National Association of Trade Unions (NATU) v. Republic Planters Bank Digest, G. R. No. 93468

NATU v Republic
G. R. No. 93468, December 29, 1994


Facts of the Case:

Petitioner NATU filed a petition for certification election to determine the exclusive bargaining agent of its supervisory employees.  The bank (Private respondent) moved to dismiss the petition alleging that the supervisory employees are actually managerial employees hence prohibited from joining unions.  The Med Arbiter granted the petition but the decision was modified by the Sec. of Labor on the ground that the ff employees are deemed as managerial and/or confidential employees and are therefore ineligible to join or form labor unions (Dept. Managers,  Asst. Managers,  branch Cashiers and Controllers).

ISSUE :  W/N the Department Managers, Assistant Managers, Branch Managers/OICs, Cashiers and Controllers of respondent Bank are managerial and/or confidential employees hence ineligible to join or assist the union of petitioner.


RULING:
The subject employees are supervisory and not managerial.  As provided under 212 of the Philippine Labor Code,  a Managerial employee is;

a)   One vested with power to lay down and execute management policies,  or to hire,                   transfer,  suspend, lay off, recall, discharge,  assign or discipline employees, and 

b)  One vested with both the power or prerogative.

Like Branch Managers, Cashiers and Controllers, Department Managers do not possess the power to lay down policies nor to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees. They occupy supervisory positions, charged with the duty among others to "recommend proposals to improve and streamline operations.

On one hand, a confidential employee is one entrusted with confidence on delicate matters, or with the custody, handling, or care and protection of the employer's property.

Therefore only the Branch Managers/OICs, Cashiers and Controllers of respondent bank who are deemed as confidential employees are ineligible to join or assist petitioner NATU-Republic Planters Bank Supervisors Chapter, or join, assist or form any other labor organization

Doctrine of Necessary Implication
The disqualification of managerial employees from joining a union is due to the evident conflict of interest as they are supposed to be on the side of the management.  As to confidential employees,  their disqualification is due to the undue advantage they possess.
Branch managers/Cashiers/Controllers are all considered confidential employees and hence disqualified from joining a labor organization.  Do note that this is not applicable to all banks in general.

* The blogger is also graduate of Industrial Relations major in Human Resource Management hence Labor Relations is a topic within her sphere of interest.


  

Villuga v. NLRC Digest

Villuga v. National Labor Relations Commission

Petitioner Villuga was employed by Private Respondent Zapanta (of Broad St. Tailoring) as a cutter.  He was also tasked to distribute work to other tailors and sewers when the shop manager or assistant is not around and makes sure that the work conform to the pattern given. The other petitioners  were ironers,  repairmen and sewers who were paid on piecerate basis.  The petitioners did not fill in any time record since they did not work on fixed hours,  they also work at home when job orders increased.  Villuga got ill and was not able to report to work for a few days but has notified the employer.  Subsequently,  he was considered to have abandoned his job.  This prompted Villuga to file a complaint on the ground that he was refused back to work due to an alleged participation to a union organized by the tailors.  The other petitioners claimed that they were dismissed due to union participation.  The Labor Arbiter dismissed their complaint,  the NLRC affirmed the dismissal.

Issue:   W/N petitioner Villuga is a managerial employee

RULING:   No.  Villuga's  primary work is to cut or prepare patterns and not to lay down management policies since there is already a manager/assistant in-charge of this exact responsibility.   Note that he only distributes or assigns work occasionally and does not take part in policy-making activities.
The test of 'supervisory' or managerial status depends on whether a person possesses the authority that is not merely routinary/clerical in nature but one that requires the use of independent judgement.  Note that your functions are not managerial if you only execute approved and established policies.

Requirements to be considered one to be part of the managerial staff is laid down in Rule 1,  Sec. 2(c)  Book III),  as follows:
1) Performance of work directly related to management policies.
2)  Customarily/regularly exercise discretion and independent judgement in the performance of his functions.
3)  Regularly/directly assists in managing the establishment.
4)  Does not devote 20% of his time to work other than those described above.

Finally,  there was no abandonment of work by Villuga,  1) to be considered as such, his act must be deliberate and an unjustified refusal and accompanied by overt acts,  mere absence is not a sufficient ground.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE TO READ
Labor Law Digests

About the Blogger
*She holds a postgraduate in Industrial Relations major in Human Resource Management from University of the Philippines (UP) School of Labor and Industrial Relations (SOLAIR) and is currently on-leave from her law studies.