Tabangao Shell Refinery Employees Assoc.

v Pilipinas Shell(2014) on a bargaining position to the point of stalemate does not establish bad
faith. The lump sum package of P95k/year is just and equitable for the
In anticipation of the expiration on April 30, 2004 of the 2001-2004 new CBA
CBA between Tabangao Shell Refinery Employees Association (union)
and Pilipinas Shell (company), the parties started negotiations for a new ISSUE + RULING
CBA. The parties discussed the economic items in multiple meetings
with the union proposing a 12% annual across-the-board basic salary Whether or not the findings of fact of the Secretary of Labor and
increase for the next three years and the company counter-proposing to Employment that there already existed a bargaining deadlock when
grant all covered employees a lump sum amount of P88k yearly for the she assumed jurisdiction over the labor dispute between the union
3-year period of the new CBA. The union requested the financial data and the company, and that there was no bad faith on the part of the
for the manufacturing class of business in the Philippines and company when it was bargaining with the union are supported by
justification for the company’s counter-offer. The company did so but substantial evidence YES
the union still asked for additional documents to justify the company’s
counter offer. The union requested for a copy of the comparison of the - The final and executory Decision correctly characterized the
salaries of its members and those from allied industries but the company nature of the duty to bargain, that is, it does not compel any
denied the request on the ground that the requested information was party to accept a proposal or to make any concession.
entrusted to the company under a confidential agreement. The union o While the purpose of collective bargaining is the
manifested that the company was bargaining in bad faith because of its reaching of an agreement between the employer and the
alleged failure on the part of the company to justify its offer. The employee’s union resulting in a binding contract
company proposed the declaration of a deadlock and recommended that between the parties, the failure to reach an agreement
the help of a third party be sought. The union also filed a Notice of after negotiations continued for a reasonable period
Strike in the NCMB, alleging bad faith bargaining on the part of the does not mean lack of good faith. 
company. The NCMB immediately summoned the parties for o The laws invite and contemplate a collective bargaining
mandatory conciliation-mediation proceedings, but the parties failed to contract but do not compel one.
reach an amicable settlement. During the cooling off period, the union o For after all, a CBA, like any contract is a product of
conducted the necessary strike vote, and the members of the union mutual consent and not of compulsion. 
unanimously voted for the holding of a strike. The company then filed a o As such, the duty to bargain does not include the
Petition for Assumption of Jurisdiction with the Sec. of Labor and obligation to reach an agreement.
Employment pursuant to par. 1 of Art. 263(g). Said petition was granted - The corporation’s unswerving position on the matter of annual
by the SOLE. The union filed a complaint for Unfair Labor Practice lump sum payment in lieu of wage increase did not, by itself,
against the company in the NLRC alleging that the company refused, or constitute bad faith even if such position caused a stalemate in
violated its duty to bargain. The LA forwarded the case for the negotiations
consolidation with the case of the parties in the Office of the SOLE. The - As there was no bad faith on the part of the company in its
SOLE Held that company as far as their bargaining stance was bargaining with the union, deadlock was possible and did
concerned was not bargaining in bad faith. The duty to bargain does not occur. 
include the obligation to reach an agreement. The Company's insistence
- the absence of the parties’ mutual declaration of deadlock does
not mean that there was no deadlock.  At most, it would have
been simply a recognition of the prevailing status quo between
the parties.