Case Digest (G.R. No. 96663)
Facts:
In Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Labor et al. (G.R. Nos. 96663 & 103300, August 10, 1999), the Pepsi-Cola Supervisory Employees Organization-UOEF filed on June 1990 with the Med-Arbiter a petition for a certification election to be the exclusive bargaining agent of supervisory employees of Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines, Inc. On July 12, 1990, the Med-Arbiter granted the petition, noting UOEF’s affiliation with the Union de Obreros Estivadores de Filipinas alongside two rank-and-file locals. On July 23, 1990, PEPSI petitioned the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) to cancel the union’s charter on the grounds that its members were managers and that a supervisors’ union could not affiliate with a federation whose affiliates included rank-and-file unions. PEPSI filed various motions, appeals and position papers; the Secretary of Labor ultimately denied PEPSI’s appeals and upheld the scheduling of the certification election. Meanwhile, BLR issued Registration CCase Digest (G.R. No. 96663)
Facts:
- Parties and Proceedings
- Petitioners: Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines, Inc. (PEPSI).
- Respondents: Hon. Secretary of Labor, Med-Arbiter Napoleon V. Fernando/Celenio N. Daing, and Pepsi-Cola Supervisory Employees Organization-UOEF (the Union).
- Med-Arbiter Cases:
- R100-9101-RU-002 – Certification Election petition.
- R1000-9102-RU-008 – Petition to Set Aside/Cancel/Revoke Union Charter.
- R1000-9104-RU-012 – Petition for Cancellation of Registration Certificate No. 11492-LC.
- Chronology of Events
- June–July 1990
- Union files certification election petition to represent supervisors.
- July 12, 1990: Med-Arbiter grants petition, noting Union’s affiliation with Union de Obreros Estibadores de Filipinas (federation) and two rank-and-file unions (PCLU, PEUP).
- July–October 1990
- July 23: PEPSI files with Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) petition to cancel Union’s charter, alleging inclusion of managerial employees and forbidden dual affiliation under Art. 245.
- August–September: PEPSI moves to reopen, files position paper, receives/schedules summons and pre-trial.
- October 12: PEPSI appeals to Secretary of Labor, moves to suspend election; suspended October 18.
- November 1990–February 1991
- November 12, 1990: Secretary denies reconsideration of appeal.
- PEPSI files certiorari with Supreme Court; February 6, 1991: SC grants TRO/preliminary injunction against election.
- March–December 1991
- Federation and OSG submit comments: argue Art. 245 does not bar supervisory local union from affiliating with federation containing rank-and-file locals.
- Union files rejoinder; PEPSI replies and supplements, emphasizing conflicts of interest.
- August: OSG rejoinder stresses employer’s lack of standing in certification.
- December: SC Second Division grants PEPSI’s motion for reconsideration; case proceeds.
- G.R. No. 103300 (Cagayan de Oro cases)
- May 23, 1991: Med-Arbiter dismisses cancellation/revocation petitions; orders certification election among supervisors.
- June–October: PEPSI appeals to Secretary; October 4: Secretary sustains call for election but refers cancellation petitions to regional office; motion for reconsideration denied December 12.
- BLR issues Registration Certificate No. 11492-LC in favor of Union; PEPSI files certiorari challenging:
- Union Withdrawal and Final Determination
- September 1, 1992: Union withdraws from federation, rendering affiliation issue moot.
- Supreme Court issues decision dismissing petitions but modifies Secretary’s October 4, 1991 order: declares Credit & Collection Managers and Accounting Managers as highly confidential employees, ineligible for supervisors’ union membership.
Issues:
- Can a supervisors’ union affiliate with a federation that also comprises rank-and-file locals without violating Article 245 of the Labor Code?
- Does the pendency of a petition to cancel/revoke a union’s registration certificate constitute a prejudicial question to a certification election petition?
- Are certain positions (Route Managers, Chief Checkers, Warehouse Operations Managers, Credit & Collection Managers, Accounting Managers) managerial or confidential employees, and thus ineligible to join a supervisors’ union under Art. 245 and its necessary implication?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)