Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
issue
WON CIR gravely abused its discretion by declaring the strike as illegal. NO, strike was declared illegal and unjustified by the Supreme Court.
ratio
The Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts findings that the USUPs Notice of Strike was but a direct offshoot of the losing effort to compel the DSA and the ship owners to recognize USUP as the sole collective bargaining agent of the employees, to the exclusion of the DMA as the existing collective bargaining agent of the DSA. First, the Court noted that the USUP filed its Notice of Strike even before i ts receipt of the ship owners answers to its set of demands, thereby showing that the USUP was already set on continuing the strike with or without the answer of the ship owners. This, according to the Court was a clear showing that USUP was aware of the existence of DMA as a valid collective bargaining agent, operating as a legal bar to entertaining USUPs demands. Second, the Court stated that USUP completely disturbed the status quo the return to normal and original operating practices through the strike that was done by USUP. By striking, USUP impaired existing CBA between the ship owners and the DMA which recognized "the right of the Employer to hire, promote and transfer and for legal cause suspend, layoff or discharge employees subject to the right of the union (referring to the DMA) to notification and to ask reconsideration of any action of the Employer in the premises."
It could not also be said that the DSA violated the covenant of August 20, 1959, as it was stated that the DSA was not a party thereto. Even assuming that the shipping companies were bound by the covenant, the termination of the employees was not considered to be a violation of the covenant, as the dismissals were predicated on legitimate reasons. Third, the existence of the CBA should have deterred USUP from acts tending to force its recognition as a union. The employees concerned were bound by the CBA between DMA and the ship owners, but instead of going through the procedure as stated in their CBA for grievance machinery. Fourth, it was stated by the Court that, even granting that the purpose of the strike was valid, the fact still remained that the means employed by the employees on strike were far from legitimate, as shown by the fact that the USUP used acts of violence and coercion. IMPORTANT TO THE DISCUSSION: A labor organization is wholesome if it serves its legitimate purpose of promoting the interests of labor without unnecessary labor disputes. That is why it is given personality and recognition in concluding collective bargaining agreements. But if it is made use of as a subterfuge, or as a means to subvert valid commitments, it defeats its own purpose, for it tends to undermine the harmonious relations between management and labor. The situation does not deserve any approving sanction from the Court.