Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • TABANGAO Vs Pilipinas Shell Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Raymer Oclarit
    194 views1 page
    The union filed a notice of strike against the company alleging bad faith bargaining over their collective bargaining agreement negotiations. The Department of Labor and Employment Secretary assumed jurisdiction over the labor dispute. The union argued the Secretary only had jurisdiction over the unfair labor practice charge, not issues related to the CBA. However, the court ruled that under the law, the Secretary's jurisdiction extends to all matters related to the labor dispute, including resolving unresolved issues in the CBA negotiations, in order to prevent strikes in industries vital to the national interest.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest on TABANGAO vs Pilipinas Shell

    Original Title

    TABANGAO vs Pilipinas Shell Case 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?

    Report this Document
    The union filed a notice of strike against the company alleging bad faith bargaining over their collective bargaining agreement negotiations. The Department of Labor and Employment Secretary assumed jurisdiction over the labor dispute. The union argued the Secretary only had jurisdiction over the unfair labor practice charge, not issues related to the CBA. However, the court ruled that under the law, the Secretary's jurisdiction extends to all matters related to the labor dispute, including resolving unresolved issues in the CBA negotiations, in order to prevent strikes in industries vital to the national interest.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    194 views1 page

    TABANGAO Vs Pilipinas Shell Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Raymer Oclarit
    The union filed a notice of strike against the company alleging bad faith bargaining over their collective bargaining agreement negotiations. The Department of Labor and Employment Secretary assumed jurisdiction over the labor dispute. The union argued the Secretary only had jurisdiction over the unfair labor practice charge, not issues related to the CBA. However, the court ruled that under the law, the Secretary's jurisdiction extends to all matters related to the labor dispute, including resolving unresolved issues in the CBA negotiations, in order to prevent strikes in industries vital to the national interest.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    TABANGAO SHELL REFINERY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION vs

    PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION

    FACTS:
    On the parties’ 41st meeting, the company proposed the declaration of a deadlock 
    and recommended that the help of a third party be sought. The union filed a Notice of Strike in the NCMB, alle
    ging bad faith bargaining on the part of the company. NCMB immediately summoned the parties for the mandat
    ory conciliationmediation proceedings but the parties failed to reach an amicable settlement. The DOLESec ass
    umed jurisdiction over the dispute of the parties. The Secretary ruled that the company is not guilty of bargainin
    g in bad faith 
    and also proceeded to decide on the matter of the wage increase and other economic issues of the new CBA.
    The union questioned the Secretary’s assumption of jurisdiction over the labor dispute between the unio
    n and the company on the ground that the “Secretary erred in assuming jurisdiction over the ‘CBA’ case when it 
    is not the subject matter of the notice of strike” because the case was “all about ‘ULP’ in the form of bad faith b
    argaining.”For the union, the 
    DOLESec should not have touched the issue of the CBA as there was no CBA deadlock at that time, and should 
    have limited the assumption of jurisdiction to the charge of unfair labor 
    practice for bargaining in bad faith.

    ISSUE:
    Whether the Secretary of Labor and Employment’s assumption of jurisdiction is limited to the subject of strike.

    RULING: 
    No.The labor dispute between the union and the company concerned the unresolved matters between the 
    parties in relation to their negotiations for a new CBA. The power of the DOLESec to assume jurisdiction over t
    his dispute includes and extends to all questions and
    controversies arising from the said dispute, such as,but not limited to the union’s allegation of bad faith bargaini
    ng. It also includes and extends to the various unresolved provisions of the new CBA such as compensation, par
    ticularly the matter of annual wage increase or yearly
    lump sum payment in lieu of such wage increase, whether or not there was deadlock in the negotiations.
    As there is already an existing controversy on the matter of wage increase, the DOLE-Sec need not wait 
    for a deadlock in the negotiations to take cognizance of the matter. That is the significance of the power of the 
    DOLESec under Article 263(g) of the Labor Code to
    assume jurisdiction over a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an 
    industry indispensable to the national interest. Article 263(g) is both an extraordinary and a 
    preemptive power to address an extraordinary situation a strike or lockout in an industry
     indispensable to the national interest. This grant is not limited to the grounds cited in the 
    notice of strike or lockout that may have preceded the strike or lockout;nor is it limited to the incidents of the str
    ike or lockout that in the meanwhile may have taken place. As the term 
    “assume jurisdiction” connotes, the intent of the law is to give the Labor Secretary full 
    authority to resolve all matters within the dispute that gave rise to or which arose out of the 
    strike or lockout; it includes and extends to all questions and controversies arising from or 
    related to the dispute,including cases over which the labor arbiter has exclusive jurisdiction.

    You might also like