G.R. No. 155109, 155135 & 179220. September 29, 2010.
C. ALCANTARA & SONS, INC., Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL., Respondents. / NAGKAHIUSANG MAMUMUO SA ALSONS-SPFL (NAMAAL-SPFL), ET AL., Petitioners, vs. C. ALCANTARA & SONS, INC., ET AL., Respondents.

FACTS

C. Alcantara & Sons, Inc. (Company) and Nagkahiusang Mamumuo sa Alsons-SPFL (Union) were bound by a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) containing a “no strike, no lockout” clause. Negotiations for the CBA’s economic provisions reached a deadlock, leading the Union to file a notice of strike. After a failed conciliation and a strike vote, the Union went on strike. The Company secured a writ of preliminary injunction from the NLRC to prevent strikers from blocking entry to its premises, but implementation required law enforcement intervention. The Company subsequently filed a petition to declare the strike illegal for violating the CBA.
The Labor Arbiter declared the strike illegal, dismissing the Union officers and members who committed prohibited acts. The NLRC affirmed the illegality but modified the penalty, ordering the reinstatement of 71 ordinary members found not to have committed illegal acts, albeit without backwages. Both parties appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the NLRC’s decision. The Company and the Union then filed separate petitions for review with the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) the correct legal consequences of an illegal strike on the employment status of union officers and members, and (2) whether reinstated employees are entitled to return to work pending the employer’s appeal of the reinstatement order.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petitions and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision. On the first issue, the Court upheld the distinction in penalties between union officers and ordinary members involved in an illegal strike. Union officers, as leaders, are deemed to have knowingly participated in the illegal activity and are therefore subject to dismissal. Ordinary members, however, are presumed to have merely followed their leaders. They lose their employment status only if they committed illegal acts during the strike. The NLRC correctly identified 71 ordinary members who did not commit such acts; their dismissal was thus unjustified, warranting reinstatement without backwages due to the strike’s illegality.
On the second issue, the Court ruled that an order of reinstatement is immediately executory, even pending appeal. This is a legal mandate under the Labor Code intended to provide urgent relief to an unjustly dismissed employee. The employer’s obligation to reinstate is immediate and ministerial upon receipt of the order. The employer has two options: actual reinstatement or payroll reinstatement. The Company’s failure to exercise either option, based on its belief the order was erroneous, constituted a violation of the law, making it liable for the employees’ wages from the time it received the reinstatement order until the actual reinstatement or final resolution of the case.