GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGES V.

GUAGUA NATIONAL COLLEGESFACULTY LABOR UNION

G.R. No. 204693 | 13 July 2016
Unfair Labor Practice

DOCTRINE: The question of whether or not a party has met his statutory duty to bargain in good faith
typically turns on the facts of the individual case.

FACTS:•Guagua National Colleges (GNC) entered into a CBA which had a no-strike, no lock-out clause with
Guagua National Colleges Faculty Labor Union (Union 1) and Guagua National Colleges Non-Teaching and
Maintenance Labor Union (Union 2).

•The presidents of the two unions informed the president of GNC of their intention to open the negotiation for
the renewal of the existing CBA which was about to expire.

•During the meeting regarding CBA negotiations, no agreement was reached except that GNC would notify the
unions of the next negotiation meeting, but these unions thereafter only received a letter stating that
management was not inclined to grant economic proposals.
•A conference still transpired upon request but this still ultimately led to an impasse. Said unions wanted a third
party to assist them in threshing out their differences so they filed a preventive mediation case with the NCMB.
•The unions alleged that both parties had agreed on the details regarding the grant of signing bonus, but during
the scheduled meeting, no representative of GNC appeared so they were constrained to file a notice of strike. On
the other hand, GNC contended that they asked for 10 days to submit a comment, but the unions already
submitted a notice of strike so they called or conciliation conference.
•GNC then filed a motion to strike out the notice of strike and to refer the dispute to voluntary arbitration and
grievance machinery, as the grounds cited by the unions in the notice of strike (bad faith bargaining, violation of
duty to bargain, gross violation of provisions of CBA, gross diminution of benefits) come within the definition of
“grievance”.
•As NCMB has not yet acted on GNC’s motion to strike, it urged SOLE to assume jurisdiction. SOLE granted
this, and certified the same to NLRC for immediate compulsory arbitration.
ISSUE: Whether or not GNC is guilty of bad faith bargaining and thus violated its duty to bargain?
HELD: Yes, GNC engaged in bad faith bargaining, which violated its duty to bargain. The crucial question
whether or not a party has met his statutory duty to bargain in good faith typically turns on the facts of the
individual case. In this case, the collective conduct of GNC is indicative of its failure to meet its duty to bargain
in good faith. It failed to comply with the mandatory requirement of serving a reply/counter-proposal within 10
calendar days from receipt of a proposal, then it led respondent unions to believe that it was doing away with
the reply/counter-proposal when it proceeded to just orally discuss the economic terms. Thus, GNC had no
genuine intention to comply with its duty to bargain but merely went through (nablur na sa course hero ang
kasunod pero last sentence to. HAHAHAHA)