Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

G.R. No.

L-25943 January 30, 1971 FACTS:


May 16, 1965: Union declared a strike against the company.
MANILA CORDAGE COMPANY, petitioner, October 14, 1965: An agreement was signed by Carter (President of the
vs. Company) and people headed by Tabuyan claiming to be the president,
THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND MANILA CORDAGE vice-president, secretary, treasurer, auditor and directors of the Union.
WORKERS UNION-PAFLU, respondents.
Agreement comprise of the Union calling of the picketing and
QUICK FACTS: Basically the union went on strike but the strike was terminating the strike with company accepting all employees back
terminated when the company agreed to take them all back except those except for those with criminal and other cases pending.
with cases pending. The ones who negotiated with the company is the 200 employees/union members represented by Atty. Israel Bocobo
Tabuyan group, the Bocobo group was contesting the agreement stating are contesting the return-to-work agreement. (BOCOBO GROUP)
that the Tabuyan group had no authority to do so. Anyway, I think the o It wasnt clear on the case but I think the Bocobo group
Bocobo group continued their strike because their 200 members were not continued to be on strike because they werent accepted
admitted back (they probably have cases pending), so the President back (they probably have cases pending)
certified the case. The company and the Tabuyan group is saying that there o A presidential certification was issued, and the CIR
is no need for a certification because there is no labor dispute. assumed jurisdiction over this case.

The court held that a compulsory arbitration may be certified by the The company requested the President in a letter to withdraw or recall the
President as long as, in his opinion, a "labor dispute," exists in an industry certification, which was favourable indorsed by the SOLE; but no action
indispensable to the national interest, whether a strike therein be was taken.
impending, going on or already terminated without a final settlement of
the dispute. December 23, 1965: A new CBA was signed with Espano signing
additionally as EVP for the union but none of the directors were included
Although there was already a signed agreement between the Company in this later agreement.
and the Tabuyan Group/ Union there is still a labor dispute in the opinion
of the President that would require compulsory arbitration. (*The dispute In two successive motions, the company sought again to take the case out
is re the BOCOBO group) of the court by asking for either the dismissal or suspension of the
proceedings upon the grounds that: The presidential certification is not
SYLLABUS DOCTRINE: valid and conclusive. There is doubt as to the propriety of the presidential
Purpose of a presidential certification is to bring about soonest, thru certification and/or the exercise by this Court of compulsory arbitration
arbitration by the industrial court, a fair and just solution of the because there is no labor dispute and the business is not indispensable to
differences between an employer and his workers regarding the the national interest.
terms and conditions of work in the industry concerned which in the
opinion of the President involves the national interest, so that the November 15, 1965, the TABUYAN GROUP filed a manifestation to the
damage such employer-worker dispute might cause upon the national effect that there is no labor dispute, the strike has been officially
interest may be minimized as much as possible, if not totally averted by terminated and the members were instructed to stop picketing
avoiding the stoppage of work as a result of a strike or lockout or any TABUYAN GROUP
lagging of the activities of the industry or the possibility of these Before the issuance of the presidential certification, there had
contingencies which might cause detriment to such national interest. been a return to work agreement. The implication therefore is that
they were not on strike at the time of the presidential certification.
Obviously therefore they have nothing to do with the strikers and strike. Likewise the Court notes that were it not for the matter of the
the strike is certified by the President. reinstatement of the workers criminally charged, there would have
They submitted to court the purported "agreement," a document been complete accord between the parties as to the return to work of
showing the list of their "members" and a certification by the the other striking workers. For this reason, in order that the issues
company that several of these workers had returned to work. raised in those two cases be not prejudiced by the exercise of jurisdiction
in the instant case, the strikers who have been charged with criminal
BOCOBO GROUP: The TABUYAN GROUP is a spurious group headed by offenses in the conduct of the strike should not, in the meanwhile,
'strike-breakers" and that it does not recognize the agreement. It reserved return to work.
the right to contest of the claims of Tabuyan.
The strikers represented by Atty. Israel Bocobo are hereby directed to lift
COMPANY: If there was such a return-to-work agreement then there was their picket lines and return to work except the 33 strikers who have been
no strike at all that could be certified to the court by the President of the charged criminally and who should not return to work as yet. Company is
Philippines. hereby directed to accept back to work the strikers whose names appear
in the payroll of the company immediately preceding the strike, except
BOCOBO GROUP: The company claiming that since there is no more those criminally charged.
strike, has used this spurious agreement to sow confusion and
demoralization among the strikers by announcing that those who would ISSUE: W/N the presidential certification is proper even with the
not follow the return to work provided in the agreement are subject to existence of a return-to-work agreement? YES
dismissal.
RATIO:
COMPANY: On November 6, 1965, they filed a motion to suspend As far as this Court is concerned, there can be no argument against the
proceedings and a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction under the validity and efficacy of the presidential certification here in issue. This
heading "Motion to Dismiss and to Suspend Proceedings." They question Court is not constitutionally permitted to inquire into, in exactly the same
the wisdom and propriety of the presidential certification manner that the Executive cannot refuse to accord respect and sanction to
a decision of this Court merely for the reason that in his opinion the same
CIR: is without sufficient factual or legal basis.
Manila Cordage has entered into a return-to-work agreement with the
Union, and has admitted back to work the striking employees who were A compulsory arbitration may be certified by the President as long
represented by the signatories on behalf of the union. Such an agreement as, in his opinion, a "labor dispute," exists in an industry
does not bar a presidential certification of the dispute inasmuch as indispensable to the national interest, whether a strike therein be
"the relations between capital and labor are not merely contractual. They impending, going on or already terminated without a final settlement
are so impressed with public interest that labor contracts must yield to of the dispute.
the common good ..." In virtue of said certification it will be discriminatory
under the circumstances for the company not to readmit the other strikers Although there was already a signed agreement there is still a labor
not so represented. There is therefore no harm if a return to work of the dispute in the opinion of the President that would require
striking members is effected. compulsory arbitration.
If contrary to the allegations of Atty. Bocobo, the TABUYAN GROUP
The Court is aware of the pendency of Cases Nos. 175-INJ and 4325-ULP, were the legitimate officers they represented themselves to be, it
involving the same parties and, among others, the issue of illegality of would be quite clear that the industrial court should have declared
strike arising from the means employed during the picketing. Some itself without further basis or authority to continue trying to
strikers were criminally charged for acts allegedly committed during the arbitrate between parties who have already settled the differences
between themselves, precisely in the manner sought to be
encouraged and protected by the Industrial Peace Act free
collective bargaining or, it should have at least, suspended the
proceedings until the decisive issue of who were the genuine and
legitimate officers of the Union had been settled by it.
If, as contended by the BOCOBO GROUP that the TABUYAN GROUP
"had no right to represent the Union and the strikers" and that the
agreement signed by them "was unauthorized, spurious, illegal
and immoral, there can be no question that the jurisdiction and
authority of the respondent court remained unaffected by the said
collective bargaining agreement relied upon by petitioner.

The purpose of a presidential certification is to bring about soonest, thru


arbitration by the industrial court, a fair and just solution of the differences
between an employer and his workers regarding the terms and conditions of
work in the industry concerned which in the opinion of the President
involves the national interest, so that the damage such employer-worker
dispute might cause upon the national interest may be minimized as much
as possible, if not totally averted by avoiding the stoppage of work as a
result of a strike or lockout or any lagging of the activities of the industry or
the possibility of these contingencies which might cause detriment to such
national interest. This is the foundation of that court's jurisdiction in
what may be termed as a certification case.
If the employer and the workers are able to arrive at an amicable
settlement by free and voluntary collective bargaining preferably
thru a labor union, before the court is able to use its good offices, it
is but in consonance with the objective of the Industrial Peace Act
to promote unionism and free collective bargaining that the court
should step out of the picture and declare its function in the
premises at an end, except as it may become necessary to
determine whether or not the agreement forged by the parties is
not contrary to law, morals or public policy.

RULING: Affirmed the order to return to work of all the workers except
the 33 strikers who have been charged criminally. REMANDED for further
proceedings concerning the effect of the renewal collective bargaining
agreement of December 23, 1965 upon its jurisdiction acquired by virtue
of presidential certification