Facts:

This case involves a petition for certiorari filed by American President Lines (APL), who sought a review of the Office of the President's decision rendered on October 9, 1979, under O.P. Case No. 0871, which upheld the Minister of Labor's order from August 22, 1978. This order had affirmed, with slight modifications, the National Labor Relations Commission's (NLRC) resolution from November 4, 1976. The complaint leading to this legal action was initiated by the Maritime Security Union, represented by Julian Advincula and individual complainants, on March 21, 1963. They accused APL of unfair labor practices under Republic Act No. 875, alleging that the company refused to negotiate and discriminated against its employee watchmen due to their union activities, culminating in the dismissal of the complainants on January 1, 1961.

Initially lodged with the now-defunct Court of Industrial Relations, the case was transferred to the NLRC after the Labor Code of the Philippin

...

Facts:

Contractual Relationship and Service Arrangement

• On January 4, 1960, American President Lines (APL) entered into a contract with the Marine Security Agency to provide security for its vessels while moored at the Port of Manila.
• The contract was for one year and allowed termination by either party upon 30 days’ notice.
• APL’s dealings were with the agency only; the agency was responsible for recruiting, hiring, assigning, and paying the watchmen (security guards).
• Upon expiration of the one-year term, APL terminated the contract on January 4, 1961, without any renewal.
• Subsequently, APL executed a new one-year contract with the Philippine Scout Veterans Security and Investigation Agency for similar security services.

Alleged Unfair Labor Practice and Union Involvement

• Private respondents, represented by the Maritime Security Union (and individual complainants headed by Julian Advincula), charged APL with unfair labor practices.
• The allegations centered on claims that APL had refused to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement and discriminated against the watchmen by terminating their contracts allegedly due to their union activities.
• The dispute arose from the termination of contracts on January 1, 1961, which the complainants argued was motivated by actions against their union membership and activities.

Procedural History and Administrative Findings

• Initially filed by members of the Maritime Security Union through private respondents (with a cable and letter of protest), the complaint was first lodged in the now-defunct Court of Industrial Relations.
• After the enactment of Presidential Decree No. 442 (Labor Code of the Philippines), the case was transferred to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and docketed as NLRC Case No. 3553-ULP, with Arbiter Apolinario Lomabao presiding.
• Arbiter Lomabao found APL guilty of unfair labor practices, ordering reinstatement of the watchmen (with modifications based on age and capacity) and three years’ worth of backwages.
• The NLRC affirmed the arbiter’s decision with qualifications regarding reinstatement and separation pay.
• The Minister of Labor subsequently affirmed the NLRC decision by his order of August 22, 1978, which was again endorsed by the Office of the President on September 3, 1979.
• APL (the petitioner) then filed a petition for certiorari seeking the review, setting aside, and annulment of these administrative orders.

Communication and Evidentiary Developments

• On December 24, 1960, counsel for private respondents sent a cable to APL’s office in San Francisco protesting the cancellation of the contract, mentioning issues such as alleged personal grudge and protest over payment matters (including overtime, Sundays, and holidays).
• Evidence included both a cable (Exhibit “14”) and subsequent letters from the private respondents’ counsel, though these communications did not reference union recognition or collective bargaining demands as causes for the termination.
• The union itself exhibited internal discord by passing a resolution to abolish its organization on February 6, 1961, and later reviving it on December 10, 1962, thereby casting doubt on the consistency of its claims.

Issue:

Existence of Employer-Employee Relationship

• Whether an employer-employee relationship existed between APL and the individual watchmen employed by the Marine Security Agency.
• Whether the petitioner (APL) directly recruited, controlled, and paid the watchmen, or if these functions were solely within the purview of the security agency.

Commission of Unfair Labor Practice

• Whether APL committed an unfair labor practice by refusing to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the watchmen or discriminating against them due to their union activities.
• Whether the mere expiration of a fixed-term contract could be masqueraded as an adverse employment act attributable to labor discrimination.

---

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)