G.R. No. 81077 . June 6, 1990.
LUIS DE OCAMPO, JR., JOSE RODRIGO, EUGENIO ESQUEJO, VICTORINO TABERNERO, RIZALO DALIVA, FRANCISCO ACOSTA and 87 others, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and MAKATI DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, respondents.

FACTS

Makati Development Corporation (MDC) terminated 65 employees on September 30, 1980, citing the expiration of their project employment contracts. The affected employees, members of the Philippine Transport and General Workers Association (PTGWA), filed an illegal dismissal complaint. On October 8, 1980, PTGWA filed a notice of strike on grounds of union-busting and unfair labor practice. A strike was declared and picket lines established on October 14, 1980. MDC subsequently filed applications for clearance to terminate 90 striking workers, 74 of whom were project employees. The Labor Arbiter denied MDC’s applications and ordered reinstatement with back wages.
The NLRC modified this decision. It granted clearance to dismiss the union officers, declared the strike illegal, severed the employment of project employees due to contract expiration, and ordered the reinstatement without back wages of regular employees who were not officers. The petitioners, the dismissed workers, assailed this NLRC decision via certiorari, arguing grave abuse of discretion.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) whether the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration before the NLRC was filed on time; (2) whether the strike was illegal; and (3) whether the separation of the project employees was justified.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled partially in favor of the petitioners. On procedural grounds, it found the motion for reconsideration was timely filed, as the reglementary period was counted from the petitioners’ receipt of the NLRC decision.
On the substantive issues, the Court upheld the NLRC’s finding that the strike was illegal. The strike was declared under Presidential Decree No. 823, a period when strikes were strictly limited. The law only permitted strikes on unresolved economic issues in collective bargaining and required a 30-day cooling-off period after a notice of strike. The petitioners’ strike, based on alleged union-busting and unfair labor practice, was declared only six days after the notice, violating both the allowable ground and the mandatory cooling-off period. Consequently, the dismissal of the union officers who led the illegal strike was valid.
However, the Court modified the NLRC ruling regarding the project employees. It held that while project employees’ employment ends upon project completion, the termination here occurred before the completion of the New Alabang Village project. Therefore, their dismissal was not truly due to contract expiration but was premature and without valid cause. Applying the constitutional policy of protecting labor, the Court awarded them separation pay equivalent to one month’s salary for every year of service, in lieu of reinstatement, as the project was presumed completed by the time of the decision. The reinstatement order for the non-officer regular employees was affirmed.