7/21/2019 Victoriano
1/2
Victoriano vs. Elizalde
- Victorianoo Member of the INC
o Employee of Elizalde Rope since 19!o Member of the "nion
- "niono C#$ %ith company
o C#$ contains closed shop provision
- "nder R$ !&o employer %as not precl'ded (from ma)in* an
a*reement %ith a
labor or*anization to re+'ire as a condition of
employmentmembership therein, if s'ch labor or*anization is the
representativeof the employees
- R$ amended R$ !& in 19/1o b't s'ch a*reement shall not
cover members of any reli*io's sects
%hich prohibit a0liation of their members in any s'ch
laboror*anization
- V tendered resi*nation to the 'nion- "nion sent formal letter
to Company as)in* Es separation from %or) d'e
to his resi*nation to the 'nion- Co noti2ed E that 'nless he has
a satisfactory arran*ement %ith the 'nion,
he %ill be dismissed- E 2led a petition for in3'nction before
the C4I
"nion
15 $ct violates consti ri*ht of freedom to form assoca. #eca'se
it prohibits those members of reli*io's sects %hich prohib
'nion membership from 3oinin* 'nions65 "nconsti for impairin*
obli of contracts5 R$ is discriminatory 7 favors certain reli*io's
sects85 "nconsti for vio no reli*io's test shall be re+'ired for
the e:ercise of a
civil ri*ht;5 Violates e+'al protection of la%s;/5 Violates
consti provision on promotion of social 3'stice&5 Closed shop
a*reement cannot be considered as violative of reli*io's
freedom and that R$ %o'ld %ipe o't trade 'nionism as companies
%o'ldfavor employees %ho are members of sects prohibitin* 'nion
membership
7/21/2019 Victoriano
2/2
c. the assailed $ct, far from infrin*in* the constit'tional
provision onfreedom of association, 'pholds and reinforces it. It
does notprohibit the members of said reli*io's sects from a0liatin*
%ithlabor 'nions. It still leaves to said members the liberty and
thepo%er to a0liate, or not to a0liate, %ith labor 'nions.
65 >he provision on non-impairment of contracts is not
absol'te
a. ?e*islation impairin* the obli*ation of contracts can be
s'stained%hen it is enacted for the promotion of the *eneral *ood
of thepeople, and %hen the means adopted to sec're that end
arereasonable. #oth the end so'*ht and the means adopted m'st
bele*itimate, i.e., %ithin the scope of the reserved po%er of the
stateconstr'ed in harmony %ith the constit'tional limitation of
thatpo%er
b. R$ i. ='rpose@ ins're freedom of belief and reli*ion, and
to
promote *eneral %elfare 7 ?e*it p'rposeii. Means@ e:emptin*
reli*io's mems from 'nion sec'rity
cla'se 7 reasonable5 the *overnment sho'ld not be precl'ded from
p'rs'in* valid ob3ectives
sec'lar in character even if the incidental res'lt %o'ld be
favorable to areli*ion or sect. It has li)e%ise been held that the
stat'te, in order to%ithstand the strict'res of constit'tional
prohibition, m'st have a sec'larle*islative p'rpose and a primary
eAect that neither advances nor inhibitsreli*ion.
a. R$ passes these criteriab. #ene2t members of certain reli*ion
7 incidental
85 >he $ct does not re+'ire as a +'ali2cation, or condition,
for 3oinin* anyla%f'l association membership in any partic'lar
reli*ion
a. It ipso 3're e:empts the member, no act re+'ired from the
memberb. Bo% then can there be a reli*io's test re+'ired for the
e:ercise of a
ri*ht %hen no ri*ht need be e:ercised5 E+'al protection of la%s
allo%s classi2cation
a. $ll that is re+'ired of a valid classi2cation is that it be
reasonable,%hich means that the classi2cation sho'ld be based on
s'bstantialdistinctions %hich ma)e for real diAerencesD that it
m'st be*ermane to the p'rpose of the la%D that it m'st not be
limited toe:istin* conditions onlyD and that it m'st apply e+'ally
to eachmember of the class.
b. R$ passes the criteria/5
