victoriano vs alazalde

8/9/2019 Victoriano vs Alazalde

1/2

VICTORIANO VS. ELIZALDE UNION

FACTS:

Benjamin Victoriano (Appellee), a member of the religious sect known as the Iglesia ni Cristo, ha been in theemplo! of the "li#ale $ope %actor!, Inc& (Compan!) since '*& +e was a member of the "li#ale $ope orkers-.nion (.nion) which ha with the Compan! a CBA containing a close shop pro/ision which reas as follows01embership in the .nion shall be re2uire as a conition of emplo!ment for all permanent emplo!ees workersco/ere b! this Agreement&.ner 3ec 4(a), par 4, of $A 5, prior to its amenment b! $A 667, the emplo!er was not preclue from

making an agreement with a labor organi#ation to re2uire as a conition of emplo!ment membership therein, ifsuch labor organi#ation is the representati/e of the emplo!ees& 8n 9une '*, ':', howe/er, $A 667 was enacte,introucing an amenment to par 4 subsection (a) of sec 4 of $A *5, as follows0 ;;; but such agreement shall notco/er members of an! religious sects which prohibit ale an action for injunction to enjoin the Compan! an the .nion from ismissing Appellee& =he .nionin/oke the union securit! clause of the CBA an assaile the constitutionalit! of $A 667 an contens itiscriminatoril! fa/ors those religious sects which ban their members from joining labor unions&ISSUE:

hether Appellee has the freeom of choice in joining the union or not&RULING:

?"3& =he Constitution an $A *5 recogni#e freeom of association& 3ec ' (:) of Art III of the Constitution of '6,

as well as 3ec 5 of Art IV of the Constitution of '56, pro/ie that the right to form associations or societies forpurposes not contrar! to law shall not be abrige& 3ection 6 of $A *5 pro/ies that emplo!ees shall ha/e theright to self@organi#ation an to form, join of assist labor organi#ations of their own choosing for the purpose ofcollecti/e bargaining an to engage in concerte acti/ities for the purpose of collecti/e bargaining an other mutualai or protection& hat the Constitution an the Inustrial eace Act recogni#e an guarantee is the right to formor join associations& A right comprehens at least two broa notions, namel!0 >rst, libert! or freeom, i&e&, theabsence of legal restraint, whereb! an emplo!ee ma! act for himself without being pre/ente b! law an secon,power, whereb! an emplo!ee ma!, as he pleases, join or refrain from joining an association& It is, therefore, theemplo!ee who shoul ecie for himself whether he shoul join or not an association an shoul he choose to join,he himself makes up his min as to which association he woul join an e/en after he has joine, he still retainsthe libert! an the power to lea/e an cancel his membership with sai organi#ation at an! time& =he right to join aunion inclues the right to abstain from joining an! union& =he law oes not enjoin an emplo!ee to sign up with an!association&

=he right to refrain from joining labor organi#ations recogni#e b! 3ection 6 of the Inustrial eace Act is, howe/er,limite& =he legal protection grante to such right to refrain from joining is withrawn b! operation of law, where alabor union an an emplo!er ha/e agree on a close shop, b! /irtue of which the emplo!er ma! emplo! onl!

members of the collecti/e bargaining union, an the emplo!ees must continue to be members of the union for theuration of the contract in orer to keep their jobs& B! /irtue of a close shop agreement, before the enactment of$A 667, if an! person, regarless of his religious beliefs, wishes to be emplo!e or to keep his emplo!ment hemust become a member of the collecti/e bargaining union& +ence, the right of sai emplo!ee not to join the laborunion is curtaile an withrawn&

=o that all@embracing co/erage of the close shop arrangement, $A o&667 introuce an e;ception, when itae to 3ection 4 (a) (4) of the Inustrial eace Act the following pro/iso0 but such agreement shall not co/ermembers of an! religious sects which prohibit a

8/9/2019 Victoriano vs Alazalde

2/2

Degislation appropriate to safeguaring sai interests ma! moif! or abrogate contracts alrea! in eEect& %or notonl! are e;isting laws rea into contracts in orer to >; the obligations as between the parties, but the reser/ationof essential attributes of so/ereign power is also rea into contracts as a postulate of the legal orer& =he contractclause of the Constitution& must be not onl! in harmon! with, but also in suborination to, in appropriate instances,the reser/e power of the state to safeguar the /ital interests of the people& =his has special application tocontracts regulating relations between capital an labor which are not merel! contractual, an sai labor contracts,for being impresse with public interest, must !iel to the common goo&

=he purpose to be achie/e b! $A 667 is to insure freeom of belief an religion, an to promote the generalwelfare b! pre/enting iscrimination against those members of religious sects which prohibit their members fromjoining labor unions, con>rming thereb! their natural, statutor! an constitutional right to work, the fruits of whichwork are usuall! the onl! means whereb! the! can maintain their own life an the life of their epenents&

=he ini/iual emplo!ee, at /arious times in his working life, is confronte b! two aggregates of power collecti/elabor, irecte b! a union, an collecti/e capital, irecte b! management& =he union, an institution e/elope toorgani#e labor into a collecti/e force an thus protect the ini/iual emplo!ee from the power of collecti/e capital,is, parao;icall!, both the champion of emplo!ee rights, an a new source of their frustration& 1oreo/er, when the.nion interacts with management, it prouces !et a thir aggregate of group strength from which the ini/iualalso nees protection F the collecti/e bargaining relationship&

=he free e;ercise of religious profession or belief is superior to contract rights& In case of conGict, the latter must!iel to the former&

=he purpose of $A 667 is to ser/e the secular purpose of a/ancing the constitutional right to the free e;ercise ofreligion, b! a/erting that certain persons be refuse work, or be ismisse from work, or be ispossesse of theirright to work an of being impee to pursue a moest means of li/elihoo, b! reason of union securit!agreements& =o help its citi#ens to >n gainful emplo!ment whereb! the! can make a li/ing to support themsel/esan their families is a /ali objecti/e of the state& =he Constitution e/en manate that the 3tate shall aEorprotection to labor, promote full emplo!ment an e2ualit! in emplo!ment, ensure e2ual work opportunitiesregarless of se;, race or cree an regulate the relation between workers an emplo!ers&

=he primar! eEects of the e;emption from close shop agreements in fa/or of members of religious sects thatprohibit their members from at those who are members ofreligious sects that prohibit their members from joining labor unions, the bene>t upon the religious sects is merel!inciental an inirect&

=he purpose of $A 667 was not to grant rights to labor unions& =he rights of labor unions are ampl! pro/ie for in$epublic Act o& *5 an the new Dabor Coe&

=he Act oes not re2uire as a 2uali>cation, or conition, for joining an! lawful association membership in an!particular religion or in an! religious sect neither oes the Act re2uire acation for withrawing from a labor union& 9oining orwithrawing from a labor union re2uires a positi/e act $epublic Act o& 667 onl! e;empts members with suchreligious a