Published — July 06, 2022
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of your own lawyer to address your legal concerns, if any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
After reading “Who has jurisdiction to determine the legality of a strike or lockout?”, read also “No Strike, No Lockout” Clause”
-
Labor Arbiters shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide, among others, cases arising from any violation of Article 264 of this Code including questions involving the legality of strikes and lockouts.
-
The Secretary of Labor and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it, when, in his opinion, there exists a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest.
-
The Secretary of Labor and Employment may also certify the same to the National Labor Relations Commission for compulsory arbitration.
The law says:
Under Article 217 the Labor Code of the Philippines, as amended by Section 9 of R.A. No. 6715, the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC have jurisdiction to resolve cases involving claims for damages arising from employer-employee relationship, to wit:
ART. 217. Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters and the Commission- (a) Except as otherwise provided under this Code, the Labor Arbiters shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide, within thirty (30) calendar days after the submission of the case by the parties for decision without extension, even in the absence of stenographic notes, the following cases involving all workers, whether agricultural or nonagricultural:
- Unfair labor practice cases;
- Termination disputes;
- If accompanied with a claim for reinstatement, those cases that workers may file involving wages, rates of pay, hours of work and other terms and conditions of employment;
- Claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages arising from employer-employee relations;
- Cases arising from any violation of Article 264 of this Code including questions involving the legality of strikes and lockouts; and
- Except claims for Employees Compensation, Social Security, Medicare and maternity benefits, all other claims, arising from employer-employee relations, including those of persons in domestic or household service, involving an amount exceeding five thousand pesos (₱5,000.00) regardless of whether accompanied with a claim for reinstatement. (Emphasis supplied.)
Article 263 of the Labor Code of the Philippines further states that:
Article 263. Strikes, picketing and lockouts.
xxx
(g) When, in his opinion, there exists a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest, the Secretary of Labor and Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or certify the same to the Commission for compulsory arbitration. Such assumption or certification shall have the effect of automatically enjoining the intended or impending strike or lockout as specified in the assumption or certification order. If one has already taken place at the time of assumption or certification, all striking or locked out employees shall immediately return to work and the employer shall immediately resume operations and readmit all workers under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout. The Secretary of Labor and Employment or the Commission may seek the assistance of law enforcement agencies to ensure compliance with this provision as well as with such orders as he may issue to enforce the same.
Jurisprudence says:
In the case of Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Airline Pilots Association of the Philippines (G.R. No. 200088, February 26, 2018), the Supreme Court ruled that:
“There is no quarrel regarding the jurisdiction of labor arbiters to rule on the legality of strikes and lock-outs under Article 217(a)(4) but this refers to strikes or lock-outs in establishments that are not indispensable to national interest. However, if in his opinion the dispute affects industries imbued with national interest, the Secretary of Labor who has the authority, may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and may opt to hear the same until its final disposition as is obtaining at bar, or to certify the same for compulsory arbitration to the NLRC, where it is the Commission that will hear and dispose of the certified cases under Rule VIII of the Revised Rules of the NLRC. Even in voluntary arbitration, should the disputants agree to submit the dispute to voluntary arbitration, the Voluntary Arbitrator is not precluded from awarding damages.”
In the case of SACORU v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. G.R. No. 200499, October 04, 2017), the Supreme Court held that:
“When the Secretary exercises these powers, he is granted “great breadth of discretion” in order to find a solution to a labor dispute. The most obvious of these powers is the automatic enjoining of an impending strike or lockout or the lifting thereof if one has already taken place. Assumption of jurisdiction over a labor dispute, or as in this case the certification of the same to the NLRC for compulsory arbitration, always co-exists with an order for workers to return to work immediately and for employers to readmit all workers under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout.
Based on the foregoing, from the date the DOLE Secretary assumes jurisdiction over a dispute until its resolution, the parties have the obligation to maintain the status quo while the main issue is being threshed out in the proper forum – which could be with the DOLE Secretary or with the NLRC. This is to avoid any disruption to the economy and to the industry of the employer – as this is the potential effect of a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national interest – while the DOLE Secretary or the NLRC is resolving the dispute.”
In sum, those who have jurisdiction to determine the legality of a strike or lockout are the following:
- Labor Arbiter, upon filing a proper complaint and after due hearing;
- The Secretary of Labor and Employment, in cases where he assumed jurisdiction and the illegality or legality of a strike/lockout is raised; and
- The National Labore Relations Commission, in cases certified by the Secretary of Labor to the Commission for compulsory arbitration.
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.
[email-subscribers-form id=”4″]