Cebu Seaman's Association vs.

Ferrer-Calleja

Facts:
A group of deck officers and marine engineers organized themselves into an association and registered the
same as a non-stock corporation known as Cebu Seaman's Association, Inc. (CSAI) with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). The same group subsequently registered its association with the Bureau of Labor Relations as a
labor union known as the Seamen's Association of the Philippines, Incorporated (SAPI).
SAPI has an existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with Aboitiz Shipping Corporation which remitted
checked-off dues to SAPI. Later on, a group of union members headed by Manuel Gabayoyo claimed that they are
entitled to the custody of the union dues because they were elected as the new set of officers under the supervision
of SEC. Another group headed by Dominica Nacua, claiming that they were the duly elected set of officers of the union
and therefore entitled to the union dues, filed a complaint to restrain the group of Gabayoyo from representing the union.
CSAI represented by the Gabayoyo group, however, claimed that since Nacua was already expelled as
officer/member, she has no personality to represent the union.

Issue: Whether or not Seamen's Association of the Philippines is a legitimate labor organization, and therefore entitled
to the custody of the union dues

Held: . CSAI is not a legitimate labor organization because it is only registered with SEC. It is the registration of the
organization with the Bureau of Labor Relations and not with the SEC which made it a legitimate labor organization
with rights and privileges granted under the Labor Code.
On the basis of the evidence presented by the parties, SAPI, the legitimate labor union, registered with its office,
is not the same association as CSAI, the corporation, insofar as their rights under the Labor Code are concerned.
Hence, SAPI and not the CSAI is entitled to the release and custody of union fees with Aboitiz Shipping and other
shipping companies with whom it had an existing CBA.
The election of the so-called set of officers headed by Manuel Gabayoyo was conducted under the supervision of
the SEC. That being the case, the aforementioned set of officers is of the CSAI and not of SAPI. It follows, then, that
any proceedings, and actions taken by said set of officers can not, in any manner, affect the union and its members.
__------

CEBU SEAMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC., petitioner, vs. HON. PURA FERRER-CALLEJA, SEAMEN'S ASSOCIATIONOF
THE PHILS./DOMINICA C. NACUA, respondent.G.R. No. 83190 August 4, 1992
Facts;
In 1950, a group of deck officers and engineers organized themselves and registered the same as a non-stockcorporation
known as Cebu Seamen's Association, Inc. (CSAI). The same group later registered as a labor unionknown as the Seamen's
Association of the Philippines, Incorporated (SAPI).SAPI has an existing CBA with the Aboitiz which will expire on December
1988. The company has been remittingunion dues to said union until February 1987 when a group introducing itself to be a
new set of officers claimedthat they are entitled to the remittance. This group was headed by Manuel Gabayoyo.On May
1987, another group headed by Dominica Nacua, filed a complaint against CSAI for the security of the CBA.The Med-Arbiter
issued an Order directing the Aboitiz to remit the union dues to the complainant union. TheBureau of Labor Relations (BLR)
affirmed the decision of the Med-Arbiter.
Issues; Held / Ratio;
1. WON Med-Arbiter has jurisdiction---1. Article 226 of the Labor Code vests upon the Bureau of Labor Relations and Labor
Relations Division theoriginal and exclusive authority and jurisdiction to act on all inter-union and intra-union disputes.
Therefore,the Med-Arbiter originally, and the Director on appeal, correctly assumed jurisdiction over the controversy

2. WON SAPI entitled to the dues -----It is the registration of the organization with the BLR and not with the SEC which made
it a legitimate labororganization with rights and privileges granted under the Labor Code.CSAI was already inoperational
before the controversy arose - the SEC ordered the CSAI to show cause why itscertificate of registration should not be
revoked for continuous inoperation. Also, before the controversy,Dominica Nacua was elected president of SAPI. It had
an existing CBA with Aboitiz. Before the end of the termof Nacua, some members of the union showed discontentment with
the leadership of Nacua. This break-awaygroup revived the corporation and issued a resolution expelling Nacua. In
February, 1987, it held its ownelection of officers supervised by the SEC. The expulsion of Nacua from the corporation, has
not affected hermembership with the labor union. In fact, she was re-elected as the president. Whatever acts the
corporationhad done do not bind the labor union.Under the principles of administrative law in force in this jurisdiction,
decisions of administrative officers shallnot be disturbed by courts, except when the former acted without or in excess of their
jurisdiction or withgrave abuse of discretion. The Bureau of Labor Relations correctly ruled that SAPI is not the same
associationas CSAI insofar as their rights under
 CEBU SEAMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. FERRER-CALLEJA- Topic: Legitimate workers association

FACTS:
1. On October 23, 1950, a group of deck officers and marine engineers on board vessels plying Cebu and other ports of
the Philippines organized themselves into an association and registered it as a non-stock corporation known as Cebu
Seamens Association, Inc (CSAI) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Later, the same group registered
its association with the Bureau of Labor Relations as a labor union known as the Seamens Association of the Philippines,
Incorporated (SAPI).
2. SAPI had an existing collective bargaining agreement with Aboitiz Shipping Corporation and had been remitting
checked-off union dues to said union until a group of union members headed by Manuel Gabayoyo, introducing
themselves as the new set of officers elected under the supervision of the SEC, claimed that they are entitled to the
remittance and custody of such union dues.
3. Subsequently, another group headed by Dominica Nacua, claiming as the duly elected set of officers of the union,
filed a complaint, for and in behalf of the union, against CSAI to restrain them from acting on behalf of the union and
directing Aboitiz to remit the checked-off union dues.
4. CSAI filed its answer alleging that the union and the former are one and the same and that Nacua has already been
expelled as member/officer of the union through two resolutions its Board of Directors.
5. The Med-Arbiter issued an order holding that the set of officers of SAPI headed by Nacua, was the lawful set of
officers entitled to the release and custody of the union dues as well as agency fees of the said association.
6. On appeal, the Bureau of Labor Relations affirmed the decision of the Med-Arbiter and after the Secretary of Labor
denied CSAIs appeal/motion for reconsideration for lack of merit, filed a petition with the Supreme Court.

ISSUE: Who is entitled to the collection and custody of the union dues?
RULING: SAPI. It is the set of officers headed by Dominica Nacua that is the lawful set of officers of SAPI and is, therefore,
entitled to the release and custody of the union dues as well as the as the agency fees. As stated in the findings of fact,
CSAI, a non-stock corporation was registered with the SEC. The same group was registered with the BLR as SAPI. It
is the registration of the organization with the BLR and not with the SEC which made it a legitimate labor
organization with rights and privileges granted under the Labor Code.
The Supreme Court also stated that BLR correctly ruled on the basis of the evidence presented by the parties that
SAPI, the legitimate labor union, registered with its office, is not the same association as CSAI, the corporation,
insofar as their rights under the Labor Code are concerned. A record check with the BLR shows that SAPI has
submitted to it for files the list of this new set of officers, in compliance with second paragraph of Art 242 (c) of the Labor
Code [now Art. 242-A (b)]. This list sufficiently sustains the view that said officers were lawfully elected, in the absence of
clear and convincing proof to the contrary.

DISPOSITIVE: SAPI won. Petition denied

DOCTRINE: Art. 242-A (b) of the Labor Code

Art.242-A. Reportorial Requirement the following are documents to be submitted to the Bureau by the legitimate labor
organization concerned:
xxx xxx xxx
(b) Its list of officers, minutes of the election of officers and list of voters within 30 days from election.
xxx xxx xxx
Failure to comply with the above requirements shall not be a ground for cancellation of union registration but shall subject
the erring officers or members to suspension, expulsion from membership, or any appropriate penalty.

----------
the Labor Code are concerned. Hence, the former and not the latterassociation is entitled to the release and custody of
union fees.
 Cebu Seamens Association v. Ferrer-Calleja

Facts:

The records show that sometime on 23 October 1950, a group of dock officers and marine engineers on board
vessels plying Cebu and other ports of the Philippines organized themselves into an association and registered the same as a
non-stock corporation known as Cebu Seamen's Association, Inc. (CSAI), with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Later, on 23 June 1969, the same group registered its association with this Bureau as a labor union known as the Seamen's
Association of the Philippines, Incorporated (SAPI).

SAPI has an existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the Aboitiz Shipping Corporation which will
expire on 31 December 1988. In consonance with the CBA said company has been remitting checked-off union dues to
said union until February, 1987 when a group composed of members of said union, introducing itself to be its now set of
officers, went to the company and claimed that they are entitled to the remittance and custody of such union dues. This
group, headed by Manuel Gabayoyo claims that they were elected as such on January 20, 1987 under the supervision of the
SEC.

On 26 May 1987, another group headed by Dominica C. Nacua, claiming as the duly elected set of officers of the union in
an election hold on 20 December 1986, filed a complaint, for and on behalf of the union, against the Cebu Seamen's
Association, Inc. (CSAI) as represented by Manuel Gabayoyo for the security of the aforementioned CBA, seeking such relief,
among others, as an order restraining the respondent from acting on behalf of the union and directing the Aboitiz Shipping Corp.
to remit the checked-off union dues for the months of March and April 1987.

Issue:

Who is entitled to the release and custody of union dues from Aboitiz? Nacua Representing SAPI or Gabayoyo
representing CSAI?

Held:

Nacua representing SAPI.

As stated in the findings of fact in the questioned resolution of Director Pura Ferrer-Calleja, on October 23, 1950, a group of
deck officers organized the Cebu Seamen's Association, Inc., (CSAI), a non-stock corporation and registered it with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEQ. The same group registered the organization with the Bureau of Labor Relations
(BLR) as Seamen's Association of the Philippines (SAPI). It is the registration of the organization with the BLR and not with
the SEC which made it a legitimate labor organization with rights and privileges granted under the Labor Code.

We gathered from the records that CSAI, the corporation was already inoperational before the controversy in this case arose.
In fact, on August 24, 1984, the SEC ordered the CSAI to show cause why its certificate of registration should not be revoked
for continuous inoperation (p. 343, Rollo). There is nothing in the records which would show that CSAI answered said show-
cause order.

Also, before the controversy, private respondent Dominica Nacua was elected president of the labor union, SAPI. It had an
existing CBA with Aboitiz Shipping Corporation. Before the end of the term of private respondent Nacua, some members of the
union which included Domingo Machacon and petitioner Manuel Gabayoyo showed signs of discontentment with the leadership
of Nacua. 'Phis break-away group revived the moribund corporation and issued an undated resolution expelling Nacua from the
association (pp. 58-59, Rollo). Sometime in February, 1987, it held its own election of officers supervised by the Securities and
Exchange Commission. It also filed a case of estafa against Nacua sometime in May, 1986 (p. 52, Rollo).

The expulsion of Nacua from the corporation, of which she denied being a member, has however, not affected her membership
with the labor union. In fact, in the elections of officers for 1987-1989, she was re-elected as the president of the labor union.
In this connections, We cannot agree with the contention of Gabayoyo that Nacua was already expelled from the union.
Whatever acts their group had done in the corporation do not bind the labor union. Moreover, Gabayoyo cannot claim leader.
ship of the labor group by virtue of his having been elected as a president of the dormant corporation CSAI.

Public respondent Bureau of Labor Relations correctly ruled on the basis of the evidence presented by the parties that SAPI,
the legitimate labor union, registered with its office, is not the same association as CSAI, the corporation, insofar as their rights
under the Labor Code are concerned. Hence, the former and not the latter association is entitled to the release and custody of
union fees with Aboitiz Shipping and other shipping companies with whom it had an existing CBA.