Unlawful purpose strike for union recognition without

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: nstitutional
 Commission
 recognized
 the
 right
 of
 government
employees
to
organize,
but
intended
to
limit
the
 right
to
the
formation
of
unions
or
associations
only,
without
 including
the
right
to
strike.
 o Lalay
Abala.
ALS2014B.
Labor
II.
 Since
the
terms
and
conditions
of
government
employment
are
 fixed
 by
 law,
 government
 workers
 cannot
 use
 the
 same
 weapons
 employed
by
workers
in
the
private
sector
to
secure
 concessions
 from
 their
 employers.
 The
 principle
 behind
 labor
 unionism
in
private
industry
is
that
industrial
peace
cannot
be
 secured
through
compulsion
by
law.
Relations
between
private
 employers
 and
 employees
 rest
 on
 an
 essentially
 voluntary
 basis.
 In
 government
 employment,
 however,
 it
 is
 the
 legislature
 and
 where,
 properly
 given
 delegated
 power,
 the
 administrative
 heads
 of
 government
 which
 fix
 the
 terms
 and
 conditions
of
employment.
 • Bangalisan
v.
CA,
CSC
and
the
Secretary
of
DECS
 o Petitioners
 were
 charged
 with
 grave
 misconduct,
 gross
 neglect
 of
 duty
 and
 gross
 violation
 of
 the
 CS
 law,
 refusal
 to
 perform
 official
 duty,
 gross
 insubordination,
 conduct
 prejudicial
 to
 the
 best
 interest
 of
 the
 service
 and
 AWOL
 for
 joining
the
teacher’s
mass
actions.
 o The
 mass
 actions
 held
 were
 for
 all
 intents
 and
 purposes
 a
 strike.
 The
 fact
 that
 the
 conventional
 term
 “strike”
 was
 not
 used
 by
 the
 striking
 employees
 to
 describe
 their
 common
 course
of
action
is
inconsequential,
since
 the
substance
of
the
 situation,
 and
 not
 its
 appearance,
 will
 be
 deemed
 to
 be
 controlling.
 o It
 is
 the
 settled
 rule
 in
 this
 jurisdiction
 that
 employees
 in
 the
 public
sector
may
not
engage
in
strikes.
Petitioners
are
being
 penalized
 not
 because
 they
 exercised
 their
 right
 of
 peaceable
 assembly
and
petition
for
redress
of
grievances
but
because
of
 their
 successive
 unauthorized
 and
 unilateral
 absences
 which
 produced
 adverse
 effects
 upon
 their
 students
 for
 whose
 education
 they
 are
 responsible.
 It
 may
 be
 conceded
 that
 petitioners
had
valid
grievances,
but
that
will
not
justify
their
 absence
 to
 the
 prejudice
 of
 innocent
 school
 children.
 Their
 righteous
 indignation
 does
 not
 legalize
 an
 illegal
 work
 stoppage.
 11. Second
factor
in
legality
of
strike:
procedural
requirements
 • The
 requirements
 are
 mandatory,
 meaning,
 non‐compliance
 therewith
makes
the
strike
illegal
 • Notice
of
strike
(NS)
 o Filed
 with
 the
 DOLE,
 specifically
 the
 regional
 branch
 of
 the
 NCMB,
copy
furnished
the
employer
or
the
union,
as
the
case
 may
be
 o Who
files?
 ONLY
 a
 legitimate
 (registered)
 labor
 organization
 can
legally
hol...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/11/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online