LABOR RELATIONS

(SYLLABUS)

I.

Policy and Definitions (Arts. 211-212)

-Nature of Labor Relations
a. article 19 of the Civil Code
-Workers Participation
-Labor Education

II.

Labor justice system

a. National Labor Relations Commission:
-composition / powers of the commission
Adjudicatory power
Prime Security Services vs. Secretary of Labor, July 17, 1995
-2011 NLRC Rules and Procedure
-Technical rules or procedures are not strictly observed
Eastern shipping lines vs. POEA, August 16, 1991
Radio com vs. vs. NLRC, GR 101181-84, august 16, 1991
Shoemart vs. NLRC, August 13, 1993
Cadalin vs. POEA, GR 104776
Juco vs. NLRC, August 18, 1997
Lapanday vs. CA, January 31, 2000
Tolosa vs. NLRC, April 10, 2003
PNB vs. Cabansag, June 21, 2005
Smart vs. astorga, January 28, 2008
b. Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters
-Powers and duties
1. Labor Arbiters- NLRC (arts. 213-222; New Rules of Procedure of the
NLRC)
Fortune cement vs. NLRC, January 24, 1991
Cayena vs. NLRC, February 18, 1991
Boys scout vs. NLRC, April 22, 1991
Victorias Milling co. vs. NLRC, August 2, 1991
2. Secretary of Labor (assumption and return-to-work order)
PAL vs. sec. of labor, January 23, 1991/March 10, 1994
Nestle INC vs. NLRC, February 4, 1991
Sarmiento vs. tuico, GR 75271-73, June 27, 1988
UPE vs. Nestle, GR 88710-13, December 19, 1990
Telefunken vs. Sec. of labor, GR 122743, December 12, 1997
St. scholasticas college vs. ruben torres, GR 100158, june 2, 1992
Meralco vs. sec. of labor, GR 127598, January 27, 1999
Manila vs. CA, December 16, 2004

 Immaculate concepcion vs. sec. of labor, January 14, 2005

3. Injunctions and appeals- Arts. 218 (e), 264, LC
PAL vs. NLRC, Pineda, GR 120567, March 20, 1998
C. Bureau of Labor Relations
Barles vs. bitonio, june 6, 1999
Bautista vs. CA, February 28, 2005
NATIONAL CONCILIATION AND MEDIATION BOARD: EO 251
(creating the NCMB)
D. Single Entry Approach Rule, (SENA Rule)
III.

LABOR ORGANIZATION
Registration and Cancellation of Labor orgs:
San Miguel foods vs. Laguesma, October 10, 1996
SMC supervisors vs. Laguesma, August 15, 1997
Jacinto vs. CA, November 14, 1997
Furusawa vs. secretary of labor, December 10, 1997
United pepsi cola vs. Laguesma, March 25, 1998
ABS-CBN vs. ABS-CBN broadcasting corp., March 11, 1999
Abbott laboratories vs. abbott laboratories union, January 26, 2000
Philippine Skylanders vs. NLRC, January 31, 2002
DEPARTMENT ORDER 40-03 and 40-B-03
-grounds for cancellation of labor organizations

IV.

Rights of Legitimate Labor Organization (ARTS. 242-242a)

V.

Workers Right to Self-Organization

Constitutional basis: Sec. VIII, Art. III; Sec. 3, Art. XIII
Statutory basis: Arts. 243-246, Labor Code
Administrative Regulation: Rule 2 to rule 5, DO 40-03
Purpose:
BSP vs. Araos, GR. L-10091, January 29, 1958
PAFLU vs. Sec. of Labor, 16 SCRA 687
Royal Introcean Lines vs. CIR, L-11745, October 31, 1960
UST Faculty vs. Bitonio, GR 131235, November 16, 1999
Dela Salle vs. Laguesma, August 12, 1998

Paper Industries vs. Laguesma, april 12, 2000

Cainta Catholic School vs. Cainta Catholic School Employees, may 4, 2006

Rights not to join:

Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope workers union, GR L-25246, September 12,
1974
Abo vs. philame employees and workers union, 13 SCRA 120
DLSU vs. DLSUEA, GR 109002, april 12, 2000
BPI vs. BPI Employees Union GR 164301, august 10, 2010
Rights and Duties: Art. 242
Rights of members: Art. 241
Regulation: Art. 234-240, Art. 249
Appropriate Bargaining Unit: Rule 1, Sec. 1, (d), DO 40-03
Globe Doctrine:
Mech. Dept. vs. CIR, 24 SCRA 925
Belyca vs. Ferrer, GR 77395, November 29, 1988
Toyota vs. Toyota motors labor union, GR 121084, February 19, 1997
Certification Elections: Arts. 256-259, Rule VI to Rule X, DO40-03; Belyca supra
UST Faculty vs. Bitonio, GR 131235, November 16, 1999
VI.

Terms and Conditions of Work:

Right to Collective Bargaining
Pambusco vs. Pambusco employees Union, GR L-46739, September 29, 1939
San Miguel vs. Confesor, September 19, 1996
Republic Planters Bank vs, Laguesma, November 21, 1996
Samahan ng mga Manggagawa vs. Laguesma, January 31, 1997
SMC vs. Laguesma, August 15, 1997
Duty to Bargain: (Art. 251-253)
Kiok Loy vs. NLRC, GR L-54334,, January 22, 1986
Colegio de San Juan de Letran vs. Assn. of Employees, September 18, 2000
Negros vs. Sec. of DOLE, May 9, 2001
Surface Bargaining:
Standard chartered vs. Confesor, GR 114974, june 16, 2004
Gen. Milling vs. CA GR 146728, February 11, 2004

Disclosure of Information: Rule XVI, Sec. 2, DO 40-03

PROCEDURE: Art. 250, LC
Single Enterprise: RULE XVI, Sec. 3 and 4, DO 40-03
Multi-employer: RULE XVI, Sec. 5 and 6, DO 40-03
EFFECTS OF CBA:
-CBA is the new law between parties:
Kimberly Clark vs. Loredo, 226 SCRA 639 (1993)
Plastic Town Center vs. NLRC, 172 SCRA 580 (1989)
Rivera vs. Espiritu, January 23, 2003
Phil. Diamond Hotel vs. Manila Diamond Hotel, June 30, 2006
Inguillo vs. First Phil. Scales, June 5, 2009
Contract Bar Rule: Art. 232, LC, Art. 253
Associated Labor Union vs. Calleja, GR 85085, November 6, 1989
CCLU v. NLRC, GR 38955-56, October 31, 1974
FDTU vs. Pambansang Kilusan, GR 74228, December 14, 1987
Change in agent (subsidiary doctrine)
Benguet consolidated vs. BCI Employees, GR L-24711, April 30, 1968
Filipinas Port Services vs. NLRC, GR 97237, August 16, 1991
Registration: RULE XVII and XVIII, DO 40-03

VII.

Worker participation in management

Art. 255, Labor Code; Rule XXI, Book V, IRR; Art.277(h)

VIII. Grievance and Voluntary Arbitration

1. Grievance Machinery: Art. 260, LC
2. Voluntary Arbitration: Art. 261 to 262(b)
Oceanic Bic vs. Romero, GR L-43890, july 16, 1984
Mantrade vs. bacungan, GR L-48437, September 30, 1986
Bluebar vs. Minister, GR 54427, june 6, 1989
Luzon Devt Bank vs. Assn of Luzon Devt Bank Employees, October 6,
1995
San Jose vs. NLRC, August 17, 1998
Vivero vs. NLRC, October 24, 2000

IX.

Union vs. Nestle, October 17, 2002

Navarro vs. Damasco, July 4, 1995

Strikes and Concerted Actions:

Policy: Art. 263 (a), Labor Code
Great pacific vs. great pacific Life Assurance Corp. , February 11, 1999
MSF Tire vs. CA, August 5, 1999
Samahan ng mga Manggagawa vs. NLRC, February 1, 2000
San juan de Dios vs. San juan de Dios, may 28, 2004
Pinero vs. NLRC, August 20, 2004
University of Immaculate Concepcion vs. Sec. of Labor, January 14, 2005
Capitol Medical Center vs. NLRC, April 26, 2005
Biflex vs. Filflex, December 19, 2006
Definition:
Lockout- Art. 212 (m);
Strike-Art. 212 (o)
Labor or industrial dispute- Art. 212 (1)
Concrete Aggregates vs. NLRC, GR 105090, September 16, 1993
Telefunken vs. CA, Dec. 18, 2000
Forms:
Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa vs. NLRC, GR 91980, june 27, 1991
Strikes by installments:
PTWU vs. Confesor, GR 117169, march 12, 1997
Picketing:
Sta. rosa Coca Cola Plant Employee Union vs. CCBPI, GR 164302-03, January
24, 2007
As part of freedom of speech:
Phil. Blooming Mills Employees Org. vs. PBM, 51 SCRA 207
Passionate language, not libelous:
PCI Bank vs. Philna Bank, GR L-29630, july 2, 1981
GROUNDS:
ECONOMIC STRIKES:
Master Iron v. NLRC, GR 92009, February 17, 1993
IMPROVED OFFER BALLOTING:
-Art. 265, Labor Code

X.

UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE

Concepts of ULP:
Wise and Co. vs. Republic Savings, 221 SCRA 226, October 13, 1989
Shoemart vs. NLRC, August 13, 1993
Samahan ng mga Manggagawa vs. NLRC, july 17, 1997
De Leon vs. NLRC, May 30, 2001
GR 156292, January 11, 2005
St. john Colleges vs. St. John academy, October 27, 2006
ULP Strikes:
Peoples Industrial vs. Peoples industrial corp., 112 SCRA 442
Unfair Labor Practices: Arts. 247-249, LC
Limitations provided by law:
Procedure
Periods: art. 263 (b)
Cooling off period: Art. 263 (e)
Strike vote: Art. 263 (f)
Effect of failure to comply:
Lapanday vs. NLRC, GR 95494, Sept 7, 1995
Prohibited activities: art. 264, art. 266
Sporadic Violence:
Shell oil workers v. shell, GR L-28607, may 31, 1971
Pervasive Violence:
Gold City vs. NLRC, GR 103560, july 6, 1995
Great pacific life employees union vs. great pacific life, GR 126717, February
11, 1999
Liability of Officers:
De ocampo vs. NLRC, GR 81077, june 6, 1990
Ordinary members: good faith is a defense:
Ferrer vs. CIR, GR 2446267-68, may 31, 1966
Civil servants:
Jacinto v. CA, GR 124540, November 14, 1997
Bangalisan vs. CA, GR 124678, july 31, 1997
Innocent bystander rule:
Republic flour mills vs. reyes, GR L-21378, November 28, 1966
Liwayway publications vs. permanent concrete, GR L-25003, October 23,
1981

XI.

Kinds of Employment, (art. 280, LC)

Contracts of employment: Art. 1700, new Civil Code
Ambiguity:
Servidad vs. NLRC, GR 128682, march 18, 1999
Perpetual help cooperative vs. faburada, October 8, 2001
Benares vs. pancho, april 29, 2005
Brent vs. Zamora, February 5, 1990
Innodata vs. quejada-lopez, October 12, 2006
Probationary period: (Art. 281, LC)
Extension: Mariwasa v. leogardo, 169 SCRA 465
Kinds of employees:
Bulletin vs. Sanchez, GR 74425, October 7, 1986
Philacor vs. laguesma, GR 105223, September 27, 1993
United pepsi cola vs. laguesma, GR 1222256, march 25, 1998
Flexible work arrangements: Department order no. 10, series of 1997;
department order no. 18-a, December 5, 2011
Brahm industries vs. NLRC, GR 118853, October 16, 1997
Vinoya vs. NLRC, GR 126586, February 2, 2000

XII.

Termination of employment
1. Suspension of operations or closure, retrenchments, layoffs
35 SCRA 147
Caltex vs. NLRC, October 15, 2007
MacAdams vs. MacAdams, October 24, 2003
Alabang country club vs. NLRC, August 9, 2005
2. Disease/illness
Labasano vs. So Han Shui, 41 SCRA 81 (1971)
Rule: Gentex vs. NLRC, GR 102969, april 4, 1995
Certification: TEISI vs. NLRC, GR 129584, December 3, 1998
Servillana vs. Meddah, april 16, 2001
ATCI vs. CA, August 9, 2001
Manly vs. Payong, October 25, 2005
3. Discipline and dismissal: Art. 282, LC
Manila trading and supply co., vs. zulueta, 69 phils 485
PLDT vs. NLRC, 164 SCRA 671, (1988)
Not covered by company rules:
Stanford microsystems vs. NLRC, GR L-74187, January 28, 1988
Use of Drugs: R.A. 9165
Roquero vs. PAL, GR 152329, april 22, 2003

4. Other cases for termination of employment:

Yabut vs. meralco, GR 190436
Concepcion vs. minex phil. GR 153569, January 24, 2012
Magis young achievers learning center vs. adelaida manalo, GR
178835, February 13, 2009
Mercado vs. AMA, GR 183572, april 13, 2010
UE vs. A. Bueno, GR 193897, January 23, 2013
GR 147208, January 25, 2012
Canadian opportunities vs. dalangin, GR 172223, February 6, 2012
Wuerth vs. Ynson, GR 175932, February 15, 2012
Blue sky trading vs. Blas, GR 190559, march 7, 2012
Realda vs. new age graphics, GR 192190, april 25, 2012
Ever electrical vs. samahan ng mga manggagawa, GR 194795, june
13, 2012
Villanueva vs. NLRC, GR 176893, june 13, 2012
5. Due process requirement: Two notice rule
Wenphil vs. NLRC, GR 80587, February
Serrano vs. NLRC
Agabon vs. NLRC, GR 158693, November 17, 2004
JAKA foods vs. NLRC, 2005 (authorized cases)
Consequences of Illegal Dismissal
a. Reinstatement
-actual
-payroll
b. Separation pay in lieu of reinstatement
c. backwages
d. damages
-moral
- exemplary
Reinstatement from service
-art. 287, LC, R 7641
XIII. Penalties: Liability of offenders
-art. 288-289, LC
XIV.

Prescription of offenses and claims

-Art. 290-292, LC