You are on page 1of 1

Bisig Manggagawa sa Tryco v.

NLRC
GR No. 151309, 15 October 2008

FACTS:

Tryco Pharma Corporation is a manufacturer of veterinary medicines. Petitioners Larino, Barte, Egera
and Aya-ay are its regular employees assigned in the production department and members of Bisig
Manggagawa sa Tryco (BMT), the exclusive bargaining representative of the rank-and-file employees.
Tryco and BMT signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) providing for a compressed workweek
schedule.

The MOA provided that 8:00 a.m. to 6:12 p.m., from Monday to Friday, shall be considered as the regular
working hours, and no overtime pay shall be due and payable to the employee for work rendered during
those hours. The MOA specifically stated that the employee waives the right to claim overtime pay.

In 1997, the Bureau of Animal Industry of the Dept. of Agriculture instructed Tryco that production should
be conducted in Bulacan, not in Caloocan City. Thereafter, Tryco ordered petitioners to transfer to the
Bulacan Plant, but they opposed contending that it constitutes to unfair labor practice. Soon after,
petitioners filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and non-payment of wages.

LA dismissed the case, and further stated that overtime is not due because of the compressed workweek
agreement between the union and management. NLRC and CA both affirmed.

ISSUE:

1. Whether Tryco committed acts of unfair labor practice


2. Whether Petitioners are entiled to OT Pay

HELD:

1. NO
2. NO

RATIO:

1. Trycos decision to transfer its production activities to San Rafael, Bulacan, regardless of whether it was
made pursuant to the letter of the Bureau of Animal Industry, was within the scope of its inherent right to
control and manage its enterprise effectively. While the law is solicitous of the welfare of employees, it
must also protect the right of an employer to exercise what are clearly management prerogatives. The
free will of management to conduct its own business affairs to achieve its purpose cannot be denied.

2. The MOA is enforceable and binding against the petitioners. Where it is shown that the person making
the waiver did so voluntarily, with full understanding of what he was doing, and the consideration for the
quitclaim is credible and reasonable, the transaction must be recognized as a valid and binding
undertaking.

Considering that the MOA clearly states that the employee waives the payment of overtime pay in
exchange of a five-day workweek, there is no room for interpretation and its terms should be implemented
as they are written.