GR L 19997; (May, 1965) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-19997 May 19, 1965
VISAYAN BICYCLE, MANUFACTURING CO., INC., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR UNION and COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, respondents.
FACTS
The Visayan Bicycle Employees and Workers Union (VIBEMWU) was formed on November 3, 1958, and entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the Visayan Bicycle Manufacturing Co., Inc. on November 14, 1958. On February 27, 1960, VIBEMWU, through its executive board headed by Fulgencio Besana, affiliated with the National Labor Union (NLU). Besana was subsequently elected president of VIBEMWU on March 9, 1960. The company refused NLU’s demand to enforce the collective bargaining agreement. On April 25, 1960, the company dismissed Besana and Felicisimo Rodiel (another union officer) after they were involved in a fight with two other employees, Saturnino Reyes and Silvestre Pacia, within company premises during working hours. The company cited a rule against fighting as the cause. NLU filed an unfair labor practice complaint. The Court of Industrial Relations found the dismissals constituted unfair labor practice, ordered reinstatement with backwages, and denied the company’s motion for reconsideration and its request for an extension to file a supporting memorandum, adhering to its “no extension” policy.
ISSUE
1. Whether the Court of Industrial Relations abused its discretion in denying the motion for extension of time to file a memorandum in support of the motion for reconsideration.
2. Whether the company’s dismissal of Fulgencio Besana and Felicisimo Rodiel constituted unfair labor practice.
RULING
1. No. The denial of the motion for extension, pursuant to the court’s standing rule against such extensions, did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
2. Yes. The dismissal constituted unfair labor practice under Section 4(a)(1) and (4) of Republic Act 875 (The Industrial Peace Act). The Court found that the fight was a pre-arranged provocation by the recently hired employees, Reyes and Pacia, as part of a company strategy to create an apparent lawful cause for dismissal. The company did not investigate the incident, and its manager admitted Besana was dismissed for being a “hard-headed leader of the union” and had previously threatened to dismiss officers if VIBEMWU did not withdraw from NLU. The real reason for dismissal was the employees’ union activities, making it discriminatory. The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Industrial Relations.