Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Willkommen bei Scribd!

  • UST FACULTY UNION (USTFU) vs. Dir. BITONIO JR - Digest

    Hochgeladen von

    Roxanne Peña
    171 Ansichten1 Seite
    The USTFU officers claimed their election was valid, but the Director held that it violated the union's constitution and bylaws. The facts state that the election was held at a general faculty assembly organized by the university, not the union, and the officers were elected by clapping rather than secret ballot as required. The issue is whether this election process violated the union's rules. The Director held that it did violate the constitution and bylaws because the election was not convened or authorized by the union itself and did not follow the mandated secret ballot process. Therefore, the purported election of the officers was void.

    Originalbeschreibung:

    Originaltitel

    UST FACULTY UNION (USTFU) vs. Dir. BITONIO JR - Digest.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Verfügbare Formate

    DOCX, PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

    Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

    Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

    Dieses Dokument melden
    The USTFU officers claimed their election was valid, but the Director held that it violated the union's constitution and bylaws. The facts state that the election was held at a general faculty assembly organized by the university, not the union, and the officers were elected by clapping rather than secret ballot as required. The issue is whether this election process violated the union's rules. The Director held that it did violate the constitution and bylaws because the election was not convened or authorized by the union itself and did not follow the mandated secret ballot process. Therefore, the purported election of the officers was void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Als DOCX, PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    171 Ansichten1 Seite

    UST FACULTY UNION (USTFU) vs. Dir. BITONIO JR - Digest

    Hochgeladen von

    Roxanne Peña
    The USTFU officers claimed their election was valid, but the Director held that it violated the union's constitution and bylaws. The facts state that the election was held at a general faculty assembly organized by the university, not the union, and the officers were elected by clapping rather than secret ballot as required. The issue is whether this election process violated the union's rules. The Director held that it did violate the constitution and bylaws because the election was not convened or authorized by the union itself and did not follow the mandated secret ballot process. Therefore, the purported election of the officers was void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Als DOCX, PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    von 1

    UST FACULTY UNION (USTFU) vs. Dir.

    BITONIO JR

    F A C T S:

    Marino, et. al. are duly elected officers of the USTFU. The Secretary General of USTFU, posted a notice
    addressed to all USTFU members announcing a general assembly to elect the next set of officers. Through the notice,
    the members were also informed of the constitution of COMELEC to oversee the elections. Some of the appellants
    filed a petition with the Med-Arbiter against herein appellees and the members of the COMELEC alleging that the
    COMELEC was not constituted in accordance with USTFUs constitution and by-laws (CBL) and that no rules had been
    issued to govern the conduct of the election. The secretary general of UST issued notices allowing all faculty members
    to hold a general faculty assembly, to discuss the state of the unratified UST-USTFU CBA and status and election of
    USTFU officers. The general assembly was attended by members of the USTFU and also by 'non-USTFU members.
    On this occasion, appellants were elected as USTFUs new set of officers by acclamation and clapping of hands.

    I S S U E:

    W/N the USTFU officers purported election was void for having been conducted in violation of the unions
    Constitution and Bylaws (CBL)

    H E L D:

    YES. As correctly held by Public Respondent Bitonio, the CBL, which constituted the covenant between the
    union and its members, could not be suspended during the general assembly of all faculty members, since that
    assembly had not been convened or authorized by the USTFU. That the election could not be legitimized by the
    recognition of the newly elected set of officers by UST or by the alleged ratification of the new CBA by the general
    membership of the USTFU. To accept appellants' claim to legitimacy is to invest in their position, duties, responsibilities,
    rights and privileges of USTFU officers without the benefit of a lawful electoral exercise as defined in USTFU's CBL
    and Article 241(c) of the Labor Code. The CBL constitutes the fundamental law governing the members rights and
    obligations. As such, the unions constitution and bylaws should be upheld, as long as they are not contrary to law, good
    morals or public policy. There was no commission on elections to oversee the election and it was not done by secret
    balloting as mandated by USTFUs CBL as well as Article 241 (c) of the Labor Code. The Petition is hereby DISMISSED.

    Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen