FACTS: LMG has three divisions and there are two unions within one of the divisions. One union represents the daily paid employees and the other union represents the monthly paid employees. Chemical Workers Union, respondent, a duly registered labor organization acts as the collective bargaining agent of all the daily paid employees of petitioner’s Inorganic Division. Negotiations for a new CBA took place as the old CBA was about to expire. They were able to agree on the political provisions of the new CBA, but no agreement was reached on the issue of wage increase and economic issues were also not settled so with the negotiations at a deadlock. The union filed a Notice of Strike with the NCMB and despite several conferences and efforts of the conciliator-mediator, the parties failed to reach an amicable settlement so the union staged a strike. In an attempt to end the strike early, petitioner made an improved offer. Another conciliation meeting was held and petitioner reiterated its improved offer but the union rejected it. The Secretary of Labor found the labor dispute impressed with national interest and assumed jurisdiction. Then petitioner stated that it could no longer afford to grant its previous offer due to serous losses of the division so they made a lower offer. The union claims it has a positive performance in terms of income. The Secretary ordered the company to increase the wages but all other economic demands of the union were rejected. Also since the new CBA wasn’t signed within 6 months after the old one expired and the parties could not agree as to the retroactivity, the Secretary fixed the date of retroactivity.
ISSUE: W/N the company should be made to pay increased wages despite losses and whether or not the Secretary of Labor could fix the date of effectivity.
HELD: The SC ruled that the wage increases were justified. It is the income from all sources that determine financial condition. A particular division may have lost money, but other divisions may make up for it so there will be net income as a whole. Also, the company granted an increase to its’ supervisory employees so it’s unfair to deny a wage increase to the rank and file workers.
On the second ground, the SC ruled that the Secretary’s authority to assume jurisdiction carries with it’s the power to determine the retroactivity of the CBA. The authority of the Secretary to assume jurisdiction over a labor dispute includes and extends to all questions and controversies arising there from. The power is plenary and discretionary in nature for an effective and efficient disposal of the primary dispute. To deprive the Secretary of such power and discretion runs counter to the well-established rule that all doubts in the interpretation of labor laws be resolved in favor of labor. The SC is only giving meaning to this rule as the labor authorities should be helped in providing workers immediate benefits, without being hampered by arbitration or litigation processes that prove to be nerve-wracking and financially burdensome.
0 comments:
Post a Comment