Case Digest (G.R. No. L-32245)
Facts:
Dy Keh Beng v. International Labor and Marine Union of the Philippines, G.R. No. L-32245, May 25, 1979, the Supreme Court First Division, De Castro, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Dy Keh Beng, proprietor of a basket factory, sought review by certiorari of the Court of Industrial Relations' (CIR) decision of March 23, 1970 in Case No. 3019-ULP and the CIR en banc resolution of June 10, 1970 affirming that decision.A charge of unfair labor practice under Republic Act No. 875 (Industrial Peace Act), Section 4(a)(1) and (4), was filed by the International Labor and Marine Union of the Philippines on behalf of its members Carlos N. Solano and Ricardo Tudla, alleging dismissal for union activities on September 28 and 29, 1960 respectively. After preliminary investigation the case proceeded to trial before a Hearing Examiner of the CIR.
The Hearing Examiner found that an employee-employer relationship existed between petitioner and the complainants (Solano employed from May 2, 1953; Tudla from July 15, 1955), though Solano received piece-rate pay; that their work at the kaing (basket) manufacturing establishment was continuous except for illness; and that petitioner had dismissed them because of union activities. The Hearing Examiner recommended reinstatement with backwages. The CIR adopted the Hearing Examiner’s report in toto and ordered reinstatement of Solano and Tudla with backwages from their respective dates of dismissal until fully reinstated.
Petitioner challenged the CIR findings before the Supreme Court, arguing (a) there was no employer-employee relationship because the men were pakiaw/pakyaw piece workers, (b) respondent Solano was not his employee and Tudla was unknown to him, and (c) the CIR’s factual findings were not supported by evidence and the dismissal did not constitute an unfair labor practice but resulted from extortion by the union leadership. The CIR’s factual findings and remedy were affirmed en banc on June 10, 1970, prompting the present petition for review by certiorari.
In its review the Supreme Court considered precedent on the control test (e.g., Madrigal Shipping Co. v. Nieves Baens del Rosario) and on the significance of piece-rate payment (e.g., LVN Pictures v. Philippine Musicians Guild, Feati University v. Bautista), and applied the line of authority that treats CIR findings as conclusive if supported by substantial evidence. The Court modif...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Were Carlos N. Solano and Ricardo Tudla employees of petitioner Dy Keh Beng for purposes of Republic Act No. 875?
- Were Solano and Tudla dismissed by petitioner because of their union activities (i.e., did their dismissal constitute an unfair labor practice under Section 4(a)(1) and (4) of RA 875)?
- Did the testimonies and evidence support a finding of discrimination and pattern of anti-union conduct by petitioner?
- Was petitioner properly declared guilty of unfair labor practice acts as alleged?
- Was the remedy ordered by the CIR—reinstatement with backwages from dates of dismissal until r...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)