Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 178 views

    H. G. Henares & Sons vs. National Labor Union

    Uploaded by

    Nina
    This case involves Pablo Fernandez, who was fired from his job at H.G. Henares & Sons after switching shifts with a coworker in order to testify in a labor dispute case against the company. The Court of Industrial Relations found the company guilty of an unfair labor practice, as Fernandez's shift swap did not constitute misconduct and he was likely fired in retaliation for his testimony against the company as a union representative. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling, finding that Fernandez took steps to minimize the impact of his absence and was singled out for dismissal despite another employee receiving only a suspension for the same infraction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    H. G. Henares & Sons vs. National Labor Union

    Uploaded by

    Nina
    178 views2 pages
    This case involves Pablo Fernandez, who was fired from his job at H.G. Henares & Sons after switching shifts with a coworker in order to testify in a labor dispute case against the company. The Court of Industrial Relations found the company guilty of an unfair labor practice, as Fernandez's shift swap did not constitute misconduct and he was likely fired in retaliation for his testimony against the company as a union representative. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling, finding that Fernandez took steps to minimize the impact of his absence and was singled out for dismissal despite another employee receiving only a suspension for the same infraction.

    Original Description:

    H. G. Henares & Sons vs. National Labor Union digest, Unfair LAbor Practice

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves Pablo Fernandez, who was fired from his job at H.G. Henares & Sons after switching shifts with a coworker in order to testify in a labor dispute case against the company. The Court of Industrial Relations found the company guilty of an unfair labor practice, as Fernandez's shift swap did not constitute misconduct and he was likely fired in retaliation for his testimony against the company as a union representative. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling, finding that Fernandez took steps to minimize the impact of his absence and was singled out for dismissal despite another employee receiving only a suspension for the same infraction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    178 views2 pages

    H. G. Henares & Sons vs. National Labor Union

    Uploaded by

    Nina
    This case involves Pablo Fernandez, who was fired from his job at H.G. Henares & Sons after switching shifts with a coworker in order to testify in a labor dispute case against the company. The Court of Industrial Relations found the company guilty of an unfair labor practice, as Fernandez's shift swap did not constitute misconduct and he was likely fired in retaliation for his testimony against the company as a union representative. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling, finding that Fernandez took steps to minimize the impact of his absence and was singled out for dismissal despite another employee receiving only a suspension for the same infraction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    H. G. Henares & Sons vs.

    National Labor Union


    No. L-17535. December 28, 1961.
    Facts:
    1. Pablo Fernandez was employed by H.G. Henares & Sons as laboratory assistant
    in the quality control section whose job was to conduct tests on the percentage
    of solidity of ink and other products of the company.
    2. Fernandez approached Francisco Frio, another laboratory assistant working on
    the night shift, and arranged to take over the latters shift from midnight of
    November 25 to 8:00 a.m. of the next day.
    3. Francisco Frio, on the other hand, was to work on Fernandez shift from 7:00 a.m.
    to 4:00 p.m. of November 26.
    4. The arrangement, which was effected without the companys prior approval, was
    to enable Fernandez to testify, which he did, in the hearing on November 26,
    1958, in case No. 1778-ULP of the Court of Industrial Relations, an ULP case filed
    against the company on behalf of one of its employees.
    5. Conchita Martinez, Fernandez immediate superior, learned of the unauthorized
    exchange of shift from Francisco Frio whom she questioned after she allegedly
    discovered evidence of poor quality control work on the night shift.
    6. Production manager issued a memorandum recommending Fernandez discharge
    from the company.
    7. Both Francisco Frio and Pablo Fernandez were investigated, but only Fernandez
    was dismissed. Frio was given a suspension term.
    8. CIR: there was discriminatory motivation behind the dismissal of Fernandez;
    found company to be guilty of ULP and ordered reinstatement with backwages.
    9. HG Henares argues that Fernandez took it upon himself to exchange shifts w/o
    prior authorization.

    Issue: WON HG Henares and Sons committed an ULP for having dismissed
    Fernandez.
    Held: YES.
    Ratio:
    1. The action of the employee in exchanging shifts with another, who was
    performing the same kind of work in the company, without prior authorization of
    the company, in order to testify before the Court of Industrial Relations on a case
    against the company, does not by itself show any wanton disregard of the
    companys rule of discipline.
    2. On the contrary, rather than absenting himself on the day he was called to
    testify before the Industrial Court in another case against the petitioner
    company, which he was free to do, he worked on the night shift the day before
    and urged Francisco to take over his day shift on the day of the trial in order to
    avoid impairing the normal business operation of the company.
    3. In fact, both Frio and Fernandez performed the same kind of work in the
    company; and Fernandez absence, without replacement, would have placed the
    quality of the companys products in greater jeopardy.
    4. There is more reason to believe that Pablo Fernandez was dismissed from work
    because of union activities, i.e., in testifying unfavorably against the petitioner in
    another unfair labor practice case then pending in the Industrial Court.
    a. Fernandez is a member of the Board of Directors of the H. G. Henares &
    Sons Employees Association, an affiliate of the respondent union, and that
    he received the dismissal notice on November 29, 1958, or barely three
    days after he testified.

    You might also like