1.

TABANGAO SHELL REFINERY EMPLOYEES ASSOC a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable to the nati
IATION vs. PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPOR onal interest. This grant is not limited to the grounds cited
ATION G.R. No. 170007, 7 April 2014 in the notice of strike or lockout that may have preceded th
e strike or lockout; nor is it limited to the incidents of the s
FACTS: trike or lockout that in the meanwhile may have taken plac
e. As the term “assume jurisdiction” connotes, the intent of
the law is to give the Labor Secretary full authority to resol
ve all matters within the dispute that gave rise to or which
On the parties’ 41st meeting, the company proposed the de arose out of the strike or lockout; it includes and extends t
claration of a deadlock and recommended that the help of o all questions and controversies arising from or related to
a third party be sought. The union filed a Notice of Strike i the dispute, including cases over which the labor arbiter ha
n the NCMB, alleging bad faith bargaining on the part of th s exclusive jurisdiction.
e company. The NCMB immediately summoned the partie
s for the mandatory conciliation-
mediation proceedings but the parties failed to reach an a
micable settlement. The DOLE-
Sec assumed jurisdiction over the dispute of the parties. T
he Secretary ruled that the company is not guilty of bargai
ning in bad faith and also proceeded to decide on the matt
er of the wage increase and other economic issues of the ne
w CBA.

The union questioned the Secretary’s assumption of jurisdi

ction over the labor dispute between the union and the co
mpany on the ground that the “Secretary erred in assumin
g jurisdiction over the ‘CBA’ case when it is not the subject
matter of the notice of strike” because the case was “all abo
ut ‘ULP’ in the form of bad faith bargaining.” For the union
, the DOLE-
Sec should not have touched the issue of the CBA as there
was no CBA deadlock at that time, and should have limited
the assumption of jurisdiction to the charge of unfair labo
r practice for bargaining in bad faith

ISSUE:

Whether or not the Secretary of Labor and Employment’s

assumption of jurisdiction is limited to the subject of strike
.

RULING: No. The labor dispute between the union and th

e company concerned the unresolved matters between the
parties in relation to their negotiations for a new CBA. The
power of the DOLE-
Sec to assume jurisdiction over this dispute includes and e
xtends to all questions and controversies arising from the s
aid dispute, such as, but not limited to the union’s allegatio
n of bad faith bargaining. It also includes and extends to th
e various unresolved provisions of the new CBA such as co
mpensation, particularly the matter of annual wage increa
se or yearly lump sum payment in lieu of such wage increa
se, whether or not there was deadlock in the negotiations.

As there is already an existing controversy on the matter of

wage increase, the DOLE-
Sec need not wait for a deadlock in the negotiations to take
cognizance of the matter. That is the significance of the po
wer of the DOLE-
Sec under Article 263(g) of the Labor Code to assume juris
diction over a labor dispute causing or likely to cause a stri
ke or lockout in an industry indispensable to the national i
nterest. Article 263(g) is both an extraordinary and a pree
mptive power to address an extraordinary situation –