2016 Labor Law, Q7

Forbes Country Club (Club) owns a golf course and has 250 rank-and-file employees who are members of the Forbes Country Club Union (Union). The Club has a CBA with the Union and one of the stipulations is a Union Security Clause, which reads: “All regular rank-and-file employees who are members of the union shall keep their membership in good standing as a condition for their continued employment during the lifetime of this agreement.”
Peter, Paul and Mary were the Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer, and Budget Officer of the Union, respectively. They were expelled by the Board of Directors of the Union for malversation. The Union then demanded that the Club dismiss said officials pursuant to the Union Security Clause that required maintenance of union membership. The Club required the three officials to show cause in writing why they should not be dismissed. Later, the Club called the three Union officials for a conference regarding the charges against them. After considering the evidence submitted by the parties and their written explanations, the Club dismissed the erring officials. The dismissed officials sued the Club and the Union for illegal dismissal because there was really no malversation based on the documents presented and their dismissal from the Union was due to the fact that they were organizing another union.
[a] Is the dismissal of Peter, Paul and Mary by the Club valid? (2.5%)
[b] If the expulsion by the Union was found by the Labor Arbiter to be baseless, is the Club liable to Peter, Paul and Mary? Explain. (2.5%)

Quick check

What is a union security clause in a Collective Bargaining Agreement?

Which requirement must an employer satisfy before dismissing an employee under a union security clause?

What is the legal consequence if an employer dismisses an employee based on a union expulsion that is later declared baseless by a Labor Arbiter?

Which element is NOT required for a valid dismissal pursuant to a union security clause?

Choices available with full access.

Why does an employer's observance of procedural due process not completely shield it from liability if the expulsion is later ruled illegal?

Choices available with full access.

Unlock the full Labor Law answers

Learn more about these topics

1. Union Security Clause
A union security clause is a stipulation in a Collective Bargaining Agreement requiring employees to join or maintain membership in good standing with the bargaining union as a condition of continued employment. While valid and enforceable, enforcement of such a clause requires strict compliance with due process and statutory safeguards. An employer enforcing union security must ensure that the contract covers the employee, the union requests dismissal, and sufficient evidence supports the expulsion.

2. Employer Investigation
When a union demands the dismissal of an employee under a union security clause, the employer cannot blindly rely on the union's expulsion decision. The employer must conduct its own independent investigation and afford the employee procedural due process, including notice and hearing. If the employer fails to ascertain the factual basis for expulsion and the expulsion is later declared illegal or baseless, the employer becomes solidarily liable with the union for illegal dismissal.

3. Due Process Requirements
Compliance with procedural due process in dismissals based on union security clauses mandates serving the employee a notice to explain, providing an opportunity to be heard, and serving a written notice of decision. While observance of due process protects the employer from liability at the time of dismissal, it does not completely absolve the employer from substantive liability if the underlying union expulsion is subsequently proven invalid or illegal by labor tribunals.

About these questions and answers
The questions reproduced here are the official texts of the Philippine Bar Examinations, published by the Supreme Court. They are reproduced for study purposes.The suggested answers are the author’s own.

They are not official answers, have no connection with the Supreme Court, the Office of the Bar Confidant, or any bar review institution, and are not endorsed by any of them. Official answer keys, where released, should be preferred over anything here.Nothing on this page is legal advice, and reading it creates no lawyer-client relationship. Do not rely on any suggested answer in an actual legal matter. Consult counsel on your own facts.Suggested answers reflect the law and jurisprudence the author considers applicable as of the date shown.

Where a question comes from an earlier examination, the suggested answer applies the law as it now stands, which may differ from the law in force when the question was given, and may therefore differ from what would have been the correct answer at that time. Where the difference is material, the answer notes it.The practice scoring feature measures wording overlap with the suggested answer. It is not a grade, carries no official weight, and says nothing about whether your reasoning is sound.Errors are possible. If you find one, please tell me and I will correct it.Last reviewed: October 2026