FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
) 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
First Regular Session 
) 
Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago 
'J 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
The Presidential Decree No. 442, also known as the Labor Code, Article 248, makes it an 
unfair labor practice for employees "to contract out services or functions being performed by 
union members ... " Clearly, the provision does not cover situations where employers merely 
threaten to contract out services being performed by the latter. A threat has the same coercive 
effect as actually contracting out services as it instills fear in the laborer of losing his job. 
This bill extends the protection of Article 248 by making it unlawful for employers to 
, 
threaten to contract out services being performed by union members.' 
d~,-
4k'.4~ .O/;t;:id 
v/fY' MIRIAM DE~NSOR itNTIfGO 
• This bill was originally filed during the Thirteenth Congress, First Regular Session. 


FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC 
) 
OF THE PHILIPPINES 
) 
First Regular Session 
) 
SENA1
T4
ES7 
S. No. ----'=--='-=---'_ 
/) 
!lv::r~r::~tH';'J n\,-
. .:..../ 
Introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago 
v 
I 
AN ACT. 
2 
AMENDING PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 442 ALSO KNOWN AS THE LABOR CODE, 
3 
ART. 248, MAKING IT UNLAWFUL FOR EMPLOYERS TO THREATEN TO CONTRACT 
4 
OUT SERVICES BEING PERFORMED BY UNION MEMBERS 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress 
assembled: 
5 
SECTION 1. P.D. No. 448 also known as the Labor Code, Article 248, is amended by 
6 
deleting paragraph (c) and replacing it with a new paragraph to read as follows: 
7 
"(c) TO PROMISE, TO THREATEN, OR TO TAKE OTHER ACTION (1) TO 
8 
HIRE A PERMANENT REPLACEMENT OR AN EMPLOYEE WHO 
9 
(A) AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF A LABOR DISPUTE WAS AN 
10 
EMPLOYEE OF THE EMPLOYER IN A BARGAINING UNIT WHICH A 
11 
LABOR ORGANIZATION-
12 
(I) 
WAS 
THE 
CERTIFIED OR RECOGNIZED 
13 
EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING REPRESENTATIVE; OR 
14 
(II) 
AT LEAST THIRTY (30) DAYS PRIOR TO THE 
15 
COMMENCEMENT OF THE DISPUTE HAD FILED A PETITION FOR 
, 
16 
CERTIFICATION ELECTION PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 256 AND 257 OF 
17 
THIS CODE, AND THE BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS HAS NOT 
18 
COMPLETED THE REPRESENTATION PROCEEDING; AND 
19 
(B) IN CONNECTION WITH THAT DISPUTE HAS ENGAGED IN 
20 
CONCERTED ACTIVITIES 
FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECTIVE 
21 
BARGAINING OR OTHER MUTUAL AID OR PROTECTION OR DENY 
22 
ANY OTHER EMPLOYMENT RIGHT OR PRIVILEGE TO AN EMPLOYEE 
I 


I 
WHO IS WORKING FOR OR HAS UNCONDITIONALLY OFFERED TO 
2 
RETURN TO WORK FOR THE EMPLOYER, OUT OF A PREFERENCE FOR 
3 
ANY OTHER INDIVIDUAL, THAT IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE 
4 
INDIVIDUAL IS PERFORMING, HAS PERFORMED, OR HAS INDICATED 
5 
A WILLLINGNESS TO PERFORM BARGAINING UNIT WORK FOR THE 
6 
EMPLOYER DURING THE LABOR DISPUTE." 
7 
SECTION 2. Separability Clause. - If any provision or part hereof is held invalid or 
8 
unconstitutional, the remainder of the law or the provision not otherwise affected shall remain 
9 
valid and subsisting. 
10 
SECTION 3. Repealing Clause. - Any law, presidential decree or issuance, executive 
1 I 
order, letter of instruction, administrative order, rule or regulation contrary to, or inconsistent 
12 
with, the provision of this Act is hereby repealed, modified or amended accordingly. 
13 
SECTION 4. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its 
14 
publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. 
Approved. 
2