SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION, ANGEL G. ROA and MELINDA MACARAIG, petitioners, vs. NATIONAL NATIONAL LABOR RELA REL ATIONS COMMISSION (Seond Division!, LABOR ARBITER EDUARDO ". CARPIO, ILA# AT BU$LOD NG MANGGAGA#A (IBM!, ET AL., A L., respondents. FACTS: On or about bout July uly 31, 1990, pri private responden dents were ere served a Meora Meorandu ndu !ro !ro petiti petitione onerr An"el An"el #$ %oa, &i'e( &i'e( )resi )residen dentt and Mana"e Mana"err o! SMC*s SMC*s +usine +usiness ss o"is o"isti' ti's s -ivisi -ivision on .+-/, .+-/, to te ee ee't 't tat tat tey tey ad to be sepa separa rate ted d !ro !ro te te serv servi' i'e e e ee' e'ti tive ve O'to O'tobe berr 31, 31, 1990 1990 on te te "rou "round nd o! 2redundan'y 2redundan'y or or e'ess e'ess personnel personnel$2 $2 %esponde %espondent nt union, in beal! o! private private respondents, opposed te intended disissal and as4ed !or a dialo"ue wit wit ana ana"e "e ent$ ent$ A''o A''orrdin" din"ly ly,, a seri series es o! dia dialo"u lo"ues es were ere eld eld betwe etween en peti petittioner oners s and pri private vate respo espond nden entts$ 5ven 5ven be!o be!orre te te 'on' 'on'llusio usion n o! sai said dialo"ues, te a!oresaid petitioner An"el %oa issued anoter Meorandu on O'tober O'tober 1, 1990 in!orin" in!orin" private private respondents respondents tat tey would be disissed disissed !ro wor4 ee'tive as o! te 'lose o! business ours on 6oveber 7, 1990$ )riva rivate te respo espond nden ents ts we werre in !a't !a't pur pur"ed "ed on te te date date a!or a!ores esai aid$ d$ Tus Tus,, on February ebruary 78, 1991, 1991, private private respondents respondents led a 'oplaint 'oplaint a"ainst a"ainst petitioners petitioners !or lle"a lle"all -isi -isissa ssall and ;n!air ;n!air abor abor )ra'ti )ra'ti'es 'es,, wit wit a prayer prayer !or daa"e daa"es s and attorney*s !ees, wit te Arbitration +ran' o! respondent 6ational abor %ela elatio tions ns Co Cois issio sion$ n$ )etitio etitioner ners s led led a otion otion to disis disiss s te 'opla 'oplaint int,, alle"in" tat respondent abor Arbiter ad no
5-: ?e ?es$ Te law in point is Arti'le 71@ .a/ o! te abor Code$ t is ele eleen enta tary ry tat tat tis tis law law is dee deeed ed writ writte ten n into into te te C+ C+A$ A$ n !a't !a't,, te law law spea4s spea4s in plain plain and unabi" unabi"uous uous ters ters tat tat terin terinati ation on dispute disputes, s, to"et to"eter er wit un!a n!air labor pra' ra'ti'es, are atters !allin" unde nder te ori"inal and e'lu e'lusiv sive e en'e, 'onsistent 'onsistent wit te "eneral "eneral rule under Arti'le Arti'le 71@ .a/ o! te abor Code, te abor Arbiter Arbiter properly properly as
NATIONAL UNION O% BAN$ EMPLO&EES, In Its O'n Ri)t And In Be)a*+ O+ CBTC EMPLO&EES A*iated #it) It- CBTC EMPLO&EES UNION, In Its O'n Ri)t And Interest And In Be)a*+ O+ A** CBTC Ran/ And %i*e E0p*o1ees In*2din Its Me03ers, BEN"AMIN GABAT, BIEN4ENIDO MORALEDA, ELICITA GAMBOA, %AUSTINO TE4ES, SAL4ADOR LISING, and NESTOR DE LOS SANTOS, petitioners, vs. T5E 5ON. "UDGE AL%REDO M. LA6ARO, C%I7MANILA BRANC5 8884- COMMERCL$L BAN$ AND TRUST COMPAN& O% T5E P5ILIPPINES- BAN$ O% T5E P5ILIPPINE ISLANDS- A&ALA CORPORATION- MANUEL ". MAR9UE6- ENRI9UE 6OBEL- ALBERTO 4ILLA7ABRILLE- 4ICENTE A. PACIS, "R.- and DEOGRACIAS A. %ERNANDO, respondents. FACTS: On July 1, 19@@, te Coer'ial +an4 and Trust Copany, a )ilippine ban4in" institution, entered into a 'olle'tive bar"ainin" a"reeent wit te Coer'ial +an4 and Trust Copany ;nion, representin" te ran4 and le o! te ban4 wit a ebersip o! over one tousand eployees, and an aliated lo'al o! te 6ational ;nion o! +an4 5ployees, a national labor or"aniDation$ Te a"reeent was ee'tive until June 30, 19E0, wit an autoati' renewal 'lause until te parties ee'ute a new a"reeent$ On May 70, 19E0, te union, to"eter wit te 6ational ;nion o! +an4 5ployees, subitted to te ban4 ana"eent proposals !or te rene"otiation o! a new 'olle'tive bar"ainin" a"reeent$ Te !ollowin" day, owever, te ban4 suspended ne"otiations wit te union$ Te ban4 ad eanwile entered into a er"er wit te +an4 o! te )ilippine slands, anoter )ilippine ban4in" institution, wi' assued all assets and liabilities tereo!$ As a 'onseBuen'e, te union went to te ten Court o! First nstan'e o! Manila, presided over by te respondent Jud"e, on a 'oplaint !or spe'i' per!oran'e, daa"es, and preliinary in5-: 6o$ =e sustain te disissal o! te 'ase, wi' is, as 'orre'tly eld by te respondent 'ourt, an un!air labor pra'ti'e 'ontroversy witin te ori"inal and e'lusive
Trust Copany to violate te eistin" 'olle'tive bar"ainin" a"reeent in te pro'ess o! re(ne"otiation, 'onsists ainly o! te 'ivil aspe't o! te un!air labor pra'ti'e 'ar"e re!erred to under Arti'le 7G@ o! te abor Code$ Te a't 'oplained o! is broad enou" to ebra'e eiter provision$ Sin'e it involves 'olle'tive bar"ainin" weter or not it involved an a''opanyin" violation o! te Civil Code it ay ri"tly be 'ate"oriDed as an un!air labor pra'ti'e$ Te 'ivil ipli'ations tereo! do not de!eat its nature as a !undaental labor oense$ As we stated, te daa"es .alle"edly/ suered by te petitioners only !or part o! te 'ivil 'oponent o! te in
LOREN6O C. D&, 6OSIMO D&, SR., #ILLIAM IBERO, RICARDO GARCIA AND RURAL BAN$ O% A&UNGON, INC., petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND E8ECUTI4E LABOR ARBITER ALBERTO L. DALMACION, AND CARLITO 5. 4AILOCES, respondents. FACTS: Said private respondent, Carlito >$ &ailo'es, was te ana"er o! te %ural +an4 o! Ayun"on .6e"ros Oriental/, a ban4in" institution duly or"aniDed under )ilippine laws$ >e was also a dire'tor and sto'4older o! te ban4$ On June G, 19E3, a spe'ial sto'4olders* eetin" was 'alled !or te purpose o! ele'tin" te ebers o! te ban4*s +oard o! -ire'tors$ ediately a!ter te ele'tion te new +oard pro'eeded to ele't te ban4*s ee'utive o'ers$ &ailo'es was not re(ele'ted as ban4 ana"er, 3 +e'ause o! tis developent, te +oard, on July 7, 19E3, passed %esolution 6o$ 8, series o! 19E3, relievin" i as ban4 ana"er$ On Au"ust 3, 19E3, &ailo'es led a 'oplaint !or ille"al disissal and daa"es wit te Ministry o! abor and 5ployent a"ainst orenDo -y and Hosio -y, Sr$ Te 'oplaint was
aended on Septeber 77, 19E3 to in'lude additional respondents(=illia bero, %i'ardo #ar'ia and te %ural +an4 o! Ayun"on, and additional 'auses o! a'tion !or underpayent o! salary and non(payent o! livin" allowan'e$ n teir answer, orenDo -y, et al$ denied te 'ar"e o! ille"al disissal$ Tey pointed out tat &ailo'es* position was an ele'tive one, and e was not re(( ele'ted as ban4 ana"er be'ause o! te +oard*s loss o! 'onden'e in i brou"t about by is absenteeis and ne"li"en'e in te per!oran'e o! is dutiesI and tat te +oard*s a'tion was ta4en to prote't te interest o! te ban4 and was 2desi"ned as an internal 'ontrol easure to se'ure te 'e'4 and balan'e o! autority witin te or"aniDation$2 Te abor Arbiter !ound !avorably !or te private respondent$ SS;5: =eter te abor Arbiter as 5-: 6o$ Tere is no dispute tat te position !ro wi' private respondent &ailo'es 'lais to ave been ille"ally disissed is an ele'tive 'orporate o'e$ >e isel! a'Buired tat position trou" ele'tion by te ban4*s +oard o! -ire'tors at te or"aniDational eetin" o! 6oveber 1@, 19@9$ 10 >e lost tat position be'ause te +oard tat was ele'ted in te spe'ial sto'4olders* eetin" o! June G, 19E3 did not re(ele't i$ And wen &ailo'es, in is position paper subitted to te abor Arbiter, ipu"ned said sto'4olders* eetin" as ille"ally 'onvo4ed and te +oard o! -ire'tors tereby ele'ted as ille"ally 'onstituted, 11 e ade it 'lear tat at te eart o! te atter was te validity o! te dire'tors* eetin" o! June G, 19E3 wi', by not re(ele'tin" i to te position o! ana"er, in ee't 'aused terination o! is servi'es$ Te 'ase tus !alls sBuarely witin te purview o! Se'tion 8, par$ .'/, 6o$ 907(A
MAINLAND CONSTRUCTION, CO., INC., and:or LUCITA LU CARABUENA, ROBERT L. CARABUENA, ELLEN LU CARABUENA, and MARTIN LU, petitioners, vs. MILA MO4ILLA, ERNESTO MO4ILLA, "R., MILA "UDIT5 C. MO4ILLA, "UDE BRI8 C. MO4ILLA, "ONARD ELLER& C. MO4ILLA, AND MAILA "ONA5 M. 9UIMBO, s2rvivin )eirs o+ ERNESTO MO4ILLA, and T5E 5ONORABLE COMMISSIONER o+ t)e NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION7;T5 DI4ISION, respondents. FACTS: Mainland Constru'tion Co$, n'$ is a doesti' 'orporation, duly or"aniDed and eistin" under )ilippine laws, avin" been issued a 'erti'ate o! re"istration by te Se'urities and 5'an"e Coission .S5C/ on July 7, 19@@, under %e"istry 6uber @G91$ ts prin'ipal line o! business is te "eneral 'onstru'tion o! roads and brid"es and te operation o! a servi'e
sop !or te aintenan'e o! eBuipent$ %espondents on te oter and, are te survivin" eirs o! 'oplainant, 5rnesto Movilla, wo died durin" te penden'y o! te a'tion wit te abor Arbiter$ %e'ords sow tat 5rnesto Movilla, wo was a Certied )ubli' A''ountant durin" is li!etie, was ired as su' by Mainland in 19@@$ Terea!ter, e was prooted to te position o! Adinistrative O'er$ 5rnesto Movilla was re"istered wit te So'ial Se'urity Syste .SSS/ as an eployee o! petitioner Corporation$ On April 17, 19E@, durin" petitioner 'orporation*s annual eetin" o! sto'4olders, te !ollowin" were ele'ted ebers o! te +oard o! -ire'tors, viD$: %obert $ Carabuena, 5llen $ Carabuena, u'ita u Carabuena, Martin #$ u and 5rnesto $ Movilla$ On te sae day, an or"aniDational eetin" was eld and te +oard o! -ire'tors ele'ted 5rnesto Movilla as Adinistrative Mana"er$ >e o''upied te said position up to te tie o! is deat$ On April 7, 1991, te -epartent o! abor and 5ployent .-O5/ 'ondu'ted a routine inspe'tion on petitioner 'orporation and !ound tat it 'oitted su' irre"ularities in te 'ondu't o! its business$ On te basis o! tis ndin", petitioner 'orporation was ordered by -O5 to pay to its tirteen eployees, wi' in'luded Movilla, te total aount o! )309,G38$E9, representin" teir salaries, oliday pay, servi'e in'entive leave pay dierentials, unpaid wa"es and 13t ont pay$ All te eployees listed in te -O5*s order were paid by petitioner 'orporation, e'ept 5rnesto Movilla$ On O'tober E, 1991, 5rnesto Movilla led a 'ase a"ainst petitioner 'orporation andLor u'ita, %obert, and 5llen, all surnaed Carabuena, !or unpaid wa"es, separation pay and attorney*s !ees, wit te -epartent o! abor and 5ployent, %e"ional Arbitration, +ran' , -avao City$ On February 79, 1997, 5rnesto Movilla died wile te 'ase was bein" tried by te abor Arbiter and was proptly substituted by is eirs, private respondents erein, wit te 'onsent o! te abor Arbiter$ Te abor Arbiter rendered 5-: ?es$ n order tat te S5C 'an ta4e 'o"niDan'e o! a 'ase, te 'ontroversy ust pertain to any o! te !ollowin" relationsips: a/ between te 'orporation, partnersip or asso'iation and te publi'I b/ between te 'orporation, partnersip or asso'iation and its sto'4olders, partners, ebers or o'ersI '/ between te 'orporation, partnersip or asso'iation and te State as !ar as its !ran'ise, perit or li'ense to operate is 'on'ernedI and d/ aon" te sto'4olders, partners or asso'iates teselves$ @ Te !a't tat te parties involved in te 'ontroversy are all
sto'4olders or tat te parties involved are te sto'4olders and te 'orporation does not ne'essarily pla'e te dispute witin te abit o! te
PURI%ICACION G. TABANG, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and PAMANA GOLDEN CARE MEDICAL CENTER %OUNDATION, INC., respondents. FACTS: Te re'ords sow tat petitioner )uri'a'ion Taban" was a !oundin" eber, a eber o! te +oard o! Trustees, and te 'orporate se'retary o! private respondent )aana #olden Care Medi'al Center Foundation, n'$, a non(sto'4 'orporation en"a"ed in etendin" edi'al and sur"i'al servi'es$ On O'tober 30, 1990, te +oard o! Trustees issued a eorandu appointin" petitioner as Medi'al -ire'tor and >ospital Adinistrator o! private respondent*s )aana #olden Care Medi'al Center in Calaba, a"una$ Altou" te eorandu was silent as to te aount o! reuneration !or te position, petitioner 'lais tat se re'eived a ontly retainer !ee o! ve tousand pesos .)8,000$00/ !ro private respondent, but te payent tereo! was alle"edly stopped in 6oveber, 1991$ As edi'al dire'tor and ospital adinistrator, petitioner was tas4ed to run te aairs o! te a!oresaid edi'al 'enter and per!or all a'ts o! adinistration relative to its daily operations$ On May 1, 1993, petitioner was alle"edly in!ored personally by -r$ 5rnesto 6aval tat in a spe'ial eetin" eld on April 30, 1993, te +oard o! Trustees passed a resolution relievin" er o! er position as Medi'al -ire'tor and >ospital Adinistrator, and appointin" te latter and -r$ +enospital
Adinistrator, respe'tively$ )etitioner averred tat se terea!ter re'eived a 'opy o! said board resolution$ On June , 1993, petitioner lled a 'oplaint !or ille"al disissal and non(payent o! wa"es, allowan'es and 13t ont pay be!ore te labor arbiter$ %espondent 'orporation oved !or te disissal o! te 'oplaint on te "round o! la'4 o! ospital Adinistrator was interlin4ed wit er position as eber o! te +oard o! Trustees, en'e, er disissal is an intra('orporate 'ontroversy wi' !alls witin te e'lusive ospital Adinistrator was separate and distin't !ro er position as eber o! te +oard o! Trustees$ Se 'laied tat tere is no intra('orporate 'ontroversy involved sin'e se led te 'oplaint in er 'apa'ity as Medi'al -ire'tor and >ospital Adinistrator, or as an eployee o! private respondent$ On April 7, 199G, te labor arbiter issued an order disissin" te 'oplaint !or la'4 o! e ruled tat te 'ase !alls witin te ospital Adinistrator is a4in to tat o! an ee'utive position in a 'orporate ladder stru'ture$2 en'e, petitioner*s reoval !ro te said position was an intra('orporate 'ontroversy witin te ori"inal and e'lusive 5-: 6o$ Te 'ar"es a"ainst erein private respondent parta4e o! te nature o! an intra('orporate 'ontroversy$ Siilarly, te deterination o! te ri"ts o! petitioner and te 'on'oitant liability o! private respondent arisin" !ro er ouster as a edi'al dire'tor andLor ospital adinistrator, wi' are 'orporate o'es, is an intra('orporate 'ontroversy subowever, oter o'es are soeties 'reated by te
'arter or by(laws o! a 'orporation, or te board o! dire'tors ay be epowered under te by(laws o! a 'orporation to 'reate additional o'es as ay be ne'essary$ t as been eld tat an 2o'e** is 'reated by te 'arter o! te 'orporation and te o'er is ele'ted by te dire'tors or sto'4olders$ @ On te oter and, an 2eployee2 usually o''upies no o'e and "enerally is eployed not by a'tion o! te dire'tors or sto'4olders but by te ana"in" o'er o! te 'orporation wo also deterines te 'opensation to be paid to su' eployee$ E n te 'ase at bar, 'onsiderin" tat erein petitioner, unli4e an ordinary eployee, was appointed by respondent 'orporation*s +oard o! Trustees in its eorandu o! O'tober 30, 1990, 9 se is deeed an o'er o! te 'orporation$ )er!or'e, Se'tion 8.'/ o! )residential -e'ree 6o$ 907(A, wi' provides tat te S5C eer'ises e'lusive
P5ILIPPINE NATIONAL BAN$, petitioner, vs. %LORENCE O. CABANSAG, respondent. FACTS: 2n late 199E, erein %espondent Floren'e Cabansa"P arrived in Sin"apore as a tourist$ Se applied !or eployent, wit te Sin"apore +ran' o! te )ilippine 6ational +an4, a private ban4in" 'orporation or"aniDed and eistin" under te laws o! te )ilippines, wit prin'ipal o'es at te )6+ Finan'ial Center, %oas +oulevard, Manila$ At te tie, te Sin"apore )6+ +ran' was under te el o! %uben C$ Tobias, a lawyer, as #eneral Mana"er, wit te ran4 o! &i'e()resident o! te +an4$ At te tie, too, te +ran' O'e ad two .7/ types o! eployees: .a/ epatriates or te re"ular eployees, ired in Manila and assi"ned abroad in'ludin" Sin"apore, and .b/ lo'ally .dire't/ ired$ Se applied !or eployent as +ran' Credit O'er, at a total ontly pa'4a"e o! QS#G,800$00, ee'tive upon assuption o! duties a!ter approval$ %uben C$ Tobias !ound er einently Bualied and wrote on O'tober 7, 199E, a letter to te )resident o! te +an4 in Manila, re'oendin" te appointent o! Floren'e O$ Cabansa", !or te position$ 2On -e'eber @, 199E, %uben C$ Tobias wrote a letter to Floren'e O$ Cabansa" oerin" er a teporary appointent, as Credit O'er, at a basi' salary o! Sin"apore -ollars G,800$00, a ont and, upon er su''ess!ul 'opletion o! er probation to be deterined solely, by te +an4, se ay be etended at te dis'retion o! te +an4, a peranent appointent$ 2Floren'e O$ Cabansa" a''epted te position and assued o'e$ n te eantie, te )ilippine 5bassy in Sin"apore pro'essed te eployent 'ontra't o! Floren'e O$ Cabansa" and, on Mar' E, 1999, se
was issued by te )ilippine Overseas 5ployent Adinistration, an ROverseas 5ployent Certi'ate, 'erti!yin" tat se was a bona de 'ontra't wor4er !or Sin"apore$ 2+arely tree .3/ onts in o'e, Floren'e O$ Cabansa" subitted to %uben C$ Tobias, on Mar' 9, 1999, er initial R)er!oran'e %eport$ %uben C$ Tobias was so ipressed wit te R%eport tat e ade a notation and, on said R%eport: R#OO- =O%$ >owever, in te evenin" o! April 1G, 1999, wile Floren'e O$ Cabansa" was in te Nat, wi' se and Ce'ilia ABuino, te Assistant &i'e()resident and -eputy #eneral Mana"er o! te +ran' and %osanna Sariento, te Cie! -ealer o! te said +ran', rented, se was told by te two .7/ tat %uben C$ Tobias as as4ed te to tell Floren'e O$ Cabansa" to resi"n !ro er ead O'e in Manila$ >owever, %uben C$ Tobias Natly re!used$ Floren'e O$ Cabansa" did not subit any letter o! resi"nation$ 2On April 1, 1999, %uben C$ Tobias a"ain suoned Floren'e O$ Cabansa" to is o'e and deanded tat se subit er letter o! resi"nation, wit te pretet tat e needed a Cinese(spea4in" Credit O'er to penetrate te lo'al ar4et, wit te in!oration tat a Cinese(spea4in" Credit O'er ad already been ired and will be reportin" !or wor4 soon$ Se was warned tat, unless se subitted er letter o! resi"nation, er eployent re'ord will be bleised wit te notation R-SMSS5- spread tereon$ =itout "ivin" any denitive answer, Floren'e O$ Cabansa" as4ed %uben C$ Tobias tat se be "iven su'ient tie to loo4 !or anoter owever, on April 19, 1999, %uben C$ Tobias a"ain suoned Floren'e O$ Cabansa" and adaantly ordered er to subit er letter o! resi"nation$ Se re!used$ On April 70, 1999, se re'eived a letter !ro %uben C$ Tobias terinatin" er eployent wit te +an4$ On January 1E, 7000, te abor Arbiter rendered
SS;5: =eter 6%C as 5-: ?es$ Te en'e, petitioner 'annot es'ape te appli'ation o! )ilippine laws or te
P5ILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, %ERDINAND PINEDA and GOG%REDO CABLING, respondents. FACTS: )rivate respondents are Ni"t stewards o! te petitioner$ +ot were disissed !ro te servi'e !or teir alle"ed involveent in te April 3, 1993 'urren'y su""lin" in >on" on"$ A""rieved by said disissal, private respondents led wit te 6%C a petition 1 !or in5-: 6o$ #enerally, in
petition sould ave been led wit te labor arbiter$ Te
