Star Paper Corporation v.

Simbol, Comia and Estrella

Facts
Star Paper is a company primarily engaged in paper products. Simbol, Comia and Estrella are
all employees of said company. Simbol and Comia met another employee of Star Paper whom
they married and so they subsequently were compelled to resign due to the company policy that
in case two employees decide to get married, one of them should resign. Estrella was
impregnated by a co-worker who tricked her into believing he was single.

Simbol, Comia and Estrella filed a complaint for unfair labor practice and constructive dismissal
on ground that the aforementioned company policy contravenes Article 136 of the Labor Code.
The labor arbiter dismissed the same for lack of merit. The NLRC affirmed the decision. On
appeal to the CA, NLRC’s decision was reversed declaring the dismissal of Simbol, Comia and
Estrella as illegal. Hence, this petition.

Issue: Whether the policy of Star Paper banning the spouses from working in the same
company is a valid exercise of management prerogative (NO)

Ruling
The court held that Star Paper’s company policy violates the employees’ rights to marriage and
family on ground that there is no reasonable business necessity to warrant the same.

Article 136 of the Labor Code provides that it shall be unlawful for an employer to require as
condition for employment or continuation thereof that a woman employee shall not get married
or stipulate expressly that upon getting married, a woman employee shall be deemed resigned,
or to prejudice a woman employee merely by reason of her marriage.

A permissible exception is when the requirement for a woman to remain unmarried is a bona
fide occupational qualification that is reasonably necessary for satisfactory job performance.

The cases of Duncan and PT&T instructs us that the requirement for reasonableness must be
clearly established. This burden was clearly established in Duncan but not in PT&T. The court
does not find reasonable business necessity in the case at bar. Star Paper failed to show how
marriage would be detrimental to the current work posts of the employees. They policy was
premised on the mere fear that employees married to each other will be less efficient.

The policy may not facially violate Article 136 of the Labor code but it creates a disproportionate
effect and the only way it can pass judicial scrutiny is if it is proven to be reasonable despite the
discriminatory effect.

2 types of employment policies involving spouses:

1. No-spouse employment policy: policies banning only spouses from working in the
same company
2. Anti-nepotism employment policy: policies banning all immediate family members
from working in the same company

Requisites of a Bona fide occupational qualification

1. That it is reasonably related to the essential operation of the job involved
2. That there is factual basis in believing that all persons meeting the requirement would be
unable to perform the duties of the job