EMPLOYEES UNION OF BAYER VS BAYER G.R. No. 162943

Topic: Enforcement and remedies – Intra-union disputes; jurisdiction;  procedure and sanctions:

QUICKIE FACTS: Employees Union is the Collective bargaining agent of Bayer headed by Facundo However, there was a breakaway group named Reformed Employees’ Union headed by Remigio. The union dues collected by Bayer was then remitted to the Reformed Union despite the existence of a CBA between the company and the Union. The Union then filed an unfair labor practice complaint against Bayer and Remigio. Bayer was found guilty of unfair labor practice. The case against Remigio was dismissed because the rift between Facundo’s group and Remigio’s group is an intra-union dispute.

FACTS:

1. Petitioner Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (Union) is the exclusive bargaining agent of all rank-and-file employees of Bayer Philippines, and is an affiliate of the Federation of Free Workers (FFW).

2.  In 1997, the Union, headed by its president Juanito S. Facundo, negotiated with Bayer for the signing of a CBA. During the negotiations, the Union rejected Bayer’s 9.9% wage-increase proposal resulting in a bargaining deadlock. Subsequently, the Union staged a strike, prompting the Secretary of DOLE to assume jurisdiction over the dispute.

3.  Pending the resolution of the dispute, respondent Avelina Remigio and 27 other union members, without any authority from their union leaders, accepted Bayers wage-increase proposal. The DOLE Secretary issued an arbitral award ordering EUBP and Bayer to execute a CBA.

4.  Meanwhile, the rift between Facundo’s leadership and Remigio’s group broadened. Six months from the signing of the new CBA, Remigio solicited signatures from union members in support of a resolution containing the decision of the signatories to: (1) disaffiliate from FFW, (2) rename the union as Reformed Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (Reformed Union), (3) adopt a new constitution and by-laws for the union, (4) abolish all existing officer positions in the union and elect a new set of interim officers, and (5) authorize Reformed Union to administer the CBA between the Union and Bayer. The said resolution was signed by 147 of the 257 local union members.

5.  Both groups sought recognition from Bayer and demanded remittance of the union dues collected from its rank-and-file members. Bayer responded by deciding not to deal with either of the two groups, and by placing the union dues collected in a trust account until the conflict between the two groups is resolved.

6.  The Union filed a complaint for unfair labor practice (first unfair labor practice case) against Bayer for non-remittance of union dues. While the case was still pending and despite the Union’s repeated request for a grievance conference, Bayer decided to turn over the collected union dues to Reformed Union.

7.  Consequently, the Union lodged a complaint against Remigio’s group before the Industrial Relations Division of the DOLE praying for their expulsion from the Union for commission of "acts that threaten the life of the union."

8.    Labor Arbiter dismissed this complaint for lack of jurisdiction.

9.  Petitioners filed the second unfair labor practice complaint against herein respondents. Petitioners complained that Bayer refused to remit the collected union dues to EUBP despite several demands sent to the management and that the latter opted to negotiate instead with Remigio’s group.

10.  Reformed Union and Bayer agreed to sign a new CBA. In response, petitioners immediately filed an urgent motion for the issuance of a restraining order/injunction before the NLRC and the Labor Arbiter against respondents.

11.  Labor Arbiter: dismissed the Union’s second unfair labor practice complaint for lack of jurisdiction.

12.  NLRC: denied the Union’s appeal

13.  CA: sustained both the Labor Arbiter and the NLRCs rulings.

ISSUES:

W/N LA and NLRC have jurisdiction

W/N the instant case involves an intra-union dispute

W/N the company committed an act of unfair labor practice

RULINGS:

LA and NLRC have jurisdiction over the unfair labor practice complaint filed against Bayer. However, petitioner’s unfair labor practice complaint cannot prosper as against respondents Remigio et al because the issue, as against them, essentially involves an intra-union dispute

No, the case at bar is not about an intra-union dispute. The issues raised by petitioners do not fall under any of the circumstances constituting an intra-union dispute. More importantly, the petitioners do not seek a determination of whether it is the Facundo group (Union) or the Remigio group (Reformed Union) which is the true set of union officers. Instead, the issue raised pertained only to the validity of the acts of management.

Yes, the acts of the company constituted an unfair labor practice. When an employer proceeds to negotiate with a splinter union despite the existence of its valid CBA with the duly certified and exclusive bargaining agent, the former indubitably abandons its recognition of the latter and terminates the entire CBA.

DISPOSITIVE: Bayer is liable for unfair labor practice and they are ordered to remit to petitioners the collected union dues previously turned over to Remegio. The unfair labor practice complaint against Remegio is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction of LA and NLRC.

DOCTRINE: An intra-union dispute refers to any conflict between and among union members, including grievances arising from any violation of the rights and conditions of membership, violation of or disagreement over any provision of the union’s constitution and by-laws, or disputes arising from chartering or disaffiliation of the union.

It must be remembered that a CBA is entered into in order to foster stability and mutual cooperation between labor and capital. An employer should not be allowed to rescind unilaterally its CBA with the duly certified bargaining agent it had previously contracted with, and decide to bargain anew with a different group if there is no legitimate reason for doing so and without first following the proper procedure. If such behavior would be tolerated, bargaining and negotiations between the employer and the union will never be truthful and meaningful, and no CBA forged after arduous negotiations will ever be honored or be relied upon.