labor relations part i- basic concepts

13
LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTS ST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts Difference between Labstan and Labrel Labor Standards” refers to the minimum terms and conditions of employment which employees are legally entitled to and employers must comply with. Labor Relationsrefers to the interactions between employer and employees or their representatives and the mechanism by which the standards and other terms and conditions of employment are negotiated, adjusted and enforced. What are the policy objectives of labor relations law? ART. 211. Declaration of Policy. – A. It is the policy of the State: (a) To promote and emphasize the primacy of free collective bargaining and negotiations, including voluntary arbitration, mediation and conciliation, as modes of settling labor or industrial disputes; (b) To promote free trade unionism as an instrument for the enhancement of democracy and the promotion of social justice and development; (c) To foster the free and voluntary organization of a strong and united labor movement; (d) To promote the enlightenment of workers concerning their rights and obligations as union members and as employees; (e) To provide an adequate administrative machinery for the expeditious settlement of labor or industrial disputes; (f) To ensure a stable but dynamic and just industrial peace; and (g) To ensure the participation of workers in decision and policy-making processes affecting their rights, duties and welfare. B. To encourage a truly democratic method of regulating the relations between the employers and employees by means of agreements freely entered into through collective bargaining, no court or administrative agency or official shall have the power to set or fix wages, rates of pay, hours of work or other terms and conditions of employment, except as otherwise provided under this Code. (As amended by Section 3, Republic Act No. 6715, March 21, 1989). C. RULE II Sec. 1 of the IRR: The policy of the State is to promote free and responsible exercise of the right to self-organization through the establishment of a simplified mechanism for speedy registration of a labor organization and worker’s associations, determination of representation status, and resolution of inter or intra union and other related disputes. PRESENT LABOR RELATIONS POLICY METHODS OF DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, ARTICLE 211 (a)(b) To promote and emphasize the primacy of free collective Page 1 of 13

Upload: don-sumiog

Post on 11-Jul-2016

14 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

LABOR RELATIONS PART 1 AZUCENA DIGEST

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

Labor Relations

Part I- Basic Concepts

Difference between Labstan and Labrel

“Labor Standards” refers to the minimum terms and conditions of employment which employees are legally entitled to and employers must comply with.

“Labor Relations” refers to the interactions between employer and employees or their representativesand the mechanism by which the standards and other terms and conditions of employment are negotiated, adjusted and enforced.

What are the policy objectives of labor relations law?

ART. 211. Declaration of Policy. –

A. It is the policy of the State:

(a) To promote and emphasize the primacy of free collective bargaining and negotiations, including voluntary arbitration, mediation and conciliation, as modes of settling labor or industrial disputes;

(b) To promote free trade unionism as an instrument for the enhancement of democracy and the promotion of social justice and development;

(c) To foster the free and voluntary organization of a strong and united labor movement;

(d) To promote the enlightenment of workers concerning their rights and obligations as union members and as employees;

(e) To provide an adequate administrative machinery for the expeditious settlement of labor or industrial disputes;

(f) To ensure a stable but dynamic and just industrial peace; and

(g) To ensure the participation of workers in decision and policy-making processes affecting their rights, duties and welfare.

B. To encourage a truly democratic method of regulating the relations between the employers and employees by means of agreements freely entered into through collective bargaining, no court or

administrative agency or official shall have the power to set or fix wages, rates of pay, hours of work or other terms and conditions of employment, except as otherwise provided under this Code. (As amended by Section 3, Republic Act No. 6715, March 21, 1989).

C. RULE II Sec. 1 of the IRR: The policy of the State is to promote free and responsible exercise of the right to self-organization through the establishment of a simplified mechanism for speedy registration of a labor organization and worker’s associations, determination of representation status, and resolution of inter or intra union and other related disputes.

PRESENT LABOR RELATIONS POLICY

METHODS OF DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, ARTICLE 211 (a)(b)

To promote and emphasize the primacy of free collective bargaining and negotiations, including voluntary arbitration, mediation and conciliation, as modes of settling labor or industrial disputes

To promote free trade unionism as an instrument for the enhancement of democracy and the promotion of social justice and development

RATIONALE FOR VOLUNTARY DISPUTE SETTLEMENT

Labor relations are characterized by its inter-party nature. It is due to this inter-party nature that voluntary settlement is preferred.

Labor relations encourage a truly democratic method of regulating the relations between the employers and employees by means of agreements freely entered into through collective bargaining

Free agreement among the parties is the general rule while government intervention is the exception.

Note: there is symmetry in the law with respect to Article 211—A(a) with respect to B(b)

The government labor relations policy is declared in Art. 211 which is a focused elaboration of the basic labor policy announced in Art.3 which, in turn, echoes the constitutional mandates. The policy intends to attain social justice through industrial peace and progress. The latter is founded on employee participation and collective interactions between employer and employees. In Management

Page 1 of 9

Page 2: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

parlance, the input is the parties’ rights and duties, the process is worker’s organization and collective bargaining, and the output is industrial peace and progress towards social justice as the end goal.

WHY WORKERS ORGANIZE

Self-help through economic action necessarily requires increasing the bargaining power of employees; hence one of the basic purposes of a labor union is to eliminate competition among employees in the labor market. Three other human desires should be noted among the forces that led workers to organize:

(1) One is the desire for job security.

(2) Employees wished to substitute what we should term “the rule of law” for the arbitrary and often capricious exercise of power by the boss.

(3) Finally, unions helped to give employees a sense of participation in the business enterprises of which they are part—a function of labor unions which became important as organizations spread into mass production industries.

The union is the recognized instrumentality and mouthpiece of the laborers.

CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS

Article 2, Section 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare.

Article 3, Section 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.

Article 13, Section 3. The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, organized and unorganized, and promote full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all.

It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization, collective bargaining and negotiations, and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law. They shall be entitled to security of tenure, humane conditions of work, and a living wage. They shall also participate in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided by law.

The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between workers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in settling

disputes, including conciliation, and shall enforce their mutual compliance therewith to foster industrial peace.

The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers, recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the right of enterprises to reasonable returns to investments, and to expansion and growth.

WHAT DOES THE ABOVEMENTIONED CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

SPELL OUT?

The State shall:1. Afford full protection to labor

a. Local and overseasb. Organized and unorganized

2. Promote full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all

3. It shall guarantee the rights of ALL workers to the following:

a. Labor Relationsi. Self-organizationii. Collective bargaining and negotiationsiii. Peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law

b. Labor Standardsi. Security of tenureii. Humane conditions of workiii. Living wage

c. Othersi. Participation in policy and decision making

processes affecting their rights and benefits

as may be provided by law

4. Promote the principle of shared responsibility between workers and employers

5. Promote the preferential use of voluntary modes in settling disputes, including conciliation, and shall enforce their mutual compliance therewith to foster industrial peace

6. Regulate the relations between workers and employers, recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the right of enterprises to reasonable returns of investments, and to expansion and growth

DEFINITIONS

Page 2 of 9

Page 3: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

Art. 212. Definitions.

1. "Commission" means the National Labor Relations Commission or any of its divisions, as the case may be, as provided under this Code. 

2. "Bureau" means the Bureau of Labor Relations and/or the Labor Relations Divisions in the regional offices established under Presidential Decree No. 1, in the Department of Labor. 

3. "Board" means the National Conciliation and Mediation Board established under Executive Order No. 126. 

4. "Council" means the Tripartite Voluntary Arbitration Advisory Council established under Executive Order No. 126, as amended. 

5. "Employer" includes any person acting in the interest of an employer, directly or indirectly. The term shall not include any labor organization or any of its officers or agents except when acting as employer. 

6. "Employee" includes any person in the employ of an employer. The term shall not be limited to the employees of a particular employer, unless the Code so explicitly states. It shall include any individual whose work has ceased as a result of or in connection with any current labor dispute or because of any unfair labor practice if he has not obtained any other substantially equivalent and regular employment. 

7. "Labor organization" means any union or association of employees which exists in whole or in part for the purpose of collective bargaining or of dealing with employers concerning terms and conditions of employment. 

8. "Legitimate labor organization" means any labor organization duly registered with the Department of Labor and Employment, and includes any branch or local thereof. 

9. "Company union" means any labor organization whose formation, function or administration has been assisted by any act defined as unfair labor practice by this Code. 

10. "Bargaining representative" means a legitimate labor organization whether or not employed by the employer. 

11. "Unfair labor practice" means any unfair labor practice as expressly defined by the Code. 

12. "Labor dispute" includes any controversy or matter concerning terms and conditions of

employment or the association or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing or arranging the terms and conditions of employment, regardless of whether the disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee. 

13. "Managerial employee" is one who is vested with the powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies and/or to hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees. Supervisory employees are those who, in the interest of the employer, effectively recommend such managerial actions if the exercise of such authority is not merely routinary or clerical in nature but requires the use of independent judgment. All employees not falling within any of the above definitions are considered rank-and-file employees for purposes of this Book. 

14. "Voluntary Arbitrator" means any person accredited by the Board as such or any person named or designated in the Collective Bargaining Agreement by the parties to act as their Voluntary Arbitrator, or one chosen with or without the assistance of the National Conciliation and Mediation Board, pursuant to a selection procedure agreed upon in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, or any official that may be authorized by the Secretary of Labor and Employment to act as Voluntary Arbitrator upon the written request and agreement of the parties to a labor dispute. 

15. "Strike" means any temporary stoppage of work by the concerted action of employees as a result of an industrial or labor dispute. 

16. "Lockout" means any temporary refusal of an employer to furnish work as a result of an industrial or labor dispute. 

17. "Internal union dispute" includes all disputes or grievances arising from any violation of or disagreement over any provision of the constitution and by laws of a union, including any violation of the rights and conditions of union membership provided for in this Code. 

18. "Strike-breaker" means any person who obstructs, impedes, or interferes with by force, violence, coercion, threats, or intimidation any peaceful picketing affecting wages, hours or conditions of work or in the exercise of the right of self-organization or collective bargaining. 

19. "Strike area" means the establishment, warehouses, depots, plants or offices, including the sites or premises used as runaway shops, of the employer struck against, as well as the

Page 3 of 9

Page 4: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

immediate vicinity actually used by picketing strikers in moving to and fro before all points of entrance to and exit from said establishment. (As amended by Section 4, Republic Act No. 6715, March 21, 1989)

ELEMENTS TO CONSIDER AN EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP

For law on Labor Relations to apply, there must be an employer-employee relationship. In determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship, the elements that are generally considered are the following :

o (a) the selection and engagement of the employee;

o (b) the payment of wages; o (c) the power of dismissal; and o (d) the employer's power to control

the employee with respect to the means and methods by which the work is to be accomplished. It is the so-called 'control test' that is the most important element

The power to control refers to the existence of the power and not necessarily to the actual exercise thereof, nor is it essential for the employer to actually supervise the performance of duties of the employee. It is enough that the employer has the right to wield that power. (Dy Khe Beng vs International Labor and Marine Union of the Philippines et al; Corporal, et al. vs NLR; Lerio vs Genovia)

It is the law that defines and governs an employment relationship, whose terms are not restricted to those fixed in the written contract, for other factors, like the nature of the work the employee has been called upon to perform, are also considered. (Legend Hotel vs Hernani S. Realuyo)

Therefore, notwithstanding that the employees are called independent contractors, or industrial partners, or per-piece or “pakyaw” workers, when the employees’ means and methods in accomplishing the work is under the control of the employer, they are still employees and law on labor relations may henceforth be applied.

Cases

“Independent Contractors”

LVN vs Phil Musicians Guild

Notwithstanding that the employees are called independent contractors', the Board will hold them to be employees under the Act where the extent of the employer's control over them indicates that the relationship is in reality one of employment.

The right of control of the film company over the musicians is shown (1) by calling the musicians through 'call slips' in 'the name of the company; (2) by arranging schedules in its studio for recording sessions; (3) by furnishing transportation and meals to musicians; and(4) by supervising and directing in detail, through the motion picture director, the performance of the musicians before the camera, in order to suit the music they are playing to the picture which is being flashed on the screen.

Legend Hotel vs Hernani S. Realuyo

It is the law that defines and governs an employment relationship, whose terms are not restricted to those fixed in the written contract, for other factors, like the nature of the work the employee has been called upon to perform, are also considered. The power of the employer to control the work of the employee is considered the most significant determinant of the existence of an employer-employee relationship. This is the so-called control test, and is premised on whether the person for whom the services are performed reserves the right to control both the end achieved and the manner and means used to achieve that end.

“Per-piece workers”

Dy Khe Beng vs International Labor and Marine Union of the Philippines et al

Evidence showed that the work of Solano and Tudla was continuous except in the event of illness, although their services were compensated on piece basis. The control test calls for the existence of the right to control the manner of doing the work, not the actual exercise of the right considering that Dy Keh Beng is engaged in the manufacture of

Page 4 of 9

Page 5: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

baskets known as “kaing”, those working under Dy would be subject to Dy’s specifications such as the size and quality of the “kaing”. And since the laborers are done at Dy’s establishments, it could be inferred that Dy could easily exercise control upon them.

Payment by piece is just a method of compensation and does not define the essence of the relation.

“Commission” workers

ENCYCLOPEDIA vs. NLRC and Limjoco 1996 case

The fact that petitioner issued memoranda to private respondents and to other division sales managers did not prove that petitioner had actual control over them. The different memoranda were merely guidelines on company policies which the sales managers follow and impose on their respective agents. It should be noted that in petitioner's business of selling encyclopedias and books, the marketing of these products was done through dealership agreements. The sales operations were primarily conducted by independent authorized agents who did not receive regular compensations but only commissions based on the sales of the products.

RJL Martinez Fishing vs NLRC (work is intermittent but were instructed to wait)

The continuity of employment is not the determining factor, but rather whether the work of the laborer is part of the regular business or occupation of the employee.

Although it may be that private respondents alternated their employment on different vessels when they were not assigned to petitioners' boats, that did not affect their employee status.

The evidence also establishes that petitioners had a fleet of fishing vessels with about 65 ship captains, and as private respondents contended, when they finished with one vessel,they finished with one vessel, they were instructed to wait for the next.

Feati University vs Bautista (won professors of private schools are employees)

Even if university professors are considered independent contractors, still they would be covered by Rep. Act No. 875

Professors, instructors or teachers of private educational institutions who teach to earn a living are entitled to the protection of our labor laws — and one such law is Republic Act No. 875.

Corporal, et al. vs NLRC (won barbers are employees)

The Labor Arbiter's findings that the parties were engaged in a joint venture is unsupported by any documentary evidence.

Petitioners are not "independent contractors". They did not carry on an independent business. Neither did they undertake cutting hair and manicuring nails, on their own as their responsibility, and in their own manner and method. The services of the petitioners were engaged by the respondent company to attend to the needs of its customers in its barber shop. More importantly, the petitioners, individually or collectively, did not have a substantial capital or investment in the form of tools, equipment, work premises and other materials which are necessary in the conduct of the business of the respondent company.

Sy vs. CA and Sahot (again, won barbers are employees)

Private respondent, for his part, denies that he was ever an industrial partner of petitioners. There was no written agreement, no proof that he received a share in petitioners’ profits, nor was there anything to show he had any participation with respect to the running of the business. Article 1767 of the Civil Code states that in a contract of partnership two or more persons bind themselves to contribute money, property or industry to a common fund, with the intention of dividing the profits among themselves. Not one of these circumstances is present in this case. No written agreement exists to prove the partnership between the parties. Private respondent did not contribute money, property or industry for the purpose of engaging in the supposed business. There is no proof that he was

Page 5 of 9

Page 6: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

receiving a share in the profits as a matter of course, during the period when the trucking business was under operation. Neither is there any proof that he had actively participated in the management, administration and adoption of policies of the business. Thus, private respondent was not an industrial partner but an employee of petitioner.

CESAR C. LIRIO,vs. WILMER D. GENOVIA

Respondent Lirio's so-called existence of a partnership agreement was not substantiated and his assertion thereto, in the face of complainant's evidence, constitute but a self-serving assertion, without probative value, a mere invention to justify the illegal dismissal.

LOCSIN and TOMAQUIN vs. PLDT (when Security agency agreement expires, and the employees who remained in the premise and still under the control of the company are considered employees of that company)

The only issue in this case is whether petitioners became employees of respondent after the Agreement between SSCP and respondent was terminated.

This must be answered in the affirmative.

Notably, respondent does not deny the fact that petitioners remained in the premises of their offices even after the Agreement was terminated. And it is this fact that must be explained.

Evidently, respondent having the power of control over petitioners must be considered as petitioners’ employer––from the termination of the Agreement onwards––as this was the only time that any evidence of control was exhibited by respondent over petitioners.

Cases where there were no employer-employee relationship:

BERNARTE vs. PBA, EALA, and MARTINEZ (referees are independent contractors)

PBA admits repeatedly engaging petitioner’s services, as shown in the retainer contracts. PBA pays petitioner a retainer fee, exclusive

of per diem or allowances, as stipulated in the retainer contract. PBA can terminate the retainer contract for petitioner’s violation of its terms and conditions.

However, respondents argue that the all-important element of control is lacking in this case, making petitioner an independent contractor and not an employee of respondents.

The SC however held that the foregoing stipulations hardly demonstrate control over the means and methods by which petitioner performs his work as a referee officiating a PBA basketball game. The contractual stipulations do not pertain to, much less dictate, how and when petitioner will blow the whistle and make calls. On the contrary, they merely serve as rules of conduct or guidelines in order to maintain the integrity of the professional basketball league.

Once in the playing court, the referees exercise their own independent judgment, based on the rules of the game, as to when and how a call or decision is to be made. The very nature of petitioner’s job of officiating a professional basketball game undoubtedly calls for freedom of control by respondents.

JAVIER VS. FLY ACE CORP. (this is the “itanong mo sa anak mo” case where it is principled that in proving er-ee relationship, substantial evidence is necessary; self-serving statements are not substantial)

NLRC allows a relaxation of the rules of procedure and evidence in labor cases, this rule of liberality does not mean a complete dispensation of proof. Labor officials are enjoined to use reasonable means to ascertain the facts speedily and objectively with little regard to technicalities or formalities but nowhere in the rules are they provided a license to completely discount evidence, or the lack of it.

"No particular form of evidence is required to prove the existence of such employer-employee relationship. Any competent and relevant evidence to prove the relationship may be admitted. Hence, while no particular form of evidence is required, a finding that such relationship exists must still rest on some substantial evidence.

By way of evidence on this point, all that Javier presented were his self-serving statements purportedly showing his activities as an employee of Fly Ace.

Page 6 of 9

Page 7: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

Javier failed to pass the substantiality requirement to support his claim.

In said document, all Valenzuela attested to was that he would frequently see Javier at the workplace where the latter was also hired as stevedore.34 Certainly, in gauging the evidence presented by Javier, the Court cannot ignore the inescapable conclusion that his mere presence at the workplace falls short in proving employment therein.

WHO ARE EMPLOYEES?

The term “employee”:

(1) shall include any employee

(2) and shall not be limited to the employee of any particular employer, unless the Act so explicitly states otherwise

(3) and shall include any individual(a) whose work has ceased as a result of, or in

connection with any current labor dispute(b) and who has not obtained any other

substantially equivalent and regular employment.

“Employee” refers to any person working for an employer. It includes one whose work has ceased in connection with any current labor dispute or because of any unfair labor practice and one who has been dismissed from work but the legality of the dismissal is being contested in a forum of appropriate jurisdiction.

“One whose work has ceased...”

Cessation of work due to strike or lockout, or to dismissal or suspensions constituting unfair labor practices, does not in itself affect the “employee” status, in the sense that the rights and benefits of the employee are protected as though there had been no interruption of service, effective upon actual return to work.

“Substantially equivalent and regular employment”

This refers to his new job which should be similar to his work at the time of his dismissal. This holds true even if the employee receives higher salary.

It does not refer to the amount of compensation which such employee receives from his new employer

WHO ARE EMPLOYERS

“Employer” refers to any person or entity who employs the services of others, one for whom employees work and who pays their wages or salaries. An employer includes any person directly or indirectly acting in the interest of an employer.

It shall also refer to the enterprise where a labor organization operates or seeks to operate. An employer may be brought into bargaining and economic relationship with persons not in his actual employ; such persons are given the status and tights of “employees” in relation to him, in order to accord to them the protection of the Act. Thus, The nature of a “labor dispute” does not require that the disputants should stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee, with consequent protection of concerted activities carried out by many persons belonging to several employers.

CASES

Feati University vs Bautista

The term employer include any person acting in the interest of an employer, directly or indirectly, but shall not include any labor organization (otherwise than when acting as an employer) or any one acting in the capacity or agent of such labor organization.

Congress did not intend to give a complete definition of "employer", but rather that such definition should be complementary to what is commonly understood as employer.

Feati controls the work of the members of its faculty

o prescribes the courses or subjects that professors teach, and when and where to teach

o professors' work is characterized by regularity and continuity for a fixed duration

o professors are compensated for their services by wages and salaries, rather than by profits

o professors and/or instructors cannot substitute others to do their work without the consent of the university

o professors can be laid off if their work is found not satisfactory

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS vs COA (the case has nothing to do about er-ee relationship but it explains how an

Page 7 of 9

Page 8: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

entity impressed with public interest is treated as private corporation and not a public corporation)

The fact that a certain juridical entity is impressed with public interest does not, by that circumstance alone, make the entity a public corporation, inasmuch as a corporation may be private although its charter contains provisions of a public character, incorporated solely for the public good. It must be stressed that a quasi-public corporation is a species of private corporations, but the qualifying factor is the type of service the former renders to the public: if it performs a public service, then it becomes a quasi-public corporation.

LABOR ORGANIZATION AS EMPLOYER

Exceptionally, a labor organization may be deemed an “employer” when it is acting as such in relation to persons rendering services under hire, particularly in connection with its activities for profit or gain.

Reynaldo Bautista vs Hon. Amado C. Inciong

The mere fact that the respondent is a labor union does not mean that it cannot be considered an employer of the persons who work for it. Much less should it be exempted from the very labor laws which it espouses as labor organization.

LABOR DISPUTE

The test of whether a labor controversy comes within the definition of a labor dispute depends on whether it involves or concerns terms, conditions of employment or representation. The existence of a labor dispute is not negative by the fact that the plaintiffs and defendants do not stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee.

ASSOCIATED LABOR UNION vs Judge Borromeo

an issue "concerning terms, tenure or conditions of employment, or concerning the association or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing, or seeking to arrange terms or conditions of employment" to partake of the nature of a "labor dispute", it is not necessary that "the

disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee."

to apply the provisions of Sec. 9 of Republic Act No. 875, governing the conditions under which "any restraining order" or "temporary or permanent injunction" may issue in any "case involving or growing out of a labor dispute", it is not indispensable that the persons involved in the case be "employees of the same employer", although this is the usual case. Sec. 9, likewise, governs cases involving persons:

o 1) "who are engaged in the same industry, trade, craft, or occupation"; or

o 2) "who ... have direct or indirect interests therein", or

o 3) "who are members of the same or an affiliated organization of employers or employees"; or

o 4) "when the case involves any conflicting or competing interests in a "labor dispute" (as hereinbefore defined) or "persons participating or interested" therein (as hereinafter defined)".

LABOR DISPUTES AND REMEDIES: A SUMMARY

Definition

“Labor Dispute” includes any controversy or matter concerning terms and conditions of employment or the association or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing or arranging the terms and conditions of employment, regardless of whether the disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee.

Tests or Criteria of “Labor Dispute”

A. Nature: Dispute arises from employer-employee relationship, although disputants need not be proximately “employee” or “employer” of the other.

B. Subject matter: Dispute concerns (1) terms or conditions of employment; or (2) association or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, or changing terms or conditions of employment.

NB: Direct EE-ER relationship is not an essential requisite in order to have a “Labor Dispute”. As a

Page 8 of 9

Page 9: Labor Relations Part I- Basic Concepts

LABOR RELATIONS PART I: BASIC CONCEPTSST. THOMAS MORE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND LAW

general rule, labor dispute arises from EE-ER relationship. However, the law considers certain conflicts involving parties who are not ER and EEs of each other as still falling within the concept of the said term.

A labor dispute can still exist regardless of whether the disputants stand in proximate relationship of ER and EE, provided the controversy concerns, among others, the terms and conditions of employment or a change of arrangement thereon. The existence of Labor Dispute is not negative by the non-existence of EE-ER relationship. (Associated Watchmen vs US Lines)

Kinds of Labor Disputes

A. Labor Standards Disputes:

(1) Compensation – (underpayment of minimum wage)(2) Benefits – (nonpayment of holiday pay)(3) Working conditions – (unrectified work hazards)

B. Labor Relations Disputes:

(1) Organizational Right Dispute/ ULP – (coercion)(2) Representation Disputes – (determination of appropriate collective bargaining unit)(3) Bargaining Disputes – (refusal to bargain)(4) Contract Administration or Personnel Policy Disputes – (noncompliance with CBA provision)(5) Employment Tenure Disputes –(nonregularization of employees)

Remedies in Labor Disputes:

1. Grievance procedure2. Enforcement or compliance order3. Certification of bargaining representatives4. Assumption of jurisdiction5. Certification to NLRC6. Injunction7. Judicial Action8. Appeal9. Review by court

Page 9 of 9