G.R. No. L-50283-84 - Villar vs. Inciong

Petitioners Dolores Villar, Romeo Pequinto, Dionisio Ramos, Benigno Mamaraldo, Orlando Acosta, Recitacion Bernus, Anselma Andan, Rolando de Guzman and Rita Llagas were members of the Amigo Employees Union–PAFLU, the certified bargaining agent of Amigo Manufacturing, Inc. (“Company”).
The existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the Company and the Amigo Employees Union–PAFLU was due to expire February 28, 1977, and contained a closed-shop union security clause.

On January 5, 1977 the Federation of Unions of Rizal (FUR), on written authority of at least 30% of the employees (including petitioners), filed a petition for certification election with Regional Office No. 4, which PAFLU opposed as an inter-federation dispute under TUCP’s Code of Ethics. The petition was endorsed to TUCP but withdrawn when petitioners disauthorized FUR.
On February 7, 1977 the same employees adopted a “Sama-Samang Kapasiyahan” to:

Disaffiliate from PAFLU and revoke PAFLU’s authority to represent them in CBA negotiations.
Withdraw FUR’s authority for certification election.
Declare the Amigo Employees Union independent under Article 240 of the Labor Code.
Authorize Dolores Villar to file a petition for certification election in their name.

On February 9, 1977 Villar filed a petition for certification election as representative of an “independent” Amigo Employees Union. PAFLU-Amigo Employees Union intervened, moved to dismiss for lack of 30% support and other defects, and the Med-Arbiter dismissed it.
On February 14, 1977 PAFLU-Amigo Employees Union’s general membership approved a resolution directing investigation for disloyalty. PAFLU’s National President formed a Trial Committee, and on March 15, 1977 found petitioners guilty and ordered their expulsion and requested the Company to terminate them under the security clause of the existing CBA.
Also on February 15, 1977 the Company and PAFLU-Amigo Employees Union executed a new CBA, reproducing the same union security clause as in the expiring CBA.

On April 25 and 28, 1977 PAFLU formally requested the Company to terminate petitioners per the security clause and place them under preventive suspension. The Company applied for clearance to terminate (R04-Case No. T-IV-3549-T) and suspended petitioners pending resolution.
On April 25, 1977 petitioners filed a complaint with application for preliminary injunction to restrain dismissal and to set aside PAFLU’s decisions (R04-Case No. RD-4-4088-77-T).
On October 14, 1977 the OIC of Regional Office No. 4 granted the Company’s clearance to terminate petitioners and dismissed their application for preliminary injunction.
On February 15, 1979 Deputy Minister Amado G. Inciong affirmed the Regional Office decision.

Whether affirming preventive suspension and dismissal for exercise of freedom of association violated constitutional and statutory law.
Whether PAFLU’s constitution could supersede the local union’s constitution for intra-union disputes.
Whether the security clause of the new CBA could be applied to offenses committed before its conclusion and within the 60-day freedom period.