Piñero vs. NLRC

7. Piñero vs. NLRC DOCTRINE: An employee who is dismissed for !"se is #ener!lly no$ en$i$led $o !ny fin!ni!l !ssis$!ne. E%"i$y onsider!$ions& however& provide !n e'ep$ion. E%"i$y h!s (een defined !s  )"s$ie o"$side o"$side l!w& l!w& (ein# (ein# e$hi!l r!$her r!$her $h!n )"r!l !nd (elon#in# $o $he sphere sphere of mor!ls $h!n $h!n of l!w. I$ is #ro"nded on $he preep$s of onsiene !nd no$ on !ny s!n$ion of posi$ive l!w& for e%"i$y finds no room for !ppli!$ion where $here is l!w. *ACT+: Priv!$e responden$ D"m!#"e$e C!$hedr!l Colle#e& In.& !n ed"!$ion!l ins$i$"$ion& is $he employer of $he f!"l$y !nd s$!ff mem(ers omprisin# $he l!(or "nion D,CACO*+A-NA*TE,. On Deem(er /& /01& D,CACO*+A 2$hen !ffili!$ed wi$h $he N!$ion!l Alli!ne of Te!hers !nd  Allied 3or4ers 3or4ers 5 NAT NATA36 !nd priv!$e priv!$e responden$ responden$ en$ered en$ered in$o in$o ! Colle$ive Colle$ive !r#!inin# !r#!inin#  A#reemen$  A#reemen$ 2CA6 effe$ive effe$ive for 8 ye!rs. ,pon ,pon $he e'pir!$ion of $heir CA CA in /0/& /0/& $he p!r$ies p!r$ies f!iled $o onl"de !no$her CA whih led D,CACO*+A 2now !ffili!$ed wi$h NA*TE,6 $o file ! no$ie of s$ri4e wi$h $he Dep!r$men$ of L!(or !nd Employmen$ 2DOLE6 on $he #ro"nd of ref"s!l $o (!r#!in. On Novem(er 9& //& D,CACO*+A-NA*TE, ond"$ed ! s$ri4e in $he premises of priv!$e responden$ wi$ho"$ s"(mi$$in# $o $he DOLE $he re%"ired res"l$s of $he s$ri4e vo$e o($!ined from $he mem(ers of $he "nion. Priv!$e responden$ filed ! ompl!in$ $o del!re $he s$ri4e ille#!l !nd dismiss $he "nion offiers inl"din# herein pe$i$ioner who w!s $he presiden$ of $he "nion. LA rendered ! deision in f!vor of priv!$e responden$ del!rin# $he s$ri4e ille#!l !nd $he "nion offiers $o h!ve los$ $heir employmen$ s$!$"s effe$ive O$o(er 0&//9 2$he d!$e of $he deision6. Pendin# $he NLRC !ppe!l& $he offiers were !llowed $o re$"rn $o wor4 (y vir$"e of ! memor!nd"m of !#reemen$ en$ered in$o (e$ween $he "nion !nd priv!$e responden$ wi$ho"$ pre)"die $o $he o"$ome of $he !ppe!l. NLRC !ffirmed $he LA deision !nd !dded $h!$ $he "nion h!d no person!li$y $o hold ! s$ri4e (e!"se i$ w!s no$ ! le#i$im!$e l!(or or#!ni;!$ion. CA !ffirmed $he deision. Piñero (ro"#h$ $he pe$i$ion (efore $he +C. I++,E+: 3ON $he s$ri4e w!s ille#!l If yes& sho"ld Piñero (e dismissed

?98-/8& however $he "nion f!iled $o hold ! s$ri4e vo$e !nd s"(mi$ i$s res"l$ $o $he DOLE prior $o

$he holdin# of ! s$ri4e. In $he !se !$ (!r& D,CACO*+A-NA*TE, f!iled $o prove $h!$ i$ o($!ined $he re%"ired s$ri4e-vo$e !mon# i$s mem(ers !nd $h!$ $he res"l$s $hereof were s"(mi$$ed $o $he DOLE. The s$ri4e w!s $herefore orre$ly del!red ille#!l& for non-ompli!ne wi$h $he proed"r!l re%"iremen$s of Ar$ile 18 of $he L!(or Code& !nd Piñero properly dismissed from servie. P"rs"!n$ $o Ar$ile 19 of $he L!(or Code& !ny "nion offier who 4nowin#ly p!r$iip!$es in !n ille#!l s$ri4e !nd !ny wor4er or "nion offier who 4nowin#ly p!r$iip!$es in $he ommission of ille#!l !$s d"rin# ! s$ri4e m!y (e del!red $o h!ve los$ his employmen$ s$!$"s. The Co"r$ no$es $h!$ pe$i$ioner Piñero $"rned 1? ye!rs old !nd re$ired on @!rh & //1 !f$er

/

ye!rs of

servie&

renderin#

his

dismiss!l

from

servie

moo$

!nd

!!demi.
secundum rationem

("$ !lso

secundum