Case Summary (G.R. No. 110)
Key Dates
• August 9, 1989 – PBSTSEU’s petition for certification election filed.
• September 14, 1989 – FFW and ALU granted intervention; election order set.
• March 27, 1990 – Med-Arbiter Pura declares section heads and supervisors managerial.
• April 17, 1991 – Undersecretary Laguesma reverses Pura’s classification.
• August 7, 1991 – Denial of PICOP’s motion for reconsideration.
• April 12, 2000 – Supreme Court decision under the 1987 Constitution.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution – Right to freedom of association and self-organization.
• Labor Code, Article 245 – Managerial employees ineligible for rank-and-file unions; supervisory employees may form separate organizations.
Factual Background
PICOP employs over 9,000 persons, including 944 supervisory and technical staff, roughly half of whom are PBSTSEU members. PBSTSEU sought certification as exclusive bargaining agent for supervisory and technical staff. PICOP requested to file comments but submitted none. FFW and ALU intervened, leading to a four-choice ballot (PBSTSEU, FFW, ALU, no union). PICOP’s appeal alleged lack of opportunity to comment and PBSTSEU’s lack of standing.
Organizational Restructure and Classification Dispute
In late 1989, PICOP reorganized into four business groups, each headed by a vice-president or assistant vice-president. Divisions, departments, sections, and independent units were led by division managers, department managers, section managers, and unit managers, respectively. PICOP asserted that section managers and unit managers, by virtue of their authority to hire, fire, promote, transfer, suspend, and terminate, qualified as managerial employees and thus were ineligible to vote or be represented by PBSTSEU under Article 245.
Med-Arbiter’s Initial Determination
Med-Arbiter Pura, after reviewing position papers and evidence, concluded on March 27, 1990, that the disputed section heads and supervisors exercised sufficient managerial authority to be excluded from the voter list. PBSTSEU and ALU appealed this ruling to the Secretary of Labor.
Undersecretary’s Reversal
Undersecretary Laguesma, in his April 17, 1991 Resolution, set aside Pura’s order. He held that the contested employees were supervisory, not managerial, and therefore eligible to vote. He found that any hiring and firing powers were advisory and subject to confirmation by higher-level managers. PICOP’s motion for reconsideration was denied on August 7, 1991.
Issue on Managerial vs. Supervisory Status
The core legal question was whether the section managers and unit managers exercised independent policy-making authority (managerial) or merely supervised rank-and-file implementation (first-line supervisory). Under established jurisprudence (United Pepsi-Cola Supervisory Union v. Laguesma), true managerial status requires decisive, independent control over strategic and operational policies—attributes not present here.
Analysis of Authority and Job Descriptions
The Court examined job descriptions and authority charts. It concluded that PICOP’s so-called managers performed recommendatory functions: their decisions on hiring, promotion, transfer, suspension, and dismissal remained subject to review and final approval by department heads or higher executives. Such limited, non-final authority did not satisfy the statutory test for managerial status.
Due Process and Evidence Submission
PICOP claimed capricious denial of its
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 110)
Facts of the Case
- Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippines (PICOP) manufactures paper and timber products at Tabon, Bislig, Surigao del Sur.
- PICOP employs over 9,000 workers, including 944 supervisory and technical staff employees.
- Approximately 487 of these supervisory and technical staff are members of the PICOP-Bislig Supervisory and Technical Staff Employees Union (PBSTSEU).
- On August 9, 1989, PBSTSEU filed a petition for certification election to determine the exclusive bargaining agent for supervisory and technical staff.
Procedural History
- August 10 & 25, 1989: Initial hearing notices; PICOP requested and then failed to file comments.
- Federation of Free Workers (FFW) and Associated Labor Union (ALU) intervened; interventions granted on September 14, 1989.
- September 14, 1989: Med-Arbiter set certification election with four choices—PBSTSEU, FFW, ALU, or no union.
- September 21, 1989: PICOP appealed the election order for lack of opportunity to file comments and PBSTSEU’s standing.
- November 17, 1989: Secretary of Labor upheld Med-Arbiter’s order, adding supervisory staff in Cebu, Davao, and Iligan.
- January 18, 1990: Pre-election conference where PICOP objected to inclusion of certain section heads and supervisors.
PICOP’s Reorganization and Classification Argument
- Late 1989: PICOP reorganized into four business groups: Paper Products, Timber Products, Forest Resource, and Support Services, each headed by a vice-president or assistant vice-president.
- Divisions, departments, sections, and independent units led respectively by division managers, department managers, section managers, and unit managers.
- PICOP claimed section managers and unit managers exercise hiring and firing authority, classifying them as managerial employees ineligible for union membership (Article 245, Labor Code).
- Reorganization fully implemented in January 1991, after elevation of the appeal.