Scribd
Upload
73 views2 pages

4.2 Shell Oil Workers' Union Vs Shell Company

The Supreme Court ruled the strike was legal because the collective bargaining agreement included maintaining the security guard section, and dissolving it violated the agreement. While management has prerogatives, it is still bound by collective bargaining agreements. As the company did not comply with the terms of the agreement, its actions were an unfair labor practice.

Uploaded by

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

4.2 Shell Oil Workers' Union Vs Shell Company

The Supreme Court ruled the strike was legal because the collective bargaining agreement included maintaining the security guard section, and dissolving it violated the agreement. While management has prerogatives, it is still bound by collective bargaining agreements. As the company did not comply with the terms of the agreement, its actions were an unfair labor practice.

Uploaded by

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

SHELL OIL WORKERS' UNION, petitioner, vs. HELL COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES, LTD.

, and THE
COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, respondents

G.R. No. L-28607, May 31, 1971


FERNANDO, J.

TOPIC

STRIKE

FACTS

Respondent Shell Company of the Philippines (COMPANY) dissolved its security guard section stationed
at its Pandacan Installation, notwithstanding its (guard section) continuance and that such is assured by
an existing collective bargaining contract. The respondent company transferred 18 security guards to its
other department and consequently hired a private security agency to undertake the work of said
security guards. This resulted in a strike called by petitioner Shell Oil Workers’ Union (UNION), The
President certified it to respondent Court of Industrial Relations (CIR). CIR declared the strike illegal on
the ground that such dissolution was a valid exercise of a management prerogative. Thus this appeal is
taken.

Petitioner argued that the 18 security guards affected are part of the bargaining unit and covered by the
existing collective bargaining contract, as such, their transfers and eventual dismissals are illegal being
done in violation of the existing contract. The Company maintained that in contracting out the security
service and redeploying the 18 security guards affected, it was merely performing its legitimate
prerogative to adopt the most efficient and economical method of operation, that said action was
motivated by business consideration in line with past established practice and made after notice to and
discussion with the Union, that the 18 guards concerned were dismissed for wilfully refusing to obey the
transfer order, and that the strike staged by the Union is illegal.

ISSUE

Whether or not the existing collective bargaining contract on maintaining security guard section, among
others, constitutes a bar to the decision of the management to contract out security guards?

SC RULING:

Yes, the strike was legal because there was a violation of the collective bargaining agreement by
Company. It was part of the CBA that the Security Guard Section will remain. Yet, the Company did not
comply with the stipulation in CBA. It was thus an assurance of security of tenure, at least, during the
lifetime of the agreement. For what is involved is the integrity of the agreement reached, the terms of
which should be binding on both parties

The stand of Shell Company as to the scope of management prerogative is not devoid of plausibility,
management prerogative of the Company would have been valid if it were not bound by what was
stipulated in CBA. The freedom to manage the business remains with management. It cannot be denied
the faculty of promoting efficiency and attaining economy by a study of what units are essential for its
operation. To it belongs the ultimate determination of whether services should be performed by its
personnel or contracted to outside agencies. However, while management has the final say on such
matter, the labor union is not to be completely left out.
An unfair labor practice is committed by a labor union or its agent by its refusal ‘to bargain collectively
with the employer’. Collective bargaining does not end with the execution of an agreement, being a
continuous process, the duty to bargain necessarily imposing on the parties the obligation to live up to
the terms of such a collective bargaining agreement if entered into, it is undeniable that non-
compliance therewith constitutes an unfair labor practice.

The right to self-organization guarded by the Industrial Peace Act explicitly includes the right “to engage
in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining and to the mutual aid or protection.” The
employee, tenant or laborer is inhibited from striking or walking out of his employment only when so
enjoined by the CIR and after a dispute has been submitted thereto and pending award or decision by
the court of such dispute.

In the present case, the employees or laborers may strike before being ordered not to do so and before
an industrial dispute is submitted to the CIR, subject to the power of the latter, after hearing when
public interest so requires or when the dispute cannot, in its opinion, be promptly decided or settled, to
order them to return to work, with the consequence that if the strikers fail to return to work, when so
ordered, the court may authorize the employer to accept other employees or laborers.” Thus a strike
may not be staged only when, during the pendency of an industrial dispute, the CIR has issued the
proper injunction against the laborers (section 19, Commonwealth Act No. 103, as amended).

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