Case Digest (G.R. No. 203806)
Facts:
In National Union of Workers in the Hotel Restaurant and Allied Industries (NUWHRAIN-APL-IUF) Dusit Hotel Nikko Chapter v. Court of Appeals and NLRC, the Union, certified bargaining agent of rank-and-file employees of Dusit Hotel Nikko in Makati City, submitted its collective bargaining proposals on October 24, 2000. After conciliation failed, it filed a strike notice on December 20, 2001 (bargaining deadlock) and conducted a strike vote on January 14, 2002. On January 18, 2002, more than 200 male employees reported to work with closely cropped or shaved heads in deliberate violation of the Hotel’s Grooming Standards and were denied entry, prompting a picket that disrupted operations in three restaurants. On January 20, the Hotel preventively suspended and charged Union members; on January 26, it dismissed 29 Union officers and 61 members and suspended over 130 others, whereupon the Union declared a strike and picketed, obstructing ingress and egress. The Union filed successiveCase Digest (G.R. No. 203806)
Facts:
- Parties and Nature of Dispute
- Petitioner: National Union of Workers in the Hotel Restaurant and Allied Industries (NUWHRAIN) – Dusit Hotel Nikko Chapter, certified bargaining agent of rank-and-file employees of Dusit Hotel Nikko (Philippine Hoteliers, Inc.).
- Respondents: Philippine Hoteliers, Inc. (owner/operator), General Manager Chiyuki Fujimoto, Director of HR Esperanza V. Alvez, NLRC, CA, and Secretary of Labor and Employment.
- Chronology of Events
- CBA Negotiations and Deadlock
- October 24, 2000: Union submits CBA proposals.
- Dec. 20, 2001: Union files Notice of Strike (bargaining deadlock) with NCMB.
- Jan. 14, 2002: Strike vote held; majority favors strike.
- Hair-Style Protest and Initial Picket
- Jan. 17–18, 2002: Union members shave/crop hair in protest of bargaining deadlock; Hotel enforces Grooming Standards, denies entry, halts operations in three restaurants.
- Jan. 18–20, 2002: Union pickets; Hotel issues preventive suspensions and dismissal notices for alleged unfair labor practices, illegal picket/strike, grooming violations.
- Further Strike Notices and Assumption of Jurisdiction
- Jan. 20, 2002: Union files second Notice of Strike (ULP/lockout).
- Jan. 26, 2002: Hotel terminates 29 officers, 61 members; suspends others; Union declares strike and pickets, allegedly blocking ingress/egress.
- Jan. 31, 2002: Union files third Notice of Strike (ULP/union busting); Secretary of Labor assumes jurisdiction, consolidates notices, certifies dispute to NLRC for compulsory arbitration; directs “payroll reinstatement” option.
- Mar. 15, 2002: Secretary denies Union’s motion for reconsideration.
- NLRC and CA Proceedings
- Oct. 9, 2002: NLRC orders CBA execution within 30 days; declares Jan. 18 protest an illegal strike; upholds dismissal of 29 officers, 61 members; grants financial assistance to members.
- Feb. 7, 2003: NLRC denies Union’s motion for reconsideration.
- Jan. 19, 2004 & June 1, 2004: CA in G.R. No. 163942 affirms NLRC.
- May 6 & Nov. 25, 2004: CA in G.R. No. 166295 dismisses Union’s petition challenging Secretary’s orders.
- Present Petitions
- G.R. No. 163942: Review of CA’s affirmation of NLRC decision on illegality of strike, dismissals, suspensions, alleged lockout.
- G.R. No. 166295: Certiorari vs. CA’s dismissal contesting Secretary’s “payroll reinstatement” option.
Issues:
- G.R. No. 163942
- Whether the Union’s Jan. 18 and Jan. 26, 2002 concerted actions constitute an illegal strike despite the Hotel’s enforcement of grooming standards.
- Whether the dismissal of 29 officers and suspension of over 200 members is valid based on respondents’ affidavits.
- Whether the Hotel’s prevention of entry amounted to an illegal lockout.
- G.R. No. 166295
- Whether the Secretary of Labor has discretion, under Art. 263(g) of the Labor Code, to impose “payroll reinstatement” instead of actual reinstatement when assuming jurisdiction over labor disputes.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)