1 Malayang Samahan NG Manggagawa Sa M. Greenfield (MSMG-UWP) Vs Ramos

Malayang Samahan ng Manggagawa sa M.
Greenfield (MSMG-UWP) vs Ramos
G.R. No. 113907, Feb 28, 2000
FACTS:
 Petitioner MSMS, (local union) is an affiliate of ULGWP (federation). A local union election was held
under the action of the federation. The defeated candidates filed a petition for impeachment. The local
union held a general membership meeting. Several union members failed to attend the meeting. The local
union requested the company to deduct the union fines from the wages of those union members who failed
to attend the general membership meeting.
 The Secretary General of the federation disapproved the resolution imposing the Php50 fine. The company
then sent a reply to petitioner’s request stating it cannot deduct fines without going against certain laws.
The imposition of the fine became the subject of a bitter disagreement between the Federation and the local
union culminating to the latter’s declaration of general autonomy from the former. The federation asked the
company to stop the remittance of the local union’s share in the education funds. The company led a
complaint of interpleader with the DOLE.
 The federation called a meeting placing the local union under trusteeship and appointing an administrator.
Petitioner union officers received letters from the administrator requiring them to explain why they should
not be removed from the office and expelled from union membership. The officers were expelled from the
federation. The federation advised the company of the expulsion of the 30 union officers and demanded
their separation pursuant to the Union Security Clause in the CBA.
 The Federation filed a notice of strike with the NCMB to compel the company to effect the immediate
termination of the expelled union officers. Under the pressure of a strike, the company terminated the 30
union officers from employment. The petitioners filed a notice of strike on the grounds of discrimination;
interference; mass dismissal of union officers and shop stewards; threats, coercion and intimidation; and
union busting.
 The petitioners prayed for the suspension of the effects of their termination. Secretary Drilon dismissed the
petition stating it was an intra-union matter. Later, 78 union shop stewards were placed under preventive
suspension. The union members staged a walk-out and officially declared a strike that afternoon. The strike
was attended by violence.
ISSUE:
 W.O.N the RC was justified in dismissing MSMG members/employees merely upon ULGWP's demand for
the enforcement of the union security clause embodied in their CBA.
HELD:
 NO. Although this Court has ruled that union security clauses embodied in the collective bargaining
agreement may be validly enforced and that dismissals pursuant thereto may likewise be valid, this does not
erode the fundamental requirement of due process. The reason behind the enforcement of union security
clauses is the sanctity and inviolability of contracts cannot override one's right to due process. In this case,
MSMG union officers were expelled by ULGWP for allegedly committing acts of disloyalty and/or
inimical to the interest of the latter and in violation of its Constitution and By-laws. Upon demand of
ULGWP, the company terminated the petitioners without conducting a separate and independent
investigation. RC did not inquire into the cause of the expulsion and whether or not ULGWP had sufficient
grounds to effect the same. The enforcement of union security clauses is authorized by law provided such
enforcement is not characterized by arbitrariness, and always with due process. Even on the assumption
that the federation had valid grounds to expel the union officers, due process requires that these union
officers be accorded a separate hearing by RC.
 Dismissal of employees under the union security clause is authorized by law, but employees must be
afforded their fundamental rights to due process. A local union has the right, at any time, to disaffiliate
from a mother union or federation in accordance with its constitutional guarantee of freedom of association
and the same cannot be considered disloyalty.

1 Malayang Samahan NG Manggagawa Sa M. Greenfield (MSMG-UWP) Vs Ramos

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Malayang Samahan NG Manggagawa Sa M. Greenfield (MSMG-UWP) Vs Ramos

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Malayang Samahan NG Manggagawa Sa M. Greenfield (MSMG-UWP) Vs Ramos

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Malayang Samahan ng Manggagawa sa M.

Greenfield (MSMG-UWP) vs Ramos

G.R. No. 113907, Feb 28, 2000

You might also like