G.R. No. 122226 , March 25, 1998
UNITED PEPSI-COLA SUPERVISORY UNION (UPSU), petitioner, vs. HON. BIENVENIDO E. LAGUESMA and PEPSI-COLA PRODUCTS, PHILIPPINES, INC., respondents.

FACTS

The case originated from a petition for direct certification or certification election filed by the United Pepsi-Cola Supervisory Union (UPSU) among route managers/supervisory employees of Pepsi-Cola Products Phils., Inc. (Pepsi). Pepsi opposed the petition, arguing it was a duplication of a prior petition filed by the same route managers through the Pepsi-Cola Employees Association, which had been denied by Undersecretary Laguesma. The denial reiterated a prior decision in Workers Alliance Trade Unions vs. Pepsi-Cola Products Phils., Inc., which held that route managers were managerial employees. The Med-Arbiter dismissed UPSU’s petition, and Undersecretary Laguesma dismissed the appeal and subsequent motion for reconsideration. UPSU filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court, which initially dismissed it. Upon UPSU’s motion for reconsideration invoking the unconstitutionality of Article 245 of the Labor Code, the case was referred to the Court En Banc.

ISSUE

1. Whether public respondent Undersecretary Laguesma gravely abused his discretion in categorizing the members of petitioner union as managerial employees and thus ineligible to form or join labor organizations.
2. Whether Article 245 of the Labor Code, disqualifying managerial employees from joining, assisting, or forming any labor organization, violates Section 8, Article III of the 1987 Constitution .

RULING

Justice Vitug, in a separate concurring and dissenting opinion, held:
1. On the classification of employees: The members of petitioner union (route managers) are not managerial employees but supervisory employees. Their duties and responsibilities, as detailed in their job description and daily activities, are implementary of management policies already set by higher management. They do not possess the genuine authority to lay down and execute management policies or to hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge, assign, or discipline employees. Their functions are confined to carrying out directives and ensuring compliance with established company policies and procedures. Therefore, they are not disqualified from forming or joining a labor organization under Article 245 of the Labor Code.
2. On the constitutionality of Article 245: Article 245 of the Labor Code does not violate Section 8, Article III of the 1987 Constitution . The constitutional right to form unions is not absolute and is subject to limitations provided by law. Managerial employees, being vested with the trust and confidence of management and acting as its alter ego, are properly disqualified from joining labor organizations to avoid conflicts of interest. This aligns with the Corporation Code, which governs the relationship and duties of corporate officers to the corporation.
DISPOSITIVE:
Justice Vitug voted for the reversal of the resolution dated August 31, 1995, and the order dated September 22, 1995, of public respondent Undersecretary Laguesma. Justices Kapunan, Panganiban, and Quisumbing concurred and dissented with this opinion.