national union/federation to
submit a duly issued charter
certificate upon filing of the
petition
3.
The petition was filed before or
after the FREEDOM PERIOD of a
duly registered CBA; provided that
the 60‐day period based on the
original CBA shall not be affected
by any amendment, extension or
renewal of the CBA; (contract bar
rule)
4.
The petition was filed within 1 year
from entry of voluntary recognition
or within the same period from a
valid certification, consent or run‐
off election and no appeal on the
results of the certification, consent
or run‐off election is pending; (12‐
month bar; certification year bar
rule)
5.
A duly certified union has
commenced and sustained
negotiations with the Er in
accordance with Art. 250 of the LC
within the 1‐year period.
(negotiation bar rule)
6.
There exists a bargaining deadlock
which had been submitted to
conciliation or arbitration or had
become the subject of a valid
notice of strike or lockout to which
an incumbent or certified
bargaining agent is a party.
(deadlock bar rule)
7.
In case of an organized
establishment, failure to submit
the 25% support req’t for the filing
of the PCE.
8.
Non‐appearance of the petitioner
for 2 consecutive scheduled
conferences before the med‐arbiter
despite due notice, and
9.
Absence of Er‐Ee relationship
between all the members of the
petitioning union and the owner of
the establishment where the
proposed bargaining unit is sought
to be represented. (Sec.14[a], Rule
VIII, Book V, IRR, as amended by
D.O. 40‐F‐03)
Q: What is a prohibited ground for
the denial/suspension of the
petition for certification election?
A: The inclusion as union
members of Ees outside the
bargaining unit. Said Ees are
automatically deemed removed
from the list of membership of said
unions.
Q: Does the filing of a petition to
cancel the petitioner’s registration
cause the suspension or dismissal
of the petition for certification
election?
A: No. To serve as a ground for
dismissal of a PCE, the legal
personality of the petitioner should
have been revoked or cancelled
“with finality”.
Q: UNIDAD, a labor organization
claiming to represent the majority
of the rank and file workers of
BAGSAK Toyo Manufacturing
Corp. (BMTC), filed a petition for
CE during the freedom period
obtaining in said corp. Despite the
opposition thereto by SIGAW
Federation on the ground that
UNIDAD was not possessed with
all the attributes of a duly
registered union, the Med‐Arbiter
issued an order calling for a CE on
July 25, 2001. This order was
promulgated and served on the
parties on July 12, 2001. On July
14, 2001, UNIDAD submitted and
served the required documents for
its registration as an independent
union, which documents were
approved by the DOLE on July 15,
2001.
During the elections, UNIDAD won
over SIGAW. SIGAW questioned
UNIDAD's victory on the ground
that UNIDAD was not a duly
registered union when it filed the
petition for a CE. Shall SIGAW’s
case prosper or not? Why?
A: No, SIGAW's case will not
prosper. The application of
technicalities of procedural req’ts
in CE disputes will serve no lawful
objective or purpose. It is a
statutory policy that no obstacles
should be placed on the holding of
a CE, (Samahang ng Manggagawa
sa Pacific Plastic vs. Laguesma,
G.R. No. 111245, Jan. 31, 1997)
and that the law is indisputably
partial to the holding of a CE.
(Western Agusan vs. Trajano G.R.
No. 65833, May 6, 1991)
At any rate, UNIDAD completed all
the req’ts for union registration on
July 14, 2001, and legitimate
union status was accorded on July
15, 2000, or at least 10 days
before the scheduled date for
holding the CE. (2001 Bar
Question)
Q: What is meant by “contract‐bar
rule”?
A: Contract‐bar rule means that
while a valid and registered CBA is
subsisting, the BLR is not allowed
to hold an election contesting the
majority status of the incumbent
union except during the 60‐day
period immediately prior to its
expiration, which period is called
the freedom period.
Note: In the absence of such timely
notice or filing of petition, the
contract executed during the
automatic renewal period is a bar
to CE.
There shall be no amendment,
alteration, or termination of any of
the provisions of the CBA except to
give notice of one party’s intention
to amend, alter and terminate the
provisions within the freedom
period.
Q: What are the requirements in
order to invoke the contract bar
rule?
A: The existing CBA must:
1.
Be in writing and signed by all
contracting parties
2.
Contain the terms and conditions
of employment
3.
Cover employees in an appropriate
bargaining unit
4.
Be for a reasonable period or
duration
5.
Be ratified
6.
Be registered with the BLR; and
7.
The violation of the contract bar
rule or the existence of a duly
registered CBA must be specially
pleaded as a defense.
Q: What is the effect of an invalid
or unregistered CBA?
A: There is no bar and therefore a
certification election may be held.
Note: Registration of CBA only
puts into effect the contract‐bar
rule but the CBA itself is valid and
binding even if unregistered.
Q: What are the exceptions to the
contract bar rule?
A:
1.
The CBA is unregistered
another union and said CBA can
be renegotiated at the option of the
new bargaining agent. (ATU v.
Hon. Noriel, G.R. No. L‐48367,
Jan. 16, 1979)
8.
A CBA registered with falsified
supporting documents

2. 9.

The CBA is inadequate and CBA was concluded in violation of

incomplete
3.
The CBA was hastily entered into
(Doctrine of premature extension)
4.
Withdrawal of affiliation from the
contracting union brought about
by schism or mass disaffiliation
5.
Contract where the identity of the
representative is in doubt. (ALU v.
Ferrer Calleja, G.R. No. 85085,
Nov. 6, 1989)
6.
CBA entered into between the Er
and the union during the
pendency of a petition for CE
(Vassar Industries Ees Union v.
Estrella, G.R. No. L‐46562, Mar.
31, 1978)
7.
an order enjoining the parties from
entering into a CBA until the issue
of representation is resolved
10.
Petition is filed during the 60‐day
freedom period.
Note: Basic to the contract bar rule
is the proposition that the delay of
the right to select representatives
can be justified only where
stability is deemed paramount.
Excepted from the contract bar
rule are certain types of contracts
which do not foster industrial
stability, such as contracts where
the identity of the representative is
in doubt. Any stability derived
from such contracts must be
subordinated to the Ees’ freedom
of choice because it does not
establish the type of industrial
peace contemplated by law.
(Firestone Tire & Rubber Company
Ee’s Union v. Estrella, G.R. No. L‐
45513‐14, Jan. 6, 1978)

CBA conducted between the Er Q: Can the BLR certify a union as

and the union is not bar to a the exclusive bargaining
certification election filed by representative after showing proof
of majority representation thru
union membership cards without
conducting an election?
A: No. The LC (In Arts. 256, 257
and 258) provides only for a CE as
the mode for determining the
exclusive collective bargaining
representative if there is a question
of representation in an appropriate
bargaining unit. (1998 Bar
Question)
Q: When does deadlock arise?
A: It arises when there is an
impasse, which presupposes
reasonable effort at good faith
bargaining which, despite noble
intentions, did not conclude in an
agreement between the parties.
Q: What is deadlock bar rule?
A: A petition for certification
election (PCE) cannot be
entertained if, before the filing of
the PCE, a bargaining deadlock to
which an incumbent or certified
bargaining agent is a party, had
been submitted to conciliation or
arbitration or had become the
subject of a valid strike or lockout.
Q: What are the indications of a
genuine deadlock?
A:
1.
The submission of the deadlock to
a third party conciliator or
arbitrator; and
2.
The deadlock is the subject of a
valid notice strike or lockout.
Q: Capitol Medical Center Ees’
Association‐Alliance of Filipino
Workers (CMCEA‐AFW) emerged as
the certified representative of the
rank‐and‐file Ees at Capitol
Medical Center (CMC). Due to
CMC’s refusal to bargain
collectively, CMCEA‐AFW filed a
notice of strike and later on staged
the strike after complying with the
other legal req’ts. The SLE
assumed jurisdiction over the case
and issued an order certifying the
same to the NLRC for compulsory
arbitration. During all of these
events Capitol Medical Center
Alliance of Concerned employees
(Ees)‐Unified Filipino Service
Workers filed a petition for CE
among the regular rank‐and‐file
Ees of CMC. The petition for CE
was dismissed and the CMC was
directed to negotiate with CMCEA‐
AFW. Was the dismissal of the PCE
proper?
A: Yes, if the law proscribes the
conduct of a CE when there is a
bargaining deadlock submitted to
conciliation or arbitration, with
more reason should it not be
conducted if, despite attempts to
bring an Er to the negotiation table
by the certified bargaining agent,
there was "no reasonable effort in
good faith" on the Er to bargain
collectively.
The circumstances in this case
should be considered as similar in
nature to a "bargaining deadlock"
when no CE could be held. This is
also to make sure that no
floodgates will be opened for the
circumvention of the law by
unscrupulous Ers to prevent any
certified bargaining agent from
negotiating a CBA. Sec. 3, (Rule
VIII), Book V of the IRR should be
interpreted liberally so as to
include a circumstance where a
CBA could not be concluded due to
the failure of one party to willingly
perform its duty to bargain
collectively. (Capitol Medical
Center Alliance of Concerned Ees
v. Laguesma, G.R. No. 118915,
Feb. 4, 1997)
Q: Should the certification election
proceedings be suspended in view
of the pending case for cancellation
of the union’s certificate of
registration?
A: No, the pendency of a
cancellation case is not a ground
for the dismissal or suspension of
a representation proceeding
considering that a registered labor
organization (LO) continues to be a
legitimate one entitled to all the
rights appurtenant thereto until a
final valid order is issued
cancelling such registration.
Once a LO attains the status of a
LLO it begins to possess all of the
rights and privileges granted by
law to such organizations. As such
rights and privileges ultimately
affect areas which are
constitutionally protected, the
activities in which LO, associations
and unions are engaged directly
affect the public interest and
should be zealously protected.
(Progressive Dev’t Corp. v. SLE,
G.R. No. 115077, April 18, 1997)
Q: What is negotiation bar rule?
A: A PCE cannot be entertained if,
before the filing of the PCE, the
duly recognized or certified union
has commenced negotiations with
the Er in accordance with Art. 250
of the LC.
Q: What is certification year rule?
A: No PCE may be filed within one
year from the date of a valid
certification, consent, or run‐off
election or from the date of
voluntary recognition.
(4)Run‐off Election
Q: What is a run‐off election?
A: An election conducted when:
1.
An election which provides for 3 or
more choices results in none of the
contending unions receiving a
majority of the valid votes cast,
and
2.
There are no objections or
challenges which if sustained can
materially alter the results,
provided
3.
The total number of votes for all
the contending unions is at least
50% of the number of votes cast.
(Sec. 1, Rule X, Book V, IRR)
4.
Not one of the choices obtained the
majority of the valid votes cast
(50%+ 1 second majority);
5.
The two choices which garnered
the highest votes will be voted and
the one which garners the highest
number of votes will be declared
the winner provided they get the
majority votes of the total votes
cast.
Q: Who are the choices in a run‐off
election?
A: The unions receiving the highest
and 2nd highest number of the
votes cast. (Sec.2, Rule X, Book V,
IRR)
Note: “No Union” shall not be a
choice in the run‐off election
(5)Re‐run Election
Q: When does Re‐run Election take
place?
A: 1. If one choice receives a
plurality of the vote and the
remaining choices results in a tie;
or
2. If all choices received the same
number of votes.
Note: In both instances, the no
union is also a choice.
(5)Consent Election
Q: What is a consent election?
A: An election voluntarily agreed
upon by the parties, with or
without the intervention by DOLE.
(Sec.1 [h], Rule I, Book V, IRR)
Note: To afford an individual
employee‐voter an informed choice
where a local/chapter is the
petitioning union, the
local/chapter shall secure its
certificate of creation at least 5
working days before the date of the
consent election. (Sec.1, Rule VIII,
Book V, IRR as amended by DO
40‐F‐03)
Q: What are the requisites before a
labor union can be declared a
winner (double majority rule)?
A:
1.
Majority of the eligible voters cast
their votes.
2.
Majority of the valid votes cast is
for such union.
Q: How to determine the double
majority rule?
A:
1.
In determining the eligible votes
cast (first majority) include spoiled
ballots
2.
In determining valid votes (second Was HIMPHLU able to obtain the
majority), eliminate spoiled ballots required majority for it to be
but included the challenged votes. certified as the exclusive
bargaining agent?
Q: A certification election was
conducted among the rank‐and‐file A: No, it is well‐settled that under
Ees of Holiday Inn Manila Pavilion the “double majority rule” for there
Hotel. In view of the significant to be a valid certification election,
number of segregated votes, majority of the bargaining unit
contending unions, National Union must have voted and the winning
of Workers in Hotels, Restaurants union must have garnered majority
and Allied Industries—Manila of the valid votes cast.
Pavilion Hotel Chapter
Following the ruling that all the
(NUWHRAIN‐MPHC) and Holiday
probationary Ees votes should be
Inn Manila Pavilion Hotel Labor
deemed valid votes while that of
Union (HIMPHLU), referred the
the supervisory Ees should be
case back to the Med‐Arbiter to
excluded, it follows that the
decide which among those votes
number of valid votes cast would
would be opened and tallied. 11
increase. Under Art. 256 of the LC,
votes were initially segregated
the union obtaining the majority of
because they were cast by
the valid votes cast by the eligible
dismissed Ees, albeit the legality of
voters shall be certified as the sole
their dismissal was still pending
exclusive bargaining agent of all
before the CA. 6 other votes were
the workers in the appropriate
segregated because the Ees who
bargaining unit. This majority is
cast them were already occupying
50% + 1, in this case at least 170.
supervisory positions at the time of
HIMPHLU obtained 169, clearly it
the election. Still 5 other votes
was not able to obtain a majority
were segregated on the ground
vote. (NUWHRAIN ‐MPHC v. SLE,
that they were cast by
G.R. No. 181531, July 31, 2009)
probationary Ees and, pursuant to
the existing CBA, such Ees cannot Q: Distinguish certification
vote. NUHWHRAIN‐MPHC further election, consent election, direct
avers that HIMPHLU, which certification, and run‐off and re‐
garnered 169 votes, should not be run elections.
immediately certified as the
bargaining unit, as the opening of
the 17 segregated ballots would
push the number of valid votes
cast to 338, hence, the 169 votes
which HIMPHLU garnered would
be 1 vote short of the majority
which would then become 170.
A:
Purpose
Participation of
Med‐Arbiter
Certification Election
To determine the sole and
exclusive bargaining agent of all
the Ees in an appropriate
bargaining unit for the purpose of
collective bargaining.
Requires petition for CE filed by a
union or Er. A Med‐Arbiter grants
the petition and an election officer
is designated by regional director
to supervise the election.
Note: Med‐Arbiter may determine if
there is Er‐Ee relationship and if
the voters are eligible.
Consent Election
To determine the issue of majority
representation of all the workers in
the appropriate CB unit mainly for
the purpose of determining the
administrator of the CBA when the
contracting union suffered massive
disaffiliation and not for the
purpose of determining the
bargaining agent for purpose of
CB.
Held by agreement of the unions
with or without the participation of
the Med‐Arbiter.
Direct Certification
A LO is directly certified as an
appropriate bargaining unit of a
company upon showing that
petition is supported by at least a
majority of the Ees in the
bargaining unit.
Note: Direct certification is no
longer allowed.
Med‐Arbiter directly certifies that a
labor union is the exclusive CB
representative of the Ees of an
appropriate bargaining unit
without holding a CE, but merely
on the basis of evidence of in
support of the union’s claim that is
the choice of the majority of the
Ees.
Run‐Off Election
Takes place between the unions
who received the two highest
number of votes in a CE with 3 or
more choices, where not one of the
unions obtained the majority of the
valid votes cast, provided the total
union votes is at least 50% of the
votes cast.
Re‐run Election
Takes place in 2 instances:
1. If one choice receives a plurality
of the vote and the remaining
choices results in a tie; or
2. If all choices received the same
number of votes.
In both instances, the no union is
also a choice.
Note: Petition for cancellation of
registration is not a bar to a PCE.
No prejudicial question shall be
entertained in a petition for
certification election. (D.O. 40‐03).
(7)Affiliation and Disaffiliation of
the Local Union from the Mother
Union
Q: How is a local chapter
created?
A: A duly registered federation or
national union may directly create
a local/ chapter by issuing a
charter certificate indicating the
establishment of a local/chapter.
1. The chapter shall acquire legal
personality only for purposes of
filing a petition for certification
election from the date it was
issued a charter certificate
2. The chapter shall be entitled to
all other rights and privileges of a
legitimate labor organization (LLO)
only upon the submission of the
following documents in addition to
its charter certificate:
a. Names of the chapter’s officers,
their addresses, and the principal
office of the chapter
b. Chapter’s constitution and by‐
laws
c. Where the chapter’s constitution
and by‐laws are the same as that
of the federation or the national
union, this fact shall be indicated
accordingly
3. The genuineness and due
execution of the supporting
requirements shall be:
a. Certified under oath by the
secretary or treasurer of the
local/chapter, and
b. Attested to by its president
(Sec.2[e], Rule III, Book V, IRR, as
amended by D.O. 40‐F‐03)
Note: Under the LC and the rules,
the power granted to LOs to
directly create a chapter or local
through chartering is given to a
federation or national union only,
not to a trade union center.
(SMCEU v. San Miguel Packaging
Products Ees Union, G.R. No.
171153, Sep. 12, 2007)
Q: Where is the application for
registration filed?
A:
1. Independent labor unions,
chartered locals or worker’s
associations – It is filed with the
Regional Office (RO). where the
applicant principally operates. It
shall be processed by the Labor
Relations Division at the RO.
2. Federations, national unions
or worker’s association operating in
more than one region – It is filed
with the BLR of the RO, but shall
be processed by the BLR.
Q: What is the duty of the BLR
after a LO had filed the
necessary papers and documents
for registration?
A: It becomes mandatory for the
BLR to check if the req’ts under
Art. 234 of the LC have been
sedulously complied with. If its
application for registration is
vitiated by falsification and serious
irregularities, especially those
appearing on the face of the
application and the supporting
documents, a LO should be denied
recognition as a LLO. (Progressive
Dev’t Corp.‐Pizza Hut v. Laguesma,
G.R. No. 115077, April 18, 1997)
Q: Within what period should
the BLR act on the applications
submitted before it?
A: It shall act on all applications
for registration within 10m days
from receipt either by:
1. Approving the application
and issuing the certificate of
registration/acknowledging the
notice/report; or
2. Denying the
application/notice for failure of the
applicant to comply with the
requirements for
registration/notice (D.O. 40‐03,
Rule IV, Sec.4, series of 2003)
Note: All requisite documents
shall be:
1. Certified under oath by the
secretary or treasurer of the
organization, as the case may be
and
2. Attested to it by its
President.
Q: May the BLR review the
issuance of a certificate of
registration?
A: No. The BLR has the duty to
review the application for
registration not the issuance of a
certificate of registration.
Q: Why is a lesser requirement
imposed for a chartered local?
A: The intent of the law in
imposing lesser req’ts in the case
of branch or local of a registered
federation or national union is to
encourage the affiliation of a local
union in order to increase the local
union’s bargaining power
respecting terms and conditions of
labor. (Progressive Dev’t Corp v.
SLE, G.R. No. 96425, Feb. 4, 1992)
Q: What are the requirements
before a federation can be issued
a certificate of registration?
A: The application for registration
of federations and national unions
shall be accompanied by the
following documents:
1. A statement indicating the
name of the applicant labor union,
its principal address, the name of
its officers and their respective
addresses;
2. The minutes of the
organizational meeting(s) and the
list of Ees who participated in the Q: What are the requirements for
said meeting(s); affiliation?

3. The annual financial reports A: The report of affiliation of

if the applicant union has been in independently registered labor
existence for 1 or more years, unions with a federation or
unless it has not collected any national union shall be
amount from the members, in accompanied by the following
which case a statement to this documents:
effect shall be included in the
1. Resolution of the labor
application;
union's board of directors
4. The applicant union's approving the affiliation;
constitution and by‐laws, minutes
2. Minutes of the general
of its adoption or ratification, and
membership meeting approving the
the list of the members who
affiliation;
participated in it. The list of
ratifying members shall be 3. The total number of
dispensed with where the members comprising the labor
constitution and by‐laws was union and the names of members
ratified or adopted during the who approved the affiliation;
organizational meeting(s). In such
a case, the factual circumstances 4. The certificate of affiliation
of the ratification shall be recorded issued by the federation in favor of
in the minutes of the the independently registered labor
organizational meeting(s); union; and

5. The resolution of affiliation 5. Written notice to the

of at least 10 LLOs, whether employer concerned if the
independent unions or chartered affiliating union is the incumbent
locals, each of which must be a bargaining agent. (D.O. 40‐03,
duly certified or recognized Rule, III, Sec. 7, series of 2003)
bargaining agent in the
establishment where it seeks to
operate; and Q: What is the effect of
affiliation?
6. The name and addresses of
the companies where the affiliates A: The labor union that affiliates
operate and the list of all the with a federation is subject to the
members in each company laws of the parent body under
involved. (D.O. 40‐03, Rule, III, Sec. whose authority the local union
2‐B, series of 2003) functions. The constitution, by‐
laws and rules of the mother
federation, together with the
charter it issues to the local union,
constitutes an enforceable contract
between them and between the
members of the subordinate union
inter se. Thus, pursuant to the
constitution and by‐laws, the
federation has the right to
investigate and expel members of
the local union. (Villar v. Inciong,
G.R. No. L‐50283‐84, April 20,
1983)
Q: May a local union disaffiliate
from the federation?
A:
GR: A labor union may disaffiliate
from the mother union to form an
independent union only during the
60‐day freedom period immediately
preceding the expiration of the
CBA.
XPN: Even before the onset of the
freedom period, disaffiliation may
still be carried out, but such
disaffiliation must be effected by
the majority of the union members
in the bargaining unit.
Note: This happens when there is
a substantial shift in allegiance on
the part of the majority of the
members of the union. In such a
case, however, the CBA continues
to bind the members of the new or
disaffiliated and independent
union up to determine the union
which shall administer the CBA
may be conducted. (ANGLO‐KMU v.
Samahan ng Manggagawang
Nagkakaisa sa Manila Bay
Spinning Mills at J.P. Coats, G.R.
No.118562, July 5, 1996)
Q: What is the limitation to
disaffiliation?
A: Disaffiliation should be in
accordance with the rules and
procedures stated in the
constitution and by‐laws of the
federation. A local union may
disaffiliate with its mother
federation provided that there is no
enforceable provision in the
federation’s constitution
preventing disaffiliation of a local
union. (Tropical Hut Ees Union v.
Tropical Hut, G.R. Nos. L‐43495‐99,
Jan. 20, 1990)
Note: A prohibition to disaffiliate
in the Federation’s constitution
and by‐laws is valid because it is
intended for its own protection.
Q: What is the effect of
cancellation of registration of a
federation or a national union?
A:
GR: It shall operate to divest its
locals/chapters of their status as
LLO.
XPN: Locals/chapters retain
status as LLO if they arecovered by
a duly registered CBA.
Note Locals or chapters who
retained status as LLO shall be
allowed to register as independent
unions. If they fail to register, they
shall lose their legitimate status
upon the expiration of the CBA.
Q: PSEA is a local union in federation. (Philippine Skylanders
Skylander company which is v. NLRC, G.R. No. 127374, Jan. 31,
affiliated with PAFLU. PSEA won 2002)
the certification election among
the rank and file Ees of the
Skylander company but its rival
union PSEA‐WATU protested the
results. Pending the resolution
of such controversy, PSEA
disaffiliated with PAFLU and
hence affiliated with NCW which
was supported by its members.
May a local union disaffiliate
with its mother federation
pending the settlement of the
status as the sole and exclusive
bargaining agent?

A: Yes. The pendency of an

election protest does not bar the
valid disaffiliation of the local
union which was supported by the
majority of its members.

The right of a local union to

disaffiliate with the federation in
the absence of any stipulation in
the constitution and by‐laws of the
federation prohibiting disaffiliation
is well settled. Local unions remain
as the basic unit of association,
free to serve their own interest
subject to the restraints imposed
by the constitution and by‐laws of
national federation and are free to
renounce such affiliation upon the
terms and conditions laid down in
the agreement which brought such
affiliation to existence. In the case
at bar, no prohibition existed
under the constitution and by‐laws
of the federation. Hence, the union
may freely disaffiliate with the
Q: Distinguish between an independently
registered and unregistered chartered local
union.
Q: What is the form of the
CHARTERED LOCAL UNION decision of the denial of
application for registration?
Independently Unregistered
Registered A: It shall be:

How to affiliate? 1. In writing

By signing By application of 2. Stating in clear terms the

contract of with the federation reason for the decision
for the issuance of a
affiliation
charter certificate to 3. Applicant union must be
be submitted to the furnished a copy of said decision.
BLR

Effect of Disaffiliation to the union

(local) Q: Is the denial of registration
appealable?
Would not affect Would cease to be
its being a LLO LLO and would no
longer have the legal
A: Yes.
and therefore it
personality and the
would continue 1. Decisions of the Regional Office
rights and privileges
to have legal granted by law to shall be appealable to the BLR and
personality and LLO, unless the local CA.
to posses all chapter is covered by
its duly registered 2. The BLR’s decisions on cases
rights and
CBA. appealed from Regional Director
privileges of
are final and not appealable to the
LLO.
SLE.
Effect of Disaffiliation to the CBA
3. Decisions of the BLR denying
An existing CBA The CBA would the registration of a LO (federation
would continue continue to be valid. or national union) is appealable to
The local chapter will
to be valid as the SLE within 10 days from
not lose its
the LO can personality, unless it
receipt of the decision, on grounds
continue registers a new. of:
administering
a. Grave abuse of discretion; or
then CBA.
b. Gross incompetence.
Entitlement to union dues after
Disaffiliation
4. Decision of SLE appealable to
LO entitled to Union dues may no CA.
the union dues longer be collected as
there would no
and not the
longer be any labor
federation from union that is allowed
which the LO to collect such union
disaffiliated. dues from the Ees.
Q: How is appeal taken with union to seek just and equitable
regard to denial or cancellation remedies in the appropriate courts.
of registration?
Q: Where is a petition for
A: DENIAL OR CANCELLATION cancellation of registration or
OF REGISTRATION application for voluntary
dissolution filed?
By Regional By BLR
office A:

Transmit records within 24 hours 1. For legitimate independent

labor unions, local/chapter and
from receipt of the Memo of worker’s association – It shall be
Appeal filed with the Regional Office which
issued its certificate of registration
BLR will SLE decides on
or creation.
decide on the the matter
matter within within 20 days 2. For federations, national or
20 days from from receipt of industry and trade union centers –
receipt of the records It shall be filed with the BLR. (Sec.
records 1, Rule XIV, Book V, IRR as
amended by D.O. 40‐F‐03)
Appeal to CA via Rule 65

Q: Who may file a petition for

Q: Who cancels the certificate of
registration?
A: The certificate of registration of
any LLO, whether national or local,
may be cancelled by the BLR, after
due hearing, only on the grounds
specified in Art. 239. (as amended
by R.A. 9481)
cancellation of registration?
A:
1. For legitimate individual labor
union, chartered local and worker’s
association – Any party‐in‐interest
may file a petition for cancellation
of registration if the ground is:

Q: What is the effect of a a. Failure to comply with any of

petition for cancellation or of the req’ts under Art. 234, 237 and
union registration? 238 of the LC.

A: It shall not suspend the b. Violation of any provision under

proceedings for certification
election (CE) nor shall it prevent
the filing of CE.
In case of cancellation, nothing
herein shall restrict the right of the
Art. 239, LC.
2. For federations, national or
industry unions, trade union
centers – Only members of the
labor organization (LO) concerned
may file if the grounds are actions a. Adoption or application of the
involving violations of Art. 241, constitution and by‐laws or
subject to the 30% rule. amendments thereto

b. Minutes of ratification and

Q: What is the effect of c. List of members who took part

cancellation of registration if in the ratification;
the cancellation is made in the
d. Election of officers
course of the proceedings?
e. Minutes of the election of
A: Where a labor union is a party
officers and
in a proceeding and later it loses
its registration permit in the f. List of voters (Art. 239 as
course or during the pendency of amended)
the case, such union may continue
as party without need of 2. Voluntary dissolution by the
substitution of parties, subject members. (as amended by R.A.
however to the understanding that 9481)
whatever decision may be rendered
will be binding only upon those
members of the union who have Note: A pronouncement as to the
not signified their desire to legality of the strike is not within
withdraw from the case before its the meaning of Art. 239 of the LC.
trial and decision on the merits.
Q: What are the prohibited
Note: Rationale: Principle of agency grounds for cancellation of
is applied – the Ees are the union registration?
principals, and the LO is merely an
agent of the former, consequently, A:
the cancellation of the union’s 1. The inclusion as union
registration would not deprive the member of Ees who are outside the
consenting member‐Ees of their bargaining unit shall not be a
right to continue the case as they ground to cancel the union
are considered as the principals. registration. The ineligible Ees are
Q: What are the grounds for automatically deemd removed from
cancellation of union the list of membership of the union
registration? as.(Art. 245‐A as amended by RA
9481)
A:
2. The affiliation of the rank‐
1. Misrepresentation, false and‐file and supervisory unions
statement or fraud in connection operating within the same
with the: establishment to the same
federation or national union shall
not be a ground to cancel
registration of either union. (Sec. 6,
Rule XIV, Book V, as inserted by
D.O. 40‐F‐03)
Q: How is voluntary cancellation
of registration made?
A: Registration may be cancelled
by the organization itself provided:
1. At least ⅔ of its general
membership votes to dissolve the
organization, in a meeting duly
called for that purpose; and
2. An application to cancel
registration is thereafter submitted
by the board of the organization,
attested by its president.
Q: What are the “reportorial
requirements” required to be
submitted by a legitimate labor
organization (LLO) ?
A: The following documents are
required to be submitted to BLR by
the LLO concerned:
1. Within 30 days from adoption or
ratification of the constitution and
by laws (CBL) or amendments
thereto:
a. CBL or amendments thereto
b. Minutes of ratification
c. List of members who took part
in the ratification of the
constitution and by‐laws;
2. Within 30 days from date of
election or appointment:
a. List of elected and appointed
officers and agents entrusted with
the handing of union funds
b. Minutes of election of officers
c. List of voters
3. Annual financial report within
30 days after the close of every
fiscal year
4. List of members at least once a
year or whenever required by the
Bureau. (Sec. 1, Rule V, Book V,
IRR, as amended by D.O. 40‐F‐03)
Note: Failure to submit reportorial
requirements is no longer a ground
for cancellation but shall subject
the erring officers or members to
suspension, expulsion from
membership, or any appropriate
penalty (Art. 242‐A, as inserted by
R.A. 9481).
Q: What is the successor‐ in‐
interest doctrine?
A:
GR: It is when an Er with an
existing CBA is succeeded by
another Er, the successor‐in‐
interest who is the buyer in good
faith has no liability to the Ees in
continuing employment and the
bargaining agreement because
these contracts are in personam.
XPNs:
1. When the successor‐in‐
interest expressly assumes an
obligation;
2. The sale is a device to
circumvent the obligation; or
3. The sale or transfer is made
in bad faith.
(a)Substitutionary Doctrine
Q: What is the substitutionary
doctrine?
A: It is where there occurs a shift
in the Ees union allegiance after
the execution of a collective
bargaining (CB) contract with the
Er, the Ees can change their agent
(labor union) but the CB contract
which is still subsisting continues
to bind the Ees up to its expiration
date. They may however, bargain
for the shortening of said
expiration date.
Note: The Er cannot revoke the
validly executed CB contract with
their Er by the simple expedient of
changing their bargaining agent.
The new agent must respect the
contract. (Benguet Consolidated
Inc. v. BCI Ees and Worker’s Union‐
PAFLU, G.R. No. L‐24711, April 30,
1968)
It cannot be invoked to support the
contention that a newly certified
CB agent automatically assumes
all the personal undertakings of
the former agent‐like the “no strike
clause” in the CBA executed by the
latter.
(8)Union Dues and Special
Assessments
(a) Union Dues
Q: What are union dues?
A: These are regular monthly
contributions paid by the members
to the union in exchange for the
benefits given to them by the CBA
and to finance the activities of the
union in representing the union.
Q: What is check‐off?
A: It is a method of deducting from
an Ee’s pay at a prescribed period,
the amounts due the union for
fees, fines and assessments.
Deductions for union service fees
are authorized by law and do not
require individual check‐off
authorizations.
Q: What is the nature and
purpose of check‐off?
A: Union dues are the lifeblood of
the union.
All unions are authorized to collect
reasonable membership fees,
union dues, assessments and fines
and other contributions for labor
education and research, mutual
death and hospitalization benefits,
welfare fund, strike fund and
credit and cooperative
undertakings.(Art. 277[a])
Q: What are the requisites of a
valid check‐off?
A:
GR: No special assessments, atty’s
fees, negotiation fees or any other
extraordinary fees may be checked
off from any amount due to an
employee (Ee) without individual
written authorization duly signed
by the Ee.
A: These are assessments for any
purpose or object other than those
expressly provided by the labor
organization’s constitution and by‐
laws.
Q: What are the requisites for a
valid levy of special assessment
or extraordinary fees?

The authorization should A:

specifically state the:
1. Authorization by a written
1. Amount resolution of the majority of all
members at the general
2. Purpose &
membership meeting duly called
3. Beneficiary of the deduction. for that purpose;

2. Secretary’s record of the

minutes of the meeting, which
XPNs: must include the:
1. For mandatory activities under a. List of members present
the LC
b. Votes cast
2. For agency fees
c. Purpose of the special
3. When non‐members of the assessments
union avail of the benefits of the
CBA: d. Recipient of such assessments;

a. Non‐members may be assessed 3. Individual written authorization

union dues equivalent to that paid to check‐off duly signed by the Ee
by union members; concerned – to levy such
assessments.
b. Only by board resolution
approved by majority of the
members in general meeting called
Q: What is the effect of failure to
for the purpose.
strictly comply the requirements
set by law?

(b) Special Assessments A: It shall invalidate the

questioned special assessments.
Q: What are special assessments Substantial compliance of the
or extraordinary fees? requirements is not enough in view
of the fact that the special
assessment will diminish the (Agency fees) No exception;
compensation of union members. written resolution
(Palacol v. Ferrer‐Calleja, G.R. No. Not necessary
is mandatory in all
85333, Feb. 26, 1990) when:
instances.

Q: Who has jurisdiction over 1. For mandatory

check‐off disputes? activities under the
LC
A: Being an intra‐union dispute,
the Regional Director of DOLE has 2. For agency fees
jurisdiction over check off 3. When non‐
disputes. members of the
Q: Distinguish check‐off from union avail of the
special assessments. benefits of the
CBA:
A: Check‐off Special
a. Said non‐
Assessment
members may be
How approved assessed union
dues equivalent to
(Union Dues) By written that paid by union
resolution members;
By obtaining
approved by
the individual b. Only by Board
majority of all
written resolution
the members at
authorization approved by
the meeting
duly signed by majority of the
called for that
the Ee which members in general
purpose.
must specify: meeting called for
1. Amount the purpose

2. Purpose

3. Beneficia
ry Q: Are Ees who are members of
another union considered free
riders?

A: No. When the union bids to

Exception to such requirement become the bargaining agent, it
voluntarily assumes the
responsibility of representing all
the Ees.

(9)Agency Fees
Q: What is an agency fee? members of the recognized
collective bargaining agent.
A: It is an amount equivalent to
union dues, which a non‐union Q: Distinguish union dues from
member pays to the union because agency fees.
he benefits from the CBA
A:
negotiated by the union.

Note: Agency fee cannot be

imposed on Ees already in the Union Dues Agency Fee
service and are members of Is deducted from Is deducted
another union. If a closed shop members for the from non‐
agreement cannot be applied to payment of union members of the
them, neither may an agency fee, dues bargaining
as a lesser form of union security, agent (union)
be imposed to them. Payment by for the
non‐union members of agency fees enjoyment of
does not amount to an unjust the benefits
enrichment basically the purpose under the CBA.
of such dues is to avoid
discrimination between union and May not be May be
non‐union members. deducted from the deducted from
salaries of the the salary of the
Q: What are the requisites for
union members Ees without
assessment of Agency fees (Art.
without the their written
248 [e], LC)?
written consent of consent.
A: the workers
affected.
1.

The employee is part of the

bargaining unit

2.

He is not a member of the union

3.

He partook of the benefits of the

CBA

Note: The individual authorization

required under Art. 242, par. O of
the LC shall not apply to the non‐
3.RIGHT TO PEACEFUL
CONCERTED ACTIVITIES
Q: What is the constitutional basis
of strikes, lockouts and other
concerted activities?
A: The State shall guarantee the
rights of all workers to self‐
organization, collective bargaining
and negotiations, and peaceful
concerted activities, including the
right to strike in accordance with
law (Sec. 3, Art. XIII, 1987
Constitution).
Note: The law does not look with
favor upon strikes and lockouts
because of their disturbing and
pernicious effects upon the social
order and the public interests; to
prevent or avert them and to
implement Sec. 6, Art. XIV of the
Constitution, the law has created
several agencies, namely: the BLR,
the DOLE, the Labor Management
Advisory Board, and the CIR.
(Luzon Marine Dev’t Union v.
Roldan, G.R. No. L‐2660, May 30,
1950)
Q: What is a concerted action?
A: It is an activity undertaken by 2
or more employees, by one on
behalf of the others.
Q: Are all concerted actions
strikes?
A: Not all concerted activities are
strikes. They may only be protest
actions – they do not necessarily
cause work stoppage by the
protesters. A strike in contrast is
always a group action
accompanied by work stoppage.
Q: The Ees wrote and published a
letter to the bank president,
demanding his resignation on the
grounds of immorality, nepotism,
favoritism and discrimination in
the appointment and promotion of
bank Ees. The bank dismissed the
8 Ees on the alleged libelous letter.
Were the Ees engaged in a
concerted activity?
A: Yes, assuming that they acted
in their individual capacities when
they wrote the letter, they were
nonetheless protected, for they
were engaged in a concerted
activity, in their right of self‐
organization that includes
concerted activity for mutual aid
and protection. Any interference
made by the company will
constitute as ULP.
The joining in protests or
demands, even by a small group of
Ees, if in furtherance of their
interests as such is a concerted
activity protected by the Industrial
Peace Act. It is not necessary that
union activity be involved or that
collective bargaining be
contemplated. (Republic Savings
Bank v. CIR, G.R. No. L‐20303,
Oct. 31, 1967)
Q: What is a strike?
A: It means any temporary
stoppage of work by the concerted
action of employees as a result of
an industrial or labor dispute.
(Sec.1 [uu], Rule I, Book V, IRR)
It shall comprise not only
concerted work stoppages, but also
slowdowns, mass leaves, sitdowns,
attempt to damage, destroy or
sabotage plant equipment and
facilities, and similar activities.
(Samahang Manggagawa sa
Sulpicion Lines v. Sulpicio Lines,
Inc., G.R. No. 140992, Mar. 25,
2004)
Q: What is the purpose of a strike?
A: A strike is a coercive measure
resorted to by laborers to enforce
their demands. The idea behind a
strike is that a company engaged
in a profitable business cannot
afford to have its production or
activities interrupted, much less,
paralyzed. (Phil. Can Co. v. CIR,
G.R. No. L‐3021, July 13, 1950)
Q: What is a lockout?
A: It means any temporary refusal
of an employer to furnish work as
a result of an industrial or labor
dispute. (Art. 212 [p])
Q: What is picketing?
A: It is the act of marching to and
fro the employers premises which
is usually accompanied by the
display of placard and other signs,
making known the facts involved
in a labor dispute.
The right to picket as a means of
communicating the facts of a labor
dispute is a phase of the freedom
of speech guaranteed by the
Constitution. If peacefully carried
out, it can not be curtailed even in
the absence of Er‐Ee relationship.
(PAFLU v. Cloribel, G.R. No. L‐
25878, Mar. 28, 1969)
Q: Is the right to picket an
absolute right?
A: No, while peaceful picketing is
entitled to protection as an
exercise of free speech, the courts
are not without power to confine or
localize the sphere of
communication or the
demonstration to the parties to the
labor dispute, including those with
related interests, and to insulate
establishments or persons with no
industrial connection or having
interest totally foreign to the
context of the dispute. (Liwayway
Pub., Inc. v. Permanent Concrete
Workers Union, G.R. No. L‐25003,
Oct. 23, 1981)
The right to peaceful picketing
shall be exercised by the workers
with due respect for the rights of
others. No person engaged in
picketing shall commit any act of
violence, coercion or intimidation.
Stationary picket, the use of
means like placing of objects to
constitute permanent blockade or
to effectively close points of entry
or exit in company premises are
prohibited by law.
Q: Who is a strike‐breaker?
A: Any person who obstructs,
impedes, or interferes with by
force, violence, coercion, threats,
or intimidation any peaceful
picketing affecting wages, hours or
conditions of work or in the
exercise of the right of self‐
organization or collective
bargaining. (Art. 212 [r])
Q: What is a strike area?
A: It means the establishment,
warehouses, depots, plants or
offices, including the sites or
premises used as runaway shops,
of the Er struck against, as well as
the immediate vicinity actually
used by picketing strikers in
moving to and fro before all points
of entrance to and exit from said
establishment. (Sec. 1 [vv], Rule I,
Book V, IRR)
Q: What is an internal union
dispute?
A: It includes all disputes or
grievances arising from any
violation of or disagreement over
any provision of the constitution
and by laws of a union, including
any violation of the rights and
conditions of union membership
provided for in this LC. (Art. 212
[q])
Q: What is a boycott?
A: 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.
Q: What is a slowdown?
A: It is a method by which one’s
employees, without seeking a
complete stoppage of work, retard
production and distribution in an
effort to compel compliance by the
employer with the labor demands
made upon him.
Q: Does an “overtime boycott” or
“work slowdown” by the employees
constitute a strike and hence a
violation of the CBA’s “No strike,
no lockout” clause?
A: Yes, the concept of a slowdown
is a "strike on the installment
plan." It is a willful reduction in
the rate of work by concerted
action of workers for the purpose
of restricting the output of the
employer (Er), in relation to a labor
dispute; as an activity by which
workers, without a complete
stoppage of work, retard
production or their performance of
duties and functions to compel
management to grant their
demands.
Such a slowdown is generally
condemned as inherently illicit and
unjustifiable, because while the
employees (Ees) "continue to work
and remain at their positions and
accept the wages paid to them,"
they at the same time "select what
part of their allotted tasks they
care to perform of their own
volition or refuse openly or
secretly, to the Er's damage, to do
other work;" in other words, they
"work on their own terms."
(Interphil Laboratories Ees Union‐
FFW v. Interphil Laboratories, Inc.,
G.R. No. 142824, Dec. 19, 2001)
Q: What are the characteristics of
a strike?
A:
1.
Existence of an Er‐Ee relationship
2.
Existence of a labor dispute
3.
Employment relation is deemed to
continue although in a state of
belligerent suspension
4.
Temporary work stoppage
5.
Work stoppage is done through
concerted action
6.
The striking group is a legitimate
labor organization; in case of a
bargaining deadlock, it must be
the employees’ sole bargaining
representative
Q: PAL dismissed strike leader
Capt. Gaston as a result of which
the Union resolved to undertake
the grounding of all PAL planes
and the filing of applications for
“protest retirement” of members
who had completed 5 years of
continuous service, and “protest
resignation” for those who had
rendered less than 5 years of
service in the company. PAL
acknowledged receipt of said
letters and among the pilots whose
“protest resignation or retirement”
was accepted by PAL were
Enriquez and Ecarma.
Before their readmission, PAL
required Enriquez and Ecarma to
accept 2 conditions, namely: that
they sign conformity to PAL’s letter
of acceptance of their retirement
and or resignation and that they
submit an application for
employment as new employees
(Ees) without protest or
reservation. As a result of this
their seniority rights were lost.
Are the pilots entitled to the
restoration of their seniority
rights?
A: No, an Ee has no inherent right
to seniority. He has only such
rights as may be based on a
contract, statute, or an
administrative regulation relative
thereto. Seniority rights which are
acquired by an Ee through long‐
time employment are contractual
and not constitutional. The
discharge of an Ee thereby
terminating such rights would not
violate the Constitution. When the
pilots tendered their respective
retirement or resignation and PAL
immediately accepted them, both
parties mutually terminated the
contractual employment
relationship between them thereby
curtailing whatever seniority rights
and privileges the pilots had
earned through the years.
Q: Does the action of the Ees of
PAL fall under the ambit of
concerted actions protected by He or it is engaged in the same
law? industry, trade, craft, or
occupation in which such dispute
A: No, the pilot’s mass action was
occurs, or
not a strike because Ees who go on
strike do not quit their 3.
employment. Ordinarily, the
Has a direct or indirect interest
relationship of Er and Ee
therein, or
continues until one of the parties
acts to sever the relationship or 4.
they mutually act to accomplish
that purpose. As they did not Is a member, officer, or agent of
assume the status of strikers, their any association composed in whole
“protest retirement/resignation” or in part of employees or
was not a concerted activity which employers engaged in such
was protected by law. (Enrique v. industry, trade, craft, or
Zamora, G.R. No. L‐51382, Dec. occupation.
29, 1986)
Q: Liwayway Publication Inc. is a
Q: What is a labor dispute? second sub lessee of a part of the
premises of the Permanent
A: Any controversy or matter Concrete Products, Inc. It has a
concerning terms or conditions or bodega for its newsprint in the
representation of persons in sublet property which it uses for
negotiating, fixing, maintaining, its printing and publishing
changing or arranging the terms business. The daily supply of
and conditions of employment, newsprint needed to feed its
regardless of whether or not the printing plant is taken from its
disputants stand in the proximate bodega. The Ees of the Permanent
relation of Ers and Ees. (Gold City Concrete Products Inc. declared a
Integrated Port Services, Inc. v. strike against their company. The
NLRC, G.R. No. 103560, July 6, union members picketed, stopped
1995) and prohibited Liwayway’s trucks
from entering the compound to
Q: When is a person or entity
load newsprint from its bodega.
considered as participating or
interested in a labor dispute? Does the lower court have
jurisdiction to issue a writ of
A:
preliminary injunction considering
1. that there was a labor dispute
between Permanent Concrete
If relief is sought against him or it,
Products, Inc. and the union?
and

2.
A: Yes, Liwayway Publication Inc.
is not in anyway related to the
striking union except for the fact
that it is the sub‐ lessee of a
bodega in the company’s
compound.
The business of Liwayway is
exclusively the publication of
magazines which has absolutely no
relation or connection whatsoever
with the cause of the strike of the
union against their company,
much less with the terms,
conditions or demands of the
strikers. Liwayway is merely a 3rd
person or an innocent by‐stander.
(Liwayway Pub., Inc. v. Permanent
Concrete Workers Union, G.R. No.
L‐25003, Oct. 23, 1981)
A: Yes, the concerted efforts of the
members of the union and its
supporters caused a temporary
work stoppage. The allegation that
there can be no work stoppage
because the operation in the
division had been shut down is of
no consequence. It bears stressing
that the other divisions were fully
operational. (Bukluran ng
Manggagawa sa Clothman Knitting
Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 158158,
Jan.17, 2005)
a.Forms of Concerted Activities
Q: What are the types of strike?
A:
1.

Q: Because of financial problems, Economic strike – used to secure

the company decided to the economic demands such as
temporarily shutdown its higher wages and better working
operations at the dyeing and conditions for the workers
finishing division. It notified the
2.
DOLE of the shutdown. Raymund
Tomaroy with 16 members of the ULP strike – protest against ULP of
union staged a picket in front of management
the company’s compound, carrying
placards. He demanded a
resumption of work and 13th
month pay. The company filed a
petition to declare the strike illegal.
The union argues that they did not
stage a strike, for considering that
the dyeing and finishing division of
the company was shut down, it
could not have caused a work Q: Distinguish between an
stoppage. Was the action of the economic strike and an ULP
union a strike? strike.
A:ECONOMIC ULP STRIKE
STRIKE
Q: What are the different forms
As to nature of strike?
Voluntary strike Involuntary strike; A:
because the Ee will the LOis forced to go
declare a strike to on strike because of 1.
compel management the ULP committed
to grant its demands against them by the Legal Strike‐one called for a valid
Er. It is an act of
purpose and conducted through
self‐defense since
the Ee’s are being
means allowed by law.
pushed to the wall
2.
and their only
remedy is to stage a
Illegal Strike‐one staged for a
strike
purpose not recognized by law, or
Who will initiate if for a valid purpose, conducted
through means not sanctioned by
The CB agent of the Either the CB agent
appropriate or the LLO in behalf
law.
bargaining unit can of its members
declare an economic
3.
strike
Economic Strike‐ one staged by
As to the cooling‐off period workers to force wage or other
economic concessions from the
30 days from notice 15 days from the
employer which he is not required
of strike before the filing of the notice of
intended date of strike by law to grant (Consolidated
actual strike subject Labor Association of the Phil. vs.
to the 7‐day strike Marsman, G.R. No. L‐17038, July
ban 31, 1964)
As to the exception to the cooling‐off
4.
period
ULP Strike‐one called to protest
No exception – The cooling‐off
mandatory period may be against the employer’s acts of
dispensed with, and unfair practice enumerated in
Note: notice of strike the union may take Article 248 of the Labor Code, as
and strike vote may immediate action in
be dispensed with;
amended, including gross violation
case of dismissal
they may strike of the collective bargaining
from employment of
immediately their officers duly agreement (CBA) and union
elected in busting.
accordance with the
union’s constitution 5.
and by‐laws, which
may constitute Slow Down Strike‐one staged
union busting where without the workers quitting their
the existence of the work but by merely slackening or
union is threatened.
It must still observe
the mandatory 7‐
day strike ban
period before it can
stage a valid strike
by reducing their normal work Omnibus Rules Implementing The
output. Labor Code, as amended).

6. c. Requisites for a valid strike/

lockout
Wild‐Cat Strike‐one declared and
staged without filing the required Q: What are the requisites of a
notice of strike and without the lawful strike / lockout?
majority approval of the recognized
A: The requirements for a valid
bargaining agent.
strike or lockout are as follows:
7.
1.
Sit Down Strike‐one where the
It must be based on a valid and
workers stop working but do not
factual ground;
leave their place of work.
2.

A strike or lockout NOTICE shall

b. Who may declare a strike or
be filed with the National
lockout
Conciliation and Mediation Board
Q: Who may declare a strike or (NCMB) at least 15 days before the
lockout? intended date of the strike or
lockout if the issues raised are
A: unfair labor practices, or at least
1. 30 days before the intended date
thereof if the issue involves
Any certified or duly recognized bargaining deadlock.
bargaining representative may
declare a strike in cases of 3.
bargaining deadlock and unfair In cases of dismissal from
labor practice. Likewise, the employment of union officers duly
employer may declare a lockout in elected in accordance with the
the same cases. union constitution and by‐laws,
2. which may constitute UNION
BUSTING where the existence of
In the absence of a certified or duly the union is threatened, the 15‐
recognized bargaining day cooling‐off period shall not
representative, any legitimate labor apply and the union may take
organization in the establishment action immediately after the strike
may declare a strike but only on vote is conducted and the result
the ground of unfair labor practice. thereof submitted to the
(Section 2, Rule XIII Book V, Department of Labor and
Employment.
4. jurisdiction by the President or the
Secretary of Labor and
A strike must be approved by a
Employment, a certification for
majority vote of the members of
compulsory arbitration, or
the Union and a lockout must be
submission to compulsory or
approved by a majority vote of the
voluntary arbitration nor a subject
members of the Board of Directors
of a pending case involving the
of the Corporation or Association
same grounds for the strike or
or of the partners in a partnership,
lockout.
obtained by secret ballot in a
meeting called for that purpose. Q: What are the valid grounds for
declaring a strike or lockout?
5.
A: The law recognizes 2 grounds
A strike or lockout VOTE shall be
for the valid exercise of the right to
reported to the NCMB‐DOLE
strike or lockout, namely:
Regional Branch at least 7 days
before the intended strike or 1.
lockout subject to the cooling‐off
Collective Bargaining Deadlock
period.
(CBD)‐economic;
6.
2.
In the event the result of the
Unfair Labor Practice (ULP)‐
strike/lockout ballot is filed within
political
the cooling‐off period, the 7‐day
requirement shall be counted from Note: It is possible to change an
the day following the expiration of economic strike into a ULP strike.
the cooling‐off period. (NSFW vs. (Consolidated Labor Ass’n of the
Ovejera, G.R. No. 59743, May 31, Phils. v. Marsman and Co., G.R.
1982) No. L‐17038, July 31, 1964)
In case of dismissal from Violations of CBA must be gross to
employment of union officers be considered as ULP.
which may constitute union
busting, the time requirement for Q: What is conversion doctrine?
the filing of the Notice of Strike
A: It is when a strike starts as
shall be dispensed with but the
economic and later, as it
strike vote requirement, being
progresses, it becomes a ULP, or
mandatory in character, shall “in
vice versa.
every case” be complied with.
Q: Can a strike be converted into a
7.
lockout?
The dispute must not be the
subject of an assumption of
A: No, a strike cannot be converted
into a pure and simple lockout by
the mere expedient of filing before
the trial court a notice of offer to
return to work during the
pendency of the labor dispute
between the union and the
employer. (Rizal Cement Workers
Union v. CIR, G.R. No. L‐18442,
Nov. 30, 1962).
Q: Give examples of strike and
explain their legality.
A:
1.
Sit‐down strike – Characterized by
a temporary work stoppage of
workers who seize or occupy
property of the Er or refuse to
vacate the premises of the Er.
Illegal – Amounts to a criminal act
because of the Ee’s trespass on the
premises of the Er
2.
Wildcat strike – A work stoppage
that violates the labor contract and
is not authorized by the union.
Illegal –Because it fails to comply
with certain req’ts of the law, to
wit: notice of strike, vote and
report on strike vote
3.
Slowdown – Strike on an
installment plan; an activity by
which workers, without complete
stoppage of work, retard
production or their performance of
duties and functions to compel
management to grant their
demands
Illegal – Ees work on their own
terms; while the Ees continue to
work and remain in their positions
and accept wages paid to them,
they at the same time select what
part on their allotted tasks they
care to perform on their own
volition or refuse openly or secretly
4.
Sympathetic strike – Work
stoppages of workers of one
company to make common cause
with other strikers or other
companies without demands or
grievances of their own against the
Er
Illegal – There is no labor dispute
between the workers who are
joining the strikers and the latter’s
Er
5.
Secondary strike – Work stoppages
of workers of one company to exert
pressure on their Er so that the
latter will in turn bring pressure
upon the Er of another company
with whom another union has a
labor dispute
Illegal – There is no labor dispute
involved.
Note: A strike can validly take
place only in the presence of and
in relation to a labor dispute
between Er and Ee.
6. Corp., G.R. No. 155679, Dec. 19,
2006)
Welga ng bayan (Cause Oriented
Strikes) – A political strike and Q: What are the tests in
therefore there is neither a determining the legality of strike?
bargaining deadlock nor any ULP
A: The following must concur:
Illegal – It is a political rally
1.
7.
Purpose test – the strike must be
Quickie strikes‐ brief and due to either bargaining deadlock
unannounced temporary work and/or the ULP
stoppage
2.
Illegal‐ failure to comply with
Compliance with the procedural
notice requirements and etc.
and substantive req’ts of the law.
Q: Two unions, joined a welga ng (See requisites of a valid strike)
bayan. The unions, led by their
3.
officers, staged a work stoppage
which lasted for several days, Means employed test – It states
prompting FILFLEX and BIFLEX that a strike may be legal at its
Corporations to file a petition to inception but eventually be
declare the work stoppage illegal declared illegal if the strike is
for failure to comply with accompanied by violence which is
procedural req’ts. Whether the Ees widespread, pervasive and adopted
committed an illegal work as a matter of policy and not mere
stoppage? violence which is sporadic which
normally occur in a strike area.
A: Yes. Ees, who have no labor
dispute with their Er but who, on a Q: What are the instances when a
day they are scheduled to work, strike or lockout cannot be
refuse to work and instead join a declared?
welga ng bayan commit an illegal
work stoppage. There being no A: Non‐strikable issues:
showing that the two unions
1.
notified the corporations of their
intention, or that they were CBA violations not gross in
allowed by the corporations, to join character
the welga ng bayan, their work
stoppage is beyond legal 2.
protection.(BIFLEX Phils. Inc. Grounds involving inter/intra‐
Labor Union (NAFLU) vs. FILFLEX union disputes
Industrial and Manufacturing
3. action of the opposing party.
(Filipino Pipe and Foundry Corp. v.
When there is no notice of strike or
NLRC, G.R. No. 115180, Nov.r 16,
lockout or without the strike or
1999)
lockout vote
2.
4.
30/15 day Cooling‐off period
After assumption of jurisdiction by
before the intended date of actual
the SLE
strike – notice of strike is filed with
5. the NCMB taking into
consideration the cooling‐off
After certification or submission of period, at least:
dispute to compulsory or voluntary
arbitration or during the pendency a.
of cases involving the same
30 days before the intended strike
grounds for strike or lockout
for bargaining deadlocks;
6.
b.
Labor standards cases such as
15 days before the intended strike
wage orders. (Guidelines governing
for ULP
Labor Relations [Oct. 19, 1987]
issued by Sec. Drilon. See also Art. 3.
261, LC)
Strike vote
Q: What are the procedural and
substantive requisites before a a.
strike may be declared? The decision to declare a strike
must be approved by a majority of
A:
the total union membership in the
1. bargaining unit concerned.

Notice of strike – filed with the b.

NCMB taking into consideration
the cooling‐off period
Note: The failure of the union to
serve the company a copy of the
notice of strike is a clear violation
of Section 3, Rule XXII, Book V of
the Rules Implementing the LC.
The Constitutional precepts of due
process mandate that the other
party be notified of the adverse
It must be obtained by secret
ballot through meetings or
referenda called for the purpose.
c.
Its purpose is to ensure that the
intended strike is a majority
decision. The report on the strike
vote must be submitted to DOLE
at least 7 days before the intended
strike subject to the cooling‐off manner before staging a strike or
period. lockout.

d. Note: Cooling‐off and waiting

The regional branch may supervise
the conduct of the secret balloting
at its own initiative or upon
request of any party.
4.
Furnish the regional branch of the
NCMB with a notice to conduct a
strike vote, at least 24‐hours
before the meeting for such
purpose (Sec. 10, Rule XXII of the
Omnibus Rules of the NLRC).
5.
7‐Day strike ban – a 7‐day waiting
period before the date of the
purported strike (within which the
union intending to conduct a
strike must at least submit a
report to DOLE as to the result of
the strike vote)
Note: To give DOLE an opportunity
to verify whether the projected
strike really carries the imprimatur
of the majority of the union
members in addition to the
cooling‐off period before the actual
strike. (Lapanday Workers’ Union,
et.al. v. NLRC, G.R. Nos. 95494‐97,
Sep. 7, 1995)
Q: What is a cooling‐off period?
A: It is the period of time given the
NCMB to mediate and conciliate
the parties. It is the span of time
allotted by law for parties to settle
their disputes in a peaceful
period may be done
simultaneously.
Q: What is the effect of non‐
compliance with the requisites of a
strike?
A: The strike may be declared
illegal.
Q: What is the purpose of giving
notice of the conduct of a strike
vote to the NCMB at least 24 hours
before the meeting for the said
purpose?
A:
1.
Inform the NCMB of the intent of
the union to conduct a strike vote;
2.
Give the NCMB ample time to
decide on whether or not there is a
need to supervise the conduct of
the strike vote to prevent any acts
of violence and or irregularities;
3.
Ample time to prepare for the
deployment of the requisite
personnel. (Capitol Medical Center
v. NLRC, G.R. No. 147080, April
26, 2005)
Q: Is a no strike/lockout clause
legal?
A: Yes, but it is applicable only to
economic strikes, not ULP strikes.
As a provision in the CBA, it is a
valid stipulation although the
clause may be invoked by an
employer (Er) only when the strike
is economic in nature or one which
is conducted to force wage or other
concessions from the Er that are
not mandated to be granted by the
law itself. It would be inapplicable
to prevent a strike which is
grounded on ULP. (Panay Electric
Co. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 102672,
Oct. 4, 1995; Malayang Samahan
ng mga Manggagawa sa Greenfield
v. Ramos, G.R. No. 113907, Feb.
28, 2000)
Q: What is a preventive mediation
case?
A: It involves labor disputes which
are the subject of a formal or
informal request for conciliation
and mediation assistance sought
by either or both parties or upon
the initiative of the NCMB. (Sec. 1
[mm], Rule I, Book V, IRR)
Note: The regional branch may
treat the notice as preventive
mediation case upon agreement of
the parties.
Q: What are the contents of the
notice of strike or lockout?
A:
1.
Name and addresses of Er
2.
Union involved
3.
Nature of the industry to which the
Er belongs
4.
Number of union members
5.
Workers in the bargaining unit
6.
Other relevant date
7.
In case of bargaining deadlocks:
unresolved issues, written
proposals of the union, counter‐
proposals of the Er and proof of
request for conference to settle
differences
8.
In case of ULP: The acts
complained of, and the efforts
taken to resolve the dispute
Note: NCMB shall inform the
concerned party in case notice
does not conform with the req’ts.
Q: What action will the board take
on the notice of strike of strike or
lockout?
A:
1.
Upon receipt of notice, the regional
branch of the Board shall exert all
efforts at mediation and
conciliation to enable the parties to
settle the dispute amicably. It shall
also encourage the parties to
submit the dispute to voluntary
arbitration.
2.
The regional branch of the NCMB
may, upon agreement of the
parties, treat a notice as a
preventive mediation case.
3.
During the proceedings, the
parties shall not do any act which
may disrupt or impede the early
settlement of the dispute. They are
obliged, as part of their duty to
bargain collectively in good faith
and to participate fully and
promptly in conciliation meetings
called by the regional branch of the
NCMB.
4.
A notice, upon agreement of the
parties, may be referred to
alternative modes of dispute
resolution, including voluntary
arbitration.
Q: Was the strike held by the
union legal based on the fact that
the notice of strike only contained
general allegations of ULP?
A: No. Rule XIII Sec. 4 Book V of
the Implementing Rules of the LC
provides: In cases of ULP, the
notice of strike shall as far as
practicable, state the acts
complained of and the efforts to
resolve the dispute amicably. (Tiu
v. NLRC, G.R. No. 123276, Aug.
18, 1997)
Q: NFSW, the bargaining agent of
Central Azucarera de la Carlota
(CAC) rank and file employees,
filed a notice of strike based on
non‐payment of the 13th month
pay and 6 days thereafter they
held the strike. A day after the
commencement of the strike, a
report of the strike‐vote was filed
by NFSW with MOLE. CAC filed a
petition to declare the strike illegal
due to non‐compliance with the
15‐day cooling of period and the
strike was held before the lapse of
7 days from the submission to the
MOLE of the result of the strike
vote. Was the strike held by NFSW
legal?
A: No. The cooling‐off period in Art.
264(c) and the 7‐day strike ban
after the strike‐vote report
prescribed in Art. 264 (f) were
meant to be mandatory. The law
provides that “the labor union may
strike” should the dispute “remain
unsettled until the lapse of the
requisite number of days from the
filing of the notice”, this clearly
implies that the union may not
strike before the lapse of the
cooling‐off period. The cooling‐off
period is for the Ministry of Labor
and Employment to exert all efforts
at mediation and conciliation to
effect a voluntary settlement.
The mandatory character of the 7‐
day strike ban is manifest in the
provision that “in every case” the
union shall furnish the MOLE with
the results of the voting “at least 7
days before the intended strike.”
This period is to give time to verify
that a strike vote was actually
held. (NFSW v. Ovejera, G.R. No. L‐
59743, May 31, 1982)
Q: Fil Transit Ees Union filed a
notice of strike with the BLR
because of alleged ULP of the
company. Because of failure to
reach an agreement the union
went on strike. Several employees
(Ees) were dismissed because of
the strike. The union filed another
notice of strike alleging ULP,
massive dismissal of officers and
members, coercion of Ees and
violation of workers rights to self‐
organization. The Ministry of Labor
and Employment, after assuming
jurisdiction over the dispute,
ordered all striking Ees including
those who were dismissed to
return to work. The company
however countered that no strike
vote had been obtained before the
strike was called and the result of
the strike vote was not reported to
Ministry of Labor and
Employment. Was the strike held
by the union illegal for failure to
hold a strike vote?
A: Yes, there is no evidence to
show that a strike vote had in fact
been taken before a strike was
called. Even if there was a strike
vote held, the strike called by the
union was illegal because of non‐
observance by the union of the
mandatory 7‐day strike ban
counted from the date the strike
vote should have been reported to
the DOLE. (First City Interlink
Transportation Co., Inc. v.
Confessor, G.R. No. 106316, May
5, 1997)
Q: The company conceived and
decided to retrench its Ees and
selected about 40 Ees to be
dismissed because of the lack of
work. Because of this about 200
Ees during break‐time boarded
buses and went to the Ministry of
Labor but they were advised to
return to work.
Upon returning to the company’s
premises, the Ees were only
allowed to stay in the canteen and
were not given work because
according to the company the
machines were undergoing repairs.
Are the Ees entitled to
reinstatement and backwages?
A: The Ees are entitled to
reinstatement but not to
backwages. Both parties being in
pari delicto, having conducted an
illegal strike and lockout
respectively, there must be a
restoration of the status quo ante
and must bring the parties back to
their respective positions prior to
the illegal strike and lockout which
shall be done by reinstating the
remaining Ees. However, it is the
general rule that strikers are not
entitled to backwages. The
principle of “no work, no pay” is
applicable in view of the finding of
the illegality of the strike.
(Philippine Inter‐Fashion, Inc v.
NLRC, G.R. No. L‐59847, Oct. 18,
1982)
Q: What are the exceptions to the A:
“no backwages rule” of strikers?
1.
A:
Discretionary
1.
a.
When the Ees were illegally locked
If in his opinion there exists a
thus compelling them to stage a
labor dispute causing or likely to
strike
cause a strike or lockout in an
2. industry indispensable to the
national interest.
When the Er is guilty of the
grossest form of ULP b.

3. He may certify the same to the

NLRC for compulsory arbitration
When the Er committed
discrimination in the rehiring of c.
strikers refusing to readmit those
Effect – Automatically enjoins the
against whom there were pending
intended or impending
criminal cases while admitting
strike/lockout but if one has
nonstrikers who were also
already taken place, all striking or
criminally charged in court;
locked out Ees shall immediately
4. return to work and the Er shall
immediately resume operations
When the workers who staged a
and re‐admit all workers under the
voluntary ULP strike offered to
same terms and conditions
return to work unconditionally but
prevailing before the strike or
the Er refused to reinstate them.
lockout (Trans‐Asia Shipping
(Manila Diamond Hotel vs. Manila
Lines, Inc.‐Unlicensed Crews Ee’s
Diamond Hotel Ees’ Union, G.R.
Union v. CA, G.R. No. 145428,
No. 158075, June 30, 2006)
July 7, 2004)
d.Assumption of Jurisdiction by
Note: A motion for reconsideration
the Secretary of Labor or
does not suspend the effects as the
Certification of the Labor dispute
assumption order is immediately
to the NLRC for compulsory
executory.
arbitration
2.
Q: Discuss the assumption of
jurisdiction by the Secretary of Mandatory (within 24 hours)
Labor and Employment (SLE) on
strikes/lockouts. a.
In labor disputes adversely
affecting the continued operation
of hospitals, clinics or medical
institutions.
b.
May assume jurisdiction or certify
it to the NLRC for compulsory
arbitration
c.
Duty of striking union or locking
out Er to provide and maintain an
effective skeletal workforce of
medical and other health
personnel, where movement and
service shall be unhampered and
unrestricted as are necessary to
insure the proper and adequate
protection of the life and health of
its patients most especially
emergency cases for the duration
of the strike or lockout (Art. 263
[g])
Q: What does the phrase “under
the same terms and conditions”
contemplate?
A:
GR: It contemplates only actual
reinstatement. This is in keeping
with the rationale that any work
stoppage or slowdown in that
particular industry can be inimical
to the national economy.
XPN: Payroll reinstatement in lieu
of actual reinstatement but there
must be showing of special
circumstances rendering actual
reinstatement impracticable, or
otherwise not conducive to
attaining the purpose of the law in
providing for assumption of
jurisdiction by the SLE in a labor
dispute that affects the national
interest. (Manila Diamond Hotel
Ees Union v. SLE, G.R. No.
140518, Dec. 16, 2004)
Q: What are issues that the SLE
may resolve when he assumes
jurisdiction over a labor dispute?
A:
1.
Issues submitted to the SLE for
resolution and such issues
involved in the labor dispute itself.
(St. Scholastica’s College v. Torres,
G.R. No. 100158, June 2, 1992)
2.
SLE may subsume pending labor
cases before LAs which are
involved in the dispute and decide
even issues falling under the
exclusive and original jurisdiction
of LAs such as the declaration of
legality or illegality of strike (Int’l.
Pharmaceuticals v. SLE, G.R. Nos.
92981‐83, Jan. 9, 1992)
Note: Power of SLE is plenary and
discretionary. (St. Luke’s Medical
Center v. Torres, G.R. No. 99395,
June 29, 1993)
Q: Is it necessary for the SLE to
issue a return‐to‐work order in an
assumption order?
A: No, the mere issuance of an
assumption order automatically
carries with it a return‐to‐work
order although not expressly e.Nature of Assumption Order or
stated therein. (TSEU‐FFW v. CA, Certification Order
G.R. Nos. 143013‐14, Dec.18,
Q: What is the nature of the power
2000)
of SLE under Art. 263(g)?
Q: What is the extent of the powers
A: The assumption of jurisdiction
of the President during
is in the nature of a police power
strikes/lockouts?
measure. This is done for the
A: promotion of the common good
considering that a prolonged strike
1. or lockout can be inimical to the
May determine the industries, national economy. The SLE acts to
which are in his opinion maintain industrial peace. Thus,
indispensable to national interest his certification for compulsory
arbitration is not intended to
2. impede the worker’s right to strike
but to obtain a speedy settlement
May intervene at any time and
of the dispute. (Philtread Workers
assume jurisdiction over any such
Union v. Confesor, G.R. No.
labor dispute in order to settle or
117169, Mar. 12, 1997)
terminate the same. (Art. 263[g])
Art. 263(g) does not interfere with
Note: The decision of the
the workers right to strike but
President/SLE is final and
merely regulates it, when in the
executory after receipt thereof by
exercise of such right national
the parties.
interest will be affected. The LC
Q: May a return to work order be vests upon the SLE the discretion
validly issued pending to determine what industries are
determination of the legality of the indispensable to national interest.
strike?
Q: What is the nature of
A: Yes. Where the return to work assumption and certification
order is issued pending the orders of the Secretary of Labor?
determination of the legality of the
A: The underlying principle
strike, it is not correct to say that
embodied in Art. 264 (g) on the
it may be enforced only if the strike
settlement of labor disputes is that
is legal and may be disregarded if
assumption and certification
illegal. Precisely, the purpose of
orders are executor in character
the return to work order is to
and are strictly complied with by
maintain the status quo while the
the parties even during the
determination is being made.
pendency of any petition
(Sarmiento v. Tuico, G.R. Nos.
questioning their validity. This
75271‐73, June 27, 1988)
extraordinary authority given to
the Secretary of Labor is aimed at power is expressly granted by Art.
arriving at a peaceful and speedy 263 (g) of the LC, as amended by
solution to labor disputes, without B.P. Blg. 227.
jeopardizing national interests.
Q: Does the RTC have jurisdiction
Q: A notice of strike was filed by to decide on the case filed by the
the PSBA Ees Union‐FFW, alleging PSBA students?
union busting, coercion of Ees and
A: No, the RTC was without
harassment on the part of PSBA.
jurisdiction over the subject matter
The conciliation being ineffective,
of the case filed by some PSBA
the strike pushed through. A
students, involving as it does a
complaint for ULP and for a
labor dispute over which the labor
declaration of illegality of the strike
agencies had exclusive
with a prayer for preliminary
jurisdiction. That the regular
injunction was filed by PSBA
courts have no jurisdiction over
against the union.
labor disputes and to issue
While the cases were pending, a injunctions against strikes is well‐
complaint was filed in the RTC of settled. (PSBA v. Noriel, G.R. No.
Manila by some PSBA students 80648, Aug. 15, 1988)
against PSBA and the union,
Q: Members of the union learned
seeking to enjoin the union and its
that a redundancy program would
members from picketing and from
be implemented by the company.
barricading themselves in front of
Thereupon it filed a Notice of strike
the schools main gate. A TRO was
on the grounds of ULP. A number
then issued by the RTC, which the
of conciliation meetings were
union opposed on the ground that
conducted but to no avail so the
the case involves a labor dispute
union staged a strike while the
over which the RTC had no
company terminated 383 union
jurisdiction. The Acting SLE later
members from service pursuant to
on assumed jurisdiction over the
its redundancy program. Pursuant
labor dispute and ordered the
to Art. 263(g) of the LC the SLE
striking Ee’s to return to work.
certified the labor dispute for
Was the SLE correct in ordering
compulsory arbitration.
the striking Ees to return to work?
Accordingly the SLE enjoined the
A: Yes. In the opinion of the Acting strike staged by the union and all
SLE, the labor dispute adversely striking workers were directed to
affected the national interest, return to work within 24 hours
affecting as it did 9,000 students. except for those who were
He is authorized by law to assume terminated due to redundancy.
jurisdiction over the labor dispute,
Was the SLE correct in excepting
after finding that it adversely
from the return‐to‐work order
affected the national interest. This
those who were terminated due to
redundancy?
A: No, Art. 263(g) is clear and
unequivocal in stating that all
striking or lock‐out Ees shall
immediately return to work and
the Er shall immediately resume
operations and readmit all workers
under the same terms and
conditions prevailing before the
strike or lockout. Records of the
case would show that the strike
occurred one day before the
members of the union were
dismissed due to alleged
redundancy. Thus the
abovementioned article directs that
the Er must readmit all workers
under the same terms and
conditions prevailing before the
strike. (PLDT v. Manggagawa ng
Komunikasyon sa Pilipinas, G.R.
No. 162783, July 14, 2005)
f.Effect of defiance of Assumption
or Certification Order
Q: What is the effect of defiance to
the return to work order?
A: It shall be considered an illegal
act committed in the course of the
strike or lockout and shall
authorize the SLE or the NLRC, as
the case may be, to enforce the
same under pain or loss of
employment status or entitlement
to full employment benefits from
the locking‐out Er or backwages,
damages and/or other positive
and/or affirmative reliefs, even to
criminal prosecution against the
liable parties. (Sec. 6, Rule IX, of
the New Rules of Procedure of the
NLRC; St. Scholastica’s College v.
Torres, G.R. No. 100158, June 2,
1992)
g.Illegal Strike
Q: When is a strike illegal?
A:
1.
Contrary to specific prohibition of
law, such as strike by employees
(Ees) performing governmental
functions;
2.
Violates a specific req’t of law;
3.
Declared for an unlawful purpose,
such as inducing the employer (Er)
to commit ULP against non‐union
Ees;
4.
Employs unlawful means in the
pursuit of its objective, such as
widespread terrorism of non‐
strikers;
5.
Declared in violation of an existing
injunction;
6.
Contrary to an existing agreement,
such as a no strike clause or
conclusive arbitration clause
Q: What is “good faith (GF) strike”
doctrine?
A: A strike may be considered legal
where the union believed that the
company committed ULP and the
circumstances warranted such
belief in GF, although
subsequently such allegations of
ULP are found out as not true.
(Bacus v. Ople, GR No. L‐56856,
Oct. 23, 1984, People’s Industrial
and Commercial Ees and
Organization (FFW) v. People’s
Industrial and Commercial Corp.,
G.R. No.37687, Mar. 15, 1982)
Q: What is the effect of the GF of
strikers on the legality of strike?
A:
GR: A strike grounded on ULP is
illegal if no such acts actually
exist.
XPN: Even if no ULP acts are
committed by the Er, if the Ees
believe in GF that ULP acts exist so
as to constitute a valid ground to
strike, then the strike held
pursuant to such belief may be
legal. Where the union believed
that the Er committed ULP and the
circumstances warranted such
belief in GF, the resulting strike
may be considered legal although,
subsequently, such allegations of
ULP were found to be groundless.
(NUWHRAIN‐Interim Junta v.
NLRC, G.R. No. 125561, Mar. 6,
1998)
(1)Liability of Officers of the Union
and Ordinary Workers
Q: Should separation pay and
backwages be awarded to the
participants of an illegal strike?
A: No backwages will be awarded
to union members as a penalty for
their participation in the illegal
strike. As for the union officers, for
knowingly participating in an
illegal strike, the law mandates
that a union officer may be
terminated from employment and
they are not entitled to any relief.
(Gold City Integrated Port Services,
Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 86000, Sep.
21, 1990 )
Q: What is the rule on
reinstatement of striking workers?
A: Striking employees are entitled
to reinstatement, regardless of
whether or not the strike was the
consequence of the employers ULP
because while out on strike, the
strikers are not considered to have
abandoned their employment, but
rather have only ceased from their
labor; the declaration of a strike is
not a renunciation of employment
relation.
Q: Who are not entitled to
reinstatement?
A:
1.
Union officers who knowingly
participate in the illegal strike
2.
Any striker or union who
knowingly participates in the
commission of illegal acts during
the strike
Note: Those union members who
have joined an illegal strike but
have not committed any illegal act
shall be reinstated but without
back wages.
The responsibility for the illegal
acts committed during the strike
must be on an individual and not
on a collective basis. (First City
Interlink Transportation Co., Inc.
v. Confesor, G.R. No. 106316, May
5, 1997)
Q: Are strikers entitled to their
backwages or strike duration pay?
A:
GR: No, even if such strike was
legal.
XPN:
1.
Where the strikers voluntarily and
unconditionally offered to return to
work, but the employer refused to
accept the offer – workers are
entitled to back wages from the
date their offer was made
2.
When there is a return‐to‐work
order and the Ees are
discriminated against other Ees,
workers are entitled to back wages
from the date of discrimination
3.
In case of a ULP strike, in the
discretion of the authority deciding
the case
Q: What is the rule in strikes in
hospitals?
A:
1.
It shall be the duty of the striking
employees or locking‐out employer
to provide and maintain an
effective skeletal workforce of
medical and health personnel for
the duration of the strike or
lockout.
2.
SLE may immediately assume
jurisdiction within 24 hours from
knowledge of the occurrence of
such strike or lockout certify it to
the NLRC for compulsory
arbitration.
Q: More or less 1400 Ees of the
company staged a mass walk‐out,
allegedly without anybody leading
them as it was a simultaneous,
immediate and unanimous group
action and decision, to protest the
non‐payment of their salaries and
wages. The Minister of Labor and
Employment who found the strike
to be illegal granted the clearance
to terminate the employment of
those who were instigators in the
illegal strike. Was the decision of
the Minister of Employment in
granting the clearance correct?
A: No, a mere finding of the
illegality of a strike should not be
automatically followed by
wholesale dismissal of the strikers
from their employment. While it is
true that administrative agencies
exercising quasi‐judicial functions
are free from the rigidities of
procedure, it is equally well‐settled
that avoidance of technicalities of
law or procedure in ascertaining
objectively the facts in each case
should not, however, cause denial
of due process. (Bacus v. Ople,
G.R. No. L‐56856, Oct. 23, 1984)
Q: 2 days after the union struck,
the SLE ordered the striking
workers to return to work within
24 hours. But the striking union
failed to return to work and
instead they continued their
pickets. As a result, violence
erupted in the picket lines. The
service bus ferrying non‐striking
workers was stoned causing
injuries to its passengers. Threats,
defamation, illegal detention, and
physical injuries also occurred.
The company was directed to
accept back all striking workers,
except the union officers, shop
stewards, and those with pending
criminal charges. Was the SLE
correct in not including the union
officers, shop stewards and those
with pending criminal charges in
the return‐to‐work order?
A: No, 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.
(Telefunken Semiconductors Ees
Union‐FFW v. SLE, G.R. No.
122743 & 127215, Dec. 12, 1997)
(2)Waiver of Illegality of Strike
Q: When is there a waiver of the
illegality of a strike by the
employer?
A: When an employer accedes to
the peaceful settlement brokered
by the NLRC by agreeing to accept
all employees who had not yet
returned to work, it waives the
issue of the illegality of the strike.
(Reformist Union v. NLRC, G.R. No.
120482,Jan. 27, 1997)
j.Injunctions
Q: What is an injunction?
A: It is an order or a writ that
commands a person to do or not to
do a particular act. It may be a
positive (mandatory) or a negative
(prohibitory) command.
(1)Requisites for Labor Injunctions
Q: May the court or quasi‐judicial
entity issue any injunction during
strikes/lockouts?
A: GR: No court or entity shall
enjoin any picketing, strike or
lockout, or any labor dispute.
XPN:
1.
When prohibited or unlawful acts
are being or about to be committed
that will cause grave or irreparable
damage to the complaining party.
(Art. 218[e])
2.
On the ground of national interest
3.
The SLE or the NLRC may seek the
assistance of law enforcement
agencies to ensure compliance
with this provision as well as with
such orders as he may issue to
enforce the same (Art. 263[g])
(2)Innocent Bystander Rule
Q: What must an “innocent by‐
stander” satisfy before a court may
enjoin a labor strike?
A: The innocent by stander must
show:
1.
Compliance with the grounds
specified in Rule 58 of the Rules of
Court, and
2.
That it is entirely different from,
without any connection whatsoever
to, either party to the dispute and,
therefore, its interests are totally
foreign to the context thereof. (MSF
Tire & Rubber v. CA, G.R. 128632,
Aug. 5, 1999)
Q: May the RTC take cognizance of
the complaint where the same is
but an incident of a labor dispute?
A: No, where the subject matter of
the 3rd party claim is but an
incident of the labor case, it is a
matter beyond the jurisdiction of
the RTC, such courts have no
jurisdiction to act on labor cases or
various incidents arising
therefrom, including the execution
of decisions, awards or orders.
A party, by filing its 3rd party
claim with the deputy sheriff, it
submitted itself to the jurisdiction
of the NLRC acting through the LA.
The broad powers granted to the
LA and to the NLRC by Art. 217,
218 and 224 of the LC can only be
interpreted as vesting in them
jurisdiction over incidents arising
from, in connection with or
relating to labor disputes, as the
controversy under consideration,
to the exclusion of the regular
courts. The RTC, being a co‐equal
body of the NLRC, has no
jurisdiction to issue any
restraining order or injunction to
enjoin the execution of any
decision of the latter.
(Deltaventures v. Cabato, G.R. No.
118216, Mar. 9, 2000)
Q: The employer filed with the RTC
a complaint for damages with
preliminary mandatory injunction
against the union, the main
purpose of which is to dispense the
picketing of the members of the
union. The union filed a motion to
dismiss on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction. The RTC denied the
motion to dismiss and enjoined the
picketing, it said that mere
allegations of Er‐Ee relationship
does not automatically deprive the
court of its jurisdiction and even
the subsequent filing of charges of
ULP, as an afterthought, does not
deprive it of its jurisdiction. Was
the issuance by the RTC of the
injunction proper?

A: No, the concerted action taken

by the members of the union in
picketing the premises of the
department store, no matter how
illegal, cannot be regarded as acts
not arising from a labor dispute
over which the RTCs may exercise
jurisdiction. (Samahang
Manggagawa ng Liberty
Commercial v. Pimentel, G.R. No.
L‐78621, Dec. 2, 1987)
2. RIGHT TO COLLECTIVE Note:
BARGAINING
GR: No court or administrative
Q: What is collective bargaining agency or official shall have the
(CB)? power to set or fix wages, rates of
pay, hours of work, or other terms
A:
and conditions of employment
1.
XPNs: As otherwise provided under
It is the process of negotiation by the LC:
an organization or group of
1.
workmen, in behalf of its members,
with the employer (Er), concerning National Wages and Productivity
wages, hours of work, and other Commission and RTWPB as to
terms and conditions of wage fixing. (Art. 99 and 122, LC)
employment and
2.
2.
NCMB and NLRC as to wage
The settlement of disputes by distortion. (Art. 124, LC)
negotiation between an Er and the
3.
representative of his employees
(Ee) SLE and President of the
Philippines as to certification and
3.
assumption of powers over labor
It is the obligation to meet and disputes. (Art. 236[g], LC)
convene promptly and
Q: What is the purpose behind this
expeditiously in good faith for the
rule?
purpose of negotiating an
agreement with respect to wages, A: It is to encourage a truly
hours of work and all other terms democratic method of regulating
and conditions of employment the relations between the
including proposals for adjusting employers and employees by
any grievances or questions arising means of agreements freely entered
under such agreement and into through CB.
executing a contract incorporating
such agreements if requested by Q: Who are the parties to a CB?
either party but such does not
A:
compel any party to agree to a
proposal or to make any 1.
concession. (Art. 252, LC)
Employer
2. exclusion of the majority
representative.
Employees, represented by the
exclusive bargaining agent Where there is a legitimate
representation issue, there is no
Q: What are the jurisdictional
duty to bargain collectively on the
preconditions in collective
part of the Er (Lakas ng mga
bargaining? Manggagawang Makabayan v.
A: Marcelo Enterprises, G.R. No. L‐
38258, Nov. 19, 1982)
1.
Q: What is a collective bargaining
Possession of the status of agreement (CBA)?
majority representation of the
employees representative in A: It is a contract executed upon
accordance with any of the means request of either the Er or the
of selection or designation provided exclusive bargaining representative
for the Labor Code of the Ees incorporating the
agreement reached after
2. negotiations with respect to wages,
hours of work, terms and
Proof of majority representation
conditions of employment,
3. including proposals for adjusting
any grievance or questions under
A demand to bargain under Art. the agreement.
250 (a) of the LC. (Kiok Loy v.
NLRC, G.R. No. L‐54334, Jan.22, Note: The certification of the CBA
1986) by the BLR is not required to make
such contract valid. Once it is duly
a.Duty to Bargain Collectively entered into and signed by the
Q: When does the duty of the parties, a CBA becomes effective as
employer (Er) to bargain between the parties whether or not
collectively arise? it has been certified by the BLR.
(Liberty Flour Mills Ee’s
A: Only after the union requests Association v. Liberty Flour Mills,
the Er to bargain. If there is no G.R. Nos. 58768‐70, Dec. 29,
demand, the Er cannot be in 1989)
default.
Q: What is a zipper clause?
Note: Where a majority
representative has been A: It is a stipulation in a CBA
designated, it is an ULP for the Er, indicating that issues that could
as a refusal to collectively bargain, have been negotiated upon but not
to deal and negotiate with the contained in the CBA cannot be
minority representative to the
raised for negotiation when the
CBA is already in effect.
A CBA is not an ordinary contract
but one impressed with public
interest, only provisions embodied
in the CBA should be so
interpreted and complied with.
Where a proposal raised by a
contracting party does not find
print in the CBA, it is not a part
thereof and the proponent has no
claim whatsoever to its
implementation. (SMTFM‐UWP v.
NLRC , G.R. No. 113856, Sept. 7,
1998)
Q: When shall bargaining
commence?
A: It commences within 12 months
after the determination and
certification of the Ees exclusive
bargaining representative.
(certification year)
Q: What is the procedure in CB?
A: When a party desires to
negotiate an agreement:
1.
It shall serve a written notice upon
the other party with a statement of
proposals
2.
Reply by the other party shall be
made within 10 days with counter
proposals
3.
In case of differences, either party
may request for a conference
which must be held within 10
calendar days from receipt of
request
4.
If not settled, NCMB may intervene
and encourage the parties to
submit the dispute to a voluntary
arbitrator
5.
If not resolved, the parties may
resort to any other lawful means
(either to settle the dispute or
submit it to a voluntary arbitrator).
Note: During the conciliation
proceeding in the NCMB, the
parties are prohibited from doing
any act which may disrupt or
impede the early settlement of
disputes. (Art.250[d], LC)
Q: What are the stages in CB?
A:
1.
Preliminary process: Sending a
written notice for negotiation
which must be clear and
unequivocal
2.
Negotiation process.
3.
Execution process: The signing of
the agreement
4.
Publication for at least 5 days
before ratification
5.
Ratification by the majority of all
the workers in the bargaining unit
represented in the negotiation (not
necessary in case of arbitral
award)
6.
Registration process.
7.
Administration process: The CBA
shall be jointly administered by the
management and the bargaining
agent for a period of 5 years.
8.
Interpretation and Application
process.
Q: Does a petition for cancellation
of a union’s certificate of
registration involve a prejudicial
question that should first be
settled before parties could be
required to collectively bargain?
A: No. A pending cancellation
proceeding is not a bar to set
mechanics for collective bargaining
(CB). If a certification election may
still be held even if a petition for
cancellation of a union’s
registration is pending, more so
that the CB process may proceed.
The majority status of the union is
not affected by the cancellation
proceedings. (Capitol Medical
Center v. Trajano, G.R. No.
155690, June 30, 2005)
Q: What is the duty to bargain
collectively when there is no CBA?
A: It is the performance of a
mutual obligation:
1.
To meet and convene promptly and
expeditiously in good faith (GF)
2.
For the purpose of negotiating an
agreement with respect to wages,
hours of work and all other terms
and conditions of employment
3.
Including proposals for adjusting
any grievances or questions arising
under such agreement; and
4.
To execute a contract
incorporating such agreements if
requested by either party. (Art.
252)
Q: What are the limitations to the
duty to bargain collectively?
A:
1.
Such duty does not compel any
party to agree to a proposal or to
make any concession.
2.
Parties cannot stipulate terms and
conditions of employment which
are below the minimum req’ts
prescribed by law.
Q: May either party bargain to an
impasse?
A: It depends:
1.
Where the subject of a dispute is a
mandatory bargaining subject,
either party may bargain to an
impasse as long as he bargains in
GF.
2.
Where the subject is non‐
mandatory, a party may not insist
in bargaining to the point of
impasse. His instance may be
construed as evasion of duty to
bargain.
Q: What is the test of bargaining in
bad faith?
A: There is no perfect test of good
faith (GF) in bargaining. The GF or
BF is an inference to be drawn
from the facts and is largely a
matter for the NLRC’s expertise.
The charge of BF should be raised
while the bargaining is in progress.
Note: With the execution of the
CBA, BF can no longer be imputed
upon any of the parties thereto. All
provisions in the CBA are
supposed to have been jointly and
voluntarily incorporated therein by
the parties. This is not a case
where private respondent exhibited
an indifferent attitude towards CB
because the negotiations were not
the unilateral activity of petitioner
union. The CBA is good enough
that private respondent exerted
“reasonable effort of GF
bargaining.” (Samahang
Manggagawa sa Top Form
Manufacturing‐United Workers of
the Phils v. NLRC, G.R. No.
113856, Sept. 7, 1998)
Q: Does an Er’s steadfast
insistence to exclude a particular
substantive provision in the
negotiations for a CBA constitute
refusal to bargain or bargaining in
BF?
A: No. This is no different from a
bargaining representative’s
perseverance to include one that
they deem of absolute necessity.
Indeed, an adamant insistence on
a bargaining position to the point
where the negotiations reach an
impasse does not establish bad
faith. Obviously, the purpose of CB
is the reaching of an agreement
resulting in a contract binding on
the parties; but the failure to reach
an agreement after negotiations
have continued for a reasonable
period does not establish a lack of
good faith. The statutes invite and
contemplate a collective bargaining
contract, but they do not compel
one. The duty to bargain does not
include the obligation to reach an
agreement. While the law makes it
an obligation for the Er and the
Ees to bargain collectively with
each other, such compulsion does
not include the commitment to
precipitately accept or agree to the
proposals of the other. All it Q: May economic exigencies justify
contemplates is that both parties refusal to bargain?
should approach the negotiation
A: No. An employer is not guilty of
with an open mind and make
refusal to bargain by adamantly
reasonable effort to reach a
rejecting the union’s economic
common ground of agreement.
demands where he is operating at
(Union of Filipro Ees v. Nestle
a loss, on a low profit margin, or in
Phils., G.R. Nos. 158930‐31, Mar.
a depressed industry, as long as he
3, 2008)
continues to negotiate. But
Q: What is a deadlock? financial hardship constitutes no
excuse for refusing to bargain
A: It is synonymous with impasse
collectively.
or a standstill which presupposes
reasonable effort at GF bargaining Q: What is the duty to bargain
but despite noble intentions does collectively when there is a CBA?
not conclude an agreement
A:
between the parties.
1.
Q: In case of deadlock in the
renegotiation of the CBA, what are When there is a CBA the duty to
the actions that may be taken by bargain collectively shall also mean
the parties? that neither party shall terminate
nor modify such agreement during
A: The parties may:
its lifetime.
1.
2.
Call upon the NCMB to intervene
Either party can serve a written
for the purpose of conducting
notice to terminate or modify the
conciliation or preventive
agreement at least 60 days prior to
mediation;
its expiration date.
2.
3.
Refer the matter for voluntary
It shall be the duty of both parties
arbitration or compulsory
to keep the status quo and to
arbitration;
continue in full force and effect the
3. terms and conditions of the
existing agreement during the 60‐
Declare a strike or lockout upon
day period and/or until a new
compliance with the legal req’ts
agreement is reached by the
(This remedy is a remedy of last
parties. (Art. 253, LC)
resort).
Q: What is the automatic renewal
clause of CBAs?
A: Although a CBA has expired, it
continues to have legal effects as
between the parties until a new
CBA has been entered into (Pier &
Arrastre Stevedoring Services, Inc.
v. Confessor, G.R. No. 110854,
February 13, 1995). This is so
because the law makes it a duty of
the parties to keep the status quo
and to continue in full effect the
terms and conditions of the
existing agreement until a new
agreement is reached by the
parties. (Art. 253, LC). (2008 Bar
Question)
Q: What may be done during the
60‐day freedom period?
A:
1.
A labor union may disaffiliate from
the mother union to form a local or
independent union only during the
60‐day freedom period immediately
preceding the expiration of the
CBA.
2.
Either party can serve a written
notice to terminate or modify
agreement at least 60‐days prior to
its expiration period.
3.
A petition for certification election
may be filed.
Q: When to file CBA?
A: Within 30 days from execution
of CBA.
Q: What are the requirements for
registration?
A: The application for CBA
registration shall be accompanied
by the original and 2 duplicate
copies of the following req’ts:
1.
CBA
2.
A statement that the CBA was
posted in at least 2 conspicuous
places in the establishment
concerned for at least 5 days
before its ratification
3.
Statement that the CBA was
ratified by the majority of the Ees
in the bargaining unit.
Note: The following documents
must be certified under oath by
the representative of the Er and
the labor union. No other
document shall be required in the
registration of the CBA.
Q: What is a single enterprise
bargaining?
A: It involves negotiation between
one certified labor union and one
Er. Any voluntarily recognized or
certified labor union may demand
negotiations with its Er for terms
and conditions of work covering
Ee’s in the bargaining unit
concerned.
Q: What is a multi‐Er bargaining Other terms and conditions of
scheme? employment

A: It involves negotiation between Q: What are the non‐economic

and among several certified labor provisions of a CBA?
unions and Ers.
A:
Q: What is the duration of a CBA?
1.
A:
Coverage of the bargaining unit
1.
2.
With respect to the representation
Union security clauses
aspect (refers to the identity and
majority status of the union that 3.
negotiated the CBA as the
exclusive bargaining Management prerogatives and/or
representative): 5 years rights/responsibilities of
employees
2.
4.
With respect to all other provisions
(refers to the rest of the CBA, Grievance machinery and
economic as well as non‐economic voluntary arbitration
provisions other than
5.
representational provisions): 3
years after the execution of the No strike – no lock out provision
CBA
Q: What is the effectivity and
Q: What are the economic retroactivity date of other economic
provisions of a CBA? provisions of the CBA?

A: A:

1. 1.

Wages If the CBA is the very first for the

bargaining unit, the parties have to
2.
decide the CBA effectivity date.
Family planning
2.
3.
Those made within 6 months after
Effectivity of the agreement date of expiry of the CBA are
subject to automatic retroaction to
4. the day immediately following the
date of expiry.
3.
Those not made within 6 months,
the parties may agree to the date of
retroaction.
Note: This rule applies only if there
is an existing agreement. If there is
no existing agreement, there is no
retroactive effect because the date
agreed upon shall be the start of
the period of agreement.
Art. 253‐A on retroactivity does not
apply if the provisions were
imposed by the SLE by virtue of
arbitration. It applies only if the
agreement was voluntarily made
by the parties.
Q: May the economic provisions of
an existing CBA be extended
beyond the 3 year period as
prescribed by law in the absence of
a new agreement?
A: Yes. Under the principle of hold
over, until a new CBA has been
executed by and between the
parties, they are duty bound to
keep the status quo and must
continue in full force and effect the
terms and conditions of the
existing agreement. The law does
not provide for any exception or
qualification as to which of the
economic provisions of the existing
agreement are to retain force and
effect. Therefore, it must be
encompassing all the terms and
condition in the said agreement.
(New Pacific Timber v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 124224, Mar. 17, 2000)
Q: Mindanao Terminal Company
and respondent union has an
existing CBA which was about to
expire. Thus, negotiations were
held regarding certain provisions of
the CBA which resulted in a
deadlock. Thus the union filed a
notice of strike. During the
conference called by the NCMB the
company and the union were able
to agree on all of the provisions of
the CBA except for one. However,
the last unresolved provision was
subsequently settled but no CBA
was signed. Hence, in the records
of the Mediation Arbiter, all issues
were settled before the lapse of the
6 month period after the expiration
of the old CBA. Does the signing of
the CBA determine the date it was
entered into within the 6 month
period?
A: No. The signing of the CBA does
not determine whether the
agreement was entered into within
the 6 month period from the date
of expiration of the old CBA. In the
present case, there was already a
meeting of the minds between the
company and the union prior to
the end of the 6 month period after
the expiration of the old CBA.
Hence, such meeting of the mind is
sufficient to conclude that an
agreement has been reached
within the 6 month period as
provided under Art. 253‐A of the
LC. (Mindanao Terminal and
Brokerage Services Inc., v.
Confessor, G.R. No. 111809, May
5, 1997)
Q: When is the effectivity of a CBA
arbitral award concluded beyond 6
months from the expiration of the
old CBA?
A: The CBA arbitral awards
granted 6 months from the
expiration of the last CBA shall
retroact to such time agreed upon
by both the Er and the union.
Absent such agreement as to
retroactivity, the award shall
retroact to the 1st day after the 6
month period following the
expiration of the last day of the
CBA should there be one. In the
absence of a CBA, the SLE’s
determination of the date of
retroactivity as part of his
discretionary powers over arbitral
award shall control. (Manila
Electric Company v. Quisumbing,
G.R. No. 127598, Feb. 22 and Aug.
1, 2000)
Q: PAL was suffering from a
worsened financial condition
resulting to a retrenchment which
downsized its labor force by more
than 1/3 thereby affecting
numerous union members. Hence,
the union went on strike. The PAL
offered that shares of stock be
transferred to its Ees but the
union refused. Thus, PAL claimed
it has no alternative left but to
close. Hence, the union PALEA
offered that the CBA be suspended
for 10 years and to waive some of
the economic benefits in the CBA
provided they remain the certified
bargaining agent. PAL agreed and
resumed operations. Is the
agreement to suspend the CBA for
10 years abdicated the worker’s
right to bargain?
A: No. The primary purpose of a
CBA is to stabilize labor‐
management relations in order to
create a climate of a sound and
stable industrial peace. The
assailed agreement was the result
of the voluntary CB negotiations
undertaken in the light of severe
financial situation faced by PAL.
Q: Is the agreement in conflict with
Art. 253‐A of the LC?
A: No. There is no conflict between
the agreement and Art. 253‐A of
the LC for the latter has a 2‐fold
purpose namely: a) to promote
industrial stability and
predictability and b) to assign
specific time tables wherein
negotiations become a matter of
right and requirement. In so far as
the first purpose, the agreement
satisfies the first purpose. As
regard the second purpose,
nothing in Art. 253‐A prohibits the
parties from waiving or suspending
the mandatory timetables and
agreeing on the remedies to
enforce the same.
Q: Does the agreement violate the
5 year representation limit as
provided under Art. 253‐A of the
LC?
A: No. For under the said article,
the representation limit of the
exclusive bargaining agent applies
only when there is an existing CBA
in full force and effect. In this case,
the parties agreed to suspend the
CBA and put in abeyance the limit
on representation. (Rivera v.
Espiritu, G.R. No. 135547, Jan.
23, 2002)
b.Mandatory provisions of the CBA
Q: What are the mandatory
provisions of the CBA?
A:
1.
Grievance machinery
2.
Voluntary arbitration
3.
Q: How are cases arising from the
Interpretation or implementation of
CBAs handled and disposed?
A: They are disposed through the
grievance machinery and if not
resolved by the grievance
machinery, through voluntary
arbitration. (1995 Bar Question)
Q: What is grievance?
A: It is any question by either the
employer or the union regarding
the interpretation or
implementation of any provision of
the CBA or interpretation or
enforcement of company personnel
policies. (Sec.1 [u], Rule I, Book V,
IRR)

Wages Q: What provisions must the

parties include in a CBA?
4.
A:
Hours of work
1.
5.
Provisions that will ensure the
Family planning mutual observance of its terms
6. and conditions.

Rates of pay 2.

7. A machinery for adjustment and

resolution of grievances arising
Mutual observance clause from the:

Note: In addition, the BLR requires a.

the CBA should include a clear
statement of the terms of the CBA. Interpretation/implementation of
the CBA and
Er’s duty to bargain is limited to
mandatory bargaining subjects; as b.
to other matters, he is free to Interpretation/ enforcement of
bargain or not. company personnel policies. (Art.
260, par. 1).
(1)Grievance Procedure
Q: What is grievance machinery?
A: It refers to the mechanism for
the adjustment and resolution of
grievances arising from the
interpretation or enforcement of
company personnel policies. It is
part of the continuing process of
collective bargaining (CB).
Note: It is a must provision in any
CBA and no collective agreement
can be registered in the absence of
such procedure.
Q: How is grievance machinery
established?
A:
1.
Agreement by the parties
2.
A grievance committee – composed
of at least 2 representatives each
from the members of the
bargaining unit and the employer,
unless otherwise agreed upon by
the parties – shall be created
within 10 days from the signing of
CBA
Note: Although Art. 260 of the
Labor Code mentions “parties to a
CBA”, it does not mean that a
grievance machinery cannot be set
up in a CBA‐less enterprise. In any
workplace where grievance can
arise, a grievance machinery can
be established.
Q: What is grievance procedure?
A: It refers to the internal rules of
procedure established by the
parties in their CBA which usually
consists of successive steps
starting at the level of the
complainant and his immediate
supervisor and ending, when
necessary, at the level of the top
union and company officials and
with voluntary arbitration as the
terminal step.
Q: What will happen to grievances
submitted to the grievance
machinery which are not settled
within 7 calendar days from the
date of their submission?
A: They shall automatically be
referred to voluntary arbitration
prescribed in the CBA. (Art. 260,
par.2, Labor Code)
Either party may serve notice upon
the other of its decision to submit
the issue to voluntary arbitration
(VA):
1.
If the party upon whom such
notice is served fails/refuses to
respond within 7 days from
receipt, VA/panel designated in
the CBA shall commence
arbitration proceedings
2.
If the CBA does not designate or if
the parties failed to name the
VA/panel, the regional branch of
NCMB appoints VA/panel
(2)Voluntary Arbitration
Q: What is voluntary arbitration? without delay, such that once an
award has been rendered by an
A: It refers to the mode of settling
arbitrator, nothing is left to be
labor management disputes by
done by both parties but to comply
which the parties select a
with the same. After all, they are
competent, trained and impartial
presumed to have freely chosen
third person who shall decide on
arbitration as the mode of
the merits of the case and whose
settlement for that particular
decision is final and executory.
dispute. Pursuant thereto, they
(Sec.1 [d], Rule II, NCMB Revised
have chosen a mutually acceptable
Procedural Guidelines in the
arbitrator who shall hear and
Conduct of Voluntary Arbitration
decide their case. Above all, they
Proceedings, Oct. 15, 2004)
have mutually agreed to be bound
Q: What is the difference between by said arbitrator's decision.
compulsory and voluntary (Luzon Dev’t Bank v. Ass’n of
arbitration? Luzon Dev’t Bank Ees, G.R. No.
120319, Oct. 6, 1995)
A: Compulsory arbitration is a
system whereby the parties to a Q: What is the basis for voluntary
dispute are compelled by the arbitration and its rationale?
government to forego their right to
A: The State shall promote the
strike and are compelled to accept
principle of shared responsibility
the resolution of their dispute
between workers and employers
through arbitration by a 3rd party.
and the preferential use of
The essence of arbitration remains
voluntary modes in settling
since a resolution of a dispute is
disputes, including conciliation,
arrived at by resort to a
and shall enforce their mutual
disinterested third party whose
compliance therewith to foster
decision is final and binding on the
industrial peace (Sec. 3, Art. XIII,
parties, but in compulsory
1987 Constitution).
arbitration, such a third party is
normally appointed by the (3)No Strike‐No Lockout Clause
government.
Q: When does the No Strike‐No
Under voluntary arbitration, on the Lockout clause in the CBA apply?
other hand, referral of a dispute by
the parties is made, pursuant to a A: The “no strike‐no lockout”
voluntary arbitration clause in clause in the CBA applies only to
their collective agreement, to an economic strikes. It does not apply
to ULP strikes. Hence, if the strike
impartial third person for a final
is founded on an unfair labor
and binding resolution. Ideally,
practice of the employer, a strike
arbitration awards are supposed to
declared by the union cannot be
be complied with by both parties
considered a violation of the no
strike clause. (Master Iron Labor exclusive bargaining
Union v. NLRC, G.R. No. 92009, representative. In establishments
Feb. 17, 1993) where no legitimate labor
organization exists, the workers
(4)Labor Management Council
representative shall be elected
Q: What is the role of the directly by the employees at large.
Department of Labor and (Sec. 2, Rule XXI, Book V, IRR)
Employment in the creation of
c.ULP in Collective Bargaining
Labor Management Councils?
Q: What are the forms of ULP in
A: The Department shall promote
bargaining?
the formation of labor‐management
councils in organized and A:
unorganized establishments to
1.
enable the workers to participate
in policy and decision‐making Failure to meet and convene
processes in the establishment,
insofar as said processes will 2.
directly affect their rights, benefits
Evading the mandatory subjects of
and welfare, except those which
bargaining.
are covered by collective
bargaining agreements or are 3.
traditional areas of bargaining.
Bad faith in bargaining
The Department shall promote (boulwarism), including failure to
other labor‐management execute the CBA if requested
cooperation schemes and, upon its
own initiative or upon the request 4.
of both parties, may assist in the Gross violation of the CBA
formulation and development of
programs and projects on 5.
productivity, occupational safety
Surface Bargaining
and health, improvement of quality
of work life, product quality 6.
improvement, and other similar
schemes. (Sec. 1, Rule XXI, Book Blue sky bargaining
V, IRR)
Note: Violations of CBA, except
Q: How is the representative in the those which are gross in character,
Management Council Selected? shall no longer be treated as ULP
but a grievance under CBA. (Art.
A: In organized establishments, the 261, LC, Silva v. NLRC, G.R. No.
workers’ representatives to the 110226, June 19 1997)
council shall be nominated by the
Q: When is there refusal
bargain?
A: A union violates its duty to
bargain collectively by entering
negotiations with a fixed purpose
of not reaching an agreement or
signing a contract.
Q: What is featherbedding/ make
work activities?
A: It refers to the practice of the
union or its agents in causing or
attempting to cause an employer
(Er) to pay or deliver or agree to
pay or deliver money or other
things of value, in the nature of an
exaction, for services which are not
performed or not to be performed,
as when a union demands that the
Er maintain personnel in excess of
the latter’s requirements.
Note: It is not featherbedding if the
work is performed no matter how
unnecessary or useless it may be.
Q: What is the sweetheart
doctrine?
A: It is when a LO asks for or
accepts negotiations or atty’s fees
from employers as part of the
settlement of any issue in CB or
any other dispute.
Note: The resulting CBA is
considered as a “sweetheart
contract” – a CBA that does not
substantially improve the
employees wages and benefits and
whose benefits are far below than
those provided by law.
Q: What is blue‐sky bargaining?
to A: It is defined as making
exaggerated or unreasonable
proposals.
Note: Whether or not the union is
engaged in blue‐sky bargaining is
determined by the evidence
presented by the union as to its
economic demands. Thus, if the
union requires exaggerated or
unreasonable economic demands,
then it is guilty of ULP. (Standard
Chartered Bank v. Confessor, G.R.
No. 114974, June 16, 2004)
Q: When does boulwarism occur?
A: It occurs when employer (Er)
directly bargains with the
employee (Ee) disregarding the
union; the aim was to deal with
the labor union through Ees rather
than with the Ees thru the union.
Er submits its proposals and
adopts a take‐it‐or‐leave‐it stand.
d.Unfair Labor Practice
(1)ULP of Employers
Q: What are the ULP that may be
committed by Ers?
A:
1.
Interference
2.
Yellow dog condition
3.
Contracting out
4.
Company unionism
5.
Discrimination for or against union
membership
6.
Discrimination because of
testimony
7.
Violation of duty to bargain
8.
Paid negotiation
9.
Gross violation of CBA
(a)Interference
Q: What is meant by interference?
A: The act of Er to interfere with,
restrain or coerce Ees in the
exercise of their right to self
organization.
Q: What is the test of interference?
A: Whether the Er has engaged in
conduct which, it may reasonably
be said, tends to interfere with the
free exercise of the Ees right to
self‐organization.
Note: Direct evidence that an Ee
was in fact intended or coerced by
the statements of threats of the Er
is not necessary if there is a
reasonable interference that the
anti‐union conduct of the Er does
have an adverse effect on self‐
organization and CB. (The Insular
Life Assurance‐NATU v. The
Insular Life Co. Ltd, G.R. No.L‐
25291, Jan. 30, 1971)
Q: What is the totality of conduct
doctrine?
A: It states that the culpability of
Er’s remarks is to be evaluated not
only on the basis of their
implications, but against the
background of and in conjunction
with collateral circumstances.
Under this doctrine, expressions of
opinion by an Er, though innocent
in themselves, frequently were held
to be ULP because of:
1.
The circumstances under which
they were uttered
2.
The history of the particular Er’s
labor relations or anti‐union bias
3.
Their connection with an
established collateral plan of
coercion or interference. (The
Insular Life Assurance‐NATU v.
The Insular Life Co. Ltd, G.R. No.L‐
25291, Jan. 30, 1971)
Q: Phil. Marine Officers Guild
(PMOG) is a union representing
some of Philsteam’s officers and
Cebu Seamen’s Association (CSA)
is another union representing
some of Philsteam’s officers. PMOG
sent a letter to Philsteam
requesting for CB but the company
asked the former to first prove it
represents the majority. Q: When does lockout or closure
Simultaneously, Philsteam amount to ULP?
interrogated its captains, deck
A: A lockout, actual or threatened,
officers and engineers while CSA
as a means of dissuading the Ees
likewise sent its demands to
from exercising their rights is
Philsteam. The company
clearly an ULP. However, to hold
recognized CSA as representing the
an Er guilty, the evidence must
majority and entered into a CBA.
establish that the purpose was to
Hence PMOG declared a strike.
interfere with the Ees exercise of
PMOG was subjected to vilification
their rights.
and Philsteam’s pier
superintendent participated in the Q: What are other examples of acts
solicitation of membership for of interference?
CSA. Is the company guilty of
ULP? A:

A: Yes. Although the company is 1.

free to make interrogations as to
Outright and unconcealed
its Ees’ union, the same should be
intimidation
for a legitimate purpose and must
not interfere with the exercise of 2.
self‐organization otherwise it is
considered as ULP. Moreover, In order that interrogation would
Philsteam’s supervisory Ees’ not be deemed coercive:
statement that PMOG is a “money‐ a.
making” union, which is made to
appear to be said in behalf of the The Er must communicate to the
union and the participation of the Ee the purpose of questioning
company’s pier superintendent in
b.
soliciting membership for the
competing union, is ULP for Assure him that no reprisal would
interfering with the exercise of the take place
right to self‐organization.
(Philsteam and Navigation v. c.
Philippine Marine Officers Guild,
Obtain Ee participation voluntarily
G.R. Nos. L‐20667 and L‐20669,
Oct. 29, 1965) d.

Q: What is a lockout? Must be free from Er hostility to

union organization
A: It means any temporary refusal
of an Er to furnish work as a result e.
of an industrial or labor dispute.
Must not be coercive in nature
(Art.212[p])
3.
Intimidating expressions of opinion
by Er
Note: An Er who interfered with
the right to self‐organization before
a union is registered can be held
guilty of ULP. (Samahan ng mga
Manggagawa sa Bandolino‐LMLC
v. NLRC, G.R. No. 125195, July
17, 1997)
It is the prerogative of the company
to promote, transfer or even
demote its Ees to other positions
when the interests of the company
reasonably demand it. Unless
there are circumstances which
directly point to interference by the
company with the Ees right to self‐
organization, the transfer of an Ee
should be considered as within the
bounds allowed by law.
(Rubberworld Phils. v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 75704, July 19, 1989)
(b)Yellow Dog
Q: What is a yellow dog condition?
A: It is to require as a condition of
employment that a person or an Ee
shall not join a labor organization
or shall withdraw from one to
which he belongs.
Q: What is a yellow dog contract?
A: It is a promise exacted from
workers as condition of
employment that they are not to
belong to or attempt to foster a
union during their period of
employment.
Q: Is yellow dog contract valid?
A: No. It is null and void because:
1.
It is contrary to public policy for it
is tantamount to involuntary
servitude.
2.
It is entered into without
consideration for Ees in waiving
their right to self‐organization.
3.
Ees are coerced to sign contracts
disadvantageous to their family.
Note: This is one of the cases of
ULP that may be committed in the
absence of an Er‐Ee relationship.
Q: What are the 3 usual provisions
under a yellow dog contract?
A:
1.
A representation by the Ee that he
is not a member of a labor union.
2.
A promise by the Ee not to join a
labor union.
3.
A promise by the Ee that upon
joining a labor union, he will quit
his employment.
(c)Contracting Out
Q: What is “contracting out” as a
form of ULP?
A: It is to contract out services or
functions being performed by
union members when such will
interfere with, restrain or coerce
Ees in the exercise of their rights
to self‐organization.
Q: Does it mean that an Er cannot
contract out work?
A:
GR: Contracting out services is not
ULP per se.
XPNs: It is ULP only when the ff.
exists:
1.
The services contracted out are
being performed by union
members; and
2.
Such contracting out interferes
with, restrains, or coerce Ees in
the exercise of their right to self‐
organization.
Note: When the contracting out is
being done for business reasons
such as decline in business,
inadequacy of equipment or to
reduce cost, then it is a valid
exercise of management
prerogative.
Q: Company "A" contracts out its
clerical and janitorial services. In
the negotiations of its CBA, the
union insisted that the company
may no longer engage in
contracting out these types of
services, which services the union
claims to be necessary in the
company's business, without prior
consultation. Is the union's stand
valid or not? For what reason(s)?
A: The union's stand is not valid. It
is part of management prerogative
to contract out any work, task, job
or project except that it is an ULP
to contract out services or
functions performed by union
members when such will interfere
with, restrain or coerce Ees in the
exercise of their rights to self‐
organization. (Art. 248[c] of the
LC). (2001 Bar Question)
Q: What is a run‐away shop?
A: It is an industrial plant moved
by its owners from one location to
another to escape labor regulations
or State laws or to discriminate
against Ees at the old plant
because of their union activities.
Q: Is resorting to run‐away shop
ULP?
A: Yes. Where a plant removal is
for business reasons but the
relocation is hastened by anti‐
union motivation, the early
removal is ULP. It is immaterial
that the relocation is accompanied
by a transfer of title to a new
employer (Er) who is an alter ego of
the original Er.
(d)Company Unionism
Q: What is a company union?
A: Any labor organization whose
formation, function or
administration has been assisted
by any act defined as ULP. (Art. 4.
212[i])
Supervisory assistance‐ Soliciting
Q: What are the forms of company membership, permitting union
unionism? activities during work time or
coercing Ees to join the union by
A:
threats of dismissal or demotion
1.
Q: What is meant by the act of
Initiation of the company union company‐domination of union?
idea by:
A: This is to initiate, dominate,
a. assist or otherwise interfere with
the formation or administration of
Outright formation by Er or his any labor organization including
representatives giving of financial or other support
to it or its organizers or
b.
supporters.
Ee formation on outright demand
Q: Why is company
or influence by Er and
unionism/captive unionism a form
c. of ULP?

Managerially motivated formation A: It is considered ULP because the

by Ees officers will be beholden to the Ers
and they will not look after the
2. interest of whom they represent.
Financial support to the union by: (e)Discrimination for or against
a. union membership

Er defrays union expenses Q: What is meant by

b.
Pays atty’s fees to the attorney who
drafted the Constitution or by‐laws
of the union.
3.
Er encouragement assistance ‐
Immediately granting of exclusive
recognition as bargaining agent
without determining whether the
union represents the majority of
the employees
discrimination as a form of ULP?
A: It is to discriminate in regard to
wages, hours of work and other
terms and conditions of
employment in order to encourage
or discourage membership in any
labor organization.
Q: When is a discharge of an Ee
discriminatory?
A: For the test of determining
whether or not a discharge is
discriminatory, it is necessary that
the underlying reason for the
discharge be established.
The fact that a lawful cause for
discharge is available is not a
defense where the Ee is actually
discharged because of his union
activities. If the discharge is
actually motivated by lawful
reason, the fact that the Ee is
engaged in union activities at the
time will lie against the Er and
prevent him from the exercise of
business judgment to discharge an
Ee for cause. (Phil. Metal
Foundries Inc. v. CIR, G.R. Nos. L‐
34948‐49, May 15, 1979)
Q: Jobo has 3 hotels, the Taal
Vista Lodge, Manila Hotel and the
Pines Hotel. Among the 3, Pines
Hotel had more Ees and the only
one with a labor organization (LO).
When the bonus was distributed
among the 3 hotels, Pines Hotel
Ees received the least amount
compared to the Ees of Manila
Hotel and Taal Vista Lodge. Did
the company commit ULP?
A: Yes. The sharing of the bonuses
is discriminatory and such
constitute ULP. The Pines Hotel
Ees would be receiving fewer
bonuses compared to the Ees of
Taal Vista Lodge and Manila Hotel
where neither has a LO nor does
the complainant union has a
member. Taking into account that
Pines Hotel is realizing profit
compared to that of Taal Vista.
Same analogy applies in the salary
increase. (Manila Hotel Co. v. Pines
Hotel Ees’ Ass’n, G.R. No.L‐30139,
Sep. 28, 1972)
Q: When can there be a valid
discrimination?
A: The employer is not guilty of
ULP if it merely complies in good
faith with the request of the
certified union for the dismissal of
employees expelled from the union
pursuant to the union security
clause in the CBA. (Soriano v.
Atienza, G.R. No. L‐68619, Mar.
16, 1989)
Q: A profit sharing scheme was
introduced by the company for its
managers and supervisors who are
not members of the union, hence
do not enjoy the benefits of the
CBA. The respondent union
wanted to participate with the
scheme but was denied by the
company due to the CBA.
Subsequently the company
distributed the profit sharing to
the manager, supervisors and
other non‐union member Ees. As a
result the union filed a notice of
strike alleging ULP. Is the non‐
extension of the profit sharing
scheme to union members
discriminatory and an ULP?
A: No. There can be no
discrimination when the Ees are
not similarly situated. The
situation of union members is
different and distinct from non‐
union members because only
union members enjoy the benefit
under the CBA. The profit sharing
scheme was extended to those who
do not enjoy the benefits of the
CBA. Hence, there is no
discrimination and ULP is not
committed. (Wise and Co., Inc. v.
NLRC, G.R. No. L‐87672, Oct. 13,
1989)
Q: Is dismissal of an Ee pursuant
to a union security clause a form
of ULP?
A: No. Union security clauses in
the CBA, if freely and voluntarily
entered into, are valid and binding.
Thus, the dismissal of an Ee by the
company pursuant to a labor
union’s demand in accordance
with a union security agreement
does not constitute ULP.
(Malayang Samahan ng mga
Manggagawa sa M. Greenfield v.
Ramos, G.R. No. 113907, Feb. 28,
2000)
A union member who is employed
under an agreement between the
union and his Er is bound by the
provisions thereof since it is a joint
and several contract of the
members of the union entered into
by the union as their agent.
(Manalang v. Artex Dev’t, G.R. No.
L‐20432, Oct. 30, 1967)
Q: Is notice and hearing required
in case an Ee is dismissed
pursuant to a union security
clause?
A: Yes. Although a union security
clause in a CBA may be validly
enforced and dismissal pursuant
to thereto may likewise be valid,
this does not erode the
fundamental requirement of due
process. The reason behind the
enforcement of union security
clauses which is the sanctity and
inviolability of contracts cannot
erode one’s right to due process.
Notwithstanding the fact that the
dismissal was at the instance of
the federation and that it
undertook to hold the company
free from any liability resulting
from such dismissal, the company
may still be held liable if it was
remiss in its duty to accord the
would‐be dismissed Ees their right
to be heard on the matter.
Q: Mabeza and her co‐Ees were
asked by the company to sign an
affidavit attesting to the latter’s
compliance with pertinent labor
laws. Mabeza signed the affidavit
but refused to swear to its veracity
before the City prosecutor. Mabeza
then filed a LOA which was denied
by management. After sometime,
she attempted to return to work
but the company informed her not
to report for work and continue
with her unofficial leave. Did the
company commit ULP?
A: Yes. The act of compelling an Ee
to sign an instrument indicating
the Er’s compliance with Labor
laws which the company might
have violated together with the act
of terminating or coercing those
Ees to cooperate is an act of ULP.
This is analogous with Art. 248 (f)
of the LC which provides: “to
dismiss, discharge or otherwise
prejudice or discriminate against
an Ee for having given or being
about to give testimony under this
Code”. For in not giving a positive
testimony in favor of the Er,
Mabeza reserved not only her right
to dispute the claim but also to
work for better terms and
condition. (Mabeza v. NLRC, G.R
No. 118506, April 18, 1997)
(f)Violation of Duty to Bargain
Q: What is violation of the duty to
bargain as a kind of ULP?
A: This is the act of violating the
duty to bargain collectively as
prescribed in the LC.
Q: What are the forms of ULP in
bargaining?
A:
1.
Failure or refusal to meet and
convene
2.
Evading the mandatory subject of
bargaining
3.
Bad faith (BF) bargaining,
including failure to execute the
CBA if requested
4.
Gross violation of the CBA
Note: A company’s refusal to make
counter‐proposal, if considered in
relation to the entire bargaining
process, may indicate BF and this
is especially true where the union’s
request for a counter proposal is
left unanswered. (Kiok Loy v.
NLRC, G.R. No. L‐54334, Jan. 22,
1986)
Q: What are the examples of ULP
in bargaining?
A:
1.
Delaying negotiations by
discussing unrelated matters
2.
Refusal to accept request to
bargain
3.
Rejecting a union’s offer to prove
its majority claim
4.
Shutdown to avoid bargaining
5.
Engaging in surface bargaining
Q: Balmar Farms Ees Association
(BFEA) is affiliated with Associated
Labor Union (ALU). ALU won in the
certification election held in the
company. Thus, ALU sent its
proposal for a CBA, but the
company refused to act on it
alleging that BEA is the sole and
exclusive bargaining representative
and that BFEA through its
president had sent a letter
informing the company of its
disaffiliation with ALU. Is the
company guilty of ULP for refusing
to bargain collectively?
A: Yes. ALU is the certified
exclusive bargaining representative
after winning the certification
election. The company merely
relied on the letter of disaffiliation
by BFEA’s president without proof
and consequently refusing to
bargain collectively constitutes
ULP. Such refusal by the company
to bargain collectively with the
certified exclusive bargaining
representative is a violation of its
duty to collectively bargain which
constitutes ULP. (Balmar Farms v.
NLRC, G.R. No.73504, Oct. 15,
1991)
Q: The Kilusang Kabisig, a newly‐
formed labor union claiming to
represent a majority of the workers
in the Microchip Corp., proceeded
to present a list of demands to the
management for purposes of
collective bargaining (CB). The
Microchips Corp., a multinational
corp.engaged in the production of
computer chips for export,
declined to talk with the union
leaders, alleging that they had not
as yet presented any proof of
majority status. The Kilusang
Kabisig then charged Microchip
Corp. with ULP, and declared a
"wildcat" strike wherein means of
ingress and egress were blocked
and remote and isolated acts of
destruction and violence were
committed. Was the company
guilty of an ULP when it refused to
negotiate with the Kilusang
Kabisig?
A: No. It is not an ULP not to
bargain with a union which has
not presented any proof of its
majority status. The LC imposes
on an Er the duty to bargain
collectively only with a legitimate
labor organization designated or
selected by the majority of the Ees
in an appropriate CB unit. It is not
a ULP for an Er to ask a union
requesting to bargain collectively
that such union first show proof of
its being a majority union. (1997
Bar Question)
Q: What is surface bargaining?
A: It is the act of going through the
motions of negotiating without any
legal intent to reach an agreement.
It involves the question of whether
or not the Ers conduct
demonstrates an unwillingness to
bargain in good faith or is merely
hard bargaining. (Standard
Chartered Bank v. Confessor, G.R.
No. 114974, June 16, 2004)
Note: Occurs when the Er
constantly changes its position
over the agreement.
(g)Paid Negotiation
Q: What is meant by paid
negotiation as a form of ULP?
A: It is the act of the employer to
pay negotiation or atty’s fees to the
union or its officers or agents as
part of the settlement of any issue
in collective bargaining or any
other dispute.
(h)Gross Violation of CBA
Q: When is the violation of CBA
considered as ULP?
A: Only when the violation is gross
– There must be a flagrant and/or
malicious refusal to comply with
the economic provision of the CBA.
Note: All the ULP acts must have a
relation to the Ees exercise of their
right to self‐organization. Anti‐
union or anti‐organization motive
must be proved because it is a
definitional element of ULP.
If violation is not gross, it is not
ULP but a grievance under CBA.
The “grossly violate” phrase is an
amendment by R.A. 6715.
Q: A complaint for ULP was filed
by a prosecutor of the CIR against
Alhambra company, upon the
charges of the union that 15 of its
members employed as drivers and
helpers are discriminated for being
deprived of the benefits under the
CBA with no justifiable reason
other than union membership. Is
the company guilty of ULP?
A: Yes. The refusal to extend the
benefits and privileges under the
CBA to Ees constitutes ULP.
Failure on the part of the company
to live up in good faith to the terms
of the CBA is a serious violation of
the duty to collectively bargain
which again amounts to ULP. The
15 drivers and helpers are found to
be Ees of the company, hence, the
benefit and privileges under the
CBA should be extended to them.
(Alhambra Industries v. CIR, G.R.
No. L‐25984, Oct. 30, 1970)
Q: What are the reliefs available in
ULP cases?
A: The following reliefs may be
availed of:
1.
Cease and desist order
2.
Affirmative order
3.
Court may order the employer to
bargain. CBA may be imposed.
4.
Strike by union members
Note: ULP cases are not subject to
compromise in view of the public
interest involve. The relation
between capital and labor is not
merely contractual. They are
impressed with public interest that
labor contracts must yield to
common good.
Q: Is the commission of an ULP by
an employer subject to criminal
prosecution?
A: Yes, because ULPs are not only
violations of the civil rights of both
labor and management but are
also criminal offenses against the
State which shall be subject to
prosecution and punishment. (Art.
247 LC; See also B.P. Blg. 386 as
amended by R.A. 6715). However,
the criminal aspect can only be
filed when the decision of the labor
tribunals, finding the existence of
ULP, shall have become final and exaction, for services which are not
executory. (2005 Bar Question) performed or not to be performed,
including the demand for fee for
(2)ULP of Labor Organizations
union negotiations
Q: What are the ULP of LOs?
5.
A: It shall be ULP for a LO, its
To ask for or accept negotiations or
officers, agents or representatives:
atty’s fees from Ers as part of the
1. settlement of any issue in
collective bargaining (CB) or any
To restrain or coerce Ees in the other dispute or
exercise of their rights to self‐
organization. However, a LO shall 6.
have the right to prescribe its own
To violate a CBA.
rules with respect to the
acquisition or retention of Q: Is interference by a LO an ULP?
membership
A: No, because interference by a
2. LO in the exercise of the right to
organize is itself a function of self‐
To cause or attempt to cause an Er
organizing.
to discriminate against an Ee,
including discrimination against Q: What are examples of
an Ee with respect to whom interference which does not
membership in such organization amount to ULP?
has been denied or to terminate an
A:
Ee on any ground other than the
usual terms and conditions under 1.
which membership or continuation
of membership is made available to Union campaigns for membership
other members even among members of another
union
3.
2.
To violate the duty, or refuse to
bargain collectively with the Er, Filing by a union of a petition to
provided it is the representative of dislodge an incumbent bargaining
the Ees union

4. 3.

To cause or attempt to cause an Er A bargaining union, through a

to pay or deliver or agree to pay or union security clause, requires an
deliver any money or other things incoming employee to join the
of value, in the nature of an union.
Q: May a union coerce Ees to join
a strike?
A: No. A union violates the law
when, to restrain or coerce non‐
strikers from working during the
strike, it:
1.
Assaults or threatens to assault
them
2.
Threatens them with the loss of
their jobs
3.
Blocks their ingress to or egress
from the plant
4.
Damages non‐strikers’ automobiles
or forces them off the highway
5.
Physically preventing them from
working
6.
Sabotages the Er’s property in
their presence, thereby creating an
atmosphere of fear or violence
7.
Demonstrates loudly in front of a
non‐strikers’ residence with signs
and shouts accusing the non‐
striker of “scabbing”
8.
Holding the non striker up to
ridicule
9.
Seeking public condemnation of
the non‐striker
Q: What is a case of union induced
discrimination by labor
organization (LO)?
A: This pertains to the arbitrary
use of union security clause.
A union member may not be
expelled from the union, and
consequently from his job, for
personal and impetuous reasons
or for causes foreign to the closed
shop agreement. (Manila Mandarin
Ees Union v. NLRC, G.R. No.
76989, Sep. 29, 1987)
Labor unions are not entitled to
arbitrarily exclude qualified
applicants for membership and a
closed‐shop applicants provision
will not justify the employer in
discharging, or a union in insisting
upon the discharge of an employee
whom the union thus refuses to
admit to membership without any
reasonable ground thereof.
(Salunga v. CIR, G.R. No. L‐22456,
Sep. 27, 1967)
Q: When is there refusal to
bargain?

A: A union violates its duty to

bargain collectively by entering
negotiations with a fixed purpose
of not reaching an agreement or
signing a contract.