You are on page 1of 1

Scoty’s Dept. Store v. Micaller number to the old.

The new employees were affiliated with another


G.R. No. L-8116 | Aug 25, 1956 | J. Bautista Angelo labor union.
 Criminal cases filed against Micaller:
FACTS 1) Information for threats  dismissed
Nena Micaller was employed as a salesgirl in the Scoty's Department Store, 2) Information for slander  sentenced to pay a fine of P50 but the
owned and operated by Yu Ki Lam, Richard Yang, Yu Si Kiao and Helen decision was appealed to the CFI
Yang. Pursuant to section 5(b) of the Industrial Peace Act, Nena Micaller 3) Another information for slander.
filed charges of ULP against her above employers alleging that she was  She was dismissed for "insulting the owner of the store, Yu Ki Lam,
dismissed by them because of her membership in the National Labor Union on November 5, and for taking to the girls inside the store during
and that, prior to her separation, said employers had been questioning their business hours." And on the strength of these facts the court found
employees regarding their membership in said union and had interfered with respondents, now petitioners, guilty of unfair labor practice and
their right to organize under the law. ordered them to pay a fine of P100.
 HELD: Dismissed because of membership in National Labor Union
The employers denied the charge. They claim that the complainant was and union activities, ER guilty of ULP, and ER fined P100
dismissed from the service because of her misconduct and serious
disrespect to the management and her co-employees so much so that ISSUE
several criminal charges were filed against her with the city fiscal of Manila W/N ER is guilty of ULP
who, after investigation, filed the corresponding informations against her and
the same are now pending trial in court. HELD
YES.
After due hearing, the industrial court found the following facts:
Findings of fact binding on SC
 Prior to November, 1953, Nena Micaller was earning P4.80 a day.
 After every New Year, she was given from P180 to P200 as bonus The industrial court has made a careful analysis of the evidence and has
whereas the other employees were only given P60. For three found the petitioners have really subjected complaint and her co-employees
consecutive years (1950-1952), she was given a first prize for being to a series of questioning regarding their membership in the union or their
the best seller, the most cooperative and most honest employee. union activities which in contemplation of law are deemed acts constituting
 She organized a union among the employees of the store which was unfair labor practice. This finding is binding upon this Court.
latter affiliated with the National Labor Union. Later, the National
Labor Union sent a petition to the store containing ten demands and Questioning of employees concerning union membership and activities and
Nena was called by the management for questioning and, in the disparaging remarks by supervisory employees made in such away as to
manager's office, Yu Ki Lam, Richard Yang, Yu Si Kiao and Helen hamper the exercise of free choice on the part of the employees, have been
Yang asked her who were the members of the union, but she uniformly condemned as ULP.
pretended not to know them.
 Richard Yang and Yu Si Kiao, together with a brother-in law, went to Also, the power to impose the penalties provided for in section 25 of Republic
the house of Nena and there again questioned her regarding her Act No. 875 is lodged in ordinary courts, and not in the Court of Industrial
union membership. Relations, notwithstanding the definition of the word "Court" contained in
 Nena was brought by her employers to the house of their counsel, section 2(a) of said Act. Hence, the decision of the of the industrial court in
Atty. Joaquin Yuseco, and there she was again questioned regarding so far as it imposes a fine of P100 upon petitioners is illegal and should be
her union activities and was even made to sign a paper of withdrawal nullified.
from the union.
 The manager of the Store, Yu Ki Lam asked each employee whether
they were members of the union.
 The union gave notice to strike to the management. Upon receipt of
the notice, the management hired temporary employees equal in