DUNCAN ASSOCIATION OF DETAILMAN-PTGWO and PEDRO A.

TECSON, petitioners,
vs.
GLAXO WELLCOME PHILIPPINES, INC., Respondent.

FACTS:
Pedro A. Tecson was hired by respondent Glaxo Wellcome Philippines, Inc. as medical
representative. As stipulated in the contract signed and agreed by Tecson, The Glaxo provides
that an employee is expected to inform management of any existing or future relationship by
consanguinity or affinity with co-employees or employees of competing drug companies. If
management perceives a conflict of interest or a potential conflict between such relationship and
the employee’s employment with the company, the management and the employee will explore
the possibility of a “transfer to another department or preparation for employment outside the
company after six months.

Subsequently, Tecson entered into a romantic relationship with Bettsy, an employee of Astra
Pharmaceuticals, a competitor of Glaxo. In 1998,Tecson married Bettsy, whilst constantly
reminded by the District Manager regarding the conflict of interest which his relationship with
Bettsy might engender. When Tecson failed to resolve the conflicting issue, Glaxo offered
Tecson a separation pay or to be transferred from Camarines to Butuan-Surigao-Agusan sales
area to which the former refused to abide. Aggrieved, Tecson filed a petition to the National
Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) which affirmed Glaxo’s policy as valid. CA affirmed
NCMB’s decision, hence, this petition.

ISSUE:
Whether Glaxo’s policy against its employees marrying employees from competitor companies
is valid, and whether said policy violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

HELD:
The Court finds no merit in the petition.

The prohibition against personal or marital relationships with employees of competitor

companies upon Glaxo’s employees is reasonable under the circumstances because relationships
of that nature might compromise the interests of the company. In laying down the assailed
company policy, Glaxo only aims to protect its interests against the possibility that a competitor
company will gain access to its secrets and procedures. Glaxo possesses the right to protect its
economic interests. The law also recognizes that management has rights which are also entitled
to respect and enforcement in the interest of fair play.

The company policy does not violate the equal protection clause. In the contractual provision
and the policy in its employee handbook, Glaxo does not impose an absolute prohibition against
relationships between its employees and those of competitor companies. Its employees are free to
cultivate relationships with and marry persons of their own choosing. What the company merely
seeks to avoid is a conflict of interest between the employee and the company that may arise out
of such relationships.