Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 465 views

    Employees Union of Bayer v. Bayer Phils.

    Uploaded by

    Trxc Magsino
    This case involves a dispute between two unions - the Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (EUBP) and the Reformed Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (REUBP). EUBP was the recognized bargaining agent but a group of its members formed REUBP. Both unions claimed right to receive union dues from Bayer. Bayer initially put the dues in trust but later released them to REUBP. The Supreme Court ruled that while the dispute between the unions was intra-union, Bayer committed an unfair labor practice by unilaterally negotiating a new CBA with REUBP instead of adhering to its existing CBA with EUBP.

    Copyright:

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

    Employees Union of Bayer v. Bayer Phils.

    Uploaded by

    Trxc Magsino
    465 views3 pages
    This case involves a dispute between two unions - the Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (EUBP) and the Reformed Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (REUBP). EUBP was the recognized bargaining agent but a group of its members formed REUBP. Both unions claimed right to receive union dues from Bayer. Bayer initially put the dues in trust but later released them to REUBP. The Supreme Court ruled that while the dispute between the unions was intra-union, Bayer committed an unfair labor practice by unilaterally negotiating a new CBA with REUBP instead of adhering to its existing CBA with EUBP.

    Original Description:

    Labor Law II digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute between two unions - the Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (EUBP) and the Reformed Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (REUBP). EUBP was the recognized bargaining agent but a group of its members formed REUBP. Both unions claimed right to receive union dues from Bayer. Bayer initially put the dues in trust but later released them to REUBP. The Supreme Court ruled that while the dispute between the unions was intra-union, Bayer committed an unfair labor practice by unilaterally negotiating a new CBA with REUBP instead of adhering to its existing CBA with EUBP.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    465 views3 pages

    Employees Union of Bayer v. Bayer Phils.

    Uploaded by

    Trxc Magsino
    This case involves a dispute between two unions - the Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (EUBP) and the Reformed Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (REUBP). EUBP was the recognized bargaining agent but a group of its members formed REUBP. Both unions claimed right to receive union dues from Bayer. Bayer initially put the dues in trust but later released them to REUBP. The Supreme Court ruled that while the dispute between the unions was intra-union, Bayer committed an unfair labor practice by unilaterally negotiating a new CBA with REUBP instead of adhering to its existing CBA with EUBP.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    12 Employees Union of Bayer v. Bayer Phils.

    G.R. No. 169243, December 6, 2010

    EMERGENCY RECIT:
    EUBP <3 Bayer. Bayer proposed 9.9% wage increase, EUBP didn't agree ENTER UNION
    MEMBER REMIGIO (REUBP aka abangers) REUBP accepted the 9.9% wage increase w/o
    authority from EUBP. Remigio went around and asked the union members to join her new union
    and most of them did. Now EUBP and REUBP are asking for remittance of the union dues.
    Bayer decided not to interfere and put the union dues in a trust account. 1 st ULP was filed for
    non-remittance of union dues. Pending this (ang taksil) Bayer turned over the dues to REUBP
    (wow). 1st ULP was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 2nd ULP filed. A new CBA entered into by
    REUBP and Bayer. 2nd ULP dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appealed to CA, denied. Appealed
    to SC PROCEED TO ISSUE!

    Facts:
    Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (EUBP) is the exclusive bargaining agent of Bayer
    Philippines and an affiliate of Federation of Free Workers (FFW)
    1997 EUBP (headed by Facundo) negotiated with Bayer for the signing of a CBA,
    during the negotiations EUBP rejected Bayers proposal of a 9.9% wage increase
    resulting in a bargaining deadlock which led to a strike and for the DOLE
    Secretary to assume jurisdiction
    Pending the resolution of the dispute, Remigio and 27 other union members accepted
    the wage increase proposal W/O any authority from EUBP
    EUBPs grievance committee questioned Remigios actions and reprimanded her and
    her allies
    1998 DOLE Secretary issued an arbitral award ordering EUBP and Bayer to
    execute a CBA retroactive to Jan 1, 1997 and be made effective until Dec 31, 2001
    CBA was registered in 1998 with the Industrial Relations Division of DOLE-NCR
    The rift between Facundo and Remigio grew, and in Aug of 1998 barely six
    months from the signing of the new CBA, Remigio solicited signatures from union
    members in support of a resolution
    Resolution stating the decisions of the signatories to:
    o Disaffiliate with FFW
    o Rename the union to Reformed Employees Union of Bayer Philippines (REUBP)
    o Adopt new constitution and by laws
    o Abolish all existing officers positions and elect a new set of interim officers
    o Authorize REUBP to administer the CBA between EUBP and Bayer
    The resolution was signed by 147 of the 257 local union members, a subsequent
    resolution was also issued affirming the first resolution
    EUBP and REUBP both sough the recognition and demanded the remittance of the
    union dues collected from the rnf members from Bayer
    Sept 1998 Remigio group wrote to Facundo, FFW, and Bayer informing them of the
    decision of the majority union members to disaffiliate from FFW, another letter followed,
    informing them that:
    o An interim set of executive officers, board of directors of REUBP had been
    appointed and
    o Demanding the remittance of all union dues to REUBP
    o Remigio also asked Bayer to desist from further transacting with EUBP
    Facundo on the hand sent similar requests to Bayer for the remittance of the union dues
    Bayer decided not to deal with either and put the union dues in a trust account until the
    conflict between the two groups was resolved
    Sept 1998 EUBP filed a ULP case (1 st ULP) against Bayer for non-remittance of
    union dues
    EUBP sent a letter to Bayer asking for a grievance conference with all the REUBP
    officers, Facundo did not attend but sent two officers informing them that a preventive
    mediation conference between the two groups has been scheduled with the National
    Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) both groups failed to settle so Facundo sent
    two more letters asking for grievance meeting with the management
    Pending 1st ULP Bayer decided to turn over the union dues to REUBP
    EUBP filed a complaint for expulsion against Remigios group with the Industrial
    Relations Division of DOLE for commission of acts threatening the life of the union.
    1999 1st ULP was dismissed lack of jurisdiction, the LA explained that the root
    cause of Bayers failure to remit the union dues was due to an intra-union dispute
    between EUBP and REUBP and this should have been brought with the voluntary
    arbitration
    Dec 1999 2nd ULP case was filed charging respondents of forming a company
    union, gross violation of the CBA and the violation of their duty to bargain
    REUBP and Bayer signed a new CBA
    EUBP filed a motion for the issuance of a restraining order/injunction before the NLRC
    and the LA, they asserted their authority as the EBR
    Subsequently, EUBP amended their 2nd ULP complaint to include gross violation of the
    CBA for violating the contract bar rule
    Industrial Relations Division dismissed the complaint for expulsion for failing to
    exhaust reliefs within the union, this decision was appealed to the BLR where the
    decision was reversed
    Unfortunately BLR ruling came late as the new CBA was ratified by majority of the
    BU
    2000 - 2nd ULP case was dismissed lack of jurisdiction; the LA explained that the case
    was an intra-union dispute to which the BLR has jurisdiction over and not the NLRC
    Motion for issuance of a restraining order was also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, one
    being a case for intra-union dispute
    EUBP appealed the decision NLRC denied, MR denied
    EUBP filed a Rule 65 to the CA which sustained both rulings of the LA and NLRC
    EUBP filed a Rule 45 to the SC

    Issue:
    Were the acts of Bayer, in dealing with a splinter group of the EBR despite the existence
    of a CBA with EUBP, considered a ULP?
    Held:
    Partly meritorious so, yes and no.
    Disposing of the issue as to whether the charges were intra-union dispute: NO. Not in
    the list, the issue raise is the validity of the acts of Bayer in light of an existing CBA this
    is not an intra-union dispute, this was cognizable by the NLRC so 2 nd ULP dismissal was
    ERRONEOUS.
    As against Remigio and cohorts; complaint was validly dismissed, the issue is clearly of
    the nature of an intra-union dispute (Rule XI, Sec 1 (m)), so for the LA and NLRC to rule
    on the validity or illegality, they would have to touch on issues outside their jurisdiction
    (propriety of disaffiliation, legality of establishment of REUBP)
    BAYERS ACTS WERE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE
    An employer should not be able to rescind unilaterally a 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.
    ART. 264. Duty to bargain collectively when there exists a collective bargaining
    agreement.Where there is a collective bargaining agreement, the duty to bargain
    collectively shall also mean that neither party shall terminate or modify such agreement
    during its lifetime
    Compliance with the terms and conditions of the CBA is mandated by law, so when a
    valid and binding CBA has been entered intothe employer is expected to observe the
    terms and conditions including the union dues and representation

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy