Law Cases

Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Association v Philippine Blooming Mills          51 SCRA 189

F: petitioners staged a mass demonstration before the Malacanang Palace expressing their grievance against the abuses of the Pasig police. Their employer, herein respondent called for a meeting with the petitioner appealing to go back to work as it could hamper their operation of business and it is against the “no strike, no lockout” clause of their collective bargaining agreement. Petitioners assert they are not performing a strike but an exercise of the laborer’s constitutional right to freedom of expression. A second mtng. was called by respondent to urge the petitioners to report to work otherwise they will be dismissed from work. Petitioners did not grant the request of the respondent who consequently dismissed the officials of petitioners on grounds for violation of their CBA. The court ruled in favor of respondents hence this petition for review.

I: WON there is justified cause for the dismissal of the petitioners

R: Workers acted right in the exercise of their freedom to expression. The petitioners explained to the company that such is what they are trying to assert thus it is not violative of their agreement on “no strike, no lockout” rule. The company’s right to property should yield to the workers Constitutional right to freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom to petition for redress of grievances. The company’s loss of unrealized profits for the day of the strike is not as important as the workers fight their rights. In fact, they were even able to save money on the operational expenses for that day. The Court of Industrial Relations should not be confined by technical and procedural rules in its quest for justice. Since the CIR is a creature of the Legislature and even the rules of the legislature itself must be liberally applied if strict adherence to it would result in the denial of a person’s constitutional right, the CIR should not...