Title
United Pepsi-Cola Supervisory Union vs. Laguesma
Case
G.R. No. 122226
Decision Date
Mar 25, 1998
A union challenged the prohibition of managerial employees from unionizing under Article 245 of the Labor Code, arguing it violated constitutional rights. The Supreme Court ruled that route managers are managerial employees, and the prohibition is constitutional to prevent conflicts of interest.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-31839)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Petition
  • Petitioner: United Pepsi-Cola Supervisory Union (UPSU), a union of supervisory employees of Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines, Inc. (PCPPI).
  • Respondents: Hon. Bienvenido E. Laguesma (Undersecretary, DOLE) and PCPPI.
  • Petition and Procedural History
  • UPSU filed a petition for certification election on March 20, 1995, on behalf of PCPPI route managers.
  • The Med-Arbiter denied the petition; the Secretary of Labor affirmed, holding route managers are managerial employees and thus ineligible under Art. 245, Labor Code.
  • UPSU sought certiorari before the NLRC Third Division; petition dismissed for lack of grave abuse of discretion.
  • UPSU’s motion for reconsideration raised the constitutional issue under Art. III, Sec. 8 of the Constitution.
  • Case elevated to the Court en banc for resolution of (a) managerial vs. supervisory status and (b) constitutionality of Art. 245.

Issues:

  • Are PCPPI route managers managerial employees under Art. 212(m) of the Labor Code?
  • Does Art. 245’s prohibition on managerial employees forming or joining labor organizations violate Art. III, Sec. 8 of the 1987 Constitution?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.