Scribd
Upload
121 views2 pages

Paflu V Bureau of Labor Relations

“The principle of extemporaneous construction of a statute by the executive officers of the government, whose duty it is to execute it, is entitled with great respect, and should ordinarily control the construction of the statute by the courts …” Molina v. Rafferty provides, however, that if the construction of the executive official is clearly erroneous and far from what the law provides and intends, then the courts could control such construction.

Uploaded by

Joko Dinsay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
121 views2 pages

Paflu V Bureau of Labor Relations

“The principle of extemporaneous construction of a statute by the executive officers of the government, whose duty it is to execute it, is entitled with great respect, and should ordinarily control the construction of the statute by the courts …” Molina v. Rafferty provides, however, that if the construction of the executive official is clearly erroneous and far from what the law provides and intends, then the courts could control such construction.

Uploaded by

Joko Dinsay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

PAFLU v.

BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS


G.R. No. L-43760; August 21, 1976

PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF FREE LABOR UNIONS (PAFLU), ​petitioner ​vs. ​BUREAU OF


LABOR RELATIONS, HONORABLE CARMELO C. NORIEL, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
FREE LABOR UNIONS (NAFLU), and PHILIPPINE BLOOMING MILLS CO., INC.,
respondents.

Ponente: Fernando, ​J.

FACTS:

Bureau of Labor Relations Director, Carmelo C. Noriel granted to respondent, National


Federation of Free Labor Unions (NAFLU) the certification to be the exclusive bargaining agent
of all the employees of the Philippine Blooming Mills, Co., Inc. This was determined in a
certification election conducted in February 27, 1976 where the respondent garnered 429 votes
while petitioner, Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions (PAFLU), only acquired 414 votes.

In the case at bar, petitioner is assailing that Director Noriel committed grave abuse of discretion
when he did not follow the doctrine of ​Allied Workers Association of the Philippines v. Court of
Industrial Relations which states that during certification elections, spoiled ballots should be
counted in determining the valid votes cast. Spoiled ballots are those that are torn, defaced or
marked. It is the belief of the petitioner that they would have won over the respondent had the
17 spoiled votes been counted during the elections.

Respondents argue that said doctrine arose during a time when the Industrial Peace Act was in
effect. Since the Labor Code and its Implementing Rules and Regulations now govern labor
relations, the doctrine from the ​Allied Workers c​ ase is not anymore applicable.

ISSUE/S:

Whether or not the Director of Bureau of Labor Relations committed grave abuse of discretion
when he did not follow the ​Allied Workers ​doctrine? (NO)

SUBJECT TO STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION:

Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Labor Code: “valid votes”


A majority of the valid votes cast suffices for the certification of the victorious labor union as the
sole and exclusive bargaining agent.

RULING:
The Supreme Court ruled that the Director Noriel did not commit grave abuse of discretion when
​ octrine. The Director simply complied with the Rules and
he did not apply the ​Allied Workers d
Regulations of the present Labor Code when he did not deem the spoiled votes as “valid votes.”
The Court also held that in construing a law, great respect is afforded to the way a statute is
being construed by the executive official who is in charge of executing it.

More importantly, in this case, even if the spoiled votes have been counted, only 10 out of 17
would be intended for the petitioner. Hence, it would still not suffice for it to be granted the
certification to be the sole bargaining agent of the company’s employees.

IN RELATION TO THE TOPIC (POWER TO CONSTRUE: EXECUTIVE CONSTRUCTION):

In Re: Allen ​provides that, “The principle of extemporaneous construction of a statute by the
executive officers of the government, whose duty it is to execute it, is entitled with great respect,
and should ​ordinarily control the construction of the statute by the courts​ …”

​ rovides, however, that if the construction of the executive official is clearly


Molina v. Rafferty p
erroneous and far from what the law provides and intends, then the courts could control such
construction.

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