You are on page 1of 7

Labor Case Digest San Miguel Brewery Sales Force Union (PTGWO) ! O"le G!#! $o! L%&'&(& February )* (+)+ Facts, 1.

A CBA was entered into by PTWGO and private respondent San Miguel Corp. (SMC providing t!at t!ey s!all be entitled to a basi" #ont!ly "o#pensation plus "o##ission based on t!eir respe"tive sales. SMC t!en introdu"ed a #ar%eting s"!e#e %nown as t!e &Co#ple#entary 'istribution Syste# (C'S w!ereby its beer produ"ts were o((ered (or sale dire"tly to w!olesalers t!roug! SMC)s sales o((i"es PTWGO (iled a "o#plaint (or +,P in t!e Ministry o( ,abor on t!e ground t!at t!e C'S was "ontrary to t!e e-isting #ar%eting s"!e#e w!ereby t!e .oute Sales#en were assigned spe"i(i" territories wit!in w!i"! to sell t!eir sto"%s o( beer/ and w!olesalers !ad to buy beer produ"ts (ro# t!e#/ not t!e "o#pany w!i"! violates t!e CBA t!at t!ey entered into. T!e Minister o( ,abor dis#issed t!e "o#plaint (iled by t!e PTWGO. 1en"e/ t!is petition.

*.

0.

$.

7.

3ven as t!e law is soli"itous o( t!e wel(are o( t!e e#ployees/ it #ust also prote"t t!e rig!t o( an e#ployer to e-er"ise w!at are "learly #anage#ent prerogatives. T!e (ree will o( #anage#ent to "ondu"t its own business a((airs to a"!ieve its purpose "annot be denied. So long as a "o#pany6s #anage#ent prerogatives are e-er"ised in good (ait! (or t!e advan"e#ent o( t!e e#ployer6s interest and not (or t!e purpose o( de(eating or "ir"u#venting t!e rig!ts o( t!e e#ployees under spe"ial laws or under valid agree#ents/ t!is Court will up!old t!e# W!ere(ore/ t!e petition (or "ertiorari is dis#issed (or la"% o( #erit Farrol ! C0 G!#! $o! (''1&+ February (2* 1222

-ssue, WO2 8arrol was illegally dis#issed .el/, 1. T!e e#ployer !as t!e burden o( proving t!at t!e dis#issal is (or a "ause provided by law and t!at i( a((orded t!e e#ployee an opportunity to be !eard and to de(end !i#sel(. T!e e#ployer #ust "o#ply wit! t!e twin re;uire#ents o( twonoti"e and !earing@ a. 2oti"e i. 8irst/ w!i"! apprises t!e e#ployee o( t!e parti"ular a"ts o( o#ission (or w!i"! !is dis#issal is sougt ii. Se"ond/ in(or#ing t!e latter o( t!e e#ployer)s de"ision to dis#iss !i# (ro# wor% (t!is is a(ter !earing b. 1earing Cas! s!ortages in a "as!ier)s wor% #ay !appen/ and w!en t!ere is no proo( t!at t!e sa#e was deliberately done (or a (raudulent or wrong(ul purpose/ it "annot "onstitute brea"! o( trust so as to render t!e dis#issal (ro# wor% invalid. Assu#ing (urt!er t!at t!ere was brea"! o( trust and "on(iden"e/ it appears t!at t!is is t!e (irst in(ra"tion "o##itted by petitioner. Alt!oug! t!e e#ployer !as t!e prerogative to dis"ipline or dis#iss its e#ployee/ su"! prerogative "annot be e-er"ised wantonly/ but #ust be "ontrolled by substantive due pro"ess and te#pered by t!e (unda#ental poli"y o( prote"tion to labor ens!rined in t!e Constitution. W!ere(ore/ in view o( t!e (oregoing/ t!e assailed de"ision is .3>3.S3' and S3T AS9'3

$.

*.

Facts, 1. $. 8arrol was e#ployed as station "as!ier at respondent .CP9. T!e distri"t #anager in(or#ed t!e #ain o((i"e t!at &peragra# (unds: were used (or t!e pay#ent o( retire#ent bene(its o( (ive e#ployees. Petitioner veri(ied as "orre"t .CP9)s report t!at t!ere was a s!ortage in t!eir bran"!)s Peragra# (unds and as a "onse;uen"e/ !e was re;uired to e-plain t!e "as! s!ortage wit!in $0 !ours (ro# noti"e. A(ter #a%ing pay#ents/ !e was in(or#ed by t!e distri"t #anager t!at !e is being pla"ed under preventive suspension. +naware o( t!e ter#ination letter/ petitioner re;uested t!at !e be reinstated "onsidering t!at t!e period o( !is preventive suspension e-pired. 'espite t!e lapse o( #ore t!an two years/ t!e "ase re#ained unresolved be(ore t!e grievan"e "o##ittee/ !en"e/ it was sub#itted (or voluntary arbitration. T!e >oluntary Arbitrator (ound t!at 8arrol was illegally dis#issed and ordered .CP9 t!e pay#ent o( !is bene(its. On appeal/ t!e CA reversed t!e de"ision o( t!e >oluntary Arbitrator. Motion (or re"onsideration was denied w!i"! pro#pted 8arrol to (ile t!is petition.

*.

0.

*.

0.

-ssue, WO2 t!e #ar%eting s"!e#e i#ple#ented by SMC violated t!e CBA .el/, 1. $. T!e petition !as no #erit 3-"ept as li#ited by spe"ial laws/ an e#ployer is (ree to regulate/ a""ording to !is own dis"retion and 4udg#ent/ all aspe"ts o( e#ploy#ent/ in"luding !iring/ wor% assign#ents/ wor%ing #et!ods/ ti#e/ pla"e and #anner o( wor%/ tools to be used/ pro"esses to be (ollowed/ supervision o( wor%ers/ wor%ing regulations/ trans(er o( e#ployees/ wor% supervision/ lay5o(( o( wor%ers and t!e dis"ipline/ dis#issal and re"all o( wor% 0. 7.

<.

7.

=. ?.

P3ili""ine Telegra"3 an/ Tele"3one Cor"! ! La"lana G!#! $o! 4556& 7uly 1'* (++( Facts,

G#. S!e wrote Mrs.aplana was t!e "as!ier o( Baguio City Bran"! O((i"e o( PTAT. 1en"e/ t!is petition WO2 t!e CA erred in its appre"iation o( (a"ts and t!e de"ision it rendered .'T is to in(or# personnel regarding t!e nature and lo"ation o( t!eir (uture assign#ents a(ter training abroad. T!e petitioners !esistated but P. .el/. 0. At (irst/ t!e petitioners reported (or wor%.aplana (iled wit! . -ssues.A !eld in (avor o( . Be"ause o( P. T!e in!erent rig!t o( an e#ployer to trans(er or assign an e#ployee in t!e pursuit o( its legiti#ate business interest 8P$. s!ouldering t!eir training and travel e-penses.. . T!ey appealed t!eir trans(er but it (ell on dea( ears. 0.OMCC. Arogo reiterated !er dire"tive to . ?.A a "o#plaint against PTAT alleging t!at t!ere was no ground at all (or t!e retren"!#ent. We are not unaware t!at t!e trans(er o( an e#ployee ordinarily lies wit!in t!e a#bit o( #anage#ent prerogatives. 9t was re(erred to t!e 2ational Con"iliation and Mediation Board. T!e situation !ere presented is o( an e#ployer trans(erring an e#ployee to anot!er o((i"e in t!e e-er"ise o( w!at it too% to be sound business 4udg#ent and in a""ordan"e wit! pre5deter#ined and establis!ed o((i"e poli"y and pra"ti"e/ and o( t!e latter !aving w!at was believed to be legiti#ate reasons (or de"lining t!at trans(er/ rooted in "onsiderations o( personal "onvenien"e and di((i"ulties (or t!e (a#ily. Mrs.C . B.aplana to trans(er to . *. Arogo dire"ted .el/. 9t is t!e e#ployer6s prerogative/ based on its assess#ent and per"eption o( its e#ployees6 . Sin"e t!ere is a (inding o( (a"ts between t!e >oluntary Arbitrator and CA/ labor s!ould prevail be"ause o( t!e well5establis!ed do"trine in labor5#anage#ent relations T!e SOP in P. An e#ployee6s rig!t to se"urity o( tenure does not give !i# su"! a vested rig!t in !is position as would deprive t!e "o#pany o( its prerogative to "!ange !is assign#ent or trans(er !i# w!ere !e will be #ost use(ul. 7. Bot! were assigned at . 9a:ra ! C0 G!#! $o! ('+2(' Se"te.'T t!roug! an inter5o((i"e #e#orandu# e-e"uted t!e trans(er o( t!e petitioners. =. +nder t!ese "ir"u#stan"es/ t!e need (or t!e disse#ination o( noti"e o( trans(er to e#ployees be(ore sending t!e# abroad (or training s!ould be dee#ed ne"essary and later to !ave ripened into a "o#pany pra"ti"e or poli"y t!at "ould no longer be pere#ptorily wit!drawn/ dis"ontinued/ or eli#inated by t!e e#ployer. *. Be"ause o( t!is/ t!ey resigned (ro# wor% and t!e e-penses (or t!eir training in Ger#any were dedu"ted. W!en !is trans(er is not unreasonable/ nor in"onvenient/ nor pre4udi"ial to !i#/ and it does not involve a de#otion in ran% or di#inution o( !is salaries/ bene(its/ and ot!er privileges/ t!e e#ployee #ay not "o#plain t!at it a#ounts to a "onstru"tive dis#issal.'T)s (ailure to present eviden"e/ t!e >oluntary Arbitrator !eld in (avor o( petitioners.uested advi"e i( any parti"ipants to t!e training "ould be trans(erred to Sa#palo" .A2T3'.aplana in t!e (or# o( a written Me#orandu# stating t!at s!e will be reassigned &e((e"tive April 1</ 1B?0:.'T as Operations Analyst 99 and 3"ar#a was !ired as Eunior Operations Analyst.uali(i"ations/ aptitudes/ and "o#peten"e/ to #ove t!e# around in t!e various areas o( its business operations in order to as"ertain w!ere t!ey will (un"tion wit! #a-i#u# bene(it to t!e "o#pany. (1 9t not be #otivated by dis"ri#inationC ($ or in bad (ait! or (* e((e"ted as a (or# o( punis!#ent or de#otion wit!out su((i"ient "ause. PTAT Treasurer Mrs. On appeal/ t!e CA reversed t!e de"ision o( t!e >oluntary Arbitrator. Arogo reiterating !is reasons (or not leaving !is position in Baguio City.. <. Mr. 8or an a"t o( "lear dis"ri#ination/ insensibility/ or disdain by an e#ployer #ay be"o#e so unbearable on t!e part o( t!e e#ployee t!at it "ould (ore"lose any "!oi"e by !i# e-"ept to (orego !is "ontinued e#ploy#ent.aoag bran"! but t!e latter re(used and proposed instead t!at . 7. 1. . +pon return o( t!e petitioners/ Senior Manager A"antillado in(or#ed t!e# about t!e #e#orandu#. $. Petitioners were t!en "!osen (or a training progra# and Ger#any wit! A. S!e was eventually ter#inated (ro# e#ploy#ent. 9t is well to re#e#ber t!at "onstru"tive dis#issal does not always involve (ort!rig!t dis#issal or di#inution in ran%/ "o#pensation/ bene(its/ and privileges. . 1. 0. 7.aplana. 1. On appeal/ t!e 2.uire t!at we !onor t!is pra"ti"e and "o##end t!is poli"y.1.uali(ied "ler%s in Baguio bran"! be trained (or t!e purpose.'T)s #otion (or re"onsideration was denied. . $.egional Arbitration Bran"! (or alleged $. 1owever/ a trans(er a#ounts to "onstru"tive dis#issal Facts.A. 8airness at t!e wor%pla"e and settled e-pe"tations a#ong e#ployees re. Petitioners (iled a "o#plaint wit! t!e 2. Petitioner Da(ra was !ired by P. *.ber (4* 1221 =. 7. T!e insensibility o( private respondents is at on"e dedu"ible (ro# t!e (oregoing "ir"u#stan"es. -ssue. Motion (or re"onsideration (iled by petitioners was denied. P. $.aplana was not allowed to resu#e !er wor% as "as!ier o( Baguio City.elu"io re.C a((ir#ed t!e de"ision o( t!e .CAT3. WO2 t!e trans(er #ade by PTAT (or . PTAT/ on t!e ot!er !and "ontend t!at t!e "o#pany was 4ust e-er"ising #anage#ent prerogatives T!e .aplana valid . *. "onstru"tive dis#issal. 0. <.OMCC and tas%ed to #aintain operations and #aintenan"e o( telep!one e-"!anges in >isayas and Mindanao areas. W!ere(ore/ t!e writ o( "ertiorari prayed (or is G.

9n parti"ular/ t!e e#ployer #ust be able to s!ow t!at t!e trans(er is not unreasonable/ in"onvenient or pre4udi"ial to t!e e#ployeeC nor does it involve a de#otion in ran% or a di#inution o( !is salaries/ privileges and ot!er bene(its. But/ li%e ot!er rig!ts/ t!ere are li#its t!ereto. 1aving t!e rig!t s!ould not be "on(used wit! t!e #anner in w!i"! t!at rig!t is e-er"ised. $. T!e 2. Con"iliation pro"eeding was instituted by t!e 2CMB but t!e parties (ailed to arrive at a settle#ent.s <. 9t is ordained t!at in "ases o( retren"!#ent resulting in ter#ination o( e#ploy#ent in line o( wor%/ t!e e#ployee w!o was e#ployed on t!e latest date #ust be t!e (irst one to go.C rendered a de"ision in (avor o( Maya 8ar#s w!i"! led to t!is petition. 7.A. 9ndeed/ it is t!e prerogative o( #anage#ent to trans(er an e#ployee (ro# one o((i"e to anot!er wit!in t!e business establis!#ent based on its assess#ent and per"eption o( t!e e#ployee6s . 2o grave abuse o( dis"retion was "o##itted by t!e 2. Maya Far. . 9n "ase o( retren"!#ent to prevent losses o( operations o( establis!#ent or underta%ing not due to serious business losses or (inan"ial reverses/ t!e one (1 #ont! pay or at least one5!al( (1G$ pay (or every year o( servi"e/ w!i"!ever is !ig!er. T!is "onte#plates a situation w!ere e#ployees o""upying t!e sa#e position in t!e "o#pany are to be a((e"ted by t!e retren"!#ent progra#. <."loyees Organi=ation* et! al! ! $L#C G!#! $o! (251&5 Dece.espondent Maya 8ar#s in"lude t!e operation o( #eat pro"essing plant w!ile petitioner is t!e e-"lusive bargaining agents o( t!e e#ployees o( Maya 8ar#s . T!e . *. 1. S!e eventually stopped reporting be"ause s!e was un!appy wit! !er 4ob. 3ven as t!e law is soli"itous o( t!e wel(are o( e#ployees/ it #ust also prote"t t!e rig!t o( an e#ployer to e-er"ise w!at are "learly #anage#ent prerogatives. $?* o( t!e .<..abor Code . Sin"e t!ere oug!t to be a redu"tion in t!e nu#ber o( personnel in su"! positions/ t!e lengt! o( servi"e o( ea"! e#ployees is t!e deter#ining (a"tor/ su"! t!at t!e e#ployee w!o !as a longer period o( e#ploy#ent will be retained. T!e retire#ent progra# was later on "onverted to a spe"ial redundan"y progra# to rea"! t!e opti#u# nu#ber o( e#ployees <B e#ployees availed o( t!e spe"ial redundan"y progra#/ << e#ployees in(or#ing t!e# t!at t!eir respe"tive positions !ad been de"lared redundant. W!ere(ore/ t!e instant petition is !ereby '9SM9SS3' Blue Dairy Cor"oration ! $L#C G!#! $o! (1+)6' Se"te.el/.98O rule under t!e CBA is e-pli"it. T!e .e#ployees was done in a""ordan"e wit! Art. T!e rule is well5settled t!at labor laws dis"ourage inter(eren"e wit! an e#ployer6s 4udg#ent in t!e "ondu"t o( !is business. Private . installation o( labor5saving devises/ redundan"y/ retren"!#ent to prevent losses or t!e "losing or "essation o( operation o( t!e establis!#ent or underta%ing unless t!e "losing is (or t!e purpose o( "ir"u#venting in t!e provisions o( t!is title/ by serving a written noti"e on t!e wor%ers and t!e 'epart#ent o( .C.C a((ir#ed t!e ruling and denied t!e #otion (or re"onsideration. w!en t!e trans(er is unreasonable/ in"onvenient/ or pre4udi"ial to t!e e#ployee/ and involves a de#otion in ran% or di#inution o( salaries/ bene(its/ and ot!er privileges. $. W!ere(ore/ t!is petition (or review is Granted. T!e provision spea%s o( ter#ination in t!e line o( wor%. S!ould t!e e#ployer (ail to over"o#e t!is burden o( proo( t!e e#ployee6s trans(er s!all be $.uali(i"ations/ aptitudes and "o#peten"e/ and in order to as"ertain w!ere !e "an (un"tion wit! #a-i#u# bene(it to t!e "o#pany. *. 0.e"alde was "onstru"tively dis#issed .. As long as t!e "o#pany6s e-er"ise o( t!e sa#e is in good (ait! to advan"e its interest and not (or t!e purpose o( de(eating or "ir"u#venting t!e rig!ts o( e#ployees under t!e laws or valid agree#ents/ su"! e-er"ise will be up!eld.el/. Blue 'airy Corporation t!en (iled t!is petition -ssue.ber (6* (+++ Facts.P/ violation o( CBA and dis"ri#ination.e"alde (iled a "o#plaint (or "onstru"tive dis#issal wit! t!e . Blue 'airy Corporation (B'C !ired private respondent .espondent announ"ed t!e adoption o( an early retire#ent progra# as a "ost5"utting #easure (or t!e setba"%s it su((ered and "an be availed o( e#ployees wit! at least ? years o( servi"e (w!i"! was redu"ed to 7 years . *. $. T!e #anagerial prerogative to trans(er personnel #ust be e-er"ised wit!out grave abuse o( dis"retion/ bearing in #ind t!e basi" ele#ents o( 4usti"e and (air play. 0. T!e (reedo# o( #anage#ent to "ondu"t its business operations to a"!ieve its purpose "annot be denied. . A noti"e o( stri%e was (iled by petitioners w!i"! a""used respondents o( +. T!is is a privilege in!erent in t!e e#ployer6s rig!t to "ontrol and #anage !is enterprise e((e"tively. -ssue. 1. A (ra"tion o( at least si. W!et!er or not . 1.. +n(ortunately/ only (ew too% t!e retire#ent progra# w!i"! resulted in t!e respondent strea#lining its organiFational set5up.e"alde as (ood te"!nologist in its laboratory wit! spe"i(i" (un"tions.(< #ont!s s!all be "onsidered one (1 w!ole year. 0rt! 1)'!Closure o: establis3. 1.ber 1)* (++6 Facts.e"alde was trans(erred (ro# t!e laboratory to t!e vegetable pro"essing se"tion.A was "onvin"ed t!at petitioners were guilty o( "onstru"tive dis#issal and ordered !is reinstate#ent On appeal/ t!e 2. WO2 t!e ter#ination o( t!e si-ty5si.abor and 3#ploy#ent at least one (1 #ont! be(ore t!e intended date t!ereo(. T!us it "annot be used as subter(uge by t!e e#ployer to rid !i#sel( o( an undesirable wor%er.ent an/ re/uction o: "ersonnel > T!e e#ployer #ay also ter#inate t!e e#ploy#ent o( any e#ployee due to t!e .

7. . 0.epubli" A"t 2o. 00$ was a#ended by . T!us/ in CruF vs. <=17/ it was already de"lared a poli"y o( t!e State/ H(d To pro#ote t!e enlig!ten#ent o( wor%ers "on"erning t!eir rig!ts and obligations .e"alde)s trans(er (ro# t!e position o( (ood te"!nologist in t!e laboratory to a wor%er in t!e vegetable pro"essing se"tion.espondents/ on t!e ot!er !and/ allege t!at t!ey did not resign voluntarilyC t!ey were "o#pelled to resign in view o( an illegal "o#pany poli"y.el/. . Medina it was !eld t!at #anage#ent6s prerogatives #ust be wit!out abuse o( dis"retion. Star Pa"er Cor"! ! Si.C. W!ile su"! HobligationH was not yet (ounded in law w!en t!e Code was (or#ulated/ t!e attain#ent o( a !ar#onious labor5#anage#ent relations!ip and t!e t!en already e-isting state poli"y o( enlig!tening wor%ers "on"erning t!eir rig!ts as e#ployees de#and no less t!an t!e observan"e o( transparen"y in #anagerial #oves a((e"ting e#ployees6 rig!ts. A "lose s"rutiny o( t!e ob4e"tionable provisions o( t!e Code reveals t!at t!ey are not purely business5oriented nor do t!ey "on"ern t!e #anage#ent aspe"t o( t!e business o( t!e "o#pany as in t!e San Miguel "ase. T!e . . 0.espondents later (iled a "o#plaint (or un(air labor pra"ti"e/ "onstru"tive dis#issal/ et".C or is a valid e-er"ise o( #anage#ent prerogative . i#ple#ented t!e Code. tanta#ount to "onstru"tive dis#issal/ w!i"! !as been de(ined as a . e#ployees. *.abor Code/ t!at t!e law e-pli"itly "onsidered it a State poli"y H(t o ensure t!e parti"ipation o( wor%ers in de"ision and poli"y5#a%ing pro"esses a((e"ting t!e rig!ts/ duties and wel(are.bol* et! al! G!#! $o! (56446 0"ril (1* 1225 Facts. $. Petitioner appealed to t!e SC $. t!en (iled a petition (or "ertiorari "!arging publi" respondents wit! grave abuse o( dis"retion Facts. Petitioner Star Paper Corp.H 1owever/ even in t!e absen"e o( said "lear provision o( law/ t!e e-er"ise o( #anage#ent prerogatives was never "onsidered boundless.aboratories (P!il.C (or +. 9ndeed/ it was only on Mar"! $/ 1B?B/ wit! t!e approval o( .epubli" A"t 2o. WO2 t!e (or#ulation o( a Code o( 'is"ipline a#ong e#ployees is a s!ared responsibility o( t!e e#ployer and t!e e#ployees . T!us/ even be(ore Arti"le $11 o( t!e labor Code (P.uestioned de"ision A889. 9t is "ir"u#s"ribed by li#itations (ound in law/ a "olle"tive bargaining agree#ent/ or t!e general prin"iples o( (air play and 4usti"e.i%ewise/ "onstru"tive dis#issal e-ists w!en an a"t o( "lear dis"ri#ination/ insensibility or disdain by an e#ployer !as be"o#e so unbearable to t!e e#ployee leaving !i# wit! no option but to (orego wit! !is "ontinued e#ploy#ent. *. T!e i#ple#entation o( t!e provisions #ay result in t!e deprivation o( an e#ployee6s #eans o( liveli!ood w!i"!/ as "orre"tly pointed out by t!e 2. =.C (ound no eviden"e o( +. On appeal to t!e 2. PA...C/ it #ust be duly establis!ed t!at t!e prerogative being invo%ed is "learly a #anagerial one.6s position t!at it "annot be saddled wit! t!e HobligationH o( s!aring #anage#ent prerogatives as during t!e (or#ulation o( t!e Code/ .)s arbitrary i#ple#entation o( t!e Code o( 'is"ipline. W!ere(ore/ t!e petition is '9SM9SS3' and t!e . . Motion was re"onsideration was li%ewise denied. Moreover/ as enun"iated in Abbott .. On 1B?7/ PA.. On appeal/ t!e 2. 1. <. .C/ t!e Co##ission a((ir#ed t!e de"ision o( t!e . and a((ir#ed t!e dis#issal o( PA.H T!is was/ o( "ourse/ a#pli(ied by . 0.el/. 0. $.3A (iled a "o#plaint be(ore t!e 2. .3A #aintained t!at Art.'. .C/ is a property rig!t 9ndeed/ industrial pea"e "annot be a"!ieved i( t!e e#ployees are denied t!eir 4ust parti"ipation in t!e dis"ussion o( #atters a((e"ting t!eir rig!ts. (iled #otion to dis#iss "ontending t!at t!ey !ave t!e prerogative to pres"ribe rules and regulations 9n its reply/ PA. as 7.H PA. PA. 9n t!e present "ase/ petitioners (ailed to 4usti(y . T!e provisions o( t!e Code "learly !ave reper"usions on t!e e#ployee6s rig!t to se"urity o( tenure.*. 1. All t!is points to t!e "on"lusion t!at t!e e-er"ise o( #anagerial prerogatives is not unli#ited. . 2.P (or PA..epubli" A"t 2o <=17 w!en it de"reed t!e Hparti"ipation o( wor%ers in de"ision and poli"y #a%ing pro"esses a((e"ting t!eir rig!ts/ duties and wel(are..3A)s "!arge and de"lared t!at PA. <=17/ a#ending Arti"le $11 o( t!e . $0B(e was violated w!en PA.M3'. <. WO2 t!e poli"y o( t!e e#ployer banning spouses (ro# wor%ing in t!e sa#e "o#pany violates t!e rig!ts o( t!e e#ployee under t!e Constitution and t!e . / vs. 1. revised its Code o( 'is"ipline and it was "ir"ulated a#ong t!e e#ployees and was i##ediately i#ple#ented / and so#e e#ployees were sub4e"ted to t!e dis"iplinary #easures e#bodied t!erein PA. but it also ruled t!at t!e rule violated t!e rule on double 4eopardy.A (ound t!at no +.epubli" A"t 2o. to s!are its #anage#ent prerogative o( (or#ulating a Code o( 'is"ipline. s!owed eviden"e t!at respondents were all regular e#ployees o( t!e "o#pany w!o "ontra"ted #arriage wit! t!eir "o5e#ployee and re5 signed to "o#ply wit! "o#pany poli"y. W!ere(ore/ t!e petition is '9SM9SS3' P3ili""ine 0irlines -nc! (P0L) ! $L#C G!#! $o! )&+)& 0ugust ('* (++' -ssue.P "o##itted by PA. -ssue. <=17 !ad not yet been ena"ted/ "annot t!us be sustained.espondents appealed to t!e CA w!i"! reversed t!e de"ision o( t!e 2.A.A dis#issed t!e "o#plaint (or la"% o( #erit.P was "o##itted by PA.uitting be"ause "ontinued e#ploy#ent is rendered i#possible/ unreasonable or unli%elyC as an o((er involving a de#otion in ran% and di#inution in pay. *. 9t also stated t!at it (ailed to prove t!at t!e new Code was a#ply "ir"ulated. 7.

1owever/ a general (a"ulty asse#bly was !eld as s"!eduled. Spe"i(i"ally/ t!e purpose o( a "erti(i"ation ele"tion is to as"ertain w!et!er or not a #a4ority o( t!e e#ployees wis! to be represented by a labor organiFation and/ in t!e a((ir#ative "ase/ by w!i"! parti"ular labor organiFation. and t!at no rules !ad been issued to govern t!e "ondu"t o( t!e L7 O"tober 1BB< ele"tion. 7. T!ey e#body a "ovenant between a union and its #e#bers and "onstitute t!e (unda#ental law governing t!e #e#bers) rig!ts and obligations. Med5Arbiter issued a T.el/. IAJ re.uire#ent o( t!at nature would be valid provided it re(le"ts an in!erent .ber (5* (+++ Facts. As su"!/ t!e union)s "onstitution and bylaws s!ould be up!eld/ as long as t!ey are not "ontrary to law/ good #orals or publi" poli"y.1.uire#ents o( t!e 4ob would 4usti(y t!e sa#e/ but not on t!e ground o( a general prin"iple/ su"! as t!e desirability o( spreading wor% in t!e wor%pla"e. San Miguel Corporation (iled a 2oti"e o( Appeal wit! Me#orandu# on Appeal/ pointing out/ a#ong ot!ers/ t!e Med5Arbiter)s error in grouping toget!er all t!ree (* separate plants/ into one bargaining unit/ and in in"luding supervisory levels * and above w!ose positions are "on(idential in nature. Private . 9( t!ey are not "on(idential e#ployees/ do t!e e#ployees o( t!e t!ree plants "onstitute an appropriate single bargaining unit. en4oining t!e "ondu"t o( ele"tions. . 1owever/ t!e reverse is not always trueC an e#ployee belonging to t!e appropriate bargaining unit but w!o is not a #e#ber o( t!e union "annot vote in t!e union ele"tion/ unless ot!erwise aut!oriFed by t!e "onstitution and bylaws o( t!e union. T!e i#portan"e o( a union)s "onstitution and bylaws "annot be overe#p!asiFed.3 a Petition (or 'ire"t Certi(i"ation or Certi(i"ation 3le"tion a#ong t!e supervisors and e-e#pt e#ployees o( t!e SMC Magnolia Poultry Produ"ts Plants o( Cabuyao/ San 8ernando and Otis. A union ele"tion s!ould be distinguis!ed (ro# a "erti(i"ation ele"tion/ w!i"! is t!e pro"ess o( deter#ining/ t!roug! se"ret ballot/ t!e sole and e-"lusive bargaining agent o( t!e e#ployees in t!e appropriate bargaining unit/ (or purposes o( "olle"tive bargaining. T!ere(ore/ a union #e#ber w!o li%ewise belongs to t!e appropriate bargaining unit is entitled to vote in said ele"tion..agues#a granted t!e re"onsideration prayed (or and dire"ted t!e "ondu"t o( separate "erti(i"ation ele"tions a#ong t!e supervisors ran%ed as supervisory levels 1 to 0 (S1 to S0 and t!e e-e#pt e#ployees in ea"! o( t!e t!ree plants at Cabuyao/ San 8ernando and Otis. 2O. +pon petitioner5union)s #otion/ +nderse"retary . On t!is o""asion/ appellants were ele"ted as +ST8+)s new set o( o((i"ers by a""la#ation and "lapping o( !ands. -ssue.O ($ .1= T!ese poli"ies (o"us upon t!e potential e#ploy#ent proble#s arising (ro# t!e per"eption o( (avoritis# e-!ibited towards relatives. UST Faculty Union (USTFU) et! al! ! Bitonio* 7r! G!#! $o! ('(1'& $o e. $.agues#a/ granted respondent "o#pany)s Appeal and ordered t!e re#and o( t!e "ase to t!e Med5Arbiter o( origin (or deter#ination o( t!e true "lassi(i"ation o( ea"! o( t!e e#ployees soug!t to be in"luded in t!e appropriate bargaining unit.uality reasonably ne"essary (or satis(a"tory 4ob per(or#an"e. Said CBA was rati(ied by a #a4ority o( t!e +ST (a"ulty "o##unity.uire#ent t!at a wo#an e#ployee #ust re#ain un#arried "ould be 4usti(ied as a Hbona (ide o""upational . 0. WO2 t!e ele"tion o( t!e o((i"ers in t!is "ase was valid . Wit! #ore wo#en entering t!e wor%(or"e/ e#ployers are also ena"ting e#ploy#ent poli"ies spe"i(i"ally pro!ibiting spouses (ro# wor%ing (or t!e sa#e "o#pany. 9n a "erti(i"ation ele"tion/ all e#ployees belonging to t!e appropriate bargaining unit "an vote. A re. 9n view w!ereo(/ t!e de"ision o( t!e CA is a((ir#ed. *. T!e publi" respondent/ +nderse"retary . On L* 'e"e#ber 1BB</ appellants and +ST allegedly entered into anot!er CBA "overing t!e period (ro# L1 Eune 1BB< to *1 May $LL1. A union ele"tion is !eld pursuant to t!e union)s "onstitution and bylaws/ and t!e rig!t to vote in it is en4oyed only by union #e#bers. -ssue.a G!#! $o! ((2'++ 0ugust (&* (++4 Facts. Med5Arbiter 'anilo . T!e petitioners on t!e ot!er !and/ . (1 W!et!er Supervisory e#ployees * and 0 and t!e e-e#pt e#ployees o( t!e "o#pany are "onsidered "on(idential e#ployees/ !en"e ineligible (ro# 4oining a union.eynante issued an Order ordering t!e "ondu"t o( "erti(i"ation ele"tion a#ong t!e above#entioned e#ployees o( t!e di((erent plants as one bargaining unit. Petitioner union (iled be(ore 'O. 9t is true t!at t!e poli"y o( petitioners pro!ibiting "lose relatives (ro# wor%ing in t!e sa#e "o#pany ta%es t!e nature o( an anti5 nepotis# e#ploy#ent poli"y.3C was not "onstituted in a""ordan"e wit! +ST8+)s "onstitution and by5laws (CB. T!e general asse#bly was attended by #e#bers o( t!e +ST8+ and/ as ad#itted by t!e appellants/ also by &non5+ST8+ #e#bers Iw!oJ are #e#bers in good standing o( t!e +ST A"ade#i" Co##unity Colle"tive Bargaining +nit:. Co#panies adopt t!ese poli"ies to prevent t!e !iring o( un. San Miguel Cor"oration Su"er isors ! Lagues.uali(ied persons based on t!eir status as a relative/ rat!er t!an upon t!eir ability.uali(i"ation/H or B8OK/ w!ere t!e parti"ular re.esponednts are duly ele"ted o((i"ers o( t!e +ST 8a"ulty +nion (+ST8+ .uestioned be(ore t!e Med5Arbiter/ t!at t!e COM3. >erily/ union a((airs and ele"tions "annot be de"ided in a non5union a"tivity. T!e union !as a subsisting (ive5year CBA wit! +ST. We note t!at two types o( e#ploy#ent poli"ies involve spouses@ poli"ies banning only spouses (ro# wor%ing in t!e sa#e "o#pany (no5spouse e#ploy#ent poli"ies / and t!ose banning all i##ediate (a#ily #e#bers/ in"luding spouses/ (ro# wor%ing in t!e sa#e "o#pany (anti5nepotis# e#ploy#ent poli"ies . We a((ir#.

Be(ore t!e "on(eren"e t!e >P o( t!e union resigned and wit!drew t!e proposals !en"e t!e PC was "an"elled. W!et!er or not "erti(i"ation ele"tion "an be !eld a(ter CBA was agreed upon a(ter 7 years. An appropriate bargaining unit #ay be de(ined as &a group o( e#ployees o( a given e#ployer/ "o#prised o( all or less t!an all o( t!e entire body o( e#ployees/ w!i"! t!e "olle"tive interest o( all t!e e#ployees/ "onsistent wit! e. $ w!en a bargaining deadlo"% !ad been sub#itted to "on"iliation or arbitration or !ad be"o#e t!e sub4e"t o( a valid noti"e o( stri%e or lo"%out. T!e university #aintained it silen"e.abor +nion/ re..: T!e broad rationale be!ind t!is rule is t!at e#ployees s!ould not be pla"ed in a position involving a potential "on(li"t o( interests.abor assu#ed 4urisdi"tion and dire"ted t!at all stri%ing wor%ers to report ba"% to wor% wit!in $0 !ours.abor dis#issed t!e "ases o( +. Marat!on "on"iliations were !eld to no avail. 2ot !aving !eard (ro# t!e university/ a (ollow up re. T!e #ed5arbiter issued an order dire"ting t!e "ondu"t o( t!e "erti(i"ation ele"tion.uired to !andle labor relations #atters t!roug! e#ployees w!o are represented by t!e union wit! w!i"! t!e "o#pany is re.uired to deal and w!o in t!e nor#al per(or#an"e o( t!eir duties #ay obtain advan"e in(or#ation o( t!e "o#pany)s position wit! regard to "ontra"t negotiations/ t!e disposition o( grievan"es/ or ot!er labor relations #atters. &Manage#ent s!ould not be re. T!e Se" o( . ($ T!e (a"t t!at t!e t!ree plants are lo"ated in t!ree di((erent pla"es/ na#ely/ in Cabuyao/ .uested t!at a preli#inary "on(eren"e be !eld on May $?/ 1B?7.: T!e Court !eld t!at &i( t!ese #anagerial e#ployees would belong to or be a((iliated wit! a +nion/ t!e latter #ig!t not be assured o( t!eir loyalty to t!e +nion in view o( evident "on(li"t o( interest. T!e union t!erea(ter (iled a noti"e o( stri%e on t!e grounds o( bargaining deadlo"% and +. 0sian Design an/ Manu:acturing Cor"! ! Ferrer% Calle?a G!#! $o! L%446(& 7une 1+* (+)+ Di ine Wor/ Uni ersity o: Tacloban ! Sec! o: Labor G!#! no! +(+(& Se"te. Geograp!i"al lo"ation "an be "o#pletely disregarded i( t!e "o##unal or #utual interests o( t!e e#ployees are not sa"ri(i"ed.abor Code/ are not eligible to 4oin/ assist or (or# any labor organiFation. 9t was (ound !owever/ t!at t!e university (iled (or a petition (or "erti(i"ation ele"tion one !our be(ore t!e agree#ent was "on"luded. T!us/ in deter#ining t!e "on(identiality o( "ertain e#ployees/ a %ey . T!e +niversity)s reply re.P (iled by t!e union and t!e university. -ssue. T!e two "riteria are "u#ulative/ and bot! #ust be #et i( an e#ployee is to be "onsidered a "on(idential e#ployee M t!at is/ t!e "on(idential relations!ip #ust e-ist between t!e e#ployee and !is supervisor/ and t!e supervisor #ust !andle t!e pres"ribed responsibilities relating to labor relations.P/ re(usal to bargain/ dis"ri#ination and "oer"ion. T!e e-"lusion (ro# bargaining units o( e#ployees w!o/ in t!e nor#al "ourse o( t!eir duties/ be"o#e aware o( #anage#ent poli"ies relating to labor relations is a prin"ipal ob4e"tive soug!t to be a""o#plis!ed by t!e :"on(idential e#ployee rule. Con(eren"es were !eld a(ter t!e (iling o( t!e noti"e o( stri%e and t!e parties "a#e to an agree#ent. T!e +nion "an also be"o#e "o#pany5do#inated wit! t!e presen"e o( #anagerial e#ployees in +nion #e#bers!ip.uestion (re.ual and opposed (or"es. A(ter t!ree years/ t!e a((iliate o( t!e union/ Asso"iated . T!e Se" o( . Con(idential e#ployees are t!ose w!o (1 assist or a"t in a "on(idential "apa"ity/ ($ to persons w!o (or#ulate/ deter#ine/ and e((e"tuate #anage#ent poli"ies in t!e (ield o( labor relations.: A unit to be appropriate #ust e((e"t a grouping o( e#ployees w!o !ave substantial/ #utual interests in wages/ !ours/ wor%ing "onditions and ot!er sub4e"ts o( "olle"tive bargaining.uently "onsidered is t!e e#ployee)s ne"essary a""ess to "on(idential labor relations in(or#ation. An e#ployer w!o is re.aguna/ in Otis/ Panda"an/ Metro Manila/ and in San 8ernando/ Pa#panga is i##aterial.ber ((* (++1 Facts. T!e union t!en sub#itted proposals w!i"! were again ignored by t!e university.uested to bargain "olle"tively #ay (ile a petition (or "erti(i"ation ele"tion any ti#e e-"ept upon "lear s!owing t!e e-isten"e o( eit!er@ 1 petition is (iled wit!in one year (ro# t!e issuan"e o( a (inal "erti(i"ation ele"tion result O.+.uest was sent and warned t!e university (ro# intere(eren"e. T!ey are not . T!ere is a deadlo"% w!en t!ere is a "o#plete blo"%ing or stoppage resulting (ro# t!e a"tion o( e. On Sept </ 1B?0 t!e #ed5arbiter "erti(ied t!e 'ivine Word +niversity 3#ployees +nion as t!e sole and e-"lusive bargaining agent o( t!e 'ivine Word +niversity. 9n t!e very sa#e provision/ t!ey are not allowed #e#bers!ip in a labor organiFation o( t!e ran%5and5(ile e#ployees but #ay 4oin/ assist or (or# separate labor organiFations o( t!eir own. T!e union sub#itted its proposals on Mar"! =/ 1B?7.: An i#portant ele#ent o( t!e &"on(idential e#ployee rule: is t!e e#ployee)s need to use labor relations in(or#ation.el/.abor dire"ted to !old in abeyan"e.uali(ied to be "lassi(ied as #anagerial e#ployees w!o/ under Arti"le $07 o( t!e .uity to t!e e#ployer/ indi"ate to be best suited to serve t!e re"ipro"al rig!ts and duties o( t!e parties under t!e "olle"tive bargaining provisions o( t!e law.uested a "on(eren"e wit! t!e +niversity (or t!e purposes o( "ontinuing t!e bargaining negotiations. To W!i"! t!e Se" o( . . 'eadlo"% is t!e "ountera"tion o( t!ings produ"ing entire stoppage@ a state o( ina"tion or o( neutraliFation "aused by t!e opposition o( persons or (a"tions. .92G@ (1 On t!e (irst issue/ t!is Court rules t!at said e#ployees do not (all wit!in t!e ter# &"on(idential e#ployees: w!o #ay be pro!ibited (ro# 4oining a union.

Pro"edure@ 1 proposal $ "on(eren"e in "ase o( di((eren"es * "on"iliation 0 t!e parties are pro!ibited (ro# e-er"ising a"ts w!i"! would i#pede or disrupt t!e early settle#ent o( t!e "ase 7 e-ert e((orts (or a#i"able settle#ent T!e union a(ter sub#itting proposals w!i"! were ignored by t!e university/ re#ained passive. $estle ! $L#C . T!e +niversity)s reply re. On Sept </ 1B?0 t!e #ed5arbiter "erti(ied t!e 'ivine Word +niversity 3#ployees +nion as t!e sole and e-"lusive bargaining agent o( t!e 'ivine Word +niversity.uested t!at a preli#inary "on(eren"e be !eld on May $?/ 1B?7. 1owever su"! rig!t was (or(eited by its ina"tion. Be(ore t!e "on(eren"e t!e >P o( t!e union resigned and wit!drew t!e proposals !en"e t!e PC was "an"elled.T!e re"ords o( t!e "ase s!ows t!at t!ere was no reasonable e((ort at good (ait! bargaining on t!e part o( t!e university. Te"!ni"ally/ t!e university !as t!e rig!t to (ile t!e petition (or "erti(i"ation ele"tion as t!ere was no bargaining deadlo"%. T!e union sub#itted its proposals on Mar"! =/ 1B?7.