Sonedco Workers Free Labor Union (SWOFLU) / Renato Yude, et al. Vs. Universal Robina Corporation, Sugar Division-Southern Negros Development Corporation (SONEDCO (SONEDCO)) G.R. No. 220383. October 5, 2016
On May 6, 2002, Universal Robina Corporation Sugar Division - Southern Negros D evelopment Corporation (URC-SONEDCO) and Philippine Agricultural Commercial and Industrial Workers Union (PACIWU-TUCP), then the exclusive bargaining representative of URC-SONEDCO's rank-and-file employees , entered into a Collective Bargaining Agreement (2002 Collective Bargaining Agreement) effective January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2006.5 Under the 2002 Collective Bargaining Agreement, rank-and-file employees were entitled to a wage increase of P14.00/day for 2002 and P12.00/day for the succeeding years until 2006. On May 17, 2002, days after the 2002 Collective Bargaining Agreement was signed, a certification election was conducted. SONEDCO Workers Free Labor Union won and replaced PACIWU-TUCP as the exclusive bargaining representative. On August 28, 2007, with no collective bargaining agreement in effect, URC-SONEDCO informed the rankand-file employees that they would be granted the following economic benefits URC-SONEDCO asked the employees who wished to avail themselves of these-benefits to sign an acknowledgment receipt/waiver (2007 waiver), which stated that "[i]n the event that a subsequent [collective bargaining agreement] is negotiated between Management and Union, the new [Collective Bargaining Agreement] shall only be effective January 1, 2008. Lower Courts however erred in ruling that respondent did not commit unfair labor practice, the National Labor Relations Commission and the Court of Appeals failed to consider the totality of respondent's acts, which showed that it violated its duty to bargain collectively. This constitutes unfair labor practice under Article 259(g) of the Labor Code. The wording of the waivers shows a clear attempt to limit petitioners' bargaining power by making them waive the negotiations for 2007 and 2008. In stipulating that the collective bargaining agreement that would be entered into would only be effective the year following the 2008 waiver, respondent limited when the collective bargaining agreement could be deemed ef fective. In other words, respondent asked petitioners to forego any benefits they might have received under a collective bargaining agreement in exchange for the company-granted benefits.
The Supreme Court finds respondent Universal Robina Corporation. Sugar Division - S outhern Negros Development Corporation is GUILTY of unfair labor practice and is ORDERED to pay each of the petitioners the wage increase of P16.00 for the years 2007 and 2008; and to pay SONEDCO Workers Free Labor Union moral damages in the amount of P100,000.00; and exemplary damages in the amount of P200,000.00.
Doctrine
An employer who refuses to bargain with the union and tries to restrict its bargaining power is guilty of unfair labor practice. In determining whether an employer has not bargained in good faith, the totality of all the acts of the employer at the time of negotiations must be taken into account.
