G.R. No. 206795 - Foodbev International vs. Ferrer

Petitioner Foodbev International (Foodbev) is a partnership in the food service industry specializing in after-sales support for specialized equipment like hot and cold dispensers and displays. It employs skilled technicians for installation and maintenance.
Respondents are rank-and-file employees of Foodbev and members of the union Samahan ng Nagkakaisang Manggagawa ng Foodbev International Central (Samahan), established May 31, 2008. Respondents include union officers and regular members.
Respondent Bernadette Belardo is a managerial employee and spouse of respondent Jever Belardo, a union member. She filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, later consolidated with the labor complaints of union members.

From July 3 to 9, 2008, meetings took place between union members, Foodbev management, and Foodbev president Lucila Dela Cruz. Lucila questioned the union’s formation and threatened to close Foodbev if union activities continued.
Union members were publicly made to stand before other workers during a company meeting. Management, including Quality Assurance Manager Malou Espeña, recounted a negative experience with union presence in a previous company.
Management urged union members to resign voluntarily in exchange for minimal compensation (one month’s salary, proportional 13th month pay, rice and canned corned beef), but no separation pay. Those refusing were asked to submit apology letters for unionizing.
Most union members did not resign; Foodbev subjected them to a difficult written exam that was initially given only to union members. Upon complaint, non-union employees were also made to take the exam. Those failing were accused of violating company disciplinary rules for “slowing down work.”

A cockroach infestation was discovered in an ice cream machine installed by five technicians (including Ferrer, Aquino, Trapago, and Pario). Foodbev issued memoranda requiring explanations and later terminated these technicians for gross negligence damaging company reputation.
Multiple memoranda were issued to union members about absences and transfers, some related to their filing of unfair labor practice complaints with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).
Some union technicians were verbally and physically confronted by Foodbev’s management and family members, including insults and orders to leave, indicating an intent to dismiss them without due process.
Bernadette Belardo was found dismissed after management’s hostile confrontation and handling of her personal belongings, despite no official notice or hearing.

Respondents filed consolidated labor complaints for illegal dismissal, unfair labor practice, non-payment of benefits, and damages.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the consolidated complaints due to petitioners’ violation of the rule against forum shopping (filing multiple overlapping cases), resulting in apparent bad faith and trampling of procedural rules.
NLRC affirmed the dismissal but ruled in favor of Pimentel, one of the ice cream machine technicians, who was found illegally dismissed without valid or just cause. The rest of the complaints were dismissed. Bernadette’s complaint was dismissed for failing to prove illegal dismissal.
Respondents filed motions for reconsideration, which the NLRC denied.

The CA partly granted respondents’ petition, affirming that forum shopping was committed but set aside dismissal on technical grounds to examine substantive issues.
The CA found Foodbev guilty of unfair labor practice based on evidence of union-busting acts: threats to close company, requirement of resignation, discriminatory exams, transfer of union president and members, and verbal dismissal without due process.
On illegal dismissal claims, the CA ruled that Bernadette was dismissed illegally without notice and hearing; the ice cream machine technicians (except Pimentel) were unlawfully dismissed without substantial evidence; and other respondents’ dismissals and transfers were invalid.
The CA reversed the dismissal of complaints and ordered reinstatement or payment of separation benefits, awarding moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees to respondents.

Respondents maintained allegations of union-busting and illegal dismissal supported by detailed factual accounts and evidences including verbal threats, discriminatory policies, transfers to isolate union leaders, and unfair terminations.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in refusing to dismiss the complaints due to forum shopping.
Whether the dismissal of the ice cream machine technicians for gross negligence, habitual absences, and other infractions was lawful.
Whether Foodbev committed unfair labor practices by interfering with union activities and discriminating against union members.
Whether the verbal dismissal of respondents, including managerial employee Bernadette Belardo, violated security of tenure and due process requirements.
Whether the award of damages and attorney’s fees to respondents was proper.