G.R. No. 95405 June 29, 1999
Semirara Coal Corporation, petitioner, vs. Hon. Secretary of Labor, Semirara Coal Corporation Supervisory Union (SECCSUN) and Semirara Coal Corporation Union of Non-Managerial Employees (SCCUNME), respondents.

FACTS

Semirara Coal Corporation sought to annul the Decision and Orders of the Secretary of Labor which set aside the Med-Arbiter’s Order. The Med-Arbiter had excluded members of the Semirara Coal Corporation Supervisory Union (SECCSUN) from a certification election, deeming them managerial employees. The case originated from a petition for certification election among the company’s supervisory employees. During proceedings, the parties initially agreed to a consent election. However, the petitioner later refused to submit a list of eligible voters, contending that all its supervisors performed managerial functions, particularly citing a company memorandum allegedly vesting them with disciplinary powers.
The Secretary of Labor, on appeal, reversed the Med-Arbiter. He ruled the employees were supervisory, not managerial, and ordered the certification election to proceed with SECCSUN included as a choice. The petitioner moved for reconsideration, submitting a subsequent company memorandum dated August 30, 1990, which it claimed expressly empowered supervisors to discipline employees. The Secretary denied the motion, prompting this petition for certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the Secretary of Labor committed grave abuse of discretion in ruling that the petitioner’s supervisory employees are not managerial employees and are therefore eligible to participate in a certification election.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the Secretary of Labor’s ruling. The legal logic centered on the statutory distinction between managerial and supervisory employees under the Labor Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 6715. Managerial employees are defined as those vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies, hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees. Supervisory employees merely recommend such actions.
The Court found the petitioner’s evidence insufficient to prove its supervisors were managerial. The disciplinary memoranda presented did not conclusively show that the immediate supervisors had the sole, independent power to impose penalties without review by higher management. The Court noted that the very issuance of a new memorandum in August 1990, which purported to “empower” supervisors, tacitly admitted that such power did not exist prior thereto—that is, at the time of the Secretary’s Decision. The determination of an employee’s classification is a factual matter, and the Secretary’s finding, supported by evidence, was accorded respect and finality. No grave abuse of discretion attended the Secretary’s orders directing the inclusion of SECCSUN and the conduct of the certification election.