Case Digest (G.R. No. 100898)
Facts:
Alex Ferrer, Rafael Ferrer, Henry Diaz, Domingo Bancolita, Gil de Guzman, and Federation of Democratic Labor Unions (FEDLU) v. National Labor Relations Commission (Second Division), Hui Kam Chang (in his capacity as General Manager of Occidental Foundry Corporation), Occidental Foundry Corporation, et al., G.R. No. 100898, July 05, 1993, Supreme Court Third Division, Melo, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners were long–service, regular piece-rate employees of Occidental Foundry Corporation (OFC) in Malanday, Valenzuela, earning about P110–P140 per day and having about ten years' tenure when they were dismissed in 1989. On January 5, 1989 OFC and the local union, Samahang Manggagawa ng Occidental Foundry Corporation-FFW (SAMAHAN), executed a three‑year collective bargaining agreement (CBA) containing a union‑security/closed‑shop clause requiring permanent and regular factory workers to maintain membership “in good standing” as a condition of continued employment and authorizing dismissal upon the union’s written request accompanied by a verified board resolution.
A series of intra‑union events preceded the dismissals: petitioners had, earlier in 1989, sought to expel certain SAMAHAN officers and later held a special election (May 6 complaint withdrawn; special election on September 10, 1989), episodes that produced factionalism. On September 11, 1989, SAMAHAN officers led by Genaro Capitle adopted a resolution expelling petitioners from the union; the next day Capitle sent OFC a letter invoking Article II, Section 3 of the CBA and requested that OFC dismiss the listed employees, attaching a verified board resolution. OFC implemented the dismissals without conducting its own inquiry into the alleged loss of union good‑standing and without affording petitioners an opportunity to be heard.
After dismissal, petitioners sought representation from FEDLU and, through it, filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and unfair labor practice before the NLRC. The Labor Arbiter (decision dated April 5, 1990) dismissed the complaint, reasoning that OFC merely complied with the CBA and that the company was not required to inquire into the union’s internal determination. The Second Division of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the labor arbiter in a decision dated June 20, 1991 and denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration (NLRC NCR Case No. 00-10-04855-89).
Petitioners filed the present petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court seeking annulment of the NLRC decis...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the NLRC gravely abuse its discretion in affirming the labor arbiter’s dismissal of petitioners’ complaint by upholding OFC’s summary implementation of the CBA expulsion notice without an inquiry, in violation of procedural due process?
- If the dismissals were procedurally defective and therefore illegal, are petitioners entitled to reinstatement with full back wages and other benefits under Article 279 of the Labor Code as amended by ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)