G.R. No. L-29966 - Herald Delivery Carriers Union vs. Herald Publication, Inc.

Petitioners: Herald Delivery Carriers Union and Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions, representing delivery and carrier workers.
Respondent: Herald Publications, Inc.

The petitioner union submitted written bargaining proposals on behalf of 90 delivery and carrier workers.
The proposals pertained to mandatory issues under collective bargaining, including wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment.
Respondent Herald Publications took actions unilaterally without notifying or negotiating with the union.
The employer responded by asserting that the carriers were independent contractors, thereby questioning their right to bargain collectively.

The respondent contracted with 12 independent contractors to perform work previously done by its delivery and carrier employees.
This action led to the separation or layoff of 33 employees, undermining the union’s bargaining position.
The employer’s unilateral decision was taken in the context of adopting a new work distribution system, allegedly for the sake of “economy, efficiency, and simplicity.”

The employer did not submit any timely answer or counterproposal within the statutory period of ten (10) days as required by Section 14(a) of Republic Act No. 875.
During subsequent negotiations, there was an evident reliance on a tacit agreement between the employer and the union to postpone discussions regarding the carriers’ employee status.
Both parties eventually did not meet “across the table” for meaningful dialogue; negotiations were deferred, in part because similar panels were involved in discussions with a sister union representing other employees.

Petitioners alleged that the respondent’s failure to engage in collective bargaining in good faith constituted an unfair labor practice.
The separation of employees was seen as a consequence of the respondent’s evasion of its statutory and constitutional duties, resulting in a denial of the protections guaranteed to labor.

Did Herald Publications, Inc. breach its statutory duty to bargain collectively and in good faith as required by the Industrial Peace Act and RA No. 875?
Was the failure to respond within the prescribed ten-day period a violation of such duty?
Does labeling workers as “independent contractors” serve as an acceptable basis for avoiding the obligation to bargain on mandatory issues?

Does the implementation of a new method of distribution—contracting out work to independent contractors—constitute an unfair labor practice?
To what extent does the unilateral action, which led to the termination or layoff of employees, breach the principles of mutual consultation and good faith negotiation?
Should the separation of employees, caused by changes in the distribution system without proper union consultation, entitle them to reinstatement or recovery of back wages?