Fadriquelan vs. Monterey

Fadriquelan vs. Monterey

GR 178409, June 8, 2011

Facts:

The negotiations for the CBA between the Union and the Company reached a deadlock and led to the filing of the Union for a notice of strike. After the holding of a strike was enjoined by the DOLE, the Union filed a second notice of strike, alleging that the Company committed unfair labor practice. The Company sent first and second notices to the Union officers for intentional acts of slowdown and to inform them of their termination from work, respectively. The third notice of strike filed by the Union alleged that the Company had engaged in union busting and illegal dismissal of Union officers.

Issue:

Whether the dismissal of all 17 Union officers was justified

Held: No, it was not.

A distinction exists between the ordinary workers’ liability for illegal strike and that of the union officers who participated in it. The ordinary worker cannot be terminated for merely participating in the strike. There must be proof that he committed illegal acts during its conduct. On the other hand, a union officer can be terminated upon mere proof that he knowingly participated in the illegal strike.

But, the participation of the union officers has to be properly established. The CA held that the Company illegally terminated some union officers, there being no substantial evidence that would connect them to the slowdown.

In termination cases, the dismissed employee is not required to prove his innocence of the charges against him. The burden of proof rests upon the employer to show that the employee’s dismissal was for just cause. The employer’s failure to do so means that the dismissal was not justified.¹⁶ Here, the company failed to show that all 17 union officers deserved to be dismissed.

ALPAP vs. PAL

AIRLINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (ALPAP) vs. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC. (PAL)

GR 168382, June 6, 2011

Facts:

Claiming that PAL committed unfair labor practice, ALPAP filed a notice of strike against PAL. Despite reminders to the parties prohibiting all strikes and lockouts at PAL, ALPAP went on strike on June 5, 1998. The DOLE issued a return-to-work order on June 7, 1998. However it was only on June 26, 1998 when ALPAP officers and members reported back to work as shown in a logbook signed by each of them. As a consequence, PAL refused to accept the returning pilots for their failure to comply immediately with the return-to-work order. On June 29, 1998, ALPAP files a complaint for illegal lockout. On June 1, 1999, the DOLE Resolution declared the June 5, 1998 strike as illegal and pronounced the loss of employment status of ALPAP’s officers and members who participated in the strike in defiance of the June 7, 1998 return-to-work order.

Issue:

Whether all of ALPAP’s officers and members are bound by the June 1, 1999 DOLE Resolution for participating in an illegal strike and for defying the DOLE return-to-work order

Held: No, only the returning pilots are bound by the June 1, 1999 DOLE Resolution.

A review of the records reveals that the DOLE Secretary declared the ALPAP officers and members to have lost their employment status based on either of two grounds, viz: their participation in the illegal strike on June 5, 1998 or their defiance of the return-to-work order of the DOLE Secretary. The records of the case unveil the names of each of these returning pilots. The logbook with the heading "Return To Work Compliance/ Returnees" bears their individual signature signifying their conformity that they were among those workers who returned to work only on June 26, 1998 or after the deadline imposed by DOLE. From this crucial and vital piece of evidence, it is apparent that each of these pilots is bound by the judgment. Besides, the complaint for illegal lockout was filed on behalf of all these returnees. Thus, a finding that there was no illegal lockout would be enforceable against them. In fine, only those returning pilots, irrespective of whether they comprise the entire membership of ALPAP, are bound by the June 1, 1999 DOLE Resolution.