FACTS:

The case involves two petitions filed by Gold City Integrated Port Service, Inc. (INPORT) against the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). The petitions question the NLRC's decision awarding separation pay and backwages to participants of an illegal strike.

Early in the morning of April 30, 1985, INPORT's employees, who were members of the Macajalar Labor Union - Federation of Free Workers (MLU-FFW), stopped working and staged a mass action to express their grievances regarding wages, thirteenth month pay, and hazard pay. INPORT filed a complaint for illegal strike with the Labor Arbiter after failed conciliation conferences.

The strike was found to be illegal because it did not comply with the requirements of the Labor Code. The majority of the strikers returned to work, but some continued with the protest. INPORT accepted the other striking employees back to work, but required prior screening conducted by the MLU-FFW for the remaining strikers.

Some of the strikers claimed they were tricked into signing the strike notice and filed a motion to be dropped as respondents in the complaint. The Labor Arbiter granted the motion and ruled that the private respondents who continued the strike should be allowed to return to work without screening.

The NLRC affirmed with modification, awarding separation pay and backwages to the private respondents. Petitioner INPORT filed motions for reconsideration, and the NLRC modified its previous resolution, reducing the separation pay and deleting the backwages.

Both parties filed petitions for certiorari, with INPORT questioning the award of separation pay and backwages, and the private respondents challenging the reduction of separation pay and deletion of backwages.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the strike conducted by the workers was legal and in compliance with the requirements of the Labor Code.

2. Whether the remaining strikers are entitled to reinstatement or separation pay and backwages.

3. Whether the private respondents were actually terminated from their employment or were merely made to submit to a screening committee.

4. Whether the private respondents who refused to submit to the screening process are partly responsible for the delay in their readmission back to work.

5. Whether the striking union members among private respondents are entitled to reinstatement or separation pay.

6. Whether the union officers among private respondents may be terminated from employment for participating in an illegal strike.

7. Whether the private respondents who are no longer members of the union are entitled to reinstatement or separation pay.

8. Whether the union members are entitled to reinstatement or separation pay.

9. Whether the NLRC's award of separation pay and compensation is valid.

RULING:

1. The strike conducted by the workers was illegal for failure to comply with the requirements of the Labor Code. The individual notices of strike filed by the workers did not conform to the notice required by the law, as they were represented by a union that had an existing collective bargaining agreement with the company. Additionally, the striking workers did not observe the strike vote by secret ballot, cooling-off period, and reporting requirements, which are mandatory under the law.

2. The remaining strikers are not entitled to reinstatement or full backwages. Reinstatement and backwages are remedies given to employees who have been unjustly dismissed, and these remedies are separate and distinct. In this case, the remaining strikers were not unjustly dismissed by the company. However, they are entitled to separation pay as a form of financial assistance since reinstatement is not possible due to strained relations between the parties. The amount of separation pay awarded may be reduced or modified based on the circumstances of the case.

3. The private respondents were dismissed when the employer refused to accept them back to work after they refused to submit to the screening process.

4. The private respondents who resisted the screening process are partly responsible for the delay in their readmission back to work.

5. The striking union members among private respondents are entitled to reinstatement or separation pay, but not backwages as a penalty for their participation in the illegal strike.

6. The union officers among private respondents may be terminated from employment for participating in an illegal strike.

7. The private respondents who are no longer members of the union are not entitled to reinstatement. Instead, they are awarded separation pay.

8. The union members are entitled to one month salary for each year of service until 1985 as separation pay, except for those who are union officers and were expelled from the union in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement.

9. The NLRC's award of separation pay as "equitable relief" and compensation should be deleted as they are incompatible with the findings detailed above.

PRINCIPLES:

• The requirements of the Labor Code regarding strike notice, cooling-off period, strike vote by secret ballot, and reporting requirements are mandatory and must be complied with to ensure an opportunity for mediation and conciliation in labor disputes.

• Union officers who knowingly participate in an illegal strike and any worker or union officer who commits illegal acts during a strike may lose their employment status.

• Reinstatement and backwages are remedies for unjust dismissal, while separation pay is awarded when reinstatement is not possible. Separation pay is designed to provide assistance to the dismissed employee during the transitional period before finding another job. It is granted only in cases other than serious misconduct or those reflecting on the employee's moral character.

• Reinstatement and backwages or separation pay can only be granted if there is sufficient basis under the law, particularly after a showing of illegal dismissal.

• Workers participating in an illegal strike may not be terminated from employment unless they commit illegal acts during the strike.

• Union officers may be terminated for participating in an illegal strike.

• An illegal strike should not be countenanced by a relaxation of the sanctions prescribed by law.

• A timely motion for reconsideration can modify a resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) that has not yet acquired finality.

• Union members may be entitled to reinstatement or separation pay.

• Expulsion from the union, in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement, may render reinstatement or separation pay impossible.

• The NLRC has the power to award equitable relief, but it should be in line with the findings of the case.