[TEODORICO S. MIRANDA, JR. vs. ASIAN TERMINALS, INC.

  ● This led to the formation of a grievance committee to

(ATI) and CA] (2009)  investigate the complaints against the union officers
● Miranda, however, refused to participate in the
[Puno, C.J.]  investigation. Upon the conclusion of the investigation,
the grievance committee issued its report
Topic: Shop Steward
recommending to ATI the ​recall of the petitioner as 
Doctrine: ​A ​shop steward is appointed by the union in a shop,
Shop Steward and for his reversion to his former 
department, or plant and serves as representative of the union,
position of Checker I​, in accordance with the CBA.
charged with negotiating and adjustment of grievances of
employees with the supervisor of the employer. It is a ​union
Miranda ​questioned his recall as union Shop Steward​.
position​ and not a position within the company.

Silva issued a letter which reasoned that the Miranda’s recall as

I. FACTS: 
Shop Steward was pursuant to Sec 131 of the CBA which required
that the term of office of the Shop Steward shall be based on trust
1991: PET Teodorico S. Miranda, Jr. (Miranda) was employed by
and confidence and favorable recommendation of the duly elected
RESP Asian Terminals Inc. (ATI) as Checker I. He also became a
president of the Union. Said letter states:
member of the union, Associated Port Checkers and Workers
● [T]he management EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
Union (APCWU).
hereby ​recalls  the designation of Mr. Teodorico 
Miranda as Shop Steward​… and designate[s] Mr.
April 10, 1992: Miranda who was then the VP of the union, was
Hipolito Cruz as Shop Steward. Miranda shall revert
appointed to the position of ​Shop Steward which is a union
back to their position as Checker I and shall receive
position under the payroll of the company.
the salary that corresponds therefor.
The CBA between the union and ATI provided for the:
Miranda ​filed a complaint against Silva with the DOLE ​praying 
● appointment of a Shop Steward from among the 
for his reinstatement as Shop Steward​.
union  members​, upon the recommendation of the
union president; and
Med-Arbiter: ​ruled in favor of Miranda ordering his reinstatement
● the Shop Steward being a field representative of both
to the position of Shop Steward, because accdng to the
the company and the union and acts as an
Med-Arbiter, Silva as union Pres. did not have the authority to
independent arbiter of all complaints brought to his
recall Miranda as Shop Steward for lack of approval of the Board
attention.
of Directors of the union.
Dec. 28, 1993: Roger Silva (Pres. of APCWU) wrote a letter to
Secretary of Labor in a Resolution:​ Affirmed Med-Artbiter
Miranda regarding the ​recall of his designation as the union 
Shop Steward​. He further explained that:
PET Miranda then filed a series of claims (money claims, ULP
● Miranda was recalled as union Shop Steward due to
which was later on amended illegal demotion with a claim for
loss of trust and confidence ​in him
reduction or diminution in pay) but were dismissed for lack of
● Miranda refused to heed Silva’s reminders concerning
cause of action.
his "​chronic absenteeism​" that "is hurting the interest
of the Union members”
Miranda then filed a claim with the NLRC for unfair labor practice,
● the decision to ​dismiss the petitioner came only after
illegal demotion and reduction and diminution of pay which was
a series of personal dialogues and after Miranda had
again dismissed
been given ample opportunity to efficiently perform the
duties and obligations of a Shop Steward assigned to
While the said case was pending with the NLRC, Miranda was
the night shift
retrenched by ATI from his position as a Vessel Operation
Checker. Consequently, he again filed a separate case
Silva then gave Miranda five (5) days from receipt of the letter to
explain why he should not be recalled as Shop Steward for
1
chronic absenteeism. SEC. 13. Article V, Sec. 2: The Shop Steward shall be an independent
arbiter of all complaints and grievances brought before him as a field
representative both of the COMPANY and the UNION. Only bonafide
June 9 1994: Miranda and some of the members of APCWU sent members of "the UNION shall be designated as Shop Steward whose
a letter to ATI protesting the manner in which the APCWU designation and term of oDce shall be based on trust and con<dence and
leadership handled the affairs of the union. upon the favorable recommendation of the duly elected president of the
UNION. In like manner shall the designation of the Union rotation
representative posted in the hiring shall be based.

Digest by Palillo, C.T.

questioning the validity of his retrenchment. The case was
terminated upon the execution of a ​Quit Claim and Release.
NLRC  and  CA: ruled that there is no need to execute the
reinstatement aspect of the decision of LA Amansec since it has
been rendered ​moot and academic ​by Miranda’s re-employment
as Checker at that time.
Hence, this petition for ​certiorari ​under Rule 65.
II. ISSUE:  ATI​.
1. [Relevant] W/N PET Miranda should be reinstated to
the position of Shop Steward? ​NO, even if there was
invalid recall Miranda cannot be reinstated to Shop
Steward due to his valid retrenchment
2. W/N this case has been rendered moot and
academic? ​YES
III. RATIONALE:  Because of the Miranda’s valid retrenchment, which was finally
 
Shop Steward, ​defined​:
The position of the shop steward has been acknowledged to be a
position within the union; and even in Section 2 of Rule XIX of the
Implementing Rules of Book V of the Labor Code, as amended by
DOLE Order 40-03, 58:
● The shop steward which is a position ​within the union  retrenchment.
is understood to be a union officer who plays an
important role in the grievance procedure. The shop
steward is r​esponsible for receiving complaints and  of the case have rendered the present petition moot and
grievances  of  the  employees  and  for  bringing  academic.
these complaints to the immediate supervisor of 
the  employee  concerned​. If the grievance is not
settled through the efforts of the shop steward, it is
referred to the grievance committee.
Santa Rosa Coca-Cola Plant Employees Union v. Coca-Cola
Bottlers Phils​:
Section 501 (a) 60 and (b) 61 and Section 3 (q) 62 of the
Landrum GriDn Act of 1959 were used as the bases to conclude
that the Shop Steward is an officer of the union. These provisions
confirm that the Shop Steward occupies a position of trust within
the union. It may be an elective official within the union or key
administrative personnel, and it is considered to be within the
same class as union officers, agents and representatives.
ITCAB​, the duties and responsibilities of the Shop Steward stated
in the CBA between the union and the respondent company, as
well as the manner of the appointment and designation of the
Shop Steward show that the shop steward is a union position 
and not a position within the company. 
1. NO, even if there was ​invalid recall, Miranda cannot be
reinstated to Shop Steward due to his ​valid retrenchment.
Ruling of the Med-Arbiter Prevails: Invalid Recall
The Med-Arbiter, as affirmed by the Secretary of Labor, ruled that
there was ​neither cause nor due process in the recall of the 
Miranda from the position of union Shop Steward​, because:
Digest by Palillo, C.T.
● the claim of loss of trust and confidence due Miranda’s
alleged absenteeism was not substantiated
● that the recall was not approved by the BOD of the
union, as required by the APCWU Constitution and
By-Laws
● facts and findings of the Med-Arbiter and the Secretary
of Labor are generally conclusive on appeal.
Employment with respondent ATI and membership in the union
are required in order to occupy the position of Shop Steward. But
Miranda is neither a member of the union nor employed with 
● He was already retrenched ATI since Oct 21, 2001,
and his retrenchment was finally settled through the
execution of a Quit Claim and Release which was
executed before the NLRC.
● The Quit Claim and Release provides that in
consideration of the receipt of P367,500.00, Miranda
discharges ATI and its officers from any claims arising
from his retrenchment
settled through the Quit Claim and Release, any order for the
reinstatement of the petitioner to the position of union Shop
Steward can no longer be executed by the union. Miranda also
cannot be reinstated to the position of Checker I, since he was
already retrenched by the respondent from such position and he
released the company from any and all claims with respect to his
2. YES, the events which have taken place during the pendency
The reinstatement of Miranda as Shop Steward could not be
forced into the present circumstances because he is no longer a 
union member nor is employed by ATI​.
● Furthermore, he was already compensated for his
retrenchment from ATI, and he released respondent
ATI from any and all claims or liability with respect to
his separation from employment due to retrenchment.
To order the respondent company to reinstate the
petitioner to his employment in ATI would render the
Quit Claim and Release nugatory.
 
IV. DISPOSITIVE:  
Petition DISMISSED for being moot and academic.