Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 103 views

    Pambansang Kapatiran Vs Secretary of Labor

    Uploaded by

    Nimpa Pichay
    Local union KAPATIRAN, under the National Workers Brotherhood, was formed by workers at Formey Plastic, Inc. and ratified its constitution in April 1993. KAPATIRAN then filed a petition for a certification election, claiming there was no existing union. However, Formey and intervenor KAMAPI, a federation, claimed a valid CBA was in place between Formey and KAMAPI until December 1996. The Med-Arbiter and Secretary of Labor upheld the existing CBA, applying the contract bar rule. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, noting the petition was filed outside the 60-day period before the CBA expired, making it invalid.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Pambansang Kapatiran Vs Secretary of Labor

    Uploaded by

    Nimpa Pichay
    103 views1 page
    Local union KAPATIRAN, under the National Workers Brotherhood, was formed by workers at Formey Plastic, Inc. and ratified its constitution in April 1993. KAPATIRAN then filed a petition for a certification election, claiming there was no existing union. However, Formey and intervenor KAMAPI, a federation, claimed a valid CBA was in place between Formey and KAMAPI until December 1996. The Med-Arbiter and Secretary of Labor upheld the existing CBA, applying the contract bar rule. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, noting the petition was filed outside the 60-day period before the CBA expired, making it invalid.

    Original Description:

    Kapatiran

    Original Title

    Pambansang Kapatiran vs Secretary of Labor

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Local union KAPATIRAN, under the National Workers Brotherhood, was formed by workers at Formey Plastic, Inc. and ratified its constitution in April 1993. KAPATIRAN then filed a petition for a certification election, claiming there was no existing union. However, Formey and intervenor KAMAPI, a federation, claimed a valid CBA was in place between Formey and KAMAPI until December 1996. The Med-Arbiter and Secretary of Labor upheld the existing CBA, applying the contract bar rule. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, noting the petition was filed outside the 60-day period before the CBA expired, making it invalid.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    103 views1 page

    Pambansang Kapatiran Vs Secretary of Labor

    Uploaded by

    Nimpa Pichay
    Local union KAPATIRAN, under the National Workers Brotherhood, was formed by workers at Formey Plastic, Inc. and ratified its constitution in April 1993. KAPATIRAN then filed a petition for a certification election, claiming there was no existing union. However, Formey and intervenor KAMAPI, a federation, claimed a valid CBA was in place between Formey and KAMAPI until December 1996. The Med-Arbiter and Secretary of Labor upheld the existing CBA, applying the contract bar rule. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, noting the petition was filed outside the 60-day period before the CBA expired, making it invalid.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    1 Set_70 Pambansang Kapatiran ng mga Anak Pawis vs. Secretary of Labor PICHAY, NIMPA T.

    Local Unions and Federation PAMBANSANG KAPATIRAN NG MGA ANAK PAWIS vs. SECRETARY OF LABOR G.R. No. 111836, February 1, 1996 BELLOSILLO,J.

    st

    FACTS: The rank and file workers of Formey Plastic, Inc. (FORMEY), formed a local union known as Pambansang Kapatiran ng mga Anak Pawis sa Formey Plastic (KAPATIRAN) under the auspices of the National Workers Brotherhood (NWB). They ratified their Constitution and By-Laws on 4 April 1993. On 22 April 1993 KAPATIRAN filed a Petition for Certification Election alleging that there was no existing and effective CBA between FORMEY and any union; neither was there any recognized union within the company. FORMEY moved to dismiss the petition while Kalipunan ng Manggagawang Pilipino (KAMAPI) intervened and likewise moved to dismiss on the ground that there was already a duly registered CBA covering period Jan. 1, 1992 to Dec. 31, 1996, therefore the contract bar rule will apply. KAPATIRAN opposed both motion to dismiss claiming that the CBA executed between FORMEY and KAMAPI was fraudulently registered with the DOLE and that it was defective since what was certified as bargaining agent was KAMAPI which as federation only served as mere agent of the local union and without any legal personality to sign in behalf of the latter. Med-Arbiter found that there is a valid and existing CBA between FORMEY and KAMAPI which effectively barred the filing for petition for certification election. KAPATIRAN appealed imputing grave abuse of discretion to the Med-Arbiter in applying the contract bar rule. Secretary of Labor upheld the decision of Med-Arbiter. KAPATIRAN filed a motion for reconsideration which was likewise denied.

    ISSUES: 1. Whether or not the petition for certification election was properly filed. 2. Whether or not there was a valid CBA between FORMEY and KAMAPI. HELD: 1. No, the petition for certification election was not properly filed. The CBA entered into between FORMEY and KAMAPI was made effectively Jan. 1, 1992 and will expire Dec. 31, 1996. The petition for certification election was filed on April 22, 1993 which was filed before the so-called 60-day freedom period. 2. Yes, the court affirmed that there was a valid CBA between FORMEY and KAMAPI. Art. 253-A of the labor code provides that no petition questioning the majority status of the incumbent bargaining agent shall be entertained and no certification election shall be conducted by the DOLE outside the 60-day period immediately before the date of expiry of such 5 year term of the CBA.

    WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The decision of the Secretary of Labor and Employment dated 15 August 1993 sustaining the order of the Med-Arbiter dated 31 May 1993 is AFFIRMED.

    You might also like