Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 58 views

    Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions (Paflu)

    Uploaded by

    JAED SALAZAR
    The Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by PAFLU challenging the certification of NAFLU as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees of Philippine Blooming Mills. The Court found that Director Noriel of the Bureau of Labor Relations did not act with grave abuse of discretion in granting certification to NAFLU, as NAFLU obtained the majority of valid votes cast under the applicable rules. The Court deferred to the interpretation of the Labor Code and its implementing rules by the executive officials responsible for its enforcement.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions (Paflu)

    Uploaded by

    JAED SALAZAR
    58 views4 pages
    The Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by PAFLU challenging the certification of NAFLU as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees of Philippine Blooming Mills. The Court found that Director Noriel of the Bureau of Labor Relations did not act with grave abuse of discretion in granting certification to NAFLU, as NAFLU obtained the majority of valid votes cast under the applicable rules. The Court deferred to the interpretation of the Labor Code and its implementing rules by the executive officials responsible for its enforcement.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF FREE LABOR UNIONS (PAFLU) ,.pptx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by PAFLU challenging the certification of NAFLU as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees of Philippine Blooming Mills. The Court found that Director Noriel of the Bureau of Labor Relations did not act with grave abuse of discretion in granting certification to NAFLU, as NAFLU obtained the majority of valid votes cast under the applicable rules. The Court deferred to the interpretation of the Labor Code and its implementing rules by the executive officials responsible for its enforcement.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    58 views4 pages

    Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions (Paflu)

    Uploaded by

    JAED SALAZAR
    The Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by PAFLU challenging the certification of NAFLU as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees of Philippine Blooming Mills. The Court found that Director Noriel of the Bureau of Labor Relations did not act with grave abuse of discretion in granting certification to NAFLU, as NAFLU obtained the majority of valid votes cast under the applicable rules. The Court deferred to the interpretation of the Labor Code and its implementing rules by the executive officials responsible for its enforcement.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 4

    PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF FREE LABOR

    UNIONS (PAFLU) ,
    PETITIONER, VS. BUREAU OF LABOR
    RELATIONS, HONORABLE
    CARMELO C. NORIEL, NATIONAL
    FEDERATION OF FREE LABOR
    UNIONS (NAFLU), AND PHILIPPINE
    BLOOMING MILLS CO., INC. ,
    RESPONDENTS
    G.R. No. L-43760. August 21, 1976
    FACTS:

     In the certification election held on February 27, 1976, respondent Union


    obtained 429 votes as against 414 of petitioner Union. Again, admittedly,
    under the Rules and Regulations implementing the present Labor Code, a
    majority of the valid votes cast suffices for certification of the victorious labor
    union as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent. There were four votes cast by
    employees who did not want any union. On its face therefore, respondent
    Union ought to have been certified in accordance with the above applicable
    rule. Petitioner, undeterred, would seize upon the doctrine announced in the
    case of Allied Workers Association of the Philippines v. Court of Industrial
    Relations that spoiled ballots should be counted in determining the valid votes
    cast. Considering there were seventeen spoiled ballots, it is the submission that
    there was a grave abuse of discretion on the part of respondent Director.
    ISSUES:

     Whether Director Noriel acted with grave abuse of discretion in granting NAFLU as the
    exclusive bargaining agent of all the employees in the Philippine Blooming Mills
    RULING/STATUTORY
    CONSTRUCTION APPLIED:
    Director Noriel did not act with grave abuse of discretion. Certiorari does not lie. The conclusion
    reached by the Court derives support from the deservedly high repute attached to the construction placed
    by the executive officials entrusted with the responsibility of applying a statute. The Rules and
    Regulations implementing the present Labor Code were issued by Secretary Blas Ople of the
    Department of Labor and took effect on 3 February 1975, the present Labor Code having been made
    known to the public as far back as 1 May 1974, although its date of effectivity was postponed to 1
    November 1974,. It would appear then that there was more than enough time for a really serious and
    careful study of such suppletory rules and regulations to avoid any inconsistency with the Code. This
    Court certainly cannot ignore the interpretation thereafter embodied in the Rules. As far back as In re
    Allen,” a 1903 decision, Justice McDonough, as ponente, cited this excerpt from the leading American
    case of Pennoyer v. McConnaughy, decided in 1891: “The principle that the contemporaneous
    construction of a statute by the executive officers of the government, whose duty it is to execute it, is
    entitled to great respect, and should ordinarily control the construction of the statute by the courts, is so
    firmly embedded in our jurisprudence that no authorities need be cited to support it.” There was a
    paraphrase by Justice Malcolm of such a pronouncement in Molina v. Rafferty,” a 1918 decision:
    “Courts will and should respect the contemporaneous construction placed upon a statute by the executive
    officers whose duty it is to enforce it, and unless such interpretation is clearly erroneous will ordinarily
    be controlled thereby.” Since then, such a doctrine has been reiterated in numerous decisions. As was
    emphasized by Chief Justice Castro, “the construction placed by the office charged with implementing
    and enforcing the provisions of a Code should he given controlling weight.” The Supreme Court
    dismissed the petition, with costs against petitioner PAFLU.

    You might also like