G.R. No. L-6888 August 31, 1954
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF LABORERS AND EMPLOYEES (NOLE), petitioners, vs. ARSENIO ROLDAN, MODESTO CASTILLO, and JUAN LANTING, Judges of the Court of Industrial Relations; RIZAL CEMENT CO., INC., respondents.

FACTS

Prior to March 12, 1952, the Rizal Cement Co., Inc. employed over 200 workers at its Binangonan, Rizal factory, most of whom were members of the National Organization of Laborers and Employees (NOLE). On March 12, 1952, a strike was declared due to unmet labor demands. The strikers maintained a picket line with a tent. The following day, the company filed a petition with the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) to declare the strike illegal and order a return to work. A temporary settlement was reached around March 18, 1952, wherein the company granted a 7% wage increase and leave benefits. All strikers except NOLE President Tarcilo Rivas and member Alberto Tolentino returned to work. Rivas and Tolentino were not reinstated because they had been charged with illegal possession of hand grenades found under a cot inside the strikers’ tent. In July 1952, Rivas and Tolentino were acquitted of the criminal charge by the Court of First Instance of Rizal. Armed with this acquittal, NOLE filed a motion with the CIR for their reinstatement with backpay. The CIR, after a joint hearing, issued an order on January 5, 1953, denying reinstatement. The CIR found that despite the acquittal, the evidence convinced it that Rivas and Tolentino illegally possessed the hand grenades with the intent to blast the company’s dynamite storage as part of the strike, thereby making them responsible for an illegal strike. NOLE sought review of this order and the subsequent denial of its motion for reconsideration.

ISSUE

1. Whether the Court of Industrial Relations erred in denying the reinstatement of Tarcilo Rivas and Alberto Tolentino despite their acquittal in the criminal case for illegal possession of hand grenades.
2. Whether the strike declared on March 12, 1952, was illegal.

RULING

1. The Court of Industrial Relations did not err in denying reinstatement. An acquittal in a criminal case on the ground of reasonable doubt does not bar an administrative or civil determination based on preponderance of evidence. The CIR, after examining the evidence, was convinced by a preponderance thereof that Rivas and Tolentino were in illegal possession of the hand grenades and intended to use them to sabotage the company’s dynamite storage in connection with the strike. This constituted a breach of trust and justified loss of confidence, warranting their dismissal. The standard of proof in the CIR (preponderance of evidence) is different from that in a criminal case (proof beyond reasonable doubt).
2. The Supreme Court declined to rule on the legality of the strike, considering the question moot and immaterial. The strike had ended, the company had granted concessions to the returning workers, and the CIR’s order held only Rivas and Tolentino responsible for the illegal strike, not affecting the status of the other workers. The order of the CIR dated January 5, 1953, was affirmed.