Art277 (263) Strikes, Picketing and Lockouts

(a)Policy of the state to encourage free trade Strikes/lockouts in hospitals duty of striking
unionism & free collective bargaining union or locking out ER to provide and maintain
a skeletal workforce
(c) In cases of Bargaining deadlocks SoLE is mandated to immediately assume within
duly recognized bargaining agent may 24hrs fr knowledge of occurrence of such
file a notice of strike (NS) strike/lockout; jurisdiction over the same or
ER may file a notice of lockout certify it to NLRC for compulsory arbitration
With the Ministry; atleast 30 days b4 intended
date President is not precluded fr determining
industries that in his opinion are indispensable to
In cases of ULP period of notice is 15days the natl interest & fr intervening at any time &
in the absence of duly recognized bargaining assuming jurisdiction over any such labor dispute
agent, any LLO may file NS to settle or terminate it

In cases of dismissal fr EET of union officers (h) Before or at any stage of the compulsory
which may constitute union busting where arbitration process
existence of union is threatened - parties may opt to submit their dispute to VA-
- 15day cooling off period shall not apply; union ion
may take action immediately
(i) SoLE, NLRC or VA decide or resolve the
(e) During cooling-off period duty of Ministry to dispute within 30 calendar days fr
exert all efforts at mediation & conciliation to 1. date of assumption of jurisdiction or
effect voluntary settlement 2. certification or submission of the dispute
If dispute remains unsettled (until lapse of As the case may be
period) LU may strike or ER may declare Decision of Pres, SoLE, NLRC or VA final &
lockout executory 10 calendar days after receipt by
parties
(f) Decision to declare a strike - approved by
majority of total union membership in BU Art 278 (264) Prohibited Activities
Obtained by secret ballot in meetings or (a) No LO or ER shall declare a strike or lockout
referenda called for that purpose
1. without 1st having bargain collectively or
Decision to declare a lockout approved by 2. without the necessary strike or lockout vote
majority of Board of Directors or corp, assoc or report 1st having been obtained & reported to
partners in a partnership Ministry
Note: decision shall be valid for the duration of
the dispute based on substantially the same No strike or lockout shall be declared
grounds considered when strike/lockout vote was 1. after assumption of jurisdiction by Pres or
taken Ministry (SoLE?) or
2. after certification or submission of dispute to
Union or ER shall furnish the Ministry the results compulsory or voluntary arbitration, or
of the voting (Strike Vote Report) atleast 7days 3. during pendency of cases involving same
b4 intended strike/lockout subj to the cooling grounds for strike/lockout
period
ANY worker whose EET has been terminated as a
(g) When in his opinion, there exists a labor consequence of an unlawful strike or lockout
dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or entitled to:
lockout in an industry indispensable to national 1. Reinstatement
interest 2. with full backwages
- SoLE may assume jurisdiction over the dispute
and 1. Decide it; or 2. Certify the same to NLRC Union officer knowingly participates in an
for compulsory arbitration illegal strike*
Effect (assumption or certification): Any worker or union officer knowingly
- automatically enjoining the intended or participates in commission of illegal acts during a
impending strike/lockout as specified in the strike*
assumption or certification order *may be declared (by ER?) to have lost his EET
status
If one has already taken place at the time of Mere participation of a worker in a lawful strike
assumption/certification not sufficient ground for termination of his EET
- all striking or locked out EEs shall immediately even if a replacement had been hired by ER
return to work & ER shall immediately resume during such lawful strike
operations and readmit all workers under same (b; c & d) refer to CODAL
terms & conditions of EET prevailing b4
strike/lockout (e) No person engaged in picketing shall:

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 1
1. commit any act of violence, coercion or
intimidation (VCI); or Constitutional Status
2. obstruct the free ingress or egress fr ERs On July 17, 1953 Congress gave statutory
premises for lawful purposes, or recognition to the right to strike when it enacted
3. obstruct public thoroughfares RA 875 (Industrial Peace Act)
*Right to strike was prohibited on Sept 21, 1972
The Right to engage in concerted activities upon declaration of martial law
Art 13 Sec3 Consti guarantee RTSO, CB and
negotiation, peaceful concerted activities, 1987 Consti; Art13 Social Justice & Human
including the right to strike in acc with law* Rights (see p.1) consti imprimatur given to the
*means that State can enact reasonable laws right to strike
which can expand or even diminish the coverage 1935 & 1973 Consti did not accord consti status
of the right to strike to the right to strike
RA 6715 (March 21, 1989) law implementing
Concerted Activity by one right to strike
Concerted when an activity is planned & Note:
accomplished by people acting together Consti recognition of right to strike
Instances may arise when an individual acting serve as a reminder that injunctions should
alone may be deemed engaged in concerted be reduced at barest minimum (bernas)
activity if EE is seeking to induce group activity
or is acting as representative Nature and Definition of lockout (by ER)
Concerted activity (jurisprudentially defined) Lockout temporary refusal of any ER to furnish
one undertaken by 2 or more EEs or by 1 on work as a result of an industrial or labor dispute;
behalf of others an ERs act excluding EEs who are union
members fr the plant
Nature of strike
Strike (defined) cessation of work by EEs in an Strike & lockout similar;
effort to get more favorable terms for 1. connote temporary work stoppage
themselves or as a concerted refusal by EEs to 2. occur because of & in relation to a labor or
do any work for their ER or to work at their industrial dispute involving the parties
customary rate of speed until object of strike is Diff identity of doer; strike(done by EEs or
attained by ERs granting the demanded labor union) while lockout(by ER)
concession
Lockout is an act directed at the union itself not
Strike Defined by Art212(o) at individual EE-members of union; in a lockout
- any temporary stoppage of work by the dismissal is in discipline of union itself
concerted
action of EEs as a result of an industrial or labor Grounds for strike/lockout
dispute 1. CB deadlock
2.ULP act
A strike may be legally held because of either or
both: DO no 40-03 amended by DO 40A-03
1. CB deadlock Violations of CBAs except flagrant & malicious
2. ULP act of ER refusal to comply with economic provisions not
ULP; non-strikable
Characteristics (of Strike)
1. With established relationship bet strikers & No strike or lockout may be declared on
person/s against whom strike is called 1. grounds involving inter-union & intra-union
2. must be ER-EE relationship dispute
3. existence of a dispute 2. without 1st having files NS or lockout
4. EET relationship is deemed to continue 3. without the necessary strile/lockout vote
5. temporary work stoppage having
6. thru concerted action of EEs been obtained & reported to the board (NCMB?)
7. striking group is LLO; in case of bargaining
deadlock EEs sole bargaining representative Not declare strike
1. after assumption of jurisdiction by SoLE or 2.
Basic Objective Certification or submission of dispute to
A strike is a coercive activity resorted to by compulsory or VA-ion or
laborers to enforce their demands 3. during pendency of cases involving same
Strikers by going on strike seek to interrupt & grounds for strike/lockout
paralyze the business & production of the
company GR - Like strike, lockout not subj to labor
Because of this threat or danger of loss to the injunctions
company, it does frequently give in to demands E cases or for reasons specified such as
of strikers to maintain continuity of its production

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 2
1. natl interest cases, 2. Prohibited acts under economic assistance of ER to compel this 3 rd
Art278 are being committed person to capitulate top the union over some
issue bet them
Requisites of a valid lockout c. Sympathetic strike
1. Notice of intention to declare a strike/lockout
filed with DOLE 4. Purpose or Nature of EE Interest
2. atleast 30days elapsed since filing of the a. Economic Strike intended to force wage &
notice b4 lockout is declared other
3. Impasse has resulted in the negotiations concessions fr ER which he is not required by law
4. strike/lockout is not discriminatory to grant *also known as bargaining strike
designed to enforce union position on
ER may lockout his EEs to protect his bargaining bargainable issues;
positions after an impasse occurs in nego or b4 Striking EEs have no intention to sever EET
In ULP ER should show that he is merely relations with ER except temporarily for duration
protecting his bargaining positions & not acting of strike although ER is free to replace them if he
out of hostility or discriminating against union can
members Note: Strikes are presumed to be economic than
A lockout is valid where in the course of labor ULP
dispute; undertaken as defensive weapon in b. ULP strike called against ULP of ER; purpose
pursuance of ERs interest to make him desist fr further committing such
practice
Kinds of Strike
1. Extent A valid strike needs a labor dispute
a. General strike extends over a whole - strike can validly take place only in the
community, province, state or country; extended presence of & in relation to a labor dispute bet
form of symphatetic strike involving many ER & EEs involved
workers who cease to work in sympathy with
workers of another ER or to put pressure upon Strike defined Art 219(o)
govt or paralyze present economic & social - any temporary stoppage of work by concerted
systems action of ERs as a result of an industrial or labor
b. Local strike undertaken by workers in a dispute
particular enterprise, locality or occupation
Strike is recognized & protected only if the work
2. Nature of the Act stoppage is brought about by disagreements
a. Strike proper regarding terms & conditions of EET or ways to
b. Sit-down strike when a group of EEs or arrange or adjust it
others interested in obtaining a certain objective Note: Where there is 1. no dispute or 2. Dispute
in a particular business; forcibly take over has nothing to do with terms & conditions of
possession of the property of such business EET; stoppage of work by its EEs has no basis;
establish themselves within the plant, stop its illegal strike
production and refuse access to owners or to
others desiring to work; Natl Union of workers in hotels v. NLRC(1998)
taking over of possession by EEs; element of - alleged acts of hotel were not ULP hence not
trespass by strikers upon ppty of ER & refusal to strikeable; upheld dismissal of 15 officers who
permit it to be operated knowingly participated in the strike
c. Partial or quickie strike intermittent, ER may lawfully discharge EEs for participating in
unannounced work stoppage including an unjustifiable wildcat strike
slowdowns, unauthorized extension of rest
periods & walk outs for portion or entire shifts Sympathetic strike
Sometimes used interchangeably with wildcat Valid strike presupposes labor dispute; it follows
strike work stoppage that violates the labor that sympathetic strike is illegal
contract & is not authorized by the union Sympathetic striking EEs have no demands or
*slowdown willful reduction in the rate of work grievances of their own but strike for the
by a group of EEs for purpose of restricting purpose of directly or indirectly aiding others
output of ER without relation to advancement of interest of
strikers
3. Degree of EE interest - (Defined) stoppage of work to make common
a. Primary strike declared by EEs who have a cause with other strikers in other est/companies
direct & immediate interest; refers to an original without existence of any labor dispute bet
or initial strike (strike waged by union primarily striking EEs & their own ER
aggrieved) Strike is illegal unless there exists a labor
b. Secondary strike exists where EEs in concert dispute bet ER & striking EEs
refuse to remain at work for ER because he
persist in dealing with a 3rd person against whom Welga ng Bayan (Peoples Strike)
they have a grievance; attempt to secure

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 3
- in nature of a general strike; extended 2. EEs may not be discriminated against because
sympathetic strike they exercised right to strike
- EEs who have no labor dispute with ER but who 3. Use of strike-breakers is prohibited
on the day they are supposed to work, refuse to 4. Mere participation in a strike does not sever
work to join a welga ng bayan are committing EET relationship
illegal work stoppage
Note: In the realm of political freedom, general Art 278 (c) provides that no ER shall employ an
strike may be defensible strike-breaker nor shall any person be employed
as strike-breaker
But at the enterprise level, EEs absence fr work Strike-breaker a person who obstructs,
to join a general strike is unexcused absence impedes, or interferes by force, violence,
In relation to ER, EEs absence is illegal & coercion, threats or intimidation any peaceful
actionable work stoppage because stoppage is picketing by EEs during any labor controversy
not due to existing labor/industrial dispute bet Note: EEs who peacefully struck for a lawful
said EEs & ER object were not liable to their ER (for damages)
Strikers could not use unlawful means; unless
Avoidance of strike strikers methods or objects were illegal, ER had
- by requiring EEs to exhaust available means of no cause of action for damage to his business fr
settling dispute without resort to strike the strike
Strikers & other coercive acts are deemed
justified only when peaceful alternatives have Striking EEs may persuade or advise others to
proved unfruitful in settling dispute quit work & join strikes, so long as contractual
Disregarding grievance procedure or refusal to rights are not invaded
submit arbitrable issue to VA-ion may justify a Right to strike includes right to use peaceable &
conclusion that strike was held prematurely lawful means to induce present & expectant EEs
hence illegal to join ranks of strikers

Conciliation, Mediation, Compromise to avoid Role of the Police

strike Involvement of AFP/PNP limited to:
An issue awaiting resolution in arbitration 1. maintenance of peace & order
proceedings, whether compulsory or voluntary 2. enforcement of laws & legal orders of duly
cannot serve as basis of stike constituted authorities
To resort to strike despite ongoing arbitration is 3. performance of specific functions as may be
an act amounting to sabotage of a peaceful provided by law
conciliatory process Not station in the picket but on such that their
NCMB upon request of either or both parties or presence may deter commission of criminal acts
upon its own initiative, provide conciliation- fr either side; 50meter radius fr picket lines
mediation services to labor disputes other than except if 50m includes a public thoroughfare
strikes or lockouts (may station there)

Any compromise settlement including those Any person who obstructs the free
involving labor standard laws, voluntarily agreed ingress/egress fr ERs premises or who obstructs
upon by parties with the issuance of the Board public thoroughfare may be arrested & charged
(NCMB?) shall be final & binding upon the parties in court
NLRC or any court shall not assume jurisdiction Art278 does not prohibit a worker fr working in
over issues involved therein except place of strikers
1. in case of non-compliance thereof or
2. if there is prima facie evidence that the Status of strikers
settlement was obtained through fraud, Relationship bet ER & EE is not necessarily
misrepresentation or coercion terminated by a strike; although they cease to
work EE intend to retain their position
Premature Strike SC holds that the declaration of a strike does not
- unjustified, unreasonable hence illegal amount to renunciation of EET relation
A strike does not itself terminate the relation of
Union of the Phil. Education EEs v. PECO (1952) ER & EE
SC laid down the rule that until all the
remedies & negotiations toward the adjustment Notion of striking EE
& settlement of labor disputes have been During strike, ER-EE relationship is not
exhausted, the law does not look with favour terminated but merely suspended as the work
upon resort to radical measures stoppage is not permanent but only temporary
Striking EE is still as EE (see definition of EE in
Protection of Strikes Art 219f)
1. GR not subj to labor injuction or restraining
order

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 4
EEs status during a strike remains but the effects Alliance of Govt workers v. MoLE
of EET are suspended, hence a striking EE as a - furnishes rationale for distinguishing bet
rule is not entitled to his wage during the strike workers in private sector & govt EEs with the
right to strike
Retention by striking EE of their EE status has 2 GR terms & conditions of EEt in the govt are
main consequences: governed by law
1. ERs obligation to bargain collectively inGF with Since terms & conditions of govt EET are fixed by
his EEs continues notwithstanding the fact that law, govt workers cannot use the same weapons
EEs are on strike employed by workers in the private sector to
2. ER is under an obligation to reinstate striking secure concessions fr their ER
EEs upon termination of strike, without The principle behind labor unionism in private
discriminating against those more actively industry is that industrial peace cannot be
engaged in union activity secured thru compulsion of law
In govt EET it is the legislature & where
Legality of strike: the 6 factors affecting legality: properly given delegated power, the
Right to strike workers are able to press their administrative heads of govt which fix the terms
demands for better terms of EET; conducted & conditions of EET; & this is effected thru
peacefully statutes or admin circulars, R&R not thru CBA
Any violation of legal requirements such as
defiance of return-to-work order in industries Bangalisan v. CA (1997)
affected with public interest will render strike - issue of WON mass action launched by public
illegal school teachers was a strike
In Manila Public School Teaschers Assoc
Illegal strike is one which is: v. Laguio held that fr pleaded & admitted
1. contrary to specific prohibition of law (Ex. facts, those mass actions were to all
Strike by EEs performing govtal functions) intents & purposes a strike; constituted
2. violates a specific reqt of law concerted & unauthorized stoppage of
3. declared for an unlawful purpose (Ex. Induce absence fr work which it was the
ER to commit ULP against non-union EEs) teachers duty to perform
4. EEs unlawful means in pursuit of its objective In the absence of statute, public EEs do not have
5. declared in violation of existing injunction the right to engage in concerted work stoppages
6. contrary to existing agreement (Ex. No-strike for any purpose
clause or conclusive arbitration clause) Settled rule that EEs in the public service may
* the 6 categories of strike applied by SC in not engage in strike
Toyota case(2007) While the consti recognizes the right of govt EEs
to organize, they are prohibited fr staging
6 Factors in legality of strike *Explained strikes, which will result in temporary stoppage
1st factor. Statutory Prohibition or disruption of public service
- govt Es have right to organize but no right to The right of govt EEs to organize is limited only
strike ( a strike held by them is an illegal strike) to formation of unions or assoc without including
SSEA v. CA(1989) Govt EEs may right to strike
1. petition to Congress for betterment of terms & GR even in the absence of express statutory
conditions of EET which are within the ambit of prohibition, like CSC MC no 6, public EEs are
legislation denied the right to strike or engage in a work
2. negotiate with appropriate govt agencies for stoppage against public ER
improvement of those not fixed by law
Any unresolved grievances refer dispute to 2nd factor. Procedural Requirements
PSLMC A strike/lockout to enjoy the protection of law
But EEs in the civil service may not resort to must observe certain procedural requisites
strikes, walkouts & other temporary work (Art277)
stoppages to pressure the govt to accede to their 1. Filing of a notice of strike
demands 2. Observance of cooling off period
Terms & conditions of EET in govt including PS,I, 3. Taking of strike vote
GOCCs with orig charters are governed by law; 4. Observance of 7Day strike vote report
EEs shall not strike for the purpose of securing period
changes thereof These requirements are mandatory;
RTSO shall not be denied to govt EEs noncompliance makes strike illegal
Bill of rights right to form association or Intention of the law in requiring the NS & SVR is
societies for purposes not contrary to law shall to reasonably regulate the right to strike
not be abridged Officers of the union who participated in illegal
If purpose of the state is to prohibit strikes fr EEs strike are deemed to have lost their EET status
exercising govt functions; it could be done
because the moment it is prohibited union which Notice of strike (NS)
will go on strike will be an illegal union

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 5
NS or lockout should be filed with DOLE
specifically Regl branch of NCMB copy furnished Purpose of strike vote is to ensure that decision
ER & union as the case may be to strike rests with majority of union members
SVR submitted to NCMB atleast 7days prior to
Who files a notice of strike? intended date of strike ensures that SV was
-Only registered LLO can legally hold a strike taken
If reason is ULP by ER, notice should be filed by The 15/30day cooling-off period designed to
duly recognized or certified bargaining agent afford parties opportunity to amicably
If reason is bargaining deadlock, only the
bargaining union file a NS 7day strike ban is intended to give DOLE
Note: a union instead of filing a NS may request opportunity to verify whether projected strike
NCMB to do a preventive mediation but the union really carries the imprimatur of union members
has to be certified or duly recognized bargaining Needed vote is 50% plus 1 of the total
agent membership
Lockout needs the secret ballot concurrence of
majority of directors or partners
Contents of notice
Strike notice shall state: Strike Vote Report (SVR)
1. Names & addresses of ER & union Result of the strike or lockout voting should be
involved reported to NCMB atleast 7days b4 intended
2. Nature of industry ER belongs strike or lockout subj to cooling off period
3. No. of union members & of workers in BU - means that after strike vote is taken and result
4. Other relevant data reported to NCMB, 7days must pass b4 union can
commence the strike
In cases of bargaining deadlock, notice shall A strike held within 7day waiting period is illegal
further state the unresolved issues in bargaining Strike held without submission of result of strike
nego, accompanied by written proposals of union vote is illegal
& counter-proposals of ER
The requirement of giving notice of conduct of
In cases of ULP, state acts complained of & strike vote to NCMB atleast 24hrs b4 meeting is
efforts taken to resolve dispute amicably designed to:
1. inform NCMB of intent of union to conduct a
Cooling-off period strike vote
Time gap bet the filing of notice & actual 2. give NCMB time to deice WON there is need to
execution of strike/lockout supervise
30days bargaining deadlock 3. should NCMB decide to supervise; ample time
15days ULP to prepare
Union busting not req to observe Failure of a union to comply with the
requirement of giving notice to NCMB atleast
NCMB upon receipt of NS & during cooling off 24hrs prior to holding of a strike vote meeting
period, mediates & conciliates the parties will render subsequent strike staged by union
Parties are obliged to participate fully & promptly illegal
in conciliation meetings
A strike/lockout notice upon agreement of the Q: When should the strike vote be taken? (within
parties, may be referred to alternative modes of or outside cooling off period)
dispute reso, including voluntary arbitration A - If the Strike vote is filed within the cooling-
off period; the7day requirement shall be counted
Strike Vote (SV) fr the day ff expiration of cooling-off period; 7
Before a strike or lockout may actually be days are added to the 15 or 30day cooling-off
started, a strike/lockout vote should be taken by period
secret balloting, in meetings or referenda
specially called for the purpose Declaration of strike or lockout
- dispute remains unsettled after lapse of
Union or ER shall furnish the regl branch of cooling-off period & 7day reporting period; labor
NCMB notice of meetings atleast 24hrs before union may strike or ER may lock out
such meetings as well as results of the voting
atleast 7days b4 intended strike/lockout subject Procedural requirements, mandatory: Non-
to cooling-off period observance makes strike illegal
Case #12 NSFW v. Ovejera (1982)
Decision to declare a strike requires secret ballot (a) mandatory periods; language of law
approval of majority of total union membership Cooling-off period and 7day strike ban after SVR
in BU concerned should be deemed mandatory
It is majority of union membership not of BU Although labor union may take a strike vote and
Members of minority union may or may not be report the same within the statutory cooling-off
called to SV meeting period

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 6
 Where ER trying to bust union; union is the
(b) Purposes of strike notice & SVR victim; N/A cooling off period reqt in case of
Notice of Strike (NS) and a cooling-off period union busting
intent of law is to provide opportunity for
mediation & conciliation (to effect a voluntary Union Busting (Elements)
settlement during the cooling-off period) 1. Union officers are being dismissed
2. Officers are duly elected in acc with union CBL
7day strike vote report 3. Existence of union is threatened
Submission of SVR gives assurance that strike
vote has been taken & if report is false; majority If union is being busted, no need to observe
of members can still remedy b4 it is too late cooling off period but union must still file Notice
of strike, take strike vote & submit SVR
(c)Waiting period after Strike Notice and SVR, (mandatory even in union busting)
valid regulation of right to strike
- cooling-off period & 7days strike ban after filing NCMB Primer on Strike, Picketing, Lockout
of SVR are reasonable restrictions; imposition (1992)
essential to attain legitimate state policy Time reqt for filing of NS shall be dispensed with
objectives embodied in law; valid exercise of but strike vote reqt being mandatory in character
States police power shall in every case be complied with

Case #36 Gold City Integrated Port Services Alleged union busting 3 remaining reqts
Inc. v. NLRC (1995) 1. NS; 2. Strike vote; 3. 7day report period,
- pets EEs stopped working & gathered in a mass cannot be dispensed with
action; on the same morning strikers filed Totality of conduct doctrine an act to be
individual notices of strike; Strike illegal for not characterized as ULP should be viewed not in
having complied with formal requirements Art isolation but in connection with collateral
278 par c & f circumstances
B4 organization take into a strike because of
Case #18 Union of Filipro EEs v. Nestle (1990) alleged union busting by ER, union officers
- illegality of strikes & dismissal of complainants should notify NCMB & consul general
upheld membership
1. strike staged illegal in violation of CBA no
strike/no lockout clause & conclusive arbitration Strike During Arbitration, Illegal
clause Filsyn EEs Chapter v. Drilon (1989)
2. UFE went on strike instead of exhausting all - MoLE certified labor dispute to NLRC for
steps provided in grievance machinery in the compulsory arbitration; while conciliation
CBA meetings were still pending union officers &
3. mandatory cooling-off period & 7day strike members did not report for work
ban after submission of SVR not complied; no NS Held certification of dispute to NLRC for
filed compulsory arbitration had the effect of enjoining
4. Strike was carried out with coercion, force, intended strike subj of notices
intimidation, violence with pgysical injuries, Concerted action in not reporting for work when
sabotage, use of unnecessary force & obscene they were supposed to render work on those
language days acc to work sched & during pendency of
5. Strike on the day filed NS compulsory arbitration proceedings on certified
labor dispute constituted an illegal strike
Strike on Installment: Work Slowdown and
Overtime Boycott Another case Court held that no strike/lockout
Interphil case(2001) strike was in form of OT can be declared while a case is pending involving
boycott & work slowdown which can be classified same grounds for strike/lockout
as strike on an installment basis
Sukholai Cuisine v. CA(2006) strike was
Ilaw at Buklod ng Mangagawa v. NLRC declared illegal due to unions failure to exhaust
- Court in substantial agreement with pets all in the steps of arbitration proceedings; fully
concept of slowdown as a strike on the aware of such cannot claim good faith as a
installment plan as willful reduction in the rate of defense
work by concerted action of workers for purpose However, if after decision declaring strike illegal
of restricting output of ER, in relation to a labor new demands/matters arise not in
dispute, as an activity which worker without a connection/similar to former decision & laborers
complete stoppage of work retard production or strike anew; new strike not a violation of
their performance of duties & functions to decision (provided procedural reqts complied)
compel mgt to grant their demands
Slowdown is illicit & unjustifiable Strike despite preventive mediation
Mediation process of resolving disputes with
In case of union busting aid of a neutral person the mediator; who helps

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 7
identify issues & develop proposals to resolve - ER & union executed a CBA which they agreed
their disputes to submit all disputes to grievance & arbitration
- NCMB manual enunciates it as a remedy to proceedings; also included a no-strike no-lockout
prevent or resolve disputes whether strikeable or agreement
not NCMB director held that issues were non-
Note: Preventive mediation can be initiated strikeable; NLRC issued a TRO directing free
simply by a letter-request ingress/egress fr plant
Info discovered in mediation is inadmissible in
court; party cannot use info gathered in Ruling -
mediation against other party & mediator cannot Art265 (254) LC provides that no injunction or
be subpoenaed to reveal what transpired in RO shall be issued by any court except as
mediation otherwise provided in
Art 266(e) injunction may be used to restrain
Case #11 PAL v. SoLE (1991) an actual or threatened strike unlawful strike
Mediator advised PALEA that issues raised in NS & in Art 277(263)
are not valid grounds for a lawful strike; PALEA
declared a strike; SoLE assumed jurisdiction As held in PAL v. Drilon
Held SC held nullified SoLEs order insofar as it - after conversion of NS by NCMB into a
declared valid PALEA strike & restrained PAL fr preventive mediation, it is as if there was no
taking appropriate legal actions against PALEA notice of strike;
officers & members who led the strike & that during pendency of preventive mediation
PAL strike was illegal for 3 reasons: proceedings, no strike could be legally declared
1. premature; CBA still had 9 months to run IBM went on strike despite lack of valid NS &
2. violated no strike provision of CBA despite pendency of mediation proceedings
3. NCMB had declared the NS as appropriate for IBM after execution of MOA circulated fliers
preventive mediation showing threats of commission of prohibited
* effect of declaration was to drop the case fr activities (ipa alala sa mgt na iniaatras ang NS at
docket of NS; as if no NS ano man oras pwede muli itirik ang picket
During the pendency of mediation proceedings, lines); it was grave abuse of discretion on NLRC
no strike could be legally declared when it failed to grant pet for injunction
Strikes held in violation of terms in CBA are
Since the strike was illegal, PAL has a right to illegal when they provide for conclusive
take disciplinary action against union officers arbitration clauses; these agreements must be
who took part & union members who committed strictly adhered to
illegal acts
Under Art 277 (263) SoLE may enjoin holding of Dismissal of EEs during conciliation; when legal
strike but not companys right to take and enforceable
appropriate legal actions GTE Directories v. Sanchez (1991) GTE
terminated EET of 14 sales rep for failure to
Violation of a valid Order comply with reportorial reqts after several
- equivalent to violation or disobedience of an demands was made; during the time conciliation
order of court, strike illegal efforts were being exerted

Grievance procedure bypassed Ruling

Stipulation of no strike no lockout; until Dismissal is valid; conciliation proceedings not
grievance is resolved by proper court if not validated
settled thru a grievance procedure ER has the prerogative to lay down basic policies
- legality of such stipulation upheld in Liberal LU and rules applicable to its EEs
v. Phil Can; CBA stipulated that if laborer had a Filing of NS and commencement of conciliation
complaint should 1st be resolved by a grievance activities by BLR did not operate to make GTEs
committee; if decision not satisfactory refer to orders illegal & unenforceable so as to excuse
top officials of union & ER; submit to CIR if not continued noncompliance therewith
settled The overt, direct, deliberate & continued defiance
& disregard by EEs of their ERs authority left ER
Another case strike was illegal because union with no other alternative except to impose
did not adhere to procedure (in settlement to sanctions
prevent strike) agreed upon for settlement of
disputes; must be followed in its entirety 3rd factor. Economic and ULP strike
Agreement to exhaust all available means 2 strikeable grounds
resorting resorting to force; strikes held in 1. CB deadlock
violation of terms in CBA are illegal esp when 2. ERs ULP
they provide for conclusive arbitration clauses; A strike not based in any of these 2 causes are
these agreements must be strictly adhered to illegal

San Miguel Corp v. NLRC (2003) Ex of nonstrikeable issues

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 8
1. inter-union or intra-union disputes
2. violation of labor standards law Davao Free workers Front v. CIR
3. any issue involving wage distortion Pet union submitted bargaining proposals for
4. cases pending at DOLE, BLR, NLRC, SoLE , VA, renewal of CBA but mgt sponsored a
CA or SC organization of new LU & executed a CBA with it
5. execution & enforcement of final orders in - strike valid; against ER ULP
no.4
6. any issue covered by no strike commitment Philsteam v. PMOG (1965)
Subjection by company of its EEs to a series of
Strike on refusal to bargain or discriminatory questionings regarding their membership in
discharge or any other sort of ULP by ER is called union or their union activities in such a way as to
ULP strike hamper exercise of free choice on their part
constitutes ULP; PMOG strike was for a lawful
Strike to force wage or other concessions fr ER purpose (interference with EEs RTSO)
which he is not required by law to grant is
economic strike Lawful purpose: ULP strike in GF
Distinguish the 2 point on applicability of 2 tests in determining existence of ULP
certain reqts or strikers right 1. Strike is declared in protest of ULP actually
committed
The conversion doctrine 2. Strike declared in protest of what union
- strike may start fr economic to ULP believed to be ULP committed by mgt &
Laid Law corp (US case) Rule that strikers who circumstances warranted such belief in GF
are permanently replaced during economic phase although found subsequently not committed
of the strike are not entitled to immediate It is not even required that there be in fact ULP
reinstatement while strikers replaced after date committed; it suffices a belief in GF by labor as
of conversion are inducing factor for staging a strike
Management performed acts which strikers
Lawful purpose: Strike incident to CB believed were ULP although they were not, the
Laborers have right thru concerted action by court ruled that the strike cannot be held illegal;
means of strike, to attempt to secure attainment however unions belief needs some rational basis
of any lawful objects for the purpose of securing
improvement in terms & conditions of labor Ferrer v. CIR (1966)
Mgt circularized EEs informing them of unions
Strikes for the ff purposes are illegal: refusal to sign CBA (did not contain security
1. Procure commission of unlawful or criminal act clause as pressed in the negotiation)
2. compel ER to join a boycott - strike not illegal; surrounding circumstances
3. overthrow the govt show that pet were reasonably justified in
believing that mgt act is ULP although absolved
Bargaining deadlock fr ULP hence reinstatement must be without back
SMC v. NLRC (1999) pay
CB deadlock (defined) situation bet labor &
mgt Ferrer ruling reiterated in Norton & Harrison
where there is failure in CB negotiations resulting - former pres of unions swift dismissal without
in a stalemate required procedure; union & members
By failing to exhaust all steps in grievance reasonably led to believing that dismissal was
machinery & arbitration proceedings in CBA; NS predicated upon his union activities
should have been dismissed by NLRC & ordered Since strike was in response to what it warranted
to proceed with GM & AP in believing in GF to be ULP of mgt; ff. Ferrer
In abandoning grievance proceedings & refusing ruling did not result in termination of striking
to avail of remedies under CBA, resp violated members status as EEs; reinstatement without
mandatory provisions of CBA; no ground to backwages
sustain NS
The Good-Faith Strike Doctrine Retraced &
Legality of strike not dependent upon ability of Reiterated
mgt to grant demands Case strike may be considered legal when
The demands that gave rise to strike may not be union believed that resp. company committed
properly granted but that fact should not make ULP & circumstances warranted such belief in GF,
said demands & the consequent strike illegal although subsequently allegations of ULP found
untrue
Lawful purpose: strike against ERs ULP Ferrer Ruling upheld in Shell case(1971) where
Union busting or interference with formation of a SC held that it is not even required that there be
union constitutes ULP act; a valid ground for in fact ULP committed by ER; it suffices if such
declaration of strike belief in GF is entertained by labor as inducing
Any ULP act uner Art 258 is strikeable factor in staging a strike; strike not illegal
strikers not lost their status as EEs

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 9
 strike (no NS, SVR or 7day strike ban after SV;
Pepito v. SoLE (1980) pets were entitled not completely disregarded procedural steps); NFL
only to reinstatement but also to backwages; asserts that strike can be declared legal for it
strike was not illegal but was induced by honest was done in GF
belief that mgt committed ULP; thus cause of Held RA 6715 (Mar 21, 1989) Reqts as the
dismissal fr EET was nonexistent filing of NS, SV and notice to DOLE are
mandatory in nature; thus even if union acted in
Pepsi-cola LU v. NLRC (1982) pendency of GF in the belief that company was committing
election contest; winning union filed NS; Pepsi ULP; strike was illegal
countered that it was willing to bargain but there
was no yet final decision on appeal of losing Lawful Purpose: Strike to compel Recognition of
union &
SC said that a strike does not automatically carry Bargaining with majority union
the stigma of illegality even if no ULP were Caltex v. CIR (1972) Assoc asked company for
committed by ER; belief in GF suffices as recognition as EBR; company asked position
inducing factor in staging a strike listings assoc did not submit; Assoc filed NS
Although strike in this case was illegal, no proof Held SC held strike was legal; the strike was
that all union members participated in illegal declared not just for purpose of gaining
strike recognition but also for bargaining in BF by
In Esso Phil case, the ones who deserve company & ULP committed by its officials; cannot
punishment are the officers of union who staged be labeled unlawful
the strike in defiance of Med-A ruling
Unlawful purpose: Strike for union recognition
Good-Faith Strike Doctrine applied even to a without having proven majority status
strike without prior notice & despite a No-strike The legal way to secure union reg is not thru
clause strike but thru CE or VR by ERif no doubt as to
Phil Metal Foundries v. CIR (1979) company unions majority status
assailed legality of strike on ground that it was But where majority status of a union in not in
declared without prior notice & in violation of no- doubt despite this ER still refuses to bargain
strike clause of CBA (Caltex case above); the situation is ULP act by
SC declared strike legal when union declared a ER
strike in the belief that dismissal of Baylon was
due to his union activities, said strike was not 3 Jurisdictional preconditions to CB:
illegal (belief in GF as inducing factor) & not a 1. possession of majority status
violation of no-strike clause. 2. proof of majority representation
A no-strike clause prohibition in CBA applicable 3. demand to bargain
only to economic strikes If any or all these preconditions are not present,
it will be premature for a union to hold a strike to
Even Good-Faith strike requires a Rational Basis compel bargaining
GF strike does not tolerate a groundless strike; AIUP, Densing et al v. Cenapro (1999) CBA
does not excuse unions non-presentation of excluded casual EEs fr membership in incumbent
substantial evidence to support allegation of ULP union; formed an org & affiliated with AIUP filed
by ER NS
Tiu v. NLRC (1997) mgt issued guidelines to Held union recognition strike is calculated to
minimize OT expenses union did not submit any compel ER to recognize ones union as EBR to
comment; when put into effect if filed NS work out a CBA despite striking unions doubtful
Union gave no particulars then went on strike majority status to merit VR & lack of formal
Held NS contained general allegations that mgt certification as EBR
committed ULP amounting to union busting At the time AIUP filed PCE there was an existing
IT is the union who had the burden of proof to CBA; the petition should not have been
present substantial evidence to support its entertained because of the contract-bar rule
allegations
GR presumption of legality of strike prevails May a minority union strike? NO!
even if allegations of ULP are subsequently found Minority union cannot demand CB with ER;
out to be untrue cannot lawfully undertake strike against ER,
But in this case, the facts & evidence did not neither can it picket to compel bargaining
establish even a rational basis. It is not enough After a union has been certified as EBR, a strike
that union believed that ER committed ULP when by a minority union to compel an ER to bargain
circumstances clearly negate even a prima facie with it is unlawful
showing to warrant such belief Although minority union cannot strike, it can
engage in peaceful concerted activity short of
Do the procedural reqts apply even to a ULP strike & can file ULP complaint
strike in GF? YES! Mandatory
NFL v. NLRC & Permex (1997) union failed to Strike held to compel recognition while case is
comply with statutory reqts necessary for a valid unresolved

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 10
Luzon Marine Devt Union v. Roldan (1950)
LMDU presented a petition to ER including 2. Companys sales evaluation policy
recognition with right to CB; UOEF intervened GTE v. Sanchez (1991) ruling upon a similar
claiming it was EBR. While proceedings b4 CIR issue in San Miguel v. Ople that companys
was still unresolved LMDU declared a strike adoption of a new sales evaluation & production
Held strike was illegal policy was within its mgt prerogative; Until &
unless the rules or orders are declared to be
Unlawful purpose: Trivial; Unjust or illegal or improper by competent authority EEs
Unreasonable ignore or disobey them at their peril
Under the law, during the pendency of an Promulgations of company policies are basic mgt
industrial dispute b4 CIR, ER cannot lay off much prerogatives
less dismiss petitioning EE without permission It is recognized principle of law that company
If a strike is declared for trivial, unjust or policies & regulations are unless shown to be
unreasonable purpose, or carried out thru grossly oppressive or contrary to law; generally
unlawful means, court will declare it illegal binding and valid on the parties & must be
The laws protection withheld if the motive that complied with until finally revised or amended
impels, prompts, moves or leads members of LU unilaterally or thru nego(prefer) or by competent
or org to stage a strike be unlawful, ilegitimate, authorities
unjust, unreasonable, or trivial
3. Salary distortion under the Wage
Illegal strike: Shaven-head strikers (kalbo) in rationalization act
toursist-class hotel Ilaw at buklod Manggagawa v. NLRC (1991)
Dusit Hotel v. CA (2008) some male unions IBM presented a demand for correction of
came to work sporting closely cropped hair or significant distortion in workers wage
cleanly shaven heads; hotel terminated 29 union Held legislative intent that solution of problem
officers, 61 members & suspended others of wage distortions shall be sought by voluntary
Held unions violation of hotels grooming stds nego or arbitration & not by strikes, lockouts or
was clearly a deliberate & concerted action; not other concerted activities of EEs or mgt is made
protected action; considered illegal strike clear in IRR of RA 6727
Rule13 Sec6 IRR prohibits commission of any The partial strike or concerted refusal by union
act which will disrupt or impede early settlement members to follow their 5yr old work sched;
of labor disputes under conciliation resorted to as a means of coercing correction of
Since deadlock is being conciliated by NCMB, wage distortions was forbidden by law & contract
union officer/members action to heads shaved (CBA?); illegal
ws calculated to antagonize & embarrass hotel &
in doing so effectively disrupted operations IRR - Wage distortions me 1st voluntarily settled
violated their duty to bargain collectively by the parties & eventually by compulsory
arbitration; declares that any issue inv wage
Strike to compel removal of an EE; Implied distortion shall not be a ground for a
assertion of union infallibility strike/lockout
Right to strike is subj to restriction that primary
purpose must not be to injure an obnoxious EE & 4. Inter-union & intra-union dispute
that refusal to work with another workman may BLR exercises original & exclusive authority to
not be for an arbitrary cause act on all Inter-union & intra-union disputes
Whether dispute is bet or among unions (inter)
LDMU v. Roldan(1950) held that a strike or internal to 1 union; it does not involve ER thus
motivated by unreasonable demand demand of dispute cannot justify a work stoppage
LU for dismissal of factory foreman is illegal &
unjustified 4th factor. Means & Methods
CLU v. Std Vacuum Oil(1955) only A strike has to be pursued within the bounds of
objectionable feature of strike is unions law; law puts limits to their exercise
peremptory demand on mgt to transfer The limits are among the prohibited activities
V.Mauricio within 48hrs & its subsequent refusal under Art 264 par (e)
to extend period; this implied unacceptable That no person engaged in picketing shall
assertion of union infallibility 1. commit any act of violence, coercion or
intimidation
Unlawful purpose: Strike on nonstrikeable issue 2. obstruct free ingress to or egress fr ERs
Ex. Of nonstrikeable issues: premises for lawful purposes
1. Physical rearrangement of office 3. obstruct public thoroughfares
Reliance Surety v. NLRC (1991) ER effected a The use of violence or threat in pursuing labor
change in seating arrangement in dept.; those rights is punishable under RPC (Art289)
affected protested claiming that change was
without prior notice & done to harass them; Threats, Coercion or violence
court held that ER merely exercised reasonable Even if purpose of a strike is valid, strike may
prerogative EEs could not validly question still be held invalid where means employed are

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 11
illegal - not done with criminal intent; outcome of
The use of violence, intimidation, restraint or picketing carried to excess
coercion in carrying out concerted activities Instances may occur where a criminal action
which are injurious to rights of ppty or to a may lie; those so engaged may subj themselves
particular individuals make a strike illegal to serious criminal liability
Acts of violence justify the dismissal of guilty
strikers; EEs may be discharged for illegal acts or Blockade or obstruction
misconduct during a strike Art264(e) forbids obstruction of points of ingress
or egress as well as public thoroughfares
Note: Mere filing of charges against an EE for Such obstructions are beyond valid exercise of
alleged illegal acts during a strike does not by the right to strike because
itself justify his dismissal 1. they deprive the owners of the company
The charges must be proved at an investigation premises of its right to use them for lawful
where EE must be given opportunity to defend purposes &
himself; this is true even if the alleged ground 2. passers-by the use of public passage
constitutes a criminal offense
5th factor. Injunction
Violence on both sides 1. National Interest Cases; Automatic injunction
Where violence was committed on both sides & return-to-work order
during a strike, such violence cannot be a ground When there is a labor dispute causing or likely to
for declaring strike as illegal cause a strike affecting natl interest; SoLE may
either
Responsibility for use of force: Individual or a. assume jurisdiction or
collective? b. certify the dispute to NLRC for compulsory
GR To avoid rendering illusory the recognition arbitration
of the right to strike, responsibilities in such case SoLE may act upon his own initiative or upon
should be individual & not collective petition by any of the parties
E a diff conclusion would be called for if
existence of force while strike lasts was Assumption or certification by SoLE has the
pervasive & widespread consistently & effect of automatically enjoining the intended or
deliberately resorted to as a matter of policy impending strike or lockout as specified in the
A/Cert order
PMOG v. Cia Maritima (1968) acts of violence If one has already taken place at time of
committed were not mere isolated incidents; assumption or certification:
reveals that it was staged in pursuance of a a. all striking or locked out EEs shall immediately
preconceived plan return to work
Responsibility for these illegal acts must be on an b. ER shall immediately resume operations and
individual & not collective basis readmit all workers under same terms &
Although the strike was illegal because of the conditions prevailing b4 strike or lockout
commission of illegal acts, only the union officers
& strikers who engaged in violent, illegal & Note: This is an example of automatic injunction;
criminal acts against ER are deemed to have lost strictly limited to national interest cases
their EET status Even in those cases, parties retain option to
Union members who were merely instigated to submit the dispute to VA-ion
participate in illegal strike should be treated
differently A prohibited activity under Art264 is the holding
of a strike or lockout after assumption of
In order to hold LO liable for unlawful acts of jurisdiction by Pres or SoLE or after certification
individual officers, agents or members, there or submission of dispute to compulsory or VA-ion
must be proof of actual authorization or
ratification of such acts after actual knowledge The issuance of an injunction in National interest
thereof. cases in an exception to Art 254 which in general
Thus where a union thru its leaders not only had forbids labor injunctions
knowledge of acts of violence committed by
some of the strikers but either participated or Metrolab Industries v. Roldan(1996)
ratified it; strike was illegal & dismissal of all assumption or certification order under Art263(g)
active participants was justified (collective) has the effect of regulating mgt prerogative of
determining assignment or movement of EEs
Minor disorders Thus, pending resolution of the dispute; lay-off
- not intended by the act that minor disorders of 94 RAF EEs was declared illegal as it was
would deprive a striker of possibility of violative of the assumption order
reinstatement
What are considered national interest cases?
Officials inability to leave premises, not illegal LC vests Pres or SoLE almost unlimited discretion
detention to determine what industries may be considered

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 12
indispensable to natl interest NLRC for compulsory arbitration under Art
The assumption of jurisdiction by SoLE over 277(g) LC dealing with natl interest cases
labor disputes causing or likely to cause a strike A natl interest dispute may be certified to NLRC
or lockout in an industry indispensable to natl even b4 a strike is declared
interest in the in nature of police power measure Art 263 does not require existence of a strike but
only an industrial dispute
The SoLE acts to maintain industrial peace; his
cert for compulsory arbitration is not intended to When sitting in a compulsory arbitration certified
impede workers right to strike but to obtain to by SoLE, NLRC is not sitting as a judicial court
speedy settlement of dispute but as an admin body charged with duty to
implement the order of SoLE; its authority did
PSBA v. Noriel (1988) assumption of not include power to amend SoLEs order
jurisdiction by SoLE over labor disputes involving
academic institutions was upheld Clear intent of legislative body in enacting Art277
(263) (g)- not only to serve interest of parties
A dispute in a company supplying sulfate but community & economy as a whole
requirements of MWSS (as well as sulfuric acid of
NAPOCOR) is a natl interest dispute Effects of defiance
Noncompliance with certification order of SoLE
Category of Essential Activities considered an illegal act committed in the course
1. generation or distribution of energy of strike/lockout; shall authorize NLRC to enforce
2. those undertaken by banks, hospitals, export the same under pain of immediate disciplinary
oriented industries action inc dismissal or loss of EET status or
National Interest by Statutory Declaration payment by locking out ER of backwages,
General Banking Law (revised in 200) explicitly damages &/or other affirmative relief even
classifies banking as an industry indispensable to criminal prosecution against liable parties
natl interest
Grand Blvd Hotel v. GLOWRAIN (2003)
Assumption of Jurisdiction prior notice not Requisites of a valid Strike are:
required 1. NS filed with DOLE 30days b4 intended date
The discretion to assume jurisdiction may be (for bargaining deadlock) or 15days (in case of
exercised by SoLE without necessity of prior ULP)
notice or hearing given to any of the party 2. Strike vote must be approved by majority of
disputants the total union membership in BU by secret
Rationale for his primary assumption of ballot
jurisdiction rest on his own consideration of the 3. Notice must be given to DOLE of the results of
exigency of the situation in relation to natl the voting atleast 7days b4 intended strike
interest
In this case, union went on strike simultaneously
SoLE can immediately take action where a strike with filing of NS; illegal for failure to comply with
effectively paralyzed a vital industry without required periods
waiting the filing of NS A strike undertaken despite issuance by SoLE of
a certification order becomes a prohibited
Procedural details of assumption of jurisdiction activity thus illegal [Art 264(a)]
DO 40-G-03 details the exercise of assumption GF not a valid excuse to dispense procedural
power of SoLE steps for lawful strike

Power to assume jurisdiction; constitutional Assumption or Certification Order immediately

Union of Filipro EEs v. Nestle (1990) UFE effective even without a return-to-work order;
questions power of SoLE to assume jurisdiction strike becomes an illegal activity
over a labor dispute tainted with natl interests or Union of Filipro v. Nestle (1990) issue on
to certify the same for compulsory arbitration legality of strike committed despite a return-to-
Held the continued validity & operation of work order
Art263 & 264 LC has been recognized by Phil Held- Assumption and certification orders are
Congress when it enacted into law RA 6715 executory in character & are strictly to be
(Herrera Law) Sec 27 amended par (g) & (i) of complied with by the parties even during
Art 263LC pendency of any petition questioning their
Art 263(g) & 263 LC has been enacted pursuant validity
to [police power of State inherent power of Striking workers cannot ignore RTW orders citing
govt; does not need to be expressly conferred by ULP of ER to justify their actions
the Consti]
Note: An assumption and/or certification order of
Certification to NLRC SoLE automatically results in a return-to-work of
Certified Labor disputes cases referred to all striking workers; WON a corresponding order
has been issued by SoLE

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 13
Striking workers erred when they continued their staged in open & knowing defiance of the
strike alleging absence of return-of-work assumption & return-to-work orders
Once an assumption/cert order is issued, strikers
are enjoined OR if one has already taken place, Necessary consequence thereof is detailed by SC
all strikers shall immediately return to work in Marcopper Mining Corp v. Brillantes by
staging a strike after assumption of jurisdiction
A strike that is undertaken despite issuance by or certification for arbitration, workers forfeited
SoLE of an assumption/cert order becomes a their right to be admitted to work; having
prohibited activity thus illegal (Art 264) abandoned their EET, could be validly replaced
Note: Notice to the parties is a prerequisite even
if the order states that it is immediately Defying RTWO
executory Sarmiento v. Tuico (1988)
Return-to-work order in this situation is not a
PNOC Dockyard v. NLRC (1998) matter of option or voluntariness but of
Rule no order, decision or resolution, not even obligation; reason such return can be compelled
one that is immediately executor is binding & Not even considered violative of right against
automatically executor unless and until proper involuntary servitude
parties are duly notified therefor The worker can give up his work, if he does not
- order not validly served on resps, since their want to obey the order; but the order must be
supposed copy was; left only with a security obeyed if he wants to retain his work
guard at the gate of the premises of union The RTWO should benefit only those workers
who comply with it & regardless of the outcome
Refusal to Receive Return-to-work order of compulsory arbitration proceedings; entitled
Refusal to receive assumption of jurisdiction to be paid for work actually performed
order(AJO) amounts to defiance of order, which
defiance makes the continuation of the strike an Note: Where the return to work order is issued
illegal act; subjecting the strikers to loss of EET pending determination of the legality of strike; it
status is incorrect to say that it may be enforced only if
The strikers shall immediately resume work upon strike is legal & may be disregarded if strike is
receipt or constructive receipt of order illegal
Purpose of RTWO is to maintain status quo while
University of San Agustin v. CA (2006) determination is being made
- std operating procedure of office uf USec for
LAbRel which considers AJOs as duly served
upon posting of copies thereof on designated Defiance of RTWO, an illegal act
places; procedure was adopted to prevent Not only union officers but also union members
thwarting of AJOs by simple expedient refusal of who defy RTWO are subj to dismissal; they are
parties to receive it (as in this case) deemed to have participated in the illegal act

Well settled practice that the SoLE always gives St Scholasticas College v. Samahan (1992) -
24hrs to striking workers within which to return RTWO is immediately effective & executor
to work notwithstanding the filing of MR; it must be
But settled practice has no basis in law & strictly complied with even during the pendency
jurisprudence; immediately return to work of any petition questioning its validity; until set
indicates an almost instantaneous of automatic aside, it must be immediately complied with
compliance for a striker to return to work once Rationale is explained in UST v. NLRC citing
AJO has been duly served PALEA v. PAL

Mere issuance of an assumption order by SoLE Any declaration of strike or lockout after SoLE
automatically carries with it a return-to-work has assumed jurisdiction over the labor dispute
order [SEE Art278 (264) (a)] is considered an illegal act
Any worker or union officer who knowingly
Rationale for this prohibition is that once participates in a strike defying a RTWO may
jurisdiction over labor dispute has been properly consequently be declared to have lost his EET
acquired by competent authority, such status
jurisdiction should not be interfered with by Note: Fr the moment a worker defies a RTWO,
application of coercive process of a strike he is deemed to have abandoned his job

SC held in a no. of cases that defiance to the Federation of Free Workers v. Inciong
assumption & return-to-work orders of SoLE Workers were terminated fr work after defying
after he has assumed jurisdiction is a valid RTWO for only 9days
ground for loss of EET status of any striking Held Resp gravely abused his discretion when
union officer or member he ordered reinstatement of striking union
members who refused to work after he issued 2
The strike of union is illegal for having been RTWO which in itself is knowingly participating in

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 14
an illegal act

A strike undertaken despite issuance by SoLE of

assumption/cert order becomes a prohibited
activity thus illegal pursuant to Art 263(a); union
officers & members who participated in said
illegal activity deemed to have lost their EET
status
But to justify dismissal, defiance of RTWO must
be proved
Note: An EE who takes steps to protest his lay-
off cannot be said to have abandoned his work

For abandonment to constitute valid cause for

termination of EET, there must be a deliberate,
unjustified refusal of EE to resume his EET;
refusal must be clearly established
Thus, the alleged or perceived defiance of RTWO
does not mean automatic dismissal of defying
EEs.
Due process must be observed
Given the chance to explain, EES may prove that
no defiance at all

Individual identification of strikers

Each of the(se) officers must be individually
identified & the extend or nature of his
participation proven with certainty otherwise
termination is invalid

Aglosolos_LabRelNotes2017 Page 15