GR 93468; (December, 1994) (Digest)
G.R. No. 93468 December 29, 1994
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TRADE UNIONS (NATU)-REPUBLIC PLANTERS BANK SUPERVISORS CHAPTER, petitioner, vs. HON. RUBEN D. TORRES, SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT and REPUBLIC PLANTERS BANK, respondents.
FACTS
The National Association of Trade Unions (NATU)-Republic Planters Bank Supervisors Chapter filed a petition for a certification election among the bank’s supervisory employees. The bank moved to dismiss, arguing that the employees in question—Department Managers, Assistant Managers, Branch Managers/OICs, Cashiers, and Controllers—were managerial or confidential employees and thus ineligible to unionize. The Med-Arbiter granted the petition and ordered an election. The bank appealed to the Secretary of Labor, who modified the order, declaring the aforementioned employees as managerial and therefore disqualified from joining the supervisors’ union. NATU’s motion for reconsideration was denied.
ISSUE
Whether the Department Managers, Assistant Managers, Branch Managers/OICs, Cashiers, and Controllers of Republic Planters Bank are managerial employees, rendering them ineligible to join, assist, or form a union under the Labor Code.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the subject employees are not managerial employees but are properly classified as supervisors, eligible for union membership. The Court emphasized that managerial employees are those vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies, hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge, assign, or discipline employees. The bank’s evidence, primarily consisting of affidavits from its officers and references to banking laws, failed to substantiate that these employees exercise such independent managerial authority. Their functions, such as implementing Central Bank-prescribed internal controls (like dual control and joint custody) and adhering to policies set by the head office, are indicative of supervisory duties involving the implementation of established policies, not the formulation of them. The Court found that the Secretary of Labor erred by focusing on the nature of the banking business under general banking laws instead of applying the specific statutory test for managerial employees under the Labor Code. Consequently, the assailed orders were annulled and set aside, and the Med-Arbiter’s order for a certification election was reinstated.