Cases Reported: - Second Division

3/14/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 842 3/14/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 842
Grave Abuse of Discretion; Grave abuse of discretion may

arise when a lower court or tribunal violates or contravenes the
Constitution, the law or existing jurisprudence.—“[G]rave abuse of
discretion may arise when a lower court or tribunal violates or
contravenes the Constitution, the law or existing jurisprudence.”
The Court further held in Banal III v. Panganiban, 475 SCRA 164
(2005), that: By

_______________
* SECOND DIVISION.

2
2 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)
vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI)

grave abuse of discretion is meant, such capricious and
whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of
jurisdiction. The abuse of discretion must be grave as where the
power is exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of
passion or personal hostility and must be so patent and gross as
to amount to an evasion of positive duty or to a virtual refusal to

perform the duty enjoined by or to act at all in contemplation of
law.
Same; Certiorari; The fact that the petition before the Court of
Appeals (CA) was a certiorari petition under Rule 65; thus, even
CASES REPORTED
the CA did not have to assess and weigh the sufficiency of evidence
on which the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) based
its decision. The CA only had to determine the existence of grave
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED abuse of discretion.—The reason for this limited review is
anchored on the fact that the petition before the CA was a
____________________
certiorari petition under Rule 65; thus, even the CA did not have

to assess and weigh the sufficiency of evidence on which the
NLRC based its decision. The CA only had to determine the
G.R. No. 200499. October 4, 2017.* existence of grave abuse of discretion. As the Court held in
Soriano, Jr. v. National Labor Relations Commission, 521 SCRA
SAN FERNANDO COCA-COLA RANK-AND-FILE UNION 526 (2007): As a general rule, in certiorari proceedings under Rule
(SACORU), represented by its President, ALFREDO R. 65 of the Rules of Court, the appellate court does not assess and
MARAÑON, petitioner, vs. COCA-COLA BOTTLERS weigh the sufficiency of evidence upon which the Labor Arbiter
PHILIPPINES, INC. (CCBPI), respondent. and the NLRC based their conclusion. The query in this
proceeding is limited to the determination of whether or not the
NLRC acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/23 www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/23

abuse of discretion in rendering its decision. However, as an for, and the effects of, the Department of Labor and Employment
exception, the appellate court may examine and measure the (DOLE) Secretary’s assumption of jurisdiction over a dispute.—To
factual findings of the NLRC if the same are not supported by the Court, the issue really is this: whether the status quo to be
substantial evidence. maintained after the DOLE Secretary assumed jurisdiction
Labor Law; Termination of Employment; Redundancy; means that the effectivity of the termination of employment of the
Requisites for a Valid Implementation of a Redundancy Program. 27 employees should have been enjoined. The Court rules in favor
—For there to be a valid implementation of a redundancy of SACORU. Pertinent to the resolution of this issue is Article
program, the following should be present: (1) written notice 263(g) of the Labor Code, which provides the conditions for, and
served on both the employees and the Department of Labor and the effects of, the DOLE Secretary’s assumption of jurisdiction
Employment at least one month prior to the intended date of over a dispute: ARTICLE 263. Strikes, picketing, and lockouts.—
retrenchment; (2) payment of separation pay equivalent to at x x x x x x x (g) When, in his opinion, there exists a labor dispute
least one month pay or at least one month pay for every year of causing or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry
service, whichever is higher; (3) good faith in abolishing the indispensable to the national interest, the Secretary of Labor and
redundant positions; and (4) fair and reasonable criteria in Employment may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide
ascertaining what positions are to be declared redundant and it or certify the same to the Commission for compulsory
accordingly abolished. arbitration. Such assumption or certification shall have the effect
of automatically enjoining the intended or impending strike or
lockout as specified in the assumption or certification order. If
one has already taken place at the time of assumption or
certification, all striking or locked out employees shall
3 immediately return to work and the employer shall
immediately resume
VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 3

4
Same; Unfair Labor Practice; Right to Self-organization; In

Zambrano v. Philippine Carpet Manufacturing Corp., 828 SCRA 4 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
144 (2017), the Supreme Court (SC) stated: Unfair labor practice San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)
refers to acts that violate the workers’ right to organize.—The same vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI)
principle of according finality to the factual findings of the NLRC
and CA applies to the determination of whether CCBPI
committed an unfair labor practice. Again, the CA also correctly operations and readmit all workers under the same
ruled that the NLRC, with its findings supported by law and terms and conditions prevailing before the strike or
jurisprudence, did not commit grave abuse of discretion. In lockout. The Secretary of Labor and Employment or the
Zambrano v. Philippine Carpet Manufacturing Corp., 828 SCRA Commission may seek the assistance of law enforcement agencies
144 (2017), the Court stated: Unfair labor practice refers to acts to ensure compliance with this provision as well as with such
that violate the workers’ right to organize. There should be no orders as he may issue to enforce the same.
dispute that all the prohibited acts constituting unfair labor Same; Same; Effects of Assumption of Jurisdiction.—The
practice in essence relate to the workers’ right to self- powers given to the DOLE Secretary under Article 263(g) is an
organization. Thus, an employer may only be held liable for unfair exercise of police power with the aim of promoting public good. In
labor practice if it can be shown that his acts affect in whatever fact, the scope of the powers is limited to an industry
manner the right of his employees to self-organize. To prove the indispensable to the national interest as determined by the DOLE
existence of unfair labor practice, substantial evidence has to be Secretary. Industries that are indispensable to the national
presented. interest are those essential industries such as the generation or
distribution of energy, or those undertaken by banks, hospitals,
Same; DOLE Secretary’s Assumption of Jurisdiction Over a
and export-oriented industries. And following Article 263(g), the
Dispute; Article 263(g) of the Labor Code, provides the conditions

effects of the assumption of jurisdiction are the following: (a) the members of the San Fernando Rank-and-File Union (“SACORU”),
enjoining of an impending strike or lockout or its lifting, and (b) collectively referred to as “union members,” on the ground of
an order for the workers to return to work immediately and for redundancy due to the ceding out of two selling and distribution
the employer to readmit all workers under the same terms and systems, the Conventional Route System (“CRS”) and Mini
conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout, or the return-to- Bodega System (“MB”) to the Market Execution Partners
work order. (“MEPS”), better known as “Dealership System.” The termination
of employment was made effective on June 30, 2009, but the
PETITION for review on certiorari of the decision and union members were no longer required to report for work as they
resolution of the Court of Appeals. were put on leave of absence with pay until the effectivity date of
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court. their termination. The union members were also granted
Nenita C. Mahinay for petitioner. individual separa-
Dela Rosa & Nograles for respondent.
_______________
CAGUIOA, J.:
2 Id., at pp. 42-53. Penned by Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas,
Petitioner San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank and File Jr., with Associate Justices Mario L. Guariña III and Manuel M. Barrios,
Union (SACORU) filed a petition for review1 on certiorari concurring.
under Rule 3 Id., at p. 72. Penned by Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr.,
with Associate Justices Noel G. Tijam (now a Member of this Court) and
_______________ Manuel M. Barrios, concurring.
4 Id., at pp. 120-157. Penned by Presiding Commissioner Raul T.
1 Rollo, pp. 11-41.
Aquino, with Commissioners Teresita D. Castillon-Lora and Napoleon M.
Menese, concurring.

5
6
VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 5
San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU) 6 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
45 of the Rules of Court assailing the Decision2 dated July
21, 2011 and Resolution3 dated February 2, 2012 of the
tion packages, which twenty-two (22) of them accepted, but under
Court of Appeals (CA) in C.A.-G.R. S.P. No. 115985. The
protest.
CA affirmed the Resolution4 dated March 16, 2010 of the
To SACORU, the new, reorganized selling and distribution
National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Second
systems adopted and implemented by CCBPI would result in the
Division, which dismissed SACORU’s complaint against
diminution of the union membership amounting to union busting
respondent Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI)
and to a violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)
for unfair labor practice and declared the dismissal of 27
provision against contracting out of services or outsourcing of
members of SACORU for redundancy as valid.
regular positions; hence, they filed a Notice of Strike with the

National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) on June 3,
Facts
2009 on the ground of unfair labor practice, among others. On

June 11, 2009, SACORU conducted a strike vote where a majority
The facts, as found by the CA, are:
decided on conducting a strike.
On May 29, 2009, the private respondent company, Coca-Cola On June 23, 2009, the then Secretary of the Department of
Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (“CCBPI”) issued notices of termination Labor and Employment (DOLE), Marianito D. Roque, assumed
to twenty seven (27) rank-and-file, regular employees and
jurisdiction over the labor dispute by certifying for compulsory effective and simplified scheme of distribution and selling
arbitration the issues raised in the notice of strike. He ordered, company products; that CCBPI, through the simplied system,
“WHEREFORE, premises considered, and pursuant to would derive benefits such as: (a) lower cost to serve; (b) fewer
Article 263(g) of the Labor Code of the Philippines, as assets to manage; (c) zero capital infusion.
amended, this Office hereby CERTIFIES the labor dispute SACORU maintained that the termination of the 27 union
at COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILIPPINES, INC. to the members is a circumvention of the CBA against the contracting
National Labor Relations Commission for compulsory out of regular job positions, and that the theory of redundancy as
arbitration. a ground for termination is belied by the fact that the job
Accordingly, any intended strike or lockout or any positions are contracted out to a “third party provider”; that the
concerted action is automatically enjoined. If one has termination will seriously affect the union membership because
already taken place, all striking and locked out employees out of 250 members, only 120 members will be left upon plan
shall, within twenty-four (24) hours from receipt of this implementation; that there is no redundancy because the sales
Order, immediately return to work and the employer shall department still exists except that job positions will be contracted
immediately resume operations and readmit all workers out to a sales contractor using company equipment for the
under the same terms and conditions prevailing before the purpose of minimizing labor costs because contractual employees
strike. The parties are likewise enjoined from committing do not enjoy CBA benefits; that the contractualization program of
any act that may further exacerbate the situation.” the company is illegal because it will render the union inutile in
Meanwhile, pending hearing of the certified case, SACORU protect-
filed a motion for execution of the dispositive

8
7

VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 7 San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)
San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU) vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI)
ing the rights of its members as there will be more contractual
portion of the certification order praying that the dismissal of the employees than regular employees; and that the redundancy
union members not be pushed through because it would violate program will result in the displacement of regular employees
the order of the DOLE Secretary not to commit any act that would which is a clear case of union busting.
exacerbate the situation. Further, CCBPI argued that in the new scheme of selling and
On August 26, 2009, however, the resolution of the motion for distributing products through MEPs or “Dealership [System],”
execution was ordered deferred and suspended; instead, the issue which is a contract of sale arrangement, the ownership of the
was treated as an item to be resolved jointly with the main labor products is transferred to the MEPs upon consummation of the
dispute. sale and payment of the products; thus, the jobs of the terminated
CCBPI, for its part, argued that the new business scheme is union members will become redundant and they will have to be
basically a management prerogative designed to improve the terminated as a consequence; that the termination on the ground
system of selling and distributing products in order to reach more of redundancy was made in good faith, and fair and reasonable
consumers at a lesser cost with fewer manpower complement, but criteria were determined to ascertain what positions were to be
resulting in greater returns to investment. CCBPI also contended phased out being an inherent management prerogative; that the
that there was a need to improve its distribution system if it terminated union members were in fact paid their separation pay
wanted to remain viable and competitive in the business; that benefits when they were terminated; that they executed
after a careful review and study of the existing system of selling quitclaims and release; and that the quitclaims and release being
and distributing its products, it decided that the existing CRS and voluntarily signed by the terminated union members should be
MB systems be ceded out to the MEPs or better known as declared valid and binding against them.5
“Dealership System” because the enhanced MEPs is a cost-

b. Whether CCBPI’s implementation of the redundancy

The NLRC dismissed the complaint for unfair labor program was an unfair labor practice; and
practice and declared as valid the dismissal of the c. Whether CCBPI should have enjoined the effectivity of
employees due to redundancy. The dispositive portion of the termination of the employment of the 27 affected
the NLRC Resolution states: union members when the DOLE Secretary assumed
jurisdiction over their labor dispute.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, a Decision is hereby
rendered ordering the dismissal of the labor dispute between the The Court’s Ruling
Union and Coca-Cola Bottlers Company, Inc.
Accordingly, the charge of Unfair Labor Practice against the The petition is partly granted.
company is DISMISSED for lack of merit and the dismissal of the Although SACORU claims that its petition raises only
twenty seven (27) complainants due to redundancy is hereby questions of law, a careful examination of the issues on the
declared valid. Likewise, the Union’s Motion for Writ of Execution validity of the redundancy program and whether it
is Denied for lack of merit. constituted an unfair labor practice shows that in resolving
the issue, the Court would have to reexamine the NLRC
_______________ and CA’s
5 Id., at pp. 43-46; citations omitted.
_______________

6 Id., at p. 156.

7 Id., at p. 53.
9

VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 9
10
SO ORDERED.6 San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)

With the NLRC’s denial of its motion for
reconsideration, SACORU filed a petition for certiorari evaluation of the evidence that the parties presented, thus
under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court before the CA. The CA, raising questions of fact.8 This cannot be done following
however, dismissed the petition and found that the NLRC Montoya v. Transmed Manila Corp.9 that only questions of
did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The dispositive law may be raised against the CA decision and that the CA
portion of the CA Decision states: decision will be examined only using the prism of whether
it correctly determined the existence of grave abuse of
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED. discretion, thus:
IT IS SO ORDERED.7
Furthermore, Rule 45 limits us to the review of questions of law
raised against the assailed CA decision. In ruling for legal
SACORU moved for reconsideration of the CA Decision correctness, we have to view the CA decision in the same context
but this was denied. Hence, this petition. that the petition for certiorari it ruled upon was presented to it;
we have to examine the CA decision from the prism of
Issues whether it correctly determined the presence or absence
of grave abuse of discretion in the NLRC decision before
a. Whether CCBPI validly implemented its redundancy it, not on the basis of whether the NLRC decision on the
program; merits of the case was correct. x x x10

NLRC based their conclusion. The query in this proceeding is

“[G]rave abuse of discretion may arise when a lower limited to the determination of whether or not the NLRC acted
court or tribunal violates or contravenes the Constitution, without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of
the law or existing jurisprudence.”11 The Court further held discretion in rendering its decision. However, as an exception, the
in Banal III v. Panganiban that: appellate court may examine and measure the factual findings of
the NLRC if the same are not supported by substantial
evidence.14
By grave abuse of discretion is meant, such capricious and
whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of
jurisdiction. The abuse of discretion must be grave as where the Here, the Court finds that the CA was correct in its
power is exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of determination that the NLRC did not commit grave abuse
passion or personal hostility and must be so patent and gross as of discretion.
to amount to an eva-
CCBPI’s redundancy
_______________ program is valid.

8 See General Santos Coca-Cola Plant Free Workers Union-Tupas v. For there to be a valid implementation of a redundancy
Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils., Inc. (General Santos City), 598 Phil. 879, 884; program, the following should be present:
579 SCRA 414, 418 (2009).
9 613 Phil. 696; 597 SCRA 334 (2009). _______________
10 Id., at p. 707; pp. 342-343; emphasis in the original; citations
omitted. 12 Id., at pp. 614-615; p. 174; citations omitted.
11 Banal III v. Panganiban, 511 Phil. 605, 614; 475 SCRA 164, 174 13 550 Phil. 111; 521 SCRA 526 (2007).
(2005). 14 Id., at pp. 121-122; pp. 537-538.

11 12
VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 11 12 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU) San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)
vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI) vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI)
sion of positive duty or to a virtual refusal to perform the duty (1) written notice served on both the employees and the
enjoined by or to act at all in contemplation of law.12 Department of Labor and Employment at least one month prior to
the intended date of retrenchment; (2) payment of separation pay
equivalent to at least one month pay or at least one month pay for
The reason for this limited review is anchored on the every year of service, whichever is higher; (3) good faith in
fact that the petition before the CA was a certiorari petition abolishing the redundant positions; and (4) fair and reasonable
under Rule 65; thus, even the CA did not have to assess criteria in ascertaining what positions are to be declared
and weigh the sufficiency of evidence on which the NLRC redundant and accordingly abolished.15
based its decision. The CA only had to determine the
existence of grave abuse of discretion. As the Court held in
Soriano, Jr. v. National Labor Relations Commission:13 The NLRC found the presence of all the foregoing when
it ruled that the termination was due to a scheme that
As a general rule, in certiorari proceedings under Rule 65 of CCBPI adopted and implemented which was an exercise of
the Rules of Court, the appellate court does not assess and weigh management prerogative,16 and that there was no proof
the sufficiency of evidence upon which the Labor Arbiter and the
17
that it was exercised in a malicious or arbitrary manner.
Thus: On the issue of CCBPI’s violation of the CBA because of
its engagement of an independent contractor, the NLRC
It appears that the termination was due to the scheme adopted ruled that the implementation of a redundancy program is
and implemented by respondent company in distributing and not destroyed by the employer availing itself of the services
selling its products, to reach consumers at greater length with of an independent contractor, thus:
greater profits, through MEPs or dealership system is basically
an exercise of management prerogative. The adoption of the In resolving this issue, We find the ruling in Asian Alcohol v.
scheme is basically a management prerogative and even if it NLRC, 305 SCRA 416, in parallel application, where it was held
cause the termination of some twenty seven regular employees, it that an employer’s good faith in implementing a redundancy
was not in violation of their right to self-organization much more program is not necessarily destroyed by availment of services of
in violation of their right to security of tenure because the an independent contractor to replace the services of the
essential freedom to manage business remains with management. terminated employees. We have held previously that the
x x x reduction of the number of workers in a company made necessary
Prior to the termination of the herein individual complainants, by the introduction of the services of an independent contractor is
respondent company has made a careful study of how to be more justified when the latter is undertaken in order to effectuate more
cost effective in operations and competitive in the business economic and efficient methods of production. Likewise, in Maya
recognizing in the process that its multi-layered distribution Farms Employees Organization v. NLRC, 239 SCRA 508, it was
system has to be simplified. Thus, it was determined that held that labor laws discourage interference with employer’s
compared to other judgment in the conduct of his business. Even as the law is
solicitous of the welfare of the employees, it must also protect the
_______________ right of an employer to exercise what are clearly management
prerogatives. As long as the company’s exercise of the same is in
15 Asian Alcohol Corporation v. NLRC, 364 Phil. 912, 930; 305 SCRA good faith to advance its interest and not for the purpose of
416, 433 (1999); citations omitted. circumventing the rights of em-
16 Rollo, p. 148.
17 Id., at p. 149. _______________
18 Id., at pp. 148-150.

13

14
VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 13
distribution schemes, the company incurs the lowest cost- vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI)
to-serve through Market Execution Partners (ME[P]s) or
Dealership system. The CRS and Mini-Bodega systems ployees under the law or valid agreements, such exercise will be
posted the highest in terms of cost-to-serve. Thus, the upheld. For while this right is not absolute, the employees’ right
phasing out of the CRS and MB is necessary which, to security of tenure does not give him the vested right in his
however, resulted in the termination of the complainants position as would deprive an employer of its prerogative to
as their positions have become redundant. Be that as it exercise his right to maximize profits. (Abbot Laboratories, Phils.
may, respondent company complied with granting them Inc. v. NLRC, 154 SCRA 713).19
benefits that is more than what the law prescribes. They
were duly notified of their termination from employment
thirty days prior to actual termination. x x x 18 For its part, the CA ruled that the NLRC did not commit
grave abuse of discretion, even as it still reviewed the
factual findings of the NLRC and arrived at the same As stated earlier, the CA, even if it had no duty to
conclusion as the NLRC. On whether redundancy existed reexamine the factual findings of the NLRC, still reviewed
and the validity of CCBPI’s implementation, the CA ruled them and, in doing so, arrived at the very same conclusion.
that CCBPI had valid grounds for implementing the These factual findings are accorded not only great respect
redundancy program: but also finality,22 and are therefore binding on the Court.

In the case at hand, CCBPI was able to prove its case that from CCBPI did not commit an
the study it conducted, the previous CRS and MB selling and unfair labor practice.
distribution schemes generated the lowest volume contribution
which thus called for the redesigning and enhancement of the The same principle of according finality to the factual
existing selling and distribution strategy; that such study called findings of the NLRC and CA applies to the determination
for maximizing the use of the MEPs if the company is to retain its of whether CCBPI committed an unfair labor practice.
market competitiveness and viability; that furthermore, based on Again, the CA also correctly ruled that the NLRC, with its
the study, the company determined that the MEPs will enable the findings supported by law and jurisprudence, did not
CCBPI to “reach more” with fewer manpower and assets to commit grave abuse of discretion.
manage; that it is but a consequence of the new scheme that In Zambrano v. Philippine Carpet Manufacturing
CCBPI had to implement a redundancy program structured to Corp.,23 the Court stated:
downsize its manpower complement.20
Unfair labor practice refers to acts that violate the workers’
right to organize. There should be no dispute that all the
The CA also agreed with the NLRC that CCBPI prohibited acts constituting unfair labor practice in essence relate
complied with the notice requirements for the dismissal of to the workers’ right to self-organization. Thus, an employer may
the employees.21 only be held liable for unfair labor practice if it can be shown that
his acts
_______________
_______________
19 Id., at pp. 152-153.
20 Id., at p. 50. 22 See Skippers United Pacific, Inc. v. National Labor Relations
21 Id., at pp. 51-52. Commission, 527 Phil. 248, 256-257; 494 SCRA 661, 667 (2006).
23 G.R. No. 224099, June 21, 2017, 828 SCRA 144.

15

16
VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 15

San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU) 16 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI) San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)
Given the limited review in this petition, the Court
cannot now reexamine the foregoing factual findings of affect in whatever manner the right of his employees to self-
both the NLRC and CA that the redundancy program was organize.24
valid.
As the CA found, the NLRC’s factual findings were
supported by substantial evidence and are in fact in To prove the existence of unfair labor practice,
compliance with the law and jurisprudence. The CA substantial evidence has to be presented.25
therefore correctly determined that there was no grave Here, the NLRC found that SACORU failed to provide
abuse of discretion on the part of the NLRC. the required substantial evidence, thus:

The union’s charge of ULP against respondent company cannot

be upheld. The union’s mere allegation of ULP is not evidence, it The Court accordingly affirms these findings of the
must be supported by substantial evidence. NLRC and the CA that SACORU failed to present any
Thus, the consequent dismissal of twenty seven (27) regular evidence to prove that the redundancy program interfered
members of the complainant’s union due to redundancy is not per with their right to self-organize.
se an act of unfair labor practice amounting to union busting. For
while, the number of union membership was diminished due to CCBPI violated the return-
the termination of herein union members, it cannot safely be said to-work order.
that respondent company acted in bad faith in terminating their
services because the termination was not without a valid reason.26 SACORU claims that CCBPI violated the doctrine in
Metrolab Industries, Inc. v. Roldan-Confesor,28 when it
dismissed the employees after the DOLE Secretary
The CA ruled similarly and found that SACORU failed assumed jurisdiction over the dispute. SACORU argues
to support its allegation that CCBPI committed an unfair that CCBPI should have enjoined the termination of the
labor practice: employees which took effect on July 1, 2009 because the
DOLE Secretary enjoined further acts that could
SACORU failed to proffer any proof that CCBPI acted in a
exacerbate the situation.29 On the other hand, CCBPI
malicious or arbitrarily manner in implementing the redundancy
argued that the termination of the employment was a
program which resulted in the dismissal of the 27 employees, and
that CCBPI engaged instead the services of independent
certainty, from the time the notices of termination were
issued,30 and the status quo prior to the issuance of the
contractors. As no credible, countervailing evidence had been put
forth by SACORU with which to challenge the validity of the
assumption order included the impending termination of
the employment of the 27 employees.31
redundancy program implemented by CCBPI, the alleged unfair
labor practice acts allegedly perpetrated against
_______________
_______________ 27 Id., at p. 51.

28 324 Phil. 416; 254 SCRA 182 (1996).
24 Id., at p. 161.
29 Rollo, p. 33.
25 Id.
30 Id., at p. 1226.
26 Rollo, pp. 147-148.
31 Id., at p. 1227.

17
18
VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 17

vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI) San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)
union members may not be simply swallowed. SACORU was

unable to prove its charge of unfair labor practice and support its Both the NLRC32 and CA33 ruled that Metrolab did not
allegations that the termination of the union members was done apply to the dispute because the employees received the
with the end-in-view of weakening union leadership and notice of dismissal prior to the assumption order of the
representation. There was no showing that the redundancy DOLE Secretary, thus CCBPI did not commit an act that
program was motivated by ill will, bad faith or malice, or that it exacerbated the dispute.
was conceived for the purpose of interfering with the employees’ To the Court, the issue really is this: whether the status
right to self-organize.27 quo to be maintained after the DOLE Secretary assumed
jurisdiction means that the effectivity of the termination of
employment of the 27 employees should have been Industries that are indispensable to the national interest
enjoined. The Court rules in favor of SACORU. are those essential industries such as the generation or
Pertinent to the resolution of this issue is Article distribution of energy, or those undertaken by banks,
263(g)34 of the Labor Code, which provides the conditions hospitals, and export-oriented industries.37 And following
for, and the effects of, the DOLE Secretary’s assumption of Article 263(g), the effects of the assumption of jurisdiction
jurisdiction over a dispute: are the following:
ARTICLE 263. Strikes, picketing, and lockouts.—x x x (a) the enjoining of an impending strike or lockout or its lifting,
x x x x and
(g) When, in his opinion, there exists a labor dispute causing (b) an order for the workers to return to work immediately and for
or likely to cause a strike or lockout in an industry indispensable the employer to readmit all workers under the same terms and
to the national interest, the Secretary of Labor and Employment conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout,38 or the
may assume jurisdiction over the dispute and decide it or certify return-to-work order.
the same to the Commission for compulsory arbitration. Such
assumption or certification shall have the effect of automatically
enjoining the intended or impending strike or lockout as specified As the Court ruled in Trans-Asia Shipping Lines, Inc.-
in the assumption or certification order. If one has already Unlicensed Crews Employees Union-Associated Labor
taken place at the time of assumption or certification, all Unions (TASLI-ALU) v. Court of Appeals:39
striking or locked out employees shall immediately return
to work and the employer shall immediately resume _______________
operations and readmit all workers under the same terms
35 See Trans-Asia Shipping Lines, Inc.-Unlicensed Crews Employees
Union-Associated Labor Unions (Tasli-Alu) v. Court of Appeals, 477 Phil.
_______________
715, 724; 433 SCRA 610, 617 (2004).
32 Id., at pp. 154-155. 36 Id., at p. 727; p. 620.
33 Id., at p. 49. 37 See GTE Directories Corporation v. Sanchez, 274 Phil. 738, 757-758;
34 LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Book V, Chapter I, Art. 263(g). 197 SCRA 452, 470 (1991).
38 Trans-Asia Shipping Lines, Inc.-Unlicensed Crews Employees
Union-Associated Labor Unions (Tasli-Alu) v. Court of Appeals, supra at p.
725; p. 618.
39 Id.
19

VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 19
San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU) 20

and conditions prevailing before the strike or lockout. The
Secretary of Labor and Employment or the Commission may seek San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union (SACORU)
the assistance of law enforcement agencies to ensure compliance vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI)
with this provision as well as with such orders as he may issue to
enforce the same. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied) When the Secretary exercises these powers, he is granted
“great breadth of discretion” in order to find a solution to a labor
dispute. The most obvious of these powers is the automatic
The powers given to the DOLE Secretary under Article enjoining of an impending strike or lockout or the lifting thereof if
263(g) is an exercise of police power with the aim of one has already taken place. Assumption of jurisdiction over a
promoting public good.35 In fact, the scope of the powers is labor dispute, or as in this case the certification of the same to the
limited to an industry indispensable to the national NLRC for compulsory arbitration, always coexists with an order
interest as determined by the DOLE Secretary.36
for workers to return to work immediately and for employers to maintained until the NLRC resolved the dispute in its
readmit all workers under the same terms and conditions Resolution dated March 16, 2010, where the NLRC ruled
prevailing before the strike or lockout.40 that CCBPI did not commit unfair labor practice and that
the redundancy program was valid. This Resolution then
took the place of the return-to-work order of the DOLE
Of important consideration in this case is the return-to- Secretary and CCBPI no longer had the duty to maintain
work order, which the Court characterized in Manggagawa the status quo after March 16, 2010.
ng Komunikasyon sa Pilipinas v. Philippine Long Distance Given this, the 27 employees are therefore entitled to
Telephone Co., Inc.,41 as “interlocutory in nature, and is backwages and other benefits from July 1, 2009 until
merely meant to maintain status quo while the main March 16, 2010, and CCBPI should recompute the
issue is being threshed out in the proper forum.”42 separation pay that the 27 employees are entitled taking
The status quo is simply the status of the employment of into consideration that the termination of their
the employees the day before the occurrence of the strike or employment shall be effective beginning March 16, 2010.
lockout.43 WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition for
Based on the foregoing, from the date the DOLE review is hereby PARTLY GRANTED. The Decision of the
Secretary assumes jurisdiction over a dispute until its Court of Appeals dated July 21, 2011 and Resolution dated
resolution, the parties have the obligation to maintain the February 2, 2012 are hereby AFFIRMED as to the finding
status quo while the main issue is being threshed out in the that respondent did not commit unfair labor practice and
proper forum — which could be with the DOLE Secretary that the redundancy program is valid. Respondent,
or with the NLRC. This is to avoid any disruption to the however, is directed to pay the 27 employees backwages
economy and to the industry of the employer — as this is from July 1, 2009 until March 16, 2010, and to recompute
the potential effect of a strike or lockout in an industry their separation pay taking into consideration that the
indispensable to the national interest — while the DOLE termination of their employment is effective March 16,
Secretary or the NLRC is resolving the dispute. 2010.
SO ORDERED.
_______________
Carpio (Chairperson), Peralta, Perlas-Bernabe and
40 Id.; italics in the original. Reyes, Jr., JJ., concur.
41 G.R. Nos. 190389 & 190390, April 19, 2017, 823 SCRA 595.
42 Id., at pp. 626-627; emphasis and underscoring supplied. Petition partly granted, judgment and resolution
43 See Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co., Inc. v. Manggagawa affirmed.
ng Komunikasyon sa Pilipinas, 501 Phil. 704, 719-720; 463 SCRA 418, 432
(2005). _______________
44 Rollo, pp. 165-168.

21
22
VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 21
Since the union voted for the conduct of a strike on June
11, 2009, when the DOLE Secretary issued the return-to-
work order dated June 23, 2009,44 this means that the Notes.—Even if a business is doing well, an employer
status quo was the employment status of the employees on can still validly dismiss an employee from the service due
June 10, 2009. This status quo should have been to redundancy if that employee’s position has already
become in excess of what the employer’s enterprise
3/14/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 842
requires. (Ocean East Agency Corporation vs. Lopez, 772

SCRA 414 [2015])
The absence of criteria in the selection of an employee to
be dismissed and the erroneous implementation of the
criterion selected, both render invalid the redundancy
because both have the ultimate effect of illegally dismissing
an employee. (Id.)

——o0o——
© Copyright 2021 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 23/23

Cases Reported: - Second Division

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cases Reported: - Second Division

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cases Reported: - Second Division

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3/14/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 842 3/14/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 842

Grave Abuse of Discretion; Grave abuse of discretion may

2 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/23 www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/23

Same; Unfair Labor Practice; Right to Self-organization; In

www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/23 www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/23

8 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/23 www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/23

b. Whether CCBPI’s implementation of the redundancy

www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/23 www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/23

NLRC based their conclusion. The query in this proceeding is

VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 11 12 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

18 Id., at pp. 148-150.

VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 15

www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/23 www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001782f1bb59707a3f329003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 16/23

The union’s charge of ULP against respondent company cannot

_______________ 27 Id., at p. 51.

VOL. 842, OCTOBER 4, 2017 17

union members may not be simply swallowed. SACORU was

20 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

44 Rollo, pp. 165-168.

requires. (Ocean East Agency Corporation vs. Lopez, 772

© Copyright 2021 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.