Suggested Answers in 2018 Bar Examinations Questions

RICAFRENTE, JESTER IVAN O. (M 13) Labor Law Review Atty. Lorenzo

SUGGESTED ANSWERS IN 2018 BAR EXAMINATIONS QUESTIONS ON LABOR LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATION XV Nexturn Corporation employed Nini and Nono, whose tasks involved directing and supervising rank-and-file employees engaged in company operations. Nini and Nono are required to ensure that such employees obey company rules and regulations, and recommend to the company's Human Resources Department any required disciplinary action against erring employees. In Nexturn Corporation, there are two independent unions, representing rank-and-file and supervisory employees, respectively. a) May Nini and Nono join a union? (2.5%)  ANSWER:

Yes, Nini and Nono can join a union. Under Article 255 of the Labor Code, supervisory employees may join, assist or form a separate collective bargaining units and/or legitimate labor organizations of their own. b) May the two unions be affiliated with the same Union Federation? (2.5%)  ANSWER:

Yes, the two unions can be affiliated with the same Union Federation. Under Article 255 of the Labor Code, rank-and-file rank-and- file union and supervisors’ union operating within the same establishment may join the same federation or national union. XVI Nagrab Union and Nagrab Corporation have an existing CSA which contains the following provision: "New employees within the coverage of the bargaining unit who may be regularly employed shall become members of Nagrab Union. Membership in good standing with the Nagrab Union is a requirement for continued employment with Nagrab Corporation." Nagrab Corporation subsequently acquired all the assets and rights of Nuber Corporation and absorbed all of the latter's employees. Nagrab Union immediately demanded enforcement of the above-stated CSA provision with respect to the absorbed employees. Nagrab Corporation refused on the ground that this should not apply to the absorbed employees who were former employees of another corporation whose assets and rights it had acquired. (a) Was Nagrab Corporation correct in refusing to enforce the CSA provision with respect to the absorbed employees? (2.5%)

RICAFRENTE, JESTER IVAN O. (M 13) Labor Law Review Atty. Lorenzo

 ANSWER:

Nagrab Corporation was not correct in refusing to enforce the CBA provision with respect to the absorbed employees. The corporation cannot invoke its merger to evade from its obligation under the union shop clause contained in its existing Collective Bargaining Unit (BCA) with its own certified union. In the case of BPI vs. BPI Employees Union, the Court said that the case which involves the application of a CBA with a union shop clause should be resolved principally from the standpoint of the clear provisions of our labor laws, and the express terms of the CBA in question, and not by inference from the general consequence of the merger of corporations under the Corporation Code, which obviously does not deal with and, therefore, is silent on the terms and conditions of employment in corporations or juridical entities.

(b)May (b) May a newly-regularized employee of Nagrab Corporation (who is not part of the absorbed employees) refuse to join Nagrab Union? How would you advise the human resources manager of Nagrab Corporation to proceed? (2.5%)  ANSWER:

No, the newly- regularized employee of Nagrab Corporation (who is not part of absorbed employees) cannot refuse to join Nagrab Union in view of the union security clause provision of the CBA. While the right to join includes the right not to join, however, the recognized exception under the law is the Union Security Clause where it imposes upon employees the obligation to acquire or retain union membership as a condition for continued employment. Thus, it will be my advice to the human resources manager of Nagrab Coproration to comply with the provision of the CBA stating that "New employees within the coverage of the bargaining unit who may be regularly employed shall become members of Nagrab Union. “