Labrel 3rd Exam Notes
Labrel 3rd Exam Notes
Labrel 3rd Exam Notes
Unfair Labor Practice disrupt industrial peace and hinder the promotion of healthy
and stable labor-management relations.
Unfair Labor Practice (ULP)
A violation of the employees’ right to self-organization or Consequently, unfair labor practices are not only violations
collective bargaining. It can be committed against the worker, of the civil rights of both labor and management but are also
and secondarily, against the union. criminal offenses against the State which shall be subject to
prosecution and punishment as herein provided.
Labor Code provisions on ULP Subject to the exercise by the President or by the Secretary
1. Art. 258 [247] – Prescribes the concept of ULP’s and the of Labor and Employment of the powers vested in them by
procedure for their prosecution. Articles 263 and 264 of this Code, the civil aspects of all
2. Art. 259 [248] – ULP committed by employers. cases involving unfair labor practices, which may include
3. Art. 260 [249] – ULP committed by the labor claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of
organization/union. damages, attorney’s fees and other affirmative relief, shall
4. Art. 274 [261] – gross violations of CBA as ULP. be under the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiters.
5. Art. 278(c) [263(c) – dismissal of union officers duly
elected thereby threatening the existence of the union The Labor Arbiters shall give utmost priority to the hearing
[Union busting]. and resolution of all cases involving unfair labor practices.
They shall resolve such cases within thirty (30) calendar
Actors in the commission of Unfair Labor Practice days from the time they are submitted for decision.
1. Employers [Art. 259] – only the officers and the agents of
the corporations, associations, partnerships who have Recovery of civil liability in the administrative proceedings
actually participated in or authorized/ratified the ULPs are shall bar recovery under the Civil Code. No criminal
criminally liable. prosecution under this Title may be instituted without a final
2. Labor Organization [Art. 260] – only the officers, judgment finding that an unfair labor practice was
members of the governing boards, representatives or committed, having been first obtained in the preceding
agents, or members of labor associations or organizations paragraph.
who have participated in or authorized/ratified the ULPs During the pendency of such administrative proceeding, the
are criminally liable. running of the period of prescription of the criminal offense
3. Third persons [Art. 257] herein penalized shall be considered interrupted:
Such right shall include the right to form, join, or assist labor - Prescriptive period for ULP is 1 year from the cause of
organizations for the purpose of collective bargaining action accrues.
through representatives of their own choosing and to - The 1 year prescriptive period is postponed if the
engage in lawful concerted activities for the same purpose administrative aspect is not yet completed.
for their mutual aid and protection, subject to the provisions
of Article 264 of this Code. Act that constitutes ULP
An act complained of as ULP must have a proximate and
Unfair labor practice in the Labor Code causal connection with the following:
ART. 258. [247] Concept of Unfair Labor Practice and 1. Exercise of the right to self-organization;
Procedure for Prosecution Thereof. – Unfair labor 2. Exercise of the right to collective bargaining; or
practices violate the right of workers and employees to 3. Compliance with the CBA.
self-organization*, are inimical to the legitimate
interests of both labor and management, including their ULP is committed against
right to bargain collectively and otherwise deal with each 1. Individual who possesses the right to self-organization; or
2. Labor organization [if another labor org is being favored in Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00), or imprisonment of not less
a way discriminatory to the former]. than three months nor more than three years, or both such
fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court.
Requisites of ULP
1. Employer-employee relationship between the offended In addition to such penalty, any alien found guilty shall be
party and the offender; and summarily deported upon completion of service of sentence.
2. The act complained of must be expressly mentioned as Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding, any
ULP in the Labor Code [If not mentioned in the LC, there criminal offense punished in this Code shall be under the
is no ULP]. concurrent jurisdiction of the Municipal or Regional Trial
Court.
Liabilities resulting from ULP
1. Administrative liability – order reinstating the employee - The penalties for ULP as a criminal offense is a fine of not
or a cease-and-desist order. less than P1,000 or more than P10,000 or imprisonment of
2. Civil liability – payment of actual, moral, exemplary, and not less than 3 months or more than 3 years or both at the
other forms of damages, attorney’s fees and other discretion of the court.
affirmative relief. - It is personal in nature. The employer may be a juridical
3. Criminal liability – payment of fine or imprisonment. corporation but the one liable for the criminal violation are
the officers or agents of the corporation.
*Recovery of civil liability in the administrative proceedings of
the labor arbiter shall bar recovery under the Civil Code in the Difficulty of securing a conviction in the criminal aspect
regular courts. for ULP
- If the administrative proceeding will take long [ex: 15
Aspects of ULP years], there will be issues on whether you still have
1. Civil aspect witnesses or parties available.
- Under the labor arbiter’s jurisdiction. The labor arbiter has - The employees may no longer be in the company of the
the original and exclusive jurisdiction of ULP. employer and may have lost any interest in filling for the
- It can be compromised. criminal aspect.
- Quantum of evidence in administrative case is substantial - It is easier to secure a criminal conviction under the Wage
evidence. Rationalization Act [R.A 6727].
- If the finding of the labor arbiter is appealed, the
proceedings must continue until the last forum decides ULP committed by
with finality that there is ULP. Employers Labor Third persons
- The administrative proceeding interrupts the prescriptive [Art. 259] Organization [Art. 257]
period of the criminal offense. Even if the administrative [Art. 260]
proceeding takes as long as 15 years, you can still file a 1. Interfere 1. Restrain 1. Restrain
criminal case after. 2. Restrain 2. Coerce 2. Coerce
3. Coerce 3. Discriminate
2. Criminal aspect against
- Under the regular court’s jurisdiction. 4. Unduly
- It cannot be compromised but there can be desistance on interfere
the part of the complainant.
- ULP can be prosecuted as a criminal offense but only after Interference by management
the termination of the administrative ULP prosecution - You cannot help the union is you are the management.
under the Labor Code [cannot be prosecuted - Interference by speech is difficult to prove.
simultaneously because it will cause industrial division].
- Before it can ripen into a criminal case, there must first be Coercion
a final and executory finding that ULP has been civilly - Ex: Forcing an employee to resign from the union.
found to have been committed. - Restraint and coercion by way of conduct is easily proven
- The prosecutor’s office often cites the memorandum because it is a question of witnesses.
between the DOJ and DOLE which states that the
prosecutor’s office will refrain from entertaining labor *Restraint and coercion are already criminal violations under
related cases unless there is a clearance granted by the the RPC. It can be seen since it is behavioral. In interference it
secretary of labor. is more subtle [speech].
- The prosecutor will determine won there is a prima facie
case. Not all violations of the economic provisions of CBA are
- Evidence presented in the civil case cannot be used in the ULP
criminal case. You have to begin ab novo or from zero. - Where the acts complained of hinges on a question of
interpretation or implementation of ambiguous economic
Penalties for ULP as a criminal offense provision of the CBA, the same cannot be unfair labor
Article 288. Penalties. Except as otherwise provided in this practice [considered as grievance proceeding and
Code, or unless the act complained of hinges on a question jurisdiction is with the voluntary arbitrator].
of interpretation or implementation of ambiguous provisions - Only gross violations of economic provisions of the CBA
of an existing collective bargaining agreement any violation can constitute ULP.
of the provisions of this Code declared to be unlawful or - To be unfair labor practice it must be flagrant and or
penal in nature shall be punished with a fine of not less than malicious refusal to comply with an economic provision.
One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) nor more than Ten
ULP can be committed only in the private sector - Par.(a) is a summary of how ULP can be committed by
- If a government employee is harassed by his or her employers.
superior, on account of his or her union activities, a ULP - The listed offenses under Art. 259 are examples of
complaint cannot be brought against his government interference, restraint, or coercion.
superior. - Art. 259 is not an exhaustive list of ULP’s that may be
- The labor arbiter does not have jurisdiction over committed by the employer [ex: employer interference by
government employees. speech].
- The public sector complaints against superiors in
government for anti-union activities or acts are brought (b) To require as a condition of employment that a
before the PSLMC (Public Sector Labor Management person or an employee shall not join a labor
Council). organization or shall withdraw from one to which he
- The PSLMC has jurisdiction over labor relations matters belongs;
with respect to government employees.
Yellow dog contract
Sec. 15., E.O 180. A Public Sector Labor Management - It is an agreement which exacts from workers as a
Council, hereinafter referred to as the Council, is hereby condition of employment, that they shall not join or belong
constituted to be composed of the following: to a labor organization, or attempt to organize one, during
the period of their employment or that they shall withdraw
1. Chairman, Civil Service Commission Chairman; therefrom in case they are already members of a labor
2. Secretary, Department of Labor and Employment Vice organization.
Chairman; - A yellow dog contract is effectively an outright restriction
3. Secretary, Department of Finance Member; on the right to self-organization [ULP].
4. Secretary, Department of Justice Member; and - The employer interviewing you will ask you if you are a
5. Secretary, Department of Budget and Management member of a union and whether you have been in a strike.
Member. - The employer will require that the employee will not join a
labor organization or withdraw from one to which he
The Council shall implement and administer the provisions already belongs.
of this Executive Order. For this purpose, the Council shall
promulgate the necessary rules and regulations to Stipulations in a yellow dog contract
implement this Executive Order. 1. A representation by the employee that he is not a member
of a labor organization;
- There is no unfair labor practice against the government 2. A promise by the employee that he will not join a union;
equivalent to managerial employees. and
- The BLR has jurisdiction over inter-union and intra-union 3. A promise by the employee that upon joining a labor
disputes of unions made up government employees organization, he will quit his employment.
[employee’s organization].
(c) To contract out services or functions being
Election of officers and members of the board is an intra- performed by union members when such will interfere
union conflict within the jurisdiction of the BLR with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of
It is quite clear from this provision that BLR has the original and their right to self-organization;
exclusive jurisdiction on all inter-union and intra-union conflicts.
An intra-union conflict would refer to a conflict within or inside a Contracting out of services
labor union, and an inter-union controversy or dispute, one - You can contract out services that are not directly related
occurring or carried on between or among unions. to the main business or function of the employer. Such as
security services, maintenance services, janitorial
The subject of the case at bar, which is the election of the services, and other special admin services.
officers and members of the board of KMKK-MWSS, is, clearly, - The problem is you have to offer early retirement and
an intra-union conflict, being within or inside a labor union. It is separation benefits by which they would accede to being
well within the powers of the BLR to act upon. (Bautista vs. CA) terminated.
- It becomes ULP when the employer terminates employees
(d) To initiate, dominate, assist, or otherwise interfere - Changes in the working conditions to influence union
with the formation or administration of any labor behavior is ULP [ex: if management says that we will
organization, including the giving of financial or other discontinue our pick-up service because the union filed a
support to it or its organizers or supporters; notice of strike].
- But if management says, “we will no longer give housing
- The employer’s attitude towards a labor organization is not loans”, that is not ULP since it is not a change in the
to interfere and just stand-by. It should be neutral to the working conditions. It involves another contract [mutuum].
union. Thus, the LA or VA does not have jurisdiction over the
- The employer can help the union without running afoul loans.
with Art. 259(d) by providing in the CBA the benefits that
they wish to grant to the employees. In such case, the XPN: Union security clause is not ULP
management is just merely complying with the CBA, so it - Union security clause is a clause in the CBA which
is not ULP. It can be general welfare clause wherein provides that membership in the union is a condition for
management does not commit itself to specific grants on employment.
the fear that cannot sustain it. [ex: “such other support, - The clause requires that the employee must join the union
material, financial, etc., mutually acceptable to the union] once he becomes a regular employee.
- The employer cannot be faulted for ULP because he is just - If it involved company policies, ordinary illegal dismissal
complying with the CBA which requires that an employee provisions will apply.
who becomes regular must become a member of the
union. Distinction
Ordinary/Retaliatory Unfair Labor
Closed shop provision dismissal Practice
- The employer cannot hire persons who are not members dismissal
of the union. They must first become members of the Can be YES NO. Since it
union. compromised ripens into
criminal liability.
Union dues/agency fees must be stated in the union Can ripen into NO YES
security clause criminal
- Union members cannot be deducted union dues if it is not liability
recognized in a union security clause. Prescriptive 4 years 1 year
- Likewise, non-union members cannot be deducted agency period
fees if it is not stated in the union security clause. Reinstatemen NO. YES. Employee
t even if must be
(f) To dismiss, discharge or otherwise prejudice or position is If the employee reinstated.
discriminate against an employee for having given or abolished cannot be reinstated,
being about to give testimony under this Code; the employer must
give separation pay,
full-back wages plus
This provision in Art. 259(f) is similar to Art. 118 which 1 month salary for
provides: every year of service.
Burden of Employer must prove Complainant
Article 118. It shall be unlawful for an employer to refuse proof lawful dismissal must prove ULP
to pay or reduce the wages and benefits, discharge or in Conversion of NO. You cannot YES. If the 1-
any manner discriminate against any employee who has one case to move from ordinary year lapses and
filed any complaint or instituted any proceeding under this the other and illegal dismissal to no ULP dismissal
Title or has testified or is about to testify in such vice versa ULP dismissal. is filed, an
proceedings. ordinary illegal
dismissal case
Distinction between Art. 259(f) and Art. 118 may still be filed.
Art. 259(f) Art. 118
Labor Relations Labor Standards Dismissal for the
- Employee is - Retaliatory measure. exercise of the
dismissed/discharged - When an employee files right to self-
because he is about to a case against his organization is
file a complaint or about employer or provides a not a valid
to give a testimony for testimony supporting a ground for
ULP. complaint against labor dismissal.
- An employer standards. Example An employee is If the employer
discriminates against an - Labor standard dismissed because forced the
employee in the proceeding. of a violation of a employees to
exercise of his right to - Applies in an company policy. sign an
self-organization. unorganized workplace instrument
- It is when the employee and the employee has If the employee is indicating that the
gives testimony against just filed or testified in a always late or stole employer
the employer in an money claims or something and the observed labor
Unfair Labor Practice benefits complaint. other employee will standards
and the employer - If the employer say “no he is not late, provisions, when
punishes him by dismisses the and he did not steal.” he might not
withdrawing certain employee, then the law If the employer will have not,
benefits. compels the Labor remove the other together with the
- Even if his position has Arbiter to order the employee form work act of terminating
been abolished, the reinstatement of the that is supposed to or coercing those
court will still order the illegally dismissed be a witness, that is who refuse to
employer to reinstate employee by virtue of a retaliatory cooperate.
the employee. discrimination and the measure.
award of attorney’s fees The act preempts
and damages. the right of the
- The dismissal is based hotel workers to
on discrimination. seek better terms
and conditions of
- If it does not involve labor relations, Art. 118 is applied employment
because it is not related to the right to self-organization. through
concerted action. - It must be gross violations of economic provisions in the
CBA.
The workers are - There is gross violation when there is no question for
prevented from interpretation or there are no ambiguous terms and there
bargaining for is is flagrant and/or malicious refusal to comply with the
their wages since economic provisions of the CBA.
they were forced
to sign a waiver The provisions of the preceding paragraph
indicating that the notwithstanding, only the officers and agents of
employers corporations, associations, or partnerships who have
observe correct actually participated in, authorized or ratified unfair
labor standards. labor practices shall be held criminally liable.
The effect of which, it is brought out within the ambit of Interpretation of borderline speech
Art. 239 and is now covered by Art. 233 of the LC: The history of the speaker, the circumstances where that
Article 233 [227]. Compromise agreements. Any speech was uttered, and the general perception and the
compromise settlement, including those involving labor behavior of the speaker is considered in determining on
standard laws, voluntarily agreed upon by the parties with whether the borderline speech is ULP.
the assistance of the Bureau or the regional office of the
Secretary of Labor and Employment, shall be final and Borderline speech as ULP
binding upon the parties. - If there has been a history in the past where workers have
been complaining of unfair labor practices by the
The National Labor Relations Commission or any court employer, the borderline speech made by the employer is
shall not assume jurisdiction over issues involved therein ULP.
except in case of non-compliance thereof or if there is prima - If the employer has had a history of fighting unions of
facie evidence that the settlement was obtained through frustrating union organizations among its workers or
fraud, misrepresentation, or coercion. employees, the speech is ULP.
- Conversely, if the employer has a good history wherein he
- After it is brought out of the conciliation/mediation has no anti-union bias, then the borderline speech is not
proceedings, the compromise agreement becomes the law ULP.
between the parties. - Borderline speech partakes of the nature of what was
- The DOLE officials sign the agreement since it is with the historically exhibited by the employer.
assistance of the bureau/regional office of the DOLE. - Past activities can be presented in the trial on the merits to
prove habit, to prove a tendency. But it cannot be used to
The employer cannot interrogate an employee about his prove commission [not a violation of the rules of court/res
union activities or as to his exercise of right to self- inter alios acta rule].
organization - It only proves the habit that you are a habitual perpetrator
of unfair labor practice [disputable presumption].
Ex:
The employee was absent, and the management asks why. Dangerous Tendency Rule
The employee says that he was attending a union meeting. It is still ULP when an employer makes a threat even if
The employer says “Is that why you called in sick? And you nobody is actually threatened
expect us to look for a substitute because you are attending a The dangerous tendency rule is applied by the SC in unfair
union meeting?" That is unfair labor practice speech in a way labor practice cases. Even if you cannot produce the threat, if
because you are already interfering. your very words have the dangerous tendency of threatening
you are engaged in unfair labor practice. The yardstick that is
used is the words themselves. If the words in themselves have These are the rules in the U.S. and are applicable in the
a dangerous tendency to affect their exercise in the right to Philippines with respect to the kind of speech that the employer
self-organization, then it is ULP. can limit the employee in his exercise of the right to self-
organization.
The whole law seeks to abolish the threat to workers in the
exercise of the right to self-organization. If the words in 1. A no solicitation rule of union membership or
themselves are threatening, then ULP is committed. It does not prohibition against distribution of union literature
have to actually produce the threat. If the words that are used, during working hours/working time within company
taken in themselves are inimical to the exercise of the right to property is presumptively invalid.
self-organization, then ULP has been committed.
- The no-solicitation rule prohibiting employees at the
Application of dangerous tendency rule: Employer workplace from union solicitation is considered overly
threatening the employees that they are being spied upon broad and violative of the right to self-organization.
is ULP - It is presumed invalid because the rules are overly broad
To make the people believe that there are spies to defy people [during working hours or working time, or withing company
in the exercise of their rights is already threatening. You cannot property].
interrogate, you cannot put in spies in the ranks of your - The rule is susceptible of an interpretation by the
workers. You cannot make them believe that they are being employees that they were prohibited from engaging in
spied upon. protected activity during their free time [break periods or
meal times] or at so-called neutral areas like comfort
Use of expletives as a casual expression of surprise or rooms, cafeteria, dressing or locker rooms; these are not
exasperation work places and non-work related conversations may take
The use of expletives as a casual expression of surprise or place in these areas and during these times.
exasperation is not serious misconduct per se that warrants an - You cannot prohibit them from talking about union during
employee's dismissal. However, the employee's subsequent free time and within neutral areas.
acts showing willful and wrongful intent may be considered in
determining whether there is a just cause for their employment 2. Even though this is presumed invalid, evidence may
termination. be introduced to overcome the presumptive invalidity
or validity of the no solicitation or no distribution rule.
A teacher exclaiming "anak ng puta" after having encountered
a student is an unquestionable act of misconduct. However, These are evidence that would nullify an otherwise valid
whether it is serious misconduct that warrants the teacher's solicitation rule or will make an otherwise presumptively invalid
dismissal will depend on the context of the phrase's use. "Anak rule because it is overarching and too broad.
ng puta" is similar to "putang ina" in that it is an expletive
sometimes used as a casual expression of displeasure, rather Ex:
than a personal attack or insult. - If solicitation causes constant bickering between the pro-
union and anti-union employees, evidence may be
The utterance in question, "anak ng puta," was an expression introduced to show that the rule is necessary to maintain
of annoyance or exasperation without any clear intent to production or discipline.
maliciously damage or cause emotional harm upon the - A valid no solicitation rule may be unlawful if the employer
student. That they had not personally known each other before. simultaneously permits employees to engage during
Petitioner had no personal vendetta against Paula Mae as to working hours in extensive solicitation for charitable and
mean those words to insult her. other purposes or in solicitation on behalf of a certain
union or unions among a group of rivals or competing
While uttering an expletive out loud in the spur of the moment unions or in any union activities.
is not grave misconduct per se, the refusal to acknowledge this
mistake and the attempt to cause further damage and distress Sobrosa
to a minor student cannot be mere errors of judgment. - A term in Industrial relations which refer to when the union
Petitioner's subsequent acts are willful, which negate organizer tells the employees to bring more people.
professionalism in his behavior. In the interest of self- - Things are underground, and not out in the open because
preservation, petitioner refused to answer for his own mistake; the union is still a very insignificant minority. They might
instead, he played the victim and sought to find fault in a just be barred.
student who had no ill motive against him.
The open defiance and disrespect to school authorities and Employer cannot prevent employees from wearing union
processes are magnified in this case as respondent refused to arm bands or caps with “Union kita” and inviting others to
sign any order served on him. He even used, intentionally or join the union
unintentionally the letterhead of the AUFEA in his letters to the - That symbolic speech cannot be prevented by the
Committee and signed the same as AUFEA President when he employer.
is being complained of as a faculty member and not in his - The employer cannot interfere with the exercise of the
capacity as the Union President. (Adamson University right to self-organization.
Faculty and Union vs. Adamson University) - The employer can only stop union speech if it goes against
or threatens valid and legitimate business interest of the
employer. You cannot allow the union to talk at the
Rules on Solicitation assembly line while they are at the assembly.
- But during the breaks, the management cannot dictate
what will be the conversation there. The management
cannot enact a law which dictates what the conversations XPN: Isolated workplaces
are. You can solicit union membership during that time. However, in so called isolated workplaces, like agribusiness
or mining, the management cannot keep out union organizers.
XPNS to the General rules: The employees also live at the work site and if they cannot be
approached by the union organizers then the right to self-
3. In department stores, the general rule against organization is practically impossible to exercise. That is why
applying no solicitation rules to employees they cannot be prevented from entering these isolated
nonworking time does not apply and the reason is the workplaces.
presence of patients or customers in the working
areas, the cafeteria, like the corridors, the lobby, the Right prohibition policy by the employer
comfort rooms. The correct no solicitation rule should provide that there shall
be no union solicitation or union talk at the workstation during
4. Hospitals are justified in limited employee solicitation actual working time [specific and not broad].
and distribution rights even during nonworking hours
but only in patient care areas, and the reason, the Workplaces with neutral areas wherein union solicitation
need to provide a tranquil atmosphere for the patient. can be prohibited
The patients should be saved from dissenting 1. Shopping malls/department stores; and
exchange among employees. 2. Hospitals.
- These might be misunderstood by the by Union not prohibited from distributing flyers at the exit
customers/employees and this might cause alarm that is point of the company premises
not warranted in hospitals. Handbills/flyers is the best way to communicate what a union is
about. Prohibitions against distributions of union literature
5. Distribution of union literature by employees on solicitation cannot be prohibited at the exit/entrance. However,
company property may not be prohibited by rule in if it creates some form of physical risk of danger or injury, then
non-working areas and during non-working time. the company can prohibit the distribution thereof.
- The union can distribute flyers during non-working time Distributing handbills/flyers to the workers as they exit from the
even if it is within company premises as long as it is within workplace is allowed since it is already outside the premises. It
neutral areas. is covered by the employees’ freedom of speech. The
- However, the distribution may be prohibited in neutral employer cannot do anything about it because it is no longer
areas if there are safety concerns [littering]. within the workplace.
6. Distribution of union literature by non-employee union However, if employees would just throw the handbills, resulting
representatives within the company premises may be to clutter and danger causing people to slip and slide, the
prohibited. employer becomes negligent if he will not do anything about it.
The employer has the duty to make the workplace safe.
- A union organizer who is not an employee of the employer
is not allowed to go inside the work premises because he
is not an employee and he does not have the right to self- ULP by Labor Organization
organization vis-a-vis the company.
- A retail store's parking lot, even if it is open to the public, is Article 260. Unfair Labor Practices of Labor Organizations.
not in the nature of public property if it is owned by the It shall be unfair labor practice for a labor organization, its
company and a union does not have a free speech right to officers, agents or representatives:
enter it to solicit employees.
(a) To restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of
7. In situations where company property is isolated from their right to self-organization. However, a labor
a larger community (like agri-business mining organization shall have the right to prescribe its own
companies), as in the case of company-owned towns, rules with respect to the acquisition or retention of
ships, lumber camps, and the like, and employees membership;
cannot be reached outside the premises, union
organizers must be allowed reasonable access to ULP by labor organization/union
company property. 1. Restrain; or
- The employees also live within the company property. 2. Coerce.
- Their right to self-organization is practically rendered
nugatory if they are just left to themselves. Restraint or oercion
- They have no knowledge; they have no experience. In - Art. 260(a) is a generic description of ULP committed by
these kinds of isolated workplaces the employer cannot labor organizations.
prevent union organizers from entering the company - ULP on the part of the labor organization is actual restraint
premises. or coercion.
- Labor organizations can interfere in your right to self-
GR: Management can keep out union organizers from the organization and it is not ULP.
company premises. Union organizers do not have ER-EE - Interference by the union is not ULP. Suppose the union
relationship with the management. keeps on asking the employee “Are you pro-union? Which
union will you vote?” and the employee does not answer. deliver or agree to pay or deliver any money or other
That is not ULP even if the union is badgering him. The things of value, in the nature of an exaction, for
union has the right to campaign for their worker’s services which are not performed or not to be
allegiance. performed, including the demand for fee for union
negotiations;
It is only when the union is threatening the employee with
a crime that speech becomes restraint and coercion, or Kickback
ULP. An example would be is that if the union says “if you want your
- Threatening a co-employee that he will be cut-off from the cargo to be safe, you better contribute to the fund of the union;
clique or that no one will talk to him if he does not join a otherwise, we cannot guarantee the safety of your cargo.” The
certain union is not ULP. It does not amount to a crime employer is forced to pay for service that is not rendered. The
[non-actionable threat]. employers will pay them so the union will not destroy the cargo.
- However, it is ULP if the union tells another co-employee That is ULP.
“We know where you live, and you go home at night and
it's dark. Somebody might just smack you on the head and (e) To ask for or accept negotiation or attorney’s fees
that will be the last day of your life.” That is a veiled threat from employers as part of the settlement of any issue in
of murder and is already a crime and ULP [actionable collective bargaining or any other dispute;
threat].
- The making of false promises by a union to an employee Distinction between Art. 259(h) and Art. 260(e)
is not ULP. These are exaggerations since they are Art. 259(h) Art. 260(e)
running in the election, and they want to win. [ex: we will ULP by Employer Labor Organization
give one car for evert union member if we win the How Payment Mere asking
certification election]. committed
- A union has the right to prescribe its own rules with
respect to the acquisition or retention of members. Requisites of ULP under Art. 260(e)
However, once a labor union has a union security (1) The union or any of its officers, agents or
agreement, then the membership in a union does not representatives commit either of the following acts:
become the sole concern of the union. It is now replete a. To ask for negotiation fees or attorney’s fees; or
with public interest. b. To accept negotiation fees or attorney’s fees.
(b) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to - When the union, its officers, agents or representatives are
discriminate against an employee, including held guilty of ULP from the very moment they “ask” for
discrimination against an employee with respect to negotiation fees or attorney’s fees from the employer.
whom membership in such organization has been Under this situation.
denied or to terminate an employee on any ground - There is no need to prove that the employer has
other than the usual terms and conditions under which succumbed and given in to the union’s demand.
membership or continuation of membership is made
available to other members; (2) The negotiation fees or attorney’s fees are demanded
from, or given by, the employer as part of the settlement of
Discrimination any issues related to collective bargaining or any other
- Article 260 (b) is violation of union security clause. dispute.
- If a union does not have enough reason to expel an
employee and it has no evidence, then it goes to the - There is a need to prove that the union “asked for” or
management and forces the management to terminate an “accepted” the payment to it of the negotiation’s fees or
illegally expelled union member, then it commits ULP attorney’s fees by the employer, as principal consideration
under 260 (b), he caused the employer to discriminate for the settlement of any issues affecting labor
against a union member. management relations, or even if not a principal
- It is ULP when there is unjust expulsion of union members consideration, as part of the settlement of any such issues,
and the union subsequently compel the employer to chief of which are issues affecting collective bargaining.
terminate the expelled employee from employment.
(f) To violate a collective bargaining agreement.
(c) To violate the duty, or refuse to bargain collectively
with the employer, provided it is the representative of - It must be gross violations of economic provisions in the
the employees; CBA.
- Gross violation is the malicious or flagrant refusal to
Violation of duty of union to bargain collectively comply with the CBA.
- Refusal to comply with the duty to bargain is ULP.
- Art. 260(c) provides that it is the representative of the The provisions of the preceding paragraph
employees that violates the duty to bargain. notwithstanding, only the officers, members of
- Unless you are the exclusive bargaining agent, you cannot governing boards, representatives or agents or
demand negotiation. members of labor associations or organizations who
- There is no refusal to bargain/ULP if it is not a mandatory have actually participated in, authorized or ratified
subject of bargaining [outside the terms and conditions of unfair labor practices shall be held criminally liable.
work].
- The union is a juridical person.
(d) To cause or attempt to cause an employer to pay or
- Criminal liability is personal. The corporation cannot be disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and
held criminally liable because criminal liability is individual employee.
in nature.
- When the ULP has already ripened into a criminal case, (o). Strike means any temporary stoppage of work by the
the criminal liability devolves to individual or natural concerted action of employees, as a result of an industrial or
persons. labor dispute.
- It is the officers, representatives, agents, members of labor
associations or organizations who become criminally (p). Lockout means any temporary refusal of an employer
liable. to furnish work as a result of an industrial or labor dispute.
2. Concerted action of the employees The weightier right is this constitutional right and property right
- There must be more than one employee. of management can always be sacrificed. The work stoppage
- There must be collective action in a group. occurred not because it was intended but because they were
- It is the collective labor organization that is the not there since they were exercising their constitutional right.
legitimate and exclusive bargaining agent that There was no intention to stop the work. Their intention was to
exercises the right to strike. petition the government for redress of grievances and as a
- There is a need to file a new notice of strike when there is consequence there was no work. There is no illegal strike.
a change of union. (Philippine Blooming Mills Employment Organization vs.
Philippine Blooming Mills Inc. and CIR)
3. Industrial or labor dispute
- Any controversy or disagreement concerning the right to Merely supporting the union president in the investigation
self-organization, working conditions, or collective is not a strike
bargaining, or as to the issue of representation. The mass gathering of employees, lasting for more than an
- When jeepney drivers stop driving their vehicles because hour during office hours, inside office premises and within a
of price fuel increase [transport strike], that is not a strike. unit tasked to hear an administrative case, to protest the
It is not about the worker’s right to self-organization and prohibition against the appearance of their leader as counsel in
terms of conditions of work. The employer cannot control the said administrative case falls within the purview of the
the increase in fuel prices. It is not an industrial/labor constitutional guarantee to freedom of expression and peaceful
dispute. assembly; thus, it did not amount to a “prohibited concerted
- Picketing such as bringing placards is not in itself a strike. activity or mass action”.
4. Direct intention of work stoppage The Supreme Court said that there is no strike, since they are
- The work stoppage must be directly intended and must not merely giving moral support to the union president. There was
be side effect of a valid exercise of another right, no illegal strike because the work stoppage was not directly
- Jurisprudential element cited in Philippine Blooming Mills intended.
Employment Organization vs. Philippine Blooming Mills
Inc. and CIR. It was held that the employer cannot stop the Grounds for strike
employees from exercising their right to peaceably 1. ULP; or
assemble for redress and grievance. The work stoppage 2. CBA bargaining deadlock.
resulting from the employees exercising their right was
only a by-product and was not intended by the workers.
- The Supreme Court enunciated that it does not constitute Distinction: strike and picket
a strike when there is temporary stoppage of work by Strike Picket
workers for a day and it is clear that there is no intention to Basis Statutory right Constitutional
really stop work, but that the stoppage of work is a right
byproduct of another legal act that they (workers) do (e.g. Part of Right to self- Freedom of
march to Malacañang in the exercise of their civil right as organization speech
in the PBM case). Whether it YES NO
- If it is 1 day then it is not a strike, they are just exercising has
their right which is a privilege in the Constitution - requisites
peaceably assemble to petition the Government to redress
Exercised Collective group/Union Individual/
grievances. But the moment that they extended for 1
by collective
month, or 2 months, SC said that that is no longer an
ER-EE YES NO
unintended result of a privileged right exercised. That has
relationshi
become strike and teachers who perpetuated the strike the
p
may be dismissed by the Secretary.
- To have strike, work stoppage must be intended and not May be YES NO. Freedom of
merely a by-product of doing something legal. enjoined by speech does not
authorities admit prior
restraint.
affordable or within financial reach of the employer to
- The carrying of the placards does not say whether there is grant
work stoppage or not, but work stoppage is the essential Even if the demand that caused the deadlock is impossible to
element that has to be fulfilled for there to be a strike. grant on the part of the employer, the strike cannot be said to
- Peaceful picketing is part of the freedom of speech. That be based on a trivial ground.
the language employed by the picketers is far from being
courteous and polite does not give rise to a cause for libel The legality of a strike is not dependent on the reasonableness
and damages [privileged speech]. The employee still of the economic demands because most of the labor standards
cannot be liable for libel even if the name of the benefits now used to be impossible to grant when they were
officers/managers was mentioned in the placard. pursued. Triviality of the ground is not dependent on
affordability of the demand on a deadlock strike.
Requisites of a valid legal A strike to secure better terms and conditions of employment is
a legitimate labor activity recognized by law, and its legality
strike does not depend on the reasonableness of the demands. If
they cannot be granted, they should be rejected, but without
Negative substantial requisites
other reasons, the strike itself does not become illegal.
1. The strike must not be based on intra or inter-union
dispute.
4. It should not be based on wage distortion.
- No labor union may strike and no employer may declare a
Slowdown is a strike.
lockout on grounds involving inter-union and intra-union
disputes. (ART. 278. [263])
Wage distortion
- If the losing union in a PCE strikes, it is not a valid ground
The salary of the regular union workers was no longer any
[inter-union dispute].
different from the probationary workers who are not yet part of
- If there is a fight between two factions in the union in the
the union because they were beneficiaries of a wage order.
election of union officers [intra-union dispute], is not a valid
There is a wage distortion and management does not act on it.
ground for a strike.
The union members assail that management is not doing
anything; they make us know that our membership in the union
2. The strike cannot be based on the violation of the CBA
is not worth it. That is why the union declares a strike.
except if the violation of the CBA is gross in character,
mainly flagrant and or malicious refusal to comply
The SC held that in the particular instance of distortions of the
with the economic provisions of the CBA.
wage structure within an establishment resulting from "the
- If there is ambiguity or multiplicity of interpretations, then it
application of any prescribed wage increase by virtue of a law
can no longer be flagrant and/or malicious refusal to
or wage order," Section 3 of Republic Act No. 6727 prescribes
comply with the economic provisions.
a specific, detailed and comprehensive procedure for the
- There are very few strikes based on the unfair labor
correction thereof, thereby implicitly excluding strikes or
practice of violation of the CBA because there are very few
lockouts or other concerted activities as modes of
provisions in the CBA with an unambiguous and clear
settlement of the issue.
terminology.
When the legislature outlines the remedy for wage distortion,
3. The strike must not be based on trivial grounds.
both in the organized sector and in the non-organized sector, it
It must be based on serious grounds.
is providing you with all the avenues and remedies to resolve
this particular controversy. So, you cannot make use of a
Reliance Surety & Insurance Co., Inc. vs. NLRC
strike. You must follow these remedies. If it is organized, then
you present a grievance and if you still cannot resolve, you go
Management decided to re-shuffle the positions. In the re-
to voluntary arbitration. (Ilaw at Buklod ng mga Manggagawa
shuffling of positions, the president of the union was placed
(IBM) sa San Miguel Corporation vs. NLRC)
near the comfort room. He filed a notice of strike because of
that. The SC held that the ground for strike was trivial, which
Positive substantial requisites
was when the president of the union was placed in such
1. The strike must be based on either a CBA deadlock or
inconvenient position that he was witness to the comings and
ULP.
goings of people due to natural necessity.
CBA deadlock ULP
There is no question, finally, that the strike itself was prompted
Disagreement in the List of ULPs. The list of ULP
by no actual, existing unfair labor practice committed by the
interpretation of the CBA in the Labor Code is not
petitioner. In effecting a change in the seating arrangement in
that is already made, ratified exhaustive [only the
the office of the underwriting department, the petitioner merely
or enforced. common ways where ULP is
exercised a reasonable prerogative employees could not
committed].
validly question, much less assail as an act of unfair labor
practice. The Court is indeed at a loss how rearranging
furniture, as it were, can justify a four-month-long strike. Collective Bargaining Deadlock
- The situation between the labor and the management of
the company where there is failure in the collective
Carlos Milling company vs. CIR
bargaining negotiations resulting in a stalemate.
- Complete blocking or stoppage resulting from the action of
The requirement that the ground of strike must not be a
equal and opposing forces.
trivial ground does not mean that it must be economically
- Synonymous with impasse.
- Presupposes reasonable effort at good faith bargaining, outlaw strike. If violence just the management itself that is
which despite noble intentions, does not conclude in erupts, then find out who is responding violence. If this
agreement between the parties. responsible. happens, they are in pari
The liability/responsibility delicto. Both management
Economic strike is individual in nature. and the union are equally
It is only in labor standards that management is obliged by law applying violence and the
to grant that benefit. Higher than labor standards, management law will leave them as they
has no legal obligation. Labor relations practices call that strike are to suffer their own loss.
an “Economic Strike”.
Only pervasive violence can make the strike illegal
If a union engages in an economic strike by asking from - An otherwise legal strike which begins legally can turn and
management something that the management is not legally become illegal because the violence can turn into
obliged to grant, then management has a right for the pervasive. But a strike that has begun by pervasive
duration of the strike to find replacements because it has a violence and is continued, it is illegal, and it cannot turn
right to continue with its valid and just and legitimate and become legal.
operations. It has done nothing wrong. It’s just not giving in to - There is only one way of transformation: A strike is legal
the demand which is over and above what the law obligates and then because of violence that is pervasive, it becomes
him. It has the right to continue in operation. illegal.
Any union officer who knowingly participates in an - In many instances, the prohibited practices do not render
illegal strike and any worker or union officer who the strike illegal.
knowingly participates in the commission of illegal acts - What you do is you file an injunction to stop the prohibited
during a strike may be declared to have lost his practice.
employment status: Provided, That mere participation - The labor arbiter does not have jurisdiction to grant an
of a worker in a lawful strike shall not constitute injunction for prohibited practices, it is the NLRC that has
sufficient ground for termination of his employment, jurisdiction.
even if a replacement had been hired by the employer
during such lawful strike. Requisites for the NLRC to Grant an Injunction/Restraining
Order
Prohibited practices under Art. 279(a) 1. That prohibited or unlawful acts have been threatened
1. Striking without first bargaining; and will be committed and will be continued unless
2. Striking without first filing a notice of strike; restrained, but no injunction or temporary restraining
3. Striking without conducting a strike vote; and order shall be issued on account of any threat,
4. Striking after an assumption of jurisdiction order or prohibited or unlawful act, except against the person
certification of the dispute to the NLRC by the Secretary of or persons, association or organization making the
Labor. threat or committing the prohibited or unlawful act or
actually authorizing or ratifying the same after actual
Illegal strike knowledge thereof;
It does not comply with the statutory requirements in the Labor
Code. [ex: no observance of cooling off period or no notice of - One should present witness/es that has actual knowledge
strike] thereof.
- If an employee is from the management and complaining
Distinction between illegal strike and prohibited practices of the blocking of the ingress or egress of the main
Illegal strike Prohibited entrance of the employer's workplace, pictures must be
practices taken and have somebody stand holding a copy of the
Scope Does not comply with Where the DOLE front-page Philippine Star this will prove that it was on that
one or more of the either assumed or day that picture was taken.
procedural or certified the strike, - The union, to counter, will call the media. It will be shown
substantial but the workers then to the latter that the gates now are open, and they will
requirements of the do not stop present that in court and will claim that their evidence is
strike. striking. superior because the photo is taken by the media which is
Effect Officers who approved, Both workers and a third party. The photo shows that the gates are not
voted, or participated in officers will lose closed nor barricaded as claimed to be.
the strike will lose their their employment - One should have evidence, counter-evidence, and
employment status. status. evidence to disprove the evidence of the opposing party.
How NLRC Construes Petitions Seeking Injunction of Hiring of scabs is not illegal per se
Prohibited Acts in Strikes - A scab is a person who works despite an ongoing strike.
- The burden of proof is on those complaining against the Scabs are usually individuals who were not employed by
restraining order. the company prior to the trade union dispute, but rather
- Even if the right to strike is not interpreted in favor of labor hired after or during the strike to keep the organization
in cases of doubt. But when it comes to running.
restraining/injunction the burden of proof shifts. - Scabs are allowed in economic strikes, the hiring of
replacements for the strikers during a strike is not an ULP.
(b) No person shall obstruct, impede, or interfere with - Such hiring may even be done on a permanent basis in
by force, violence, coercion, threats or intimidation, any case of an economic strike [employer not bound to fire the
peaceful picketing by employees during any labor scabs after].
controversy or in the exercise of the right to self- - However, in ULP strikes, such replacements/scabs may
organization or collective bargaining, or shall aid or not be permanently employed. The employer is duty-
abet such obstruction or interference. bound to discharge them when the strikers are reinstated
to their former positions.
Prohibition Against Obstructing or Interfering vs. Peaceful
Picketing, Exercise of Right to Self-Organization, and (d) No public official or employee, including officers and
Aiding Obstructions or Interference personnel of the New Armed Forces of the Philippines
- Interfering with striking workers is prohibited especially if or the Integrated National Police, or armed person, shall
you are a member of the police or the military. bring in, introduce or escort in any manner, any
- Peace officers, police and military cannot remain in the individual who seeks to replace strikers in entering or
strike zone. leaving the premises of a strike area, or work in place of
- The strike zone is the immediate area surrounding the the strikers.
entrance or exit of the employer.
- The right to strike is a protected right and it cannot be The police force shall keep out of the picket lines
interfered with. unless actual violence or other criminal acts occur
- Interfering can be done by force, violation, coercion, therein: Provided, That nothing herein shall be
threats, or intimidation of any peaceful picketing by the interpreted to prevent any public officer from taking any
employee. measure necessary to maintain peace and order,
- Peaceful picketing means that the workers must be protect life and property, and/or enforce the law and
moving. If workers are not moving, it constituted legal orders.
obstruction of the ingress of egress which is also a
prohibited activity [Art. 279(e)]. Public Officials, PNP, and AFP Cannot Escort
- As long as you are walking, you are exercising your Replacements for Striking Workers or Replacement
legitimate right over the sidewalk. Workers for the Workplace
- A union can allow others to join the picket lines. - Prohibition against escorting those who will replace
striking workers.
(c) No employer shall use or employ any strike-breaker, - The strikers have the right to prevent scabs from entering.
nor shall any person be employed as a strike-breaker. However, if they destroyed the property of the employer to
prevent them from entering, that is destruction of property.
If you break the picket lines forcibly and take over the job of the Strike area
striker who has the abundant disposition to be on strike, then Strike area means the establishment, warehouses, depots,
you are both a scab and strike-breaker, but your offense is only plants or offices, including the sites or premises used as
strike breaking not a scab. runaway shops, of the employer struck against, as well as the
immediate vicinity actually used by picketing strikers in moving
to and from before all points of entrance to and exit from said
establishment. [Art. 219(s)]
Strike area encompasses the following: The union workers believed the leader and they went along for
1. Establishment itself; a strike. Even if the union president was proven to have really
2. Runaway shops; and stolen the company property and his dismissal upheld by the
3. Immediate vicinity actually used by picketing strikers. NLRC, the strike by the workers is not illegal because the
strikers were in good faith despite error.
Runaway shop
A runaway shop is an extended strike area. An employer struck Damage done by strikers
against may move some of his equipment to another location Even if it is not the local that filed the notice of strike but the
to continue operations, but he should also make that location federation [agent], it must be the local [principal] who must pay
as a strike area. the damages. The real party-in-interest is the local.
Suppose the employer transfers half of his equipment to his Summary of prohibited practices
residence, the workers can go to the employer’s residence to 1. Striking without first bargaining; [Art. 278 (a), 1st
strike. In such case, the employer cannot file an injunction paragraph];
against the workers striking in his residence since his 2. Striking without without first filing notice of strike; [Art.
residence has become an extension of the work premises that 278(a), 1st paragraph];
can be picketed. 3. Striking without conducting a strike vote [Art. 278 (a),
1st paragraph];
The employer can also open new entrances in the workplace 4. Striking after an assumption of jurisdiction or
during a strike since it is by virtue of his acts of ownership over certification of the dispute by the Secretary of Labor;
the property. By doing such, it doubles the work of strikers [Art. 279 (a), 2nd paragraph];
because they have to picket multiples entrances. 5. Striking after the dispute has been submitted to
compulsory or voluntary arbitration; [Art. 279, 2nd
Command center paragraph];
Both the union and the employer must have a command center 6. Obstructing or impeding picket lines; and
during a strike. For the union, it is somewhere away from the 7. Employing strike breakers or allowing one’s self to be
workplace but close enough. For the employer, the command employed as a strike breaker.
center is within the work premises wherein he must have a
view of the strike. Prohibited activity can be pursued
1. Under the Labor Code;
Remedies against prohibited practices 2. As an administrative offense; or
1. File an ULP Complaint under Art. 224. 3. As a criminal offense.
The jurisdiction is with the labor arbiter.
For this purpose, the contending parties are strictly GR: The Secretary of Labor’s decision in determining
enjoined to comply with such orders, prohibitions whether an industry is indispensable to the national
and/or injunctions as are issued by the Secretary of Labor interest cannot be questioned
and Employment or the Commission, under pain of It behooves upon this Court to assume a becoming modesty.
immediate disciplinary action, including dismissal or loss of And refrain from questioning the discretion of the Executive
employment status or payment by the locking-out employer Branch in government in passing judgment as to what industry
of backwages, damages and other affirmative relief, even is indispensable to the national interest. It is a political issue
criminal prosecution against either or both of them. doctrine.
Within 24 hours from knowledge If the law grants to this particular branch of government the
The Secretary of Health does not have to request the power to decide a particular exercise of power, then the only
Secretary of Labor to assume jurisdiction of a labor dispute in a way that the courts will intervene, is if there is grave abuse of
hospital. It is enough knowledge if the Secretary of Labor turns discretion. If there is a simple error, they will not; because they
on his radio and hears about an impending strike in some are co-equal branches of government and they refrain from
hospital. checking each other.
The Secretary of Labor can issue an assumption of jurisdiction When the Secretary assumes jurisdiction, it is futile to question
order. He assumes jurisdiction, and then all strikes are it. You cannot question it because the Supreme Court will
enjoined automatically. dismiss it. Only grave abuse of discretion will merit a hearing.
The age-old rule governing the relation between labor and Sit-down strike is not a peaceful strike. It is many times
capital or management and employee is that of a “fair day’s violence strike. The workers just overpowers the management,
wage for a fair day’s labor.” If there is no work performed by throw them out and they take over the plant.
the employee there can be no wage or pay, unless of course,
the laborer was able, willing and ready to work but was illegally 4. General strike
locked out, dismissed or suspended. It is hardly fair or just for A general strike is a strike called upon by one big labor
an employee or laborer to fight or litigate against his employer organization, and all its locals which has work places with
on the employer’s time. different employers, they are called upon to strike, and
because the federation is so strong, all of them will go on
XPN: Strike Duration Pay as a Form of Punitive Damage strike, even if the employer that a particular local is located has
Entitled to strike duration pay if: no problems with the workers, and the workers has no problem
a. illegal lockout; with the employer.
b. illegally dismissed; or
c. illegally suspended during the course of the strike. 5. Sympathy strike
They are sympathizing with other workers who have an axe to
If the employer has been especially reckless in committing grind against this particular employee. It has become a general
unfair labor practice, then he will be penalized with unfair labor strike, everybody strikes.
practice and damages by way of strike duration pay.
Not all the striking participants in general strikes or sympathy
DAVAO FREE WORKERS vs. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL strike is a valid exercise of the right to self-organization
RELATIONS because you must first have a labor dispute.
This is peaceful picketing. You do not harass the customers of Water districts are government employees
the supermarket or the grocery. You are just walking up and Suppose the water district employees strike against the
down there with a notice - clearly defining your issues in the management, the remedy of water district is to file an injunction
placards. That is allowed according to the United States with the regular courts and not with the NLRC. They cannot file
Supreme Court. an injunction with the NLRC since they would be impliedly
admitting that the government employees have the right to
strike. They do not have the right to strike because they are
Government employees government employees.
Humility and
180. The terms and conditions of employment in government
including any political subdivision and instrumental thereof are
governed by law.
Perseverance ⚖️
The government workers cannot use the same weapons
employed by workers in the private sector to secure
concessions from their employer. The relationship of
government employees with the government is legal and not
contractual. However, public employees are not prohibited from
exercising their constitutional right of peaceably assembling
and petition the government for redress of grievance.
The SC held that these mass actions were to all intents and
purposes, a strike. They constituted a concerted and
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: