Case Digest (G.R. No. L-17620)
Facts:
Far Eastern University v. The Court of Industrial Relations, G.R. No. L-17620, August 31, 1962, the Supreme Court En Banc, Concepcion, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Far Eastern University challenged a resolution of the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) sitting en banc that modified and affirmed in part a decision of Judge Arsenio I. Martinez. Complainant in the administrative proceedings was Tomas N. Aguirre, assisted by the Philippine Association of Colleges and University Professors (PACUP); the CIR prosecuted an unfair labor practice complaint against the University.
Aguirre had been a member of the University faculty since 1948 and was classified as a full‑time instructor (Tagalog) with a fixed compensation of P450.00 per month effective September 1, 1953. In mid‑1953 he joined PACUP and actively recruited members, allegedly persuading seven faculty to join. From December 1953 through May 1954 his earnings fell and in June 1954 the University ceased giving him teaching assignments. The University asserted reduced enrollment as the reason; Aguirre alleged the reductions were retaliatory because of his union activity. Administrative remedies produced a decision of the Director of Private Schools ordering reinstatement and payment of salary differential, later affirmed by the Secretary of Education and by the Executive Secretary, though these administrative rulings were not treated as controlling in the CIR proceedings.
On September 28, 1954 an Acting Prosecutor of the CIR filed an unfair labor practice complaint. The complaint was initially dismissed at the complainant’s request but the dismissal was set aside and the case proceeded to trial. Judge Martinez found the University guilty of unfair labor practice, ordered the salary differential from December 1, 1953 to May 31, 1954, and awarded back wages from June 1, 1954 to November 17, 1955 (with deductions for earnings at the Philippine College of Commerce), but did not order reinstatement on the ground that Aguirre’s subsequent employment in the Central Bank constituted a “substantial equivalent” of his university position.
On motion for reconsideration the CIR en banc affirmed the finding of unfair labor practice and the monetary awards but held that Aguirre’s work at the Central Bank and his teaching at the Philippine College of Commerce were not substantially equivalent to his former full‑time university post, and thus the Univer...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was Aguirre’s subsequent employment in the Central Bank of the Philippines and his part‑time teaching at the Philippine College of Commerce a “substantial equivalent” to his former full‑time instructor position at Far Eastern University so as to bar reinstatement under the Industrial Peace Act?
- Did the University commit unfair labor practice warranting payment of the salary differential and back wages awarded b...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)