"WHEREFORE, premises considered, the strike staged by respondents is hereby declared illegal for the aforementioned reasons, as a result of which the union officers, to wit:

and individual respondents who committed prohibited acts in the course of the strike, to wit: A. Mararac, W. Guzman, R. Corpuz, N. Flores, E. Rambaoa, O. Martinez, J. Casim, S. Bergonia, L. Aquino, M. Munoz, M. Legaspi, A. Ebrado, E. Caballero, J. Aguilar, B. Blace, P. Candado, C. Burato, V. dela Pena, L. Gaurino, J. Pacaldo, L. Daleon, G. Francisco, E. Blace, M. Jacobo, L. Dumaguin, J. Lumaban, F. Mendoza, R. Canones, R. Dumlao, J. Siccuan, L. Dumlao, L. Mararac, A. Labitan, D. Laguit, C. Villaviza, E. Viray, W. Dimailig, R. Ang, B. Llanos, F. Basilan, M. Tugadi, L. Villanueva and J. Mansion are hereby declared to have validly forfeited their employment status.

The rest of the striking workers, including those who were identified in petitioner's affidavits and/or photographs, but were not formally impleaded as party respondents are hereby ordered reinstated without backwages.

Respondents are hereby ordered to remove all obstructions barring free ingress to and egress from company premises.

SO ORDERED."

"We remand.

From our perusal of the records, it has dawned on Us that both parties were not able, for reasons and/or causes known only to them, to submit crucial evidence in support of their respective contentions. On the part of the petitioner, no evidence is there to support its claim that the individual respondents were sent notices. Considering the impact of a declaration of illegality of strike, the forfeiture of employment, extra caution must be taken by the Labor Arbiter in this regard.

As it appears that respondents are insistent in their posture that a strike vote had been conducted and and [sic] the same is in the custody of the federation, We are inclined to the view that, in keeping with the principles of fair play and equity, respondents be extended a final opportunity to produce the strike vote and the results thereof in evidence before the Labor Arbiter of origin. This, to Us, is the equitable measure to take under the circumstances. justice

Pending resolution, complainant-appellee filed a Motion to Delete Names. Let the same incident be remand [sic] for appropriate action.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby vacated and set aside, and the case remanded to the Labor Arbiter for further proceedings.

SO ORDERED."

"THE PUBLIC RESPONDENT COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION TANTAMOUNT TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION IN RESOLVING TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE ARBITER OF ORIGIN AS THE REQUIREMENTS OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS HAD BEEN COMPLIED WITH.

THE PUBLIC RESPONDENT COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION TANTAMOUNT TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION IN RESOLVING TO REMAND THE CASE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AS THERE ARE NO CONFLICTING VERSIONS OF FACTUAL MATTERS."

"WHETHER OR NOT THE STRIKE CONDUCTED BY PETITIONERS WAS ILLEGAL."

"ART. 264. Prohibited activities. -- (a) No labor organization or employer shall declare a strike or lockout without first having bargained collectively in accordance with Title VII of this Book or without first having filed the notice required in the preceding Article or without the necessary strike or lockout vote first having been obtained and reported to the Ministry.

Any worker whose employment has been terminated as a consequence of an unlawful lockout shall be entitled to reinstatement with full back wages. Any union officer who knowingly participates in a illegal strike and any worker or union officer who knowingly participates in the commission of illegal acts during a strike may be declared to have lost his employment status: Provided, That mere participation of a worker in a lawful strike shall not constitute sufficient ground for termination of his employment, even if a replacement had been hired by the employer during such lawful strike."

"But even going into the merits of the case, petitioner has established by substantial evidence on record that respondents totally blocked free ingress to and egress from petitioner's premises and committed illegal acts of violence, threats, coercion and intimidation in the course of their strike.

The affidavits of the witnesses of respondents which they offered during trial are as follows:

Edwin Bayan averred in his Affidavit that on June 11, 1993 he saw A. Mararac holding a Molotov; that W. Guzman, R. Corpuz, N. Flores, D. Rombaoa, O. Martinez and J. Casim threw stones at company vehicles containing employees who wanted to report for work; and that on June 11 and June 14, 1993 the following employees formed a human barricade which prevented employees who wished to work from entering the premises, to wit: S. Bergonia, L. Aquino, M. Munoz, R. Corpuz, one Mararac, N. Flores, M. Legaspi, J. Matining, A. Ebrado, E. Caballero, R. Subion, J. Aguilar, I. Espesor, B. Blace, P. Candado, C. Burato, V. dela Peña, P. Nudalo, L. Gaurino, L. Dumlao, J. Pacaldo, L. Daleon, one Francisco, D. Pastor, E. Blace, O. Martinez, M. Jacobo, L. Dumaguin, J. Lumaban, F. Mendoza, R. Canones, H. Calero, M. Villaverde, R. Dumlao, J. Siccuan, E. Rombaoa, L. Mararac, S. Landong, W. Guzman, A. Mararac, S. Bergonia, C. Rodriguez, A. Labitan, J. Casim, N. Obado, D. Laguit and C. Villaviza.

Mr. Libio B. Cruz, Jr. in his sworn affidavit alleged that on June 15, 1993, Emmanuel Viray, Cristito Burato, Pascual Capangpangan and Maximino Villaverde threw stones at the Injection and Films & Sheets Building breaking the window panes and resulting in the filing of criminal cases before the Prosecutor's Office at Valenzuela; and that Engineering Supervisor Fidel Santiago was threatened by Peter Nudalo, Francisco Basilan, David Pastor and Leonardo Gaurino resulting in the filing of a criminal complaint for Grave Threats before the Prosecutor's Office at Valenzuela. Court

Guillermo Tadeo Banag averred in his affidavit that he was coerced by Union President Pedro Nudalo to stop working and that Jaime Mansion switched off the circuit breaker to render company machines inoperable.

Oliver Salamera and Juancho Sacro alleged in their Joint Affidavit on May 5, 1993 that Union Officers Nudalo, Landong, Ramos, Semillano, Subion and Cabatingan coerced them to stop working, barricaded the gates and prohibited them from returning to work.

Nicolas Bauto and Joselito Custodio in their Joint Affidavit alleged that they were threatened with bodily harm by union officers and members forcing them to leave the plant for fear of bodily harm.

The sworn allegations of the foregoing affidavits who all took the witness stands were corroborated by the photographs submitted by petitioner in evidence and which were not rebutted by respondents, to wit:

Exhibit '1' is a blow-up photograph showing wooden planks and tent obstructing the company gate and Maysan Road leading to the company premises.

Exhibits '2' and '3' show that hollow blocks were stacked and tents built across the gate.

Exhibits '4' to '9' show security guards dismantling obstructions built by respondents across the company gates, pursuant to the TRO issued by the Commission in the Injunction case filed by petitioner.

Exhibits '10' to '16' show a human blockade barring a bus carrying other employees who wanted to report for work from entering company premises.

In picture No. 21 of Exhibit '11' and pictures 26 to 29 of Exhibits '12' to '15', those strikers who prevented the bus from carrying workers who wanted to report for work were identified in the Formal Offer of Evidence as Jerry Lumaban, Celso Rodriguez, Bernard Llanos, Cristito Burato, Jerry Aguilar, Rico Subion, Rufino Ang, Pete Lito Semillano, Sonny Bergonia, Jaime Mansion, Edwin Almonte, Margarito Legaspi, Reynaldo Corpuz, Wilfredo Dimailig, David Pastor, Clemente Ramos, Leonardo Gaurino, Leonardo Villanueva, Edmund Arcena, Stephen Landong, Willy Guzman, Maximino Villaverde, Generoso Calalo, Igmedio Espesor, Diomar Serafica, John Nero Pacaldo, Joselito Munoz, Cristopher Lias and Antonio Awalay.

Exhibit '17' shows two strikers about to throw stones, identified in the Formal Offer of Evidence as Stephen Landong and Jimmy Casim.

Exhibit '18' shows a flat tire of the bus caused by strikers, and Exhibits '19', '20' and '21' show the broken windows of the bus which was barred by strikers from entering company premises.

Exhibits '22' to '30' showed that the strikers used a human blockade, wooden posts and threw big stones and rocks to bar a bus from entering the company premises. Jksmä â Ó

Picture No. 14 of Exhibit '22', picture No. 5 of Exhibit '23' reveal that the strikers who prevented a bus carrying employees who wanted to report for work on June 14, 1993 are Stephen Landong, Emerson Rombada, George Francisco, Nicasio Flores, Julieto Albania, Arnel John Santos, Willy Guzman, Elvira Caballero, Alfredo Viernes, Elecito Blanco, Vicleo dela Peña, Cesario Villaviza, Leonardo Villanueva, Loreto Mararac, Celestino del Rosario, Alegria Aquino and Leonardo de Leon.

Exhibits '31' to '34' show that the strikers used big stones, rocks, wooden materials and GI sheets along Maysan Road leading to the company gates which made the road impassable.

All the foregoing evidence undoubtedly prove that indeed respondents blocked free ingress to and egress from the company premises by way of physical obstructions, human blockades, acts of violence, coercion, threats and intimidation."7 [Rollo, Decision of Labor Arbiter Madriaga, pp. 40-44.]