Title
Bradman Co., Inc. vs. Court of Industrial Relations
Case
G.R. No. L-24134-35
Decision Date
Jul 21, 1977
A company refused to bargain with a certified union, dismissed 59 workers for union activities, and was found guilty of unfair labor practice, leading to their reinstatement.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-24134-35)

Facts:

  1. Union Proposals and Refusal to Bargain:

    • The Manila Bay Watchmen Association (private respondent) sent a letter to The Bradman Company, Inc. (petitioner) on May 7, 1950, containing 11 sets of labor proposals for collective bargaining.
    • The company refused to act on the union's proposals, as testified by Florendo M. Padilla, the shipping manager, who stated that no written reply was made based on the recommendation of the company president.
    • On November 18, 1960, the union was certified by the Court as the sole bargaining agent for the watchmen. On December 29, 1960, the union reiterated its labor demands, warning the company of potential measures if no action was taken.
    • Despite knowing the union's certification and the membership of its workers in the union, the company continued to disregard the union's requests and bargaining proposals.
  2. Reinstatement of Workers:

    • On January 2, 1961, the company's vessel "Eurymedon" was in the Port of Manila. Union members reported for work but were stopped by the company manager, Mr. Manzano, who informed them that they had been replaced by another agency due to the pending case in court.
    • The testimonies of the union members regarding their refusal to board the vessel and subsequent denial of employment were never refuted by the company.
    • The Court found that the discharge of 59 workers was due to their union affiliation and activities, including requesting union recognition and better employment terms.

Issue:

  1. Whether the petitioner committed unfair labor practice by refusing to bargain collectively in good faith with the union.
  2. Whether the reinstatement of the 59 workers ordered by the Court of Industrial Relations was valid.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.