Title
Mamerto vs. Inciong
Case
G.R. No. L-53060
Decision Date
Nov 15, 1982
Twenty-eight petitioners, including regular employees, apprentices, and domestic helpers, were dismissed for valid causes like illegal strikes, AWOL, and rule violations. Courts upheld dismissal, citing due process and lack of unfair labor practice.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-53060)

Summary of the Case

The case involves a petition for certiorari seeking to annul orders issued by Francisco L. Estrella that dismissed the complaint of the petitioners against Lucky Garments Manufacturing Company for illegal dismissal linked to union activities. The petitioners contended that these orders were issued with grave abuse of discretion.

Procedural Background

The initial complaint was dismissed on May 18, 1979. Estrella’s order outlined various dismissals, explaining that some complainants had abandoned their posts without notice or participation in an illegal sit-down strike. Additionally, it indicated that certain complainants were not employees but household workers. The order also detailed how the complainants failed to submit position papers as required.

Appeal and Affirmation

Upon appeal, the Deputy Minister Amado G. Inciong affirmed Estrella's order, highlighting the context of unlawful strike activities by complainants and their failure to meet the employer’s expectations. The affirmation emphasized that complainants were given ample opportunity to present their case but failed to do so.

Petitioners' Allegations

Petitioners alleged denial of due process on the grounds that they were not required to submit position papers during the proceedings. They claimed that their requests for compulsory arbitration were unjustly denied. However, the public respondents contended that the petitioners did not submit the necessary documentation to support their claims, thereby forfeiting their argumentative ground.

Legal Analysis

The Court found that the process afforded to petitioners did not contravene their right to due process. The requirement to submit position papers was clearly established, and the petitioners’ inaction was detrimental to their case. The ruling underscored that the nature of the disputes revolved around the legality of the dismissals, which was a straightforward factual determination supported by substantial

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.