Title
San Miguel Corp. Employees Union vs. Confesor
Case
G.R. No. 111262
Decision Date
Sep 19, 1996
CBA renegotiation dispute between San Miguel Corp. and union over duration (2 vs. 3 years) and inclusion of spun-off entities' employees; SC upheld 3-year term and excluded spun-off employees.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 111262)

The Collective Bargaining Agreement and Corporate Restructuring

The June 28, 1990, CBA between the petitioner-union and SMC was to be effective until June 30, 1992, with the representation aspect fixed for five years, until June 30, 1994. Management informed employees in August 1991 of a restructuring plan dividing SMC into four divisions, with Magnolia and Feeds and Livestock spun off as separate corporations effective October 1, 1991. The CBA remained in effect despite these spin-offs, with negotiations for renewal to begin 60 days prior to June 30, 1992.

Dispute Over Bargaining Unit and CBA Duration

Upon commencement of renegotiations, the petitioner insisted that the bargaining unit still include employees of the spun-off corporations Magnolia and San Miguel Foods, Inc. (SMFI), and that the new CBA's terms cover only the remaining two years until June 30, 1994. Conversely, SMC contended that employees of the spun-off entities ceased to be part of its bargaining unit and that the renegotiated CBA should run for three years under Article 253-A of the Labor Code. Irreconcilable differences led to a declared deadlock and strike notices in late 1992. The Secretary of Labor assumed jurisdiction and after conciliation failed, issued an order directing that the new CBA cover only SMC employees and be effective for three years from June 30, 1992.

Issues Raised Before the Court

Two main issues were raised: (1) whether the renegotiated CBA provisions should be effective for three years or only for the remaining two years of the original CBA term; and (2) whether the bargaining unit of SMC includes employees of Magnolia and SMFI.

Legal Framework: Article 253-A of the Labor Code

Article 253-A, amended by Republic Act No. 6715 effective March 21, 1989, provides that the representation aspect of a CBA shall be for five years, and no petition or certification election questioning majority status is allowed outside the 60-day period before the expiration of this five-year term. All other provisions—economic and non-economic—must be renegotiated not later than three years after the CBA’s execution. The article aims to balance industrial peace with the timely renegotiation of CBA terms.

Legislative Intent on CBA Duration

The legislative history reveals that while the representation aspect of CBAs was fixed at five years to prevent frequent challenges to union status, the other provisions (economic and non-economic) had a recommended duration of up to three years to allow periodic renegotiations. The framers aimed to promote industrial peace and stability by allowing management and labor to work harmoniously without disturbances caused by frequent union challenges or contentious negotiations.

Court’s Ruling on CBA Duration

The Court agreed with the Secretary of Labor’s ruling that the terms of the renegotiated CBA should be effective for three years. The decision emphasized that the peculiar business circumstances of SMC—particularly the spin-off of Magnolia and SMFI—warrant a longer renegotiation period to maintain industrial peace and avoid confusion. The Court acknowledged that although the “representation aspect” lasts five years, the “other provisions” can have a different term that parties agree upon, and in this case, a three-year term was appropriate considering the situation.

Distinct Legal Personality of Magnolia and SMFI

The Court held that Magnolia Corporation and San Miguel Foods, Inc. became separate and distinct corporations on October 1, 1991, with separate management, operational policies, financial statements, and corporate personalities. It ruled that employees of these spun-off entities cannot be part of a single bargaining unit with SMC employees, consistent with established jurisprudence discouraging disregarding separate corporate entities except in cases of fraud or bad faith—which were not present here.

Basis for Separate Bargaining Units

The Court applied the test of mutuality or commonality of interests in employment to define the appropriate bargaining unit. Factors such as different types of work, wages, hours, and working conditions justified separate bargaining units for SMC, Magnolia, and SMFI. The Court emphasized that these companies operate distinct businesses: SMC in beer manufacturing, Magnolia in dairy products, and SMFI in feeds and poultry processing, necessitating different labor concerns and bargaining arrangements.

Consideration of Precedents and Labor Law Principles

The Court cited the Diatagon Labor Federation case and other labor jurisprudence to support the princ

...continue reading

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