the said Order?
FEU-NRMF v. FEU-NRMFEA-AFW (ESCAÑO)
G.R. No. 168362| October 12, 2006| YNAREZ-SANTIAGO, J.
EFFECT OF ASSUMPTION/CERTIFICATION ORDER
PETITIONER: FAR EASTERN UNIVERSITY - DR. NICANOR REYES
MEDICAL FOUNDATION (FEU-NRMF) and LILIA P. LUNA. M.D.
RESPONDENTS: FEU-NRMF EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION-ALLIANCE
OF FILIPINO WORKERS (FEU-NRMFEA-AFW) et al.
SUMMARY
FACTS:
 In view of the forthcoming expiry of the CBA, respondent union
sent a letter proposal to petitioner FEU-NRMF stating their
economic and non-economic proposals for the negotiation of the
new CBA.
 However, FEU-NRMF rejected respondent union’s demands.
 In an effort to arrive at a compromise, subsequent conciliation
proceedings were conducted before the NCMB, but the
negotiation failed.
 Hence, the union then filed a Notice of Strike before NCMB on
the ground of bargaining deadlock and after the expiration of
the thirty-day cooling off period and the seven-day strike ban ,
the union then it staged a strike.
 FEUNRMF filed a Petition for the Assumption of Jurisdiction
(AJO) or for Certification of Labor Dispute with the NLRC,
underscoring that it is a medical institution engaged in the
business of providing health care for its patients.
 Secretary of Labor granted the petition and issued an Order
assuming jurisdiction over the labor dispute, thereby prohibiting
any strike.
 However, the copy of the AJO was not served to the respondent
because there was no union officer around. Instead the copy
was posted in several conspicuous places within the premises of
the hospital. Striking employees continued to strike claiming that
they did not know about the AJO order.
 Subsequently, FEU-NRMF filed a case before the NLRC,
contending that respondent union staged the strike in defiance
of the AJO, hence, it was illegal.
ISSUE/s:
Whether the service of the AJO was validly effected by the
process server so as to bind the respondent union and hold
them liable for the acts committed subsequent to the issuance of
RULING: NO, THE STRIKE IS VALID
 Under the NLRC Revised Rules of Procedure, service of copies
of orders should be made by the process server either
personally or through registered mail. If, however, efforts to find
the party concerned personally would make prompt service
impossible, service may be completed by substituted service.
 Employment is a property right of which one cannot be deprived
of without due process. Due process here would demand that
the respondent union be properly notified of the Assumption of
Jurisdiction Order of the Secretary of Labor enjoining the strike
and requiring its members to return to work. Thus, there must be
a clear and unmistakable proof that the requirements prescribed
by the Rules in the manner of effecting personal or substituted
service had been faithfully complied with.
 Merely posting copies of the AJO does not satisfy the rigid
requirement for proper service outlined by the rules. Therefore,
the manner of service made by the process server was invalid
and irregular. Respondent union could not therefore be
adjudged to have defied the said Order since it was not properly
apprised
 Furthermore, the procedural requirements required for strike to
be valid, along with the mandatory cooling off and strike ban
periods had been fully observed by the respondent union.
 Hence, as the strike conducted by the respondent union is valid
and legal, there is therefore no reason to dismiss the union
officers. PETITION DENIED.
DOCTRINE:
Employment is a property right of which one cannot be deprived of
without due process. Due process here would demand that the
respondent union be properly notified of the Assumption of Jurisdiction
Order of the Secretary of Labor enjoining the strike and requiring its
members to return to work. Thus, there must be a clear and
unmistakable proof that the requirements prescribed by the Rules in the
manner of effecting personal or substituted service had been faithfully
complied with.
Merely posting copies of the AJO does not satisfy the rigid
requirement for proper service outlined by the above stated rules
FACTS:
 The petitioners were among the regular employees of respondent
Far Eastern University - Dr. Nicanor Reyes Medical Foundations
(FEU-NRMF) and respondent union, a legitimate labor organization
and is the duly recognized representative of the rank and file
 employees of petitioner, entered into a CBA that will expire on 30
April 1996. In view of the forthcoming expiry, respondent union sent
a letter proposal to petitioner FEU-NRMF stating their economic and
non-economic proposals for the negotiation of the new CBA.
 FEU-NRMF rejected respondent union’s demands. Respondent
union then filed a Notice of Strike before NCMB on the ground of
bargaining deadlock, then it staged a strike.
 FEUNRMF filed a Petition for the Assumption of Jurisdiction (AJO) or
for Certification of Labor Dispute with the NLRC, underscoring the
fact that it is a medical institution engaged in the business of
providing health care for its patients. Secretary of Labor granted the
petition and an Order assuming jurisdiction over the labor dispute
was issued, thereby prohibiting any strike. The copy of the AJO was
not served to the respondent because there no union officer was
around. Instead the copy was posted in several conspicuous places
within the premises of the hospital. Striking employees continued to
strike claiming that they did not know about the AJO order. FEU-
NRMF filed a case before the NLRC, contending that respondent
union staged the strike in defiance of the AJO, hence, it was illegal.
ISSUE/s:
Whether the service of the AJO was validly effected by the process
server so as to bind the respondent union and hold them liable for
the acts committed subsequent to the issuance of the said Order?
NO, THE STRIKE IS VALID
DISPOSITIVE PORTION: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant
Petition is DENIED.
RATIO:
The process server resorted to posting the Order when personal service was
rendered impossible since the striking employees were not present at the
strike area. This mode of service, however, is not sanctioned by either the
NLRC Revised Rules of Procedure or the Revised Rules of Court. Under the
NLRC Revised Rules of Procedure, service of copies of orders should be
made by the process server either personally or through registered mail.
The presumption of receipt of the copies of the Assumption of Jurisdiction
Order AJO could not be taken for granted considering the adverse effect in
case the parties failed to heed to the injunction directed by such Order.
Defiance of the assumption and return to- work orders of the Secretary of
Labor after he has assumed jurisdiction is a valid ground for the loss of
employment status of any striking union officer or member. Employment is a
property right of which one cannot be deprived of without due process. Due
process here would demand that the respondent union be properly notified of
the Assumption of Jurisdiction Order of the Secretary of Labor enjoining the
strike and requiring its members to return to work. Thus, there must be a
clear and unmistakable proof that the requirements prescribed by the Rules
in the manner of effecting personal or substituted service had been faithfully
complied with. Merely posting copies of the AJO does not satisfy the rigid
requirement for proper service outlined by the above stated rules. Needless
to say, the manner of service made by the process server was invalid and
irregular. Respondent union could not therefore be adjudged to have defied
the said Order since it was not properly apprised thereof. The affidavits
presented by the petitioner FEU-NRMF and relied upon by the Labor Arbiter
and the NLRC, in arriving at the conclusion that the respondent union
committed illegal acts during the strike, could not be given probative value by
this Court as the adverse party was not given a chance to cross-examine the
affiants. Accordingly, the strike conducted by the respondent union was valid
under the circumstances.
For a strike to be valid, the following requisites must concur: (1) the thirty-day
notice or the fifteen-day notice, in case of unfair labor practices; (2) the two-
thirds (2/3) required vote to strike done by secret ballot; and (3) the
submission of the strike vote to the Department of Labor and Employment at
least seven days prior to the strike. In addition, in case of strikes in hospitals,
clinics and medical institutions, it shall be the duty of the striking employees
to provide and maintain an effective and skeletal workforce of medical and
other health personnel in order to insure the proper and adequate protection
of the life and health of its patients. These procedural requirements, along
with the mandatory cooling off and strike ban periods had been fully
observed by the respondent union.
As the strike conducted by the respondent union is valid and legal, there is
therefore no cogent reason to dismiss the union officers. PETITION DENIED.