Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 37 views

    Goya, Inc vs. Goya, Inc. Employees Union-Ffw G.R. No. 170054 January 21, 2013

    Uploaded by

    Dominic Embodo
    This case involves a dispute between Goya, Inc. and its employees union regarding Goya's hiring of contractual workers from an outside company. While the voluntary arbitrator dismissed the union's unfair labor practice charge, they ruled that Goya must observe and comply with the collective bargaining agreement regarding hiring casual employees. The Court of Appeals dismissed Goya's petition challenging this. The Supreme Court then ruled that Goya's hiring of contractual employees did not comply with the intent of the collective bargaining agreement and was not a valid exercise of management prerogative, so they denied Goya's petition.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Goya, Inc vs. Goya, Inc. Employees Union-Ffw G.R. No. 170054 January 21, 2013

    Uploaded by

    Dominic Embodo
    37 views3 pages
    This case involves a dispute between Goya, Inc. and its employees union regarding Goya's hiring of contractual workers from an outside company. While the voluntary arbitrator dismissed the union's unfair labor practice charge, they ruled that Goya must observe and comply with the collective bargaining agreement regarding hiring casual employees. The Court of Appeals dismissed Goya's petition challenging this. The Supreme Court then ruled that Goya's hiring of contractual employees did not comply with the intent of the collective bargaining agreement and was not a valid exercise of management prerogative, so they denied Goya's petition.

    Original Description:

    bkj

    Original Title

    Goya vs Goya

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute between Goya, Inc. and its employees union regarding Goya's hiring of contractual workers from an outside company. While the voluntary arbitrator dismissed the union's unfair labor practice charge, they ruled that Goya must observe and comply with the collective bargaining agreement regarding hiring casual employees. The Court of Appeals dismissed Goya's petition challenging this. The Supreme Court then ruled that Goya's hiring of contractual employees did not comply with the intent of the collective bargaining agreement and was not a valid exercise of management prerogative, so they denied Goya's petition.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    37 views3 pages

    Goya, Inc vs. Goya, Inc. Employees Union-Ffw G.R. No. 170054 January 21, 2013

    Uploaded by

    Dominic Embodo
    This case involves a dispute between Goya, Inc. and its employees union regarding Goya's hiring of contractual workers from an outside company. While the voluntary arbitrator dismissed the union's unfair labor practice charge, they ruled that Goya must observe and comply with the collective bargaining agreement regarding hiring casual employees. The Court of Appeals dismissed Goya's petition challenging this. The Supreme Court then ruled that Goya's hiring of contractual employees did not comply with the intent of the collective bargaining agreement and was not a valid exercise of management prerogative, so they denied Goya's petition.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    GOYA, INC vs. GOYA, INC.

    EMPLOYEES UNION-FFW
    G.R. No. 170054 January 21, 2013

    DOCTRINE:

    Thus, where the CBA is clear and unambiguous, it becomes the law between the
    parties and compliance therewith is mandated by the express policy of the law. As
    repeatedly held, the exercise of management prerogative is not unlimited; it is subject
    to the limitations found in law, collective bargaining agreement or the general
    principles of fair play and justice.

    FACTS:

    Sometime in January 2004, petitioner Goya, Inc. (Company), a domestic


    corporation engaged in the manufacture, importation, and wholesale of top quality
    food products, hired contractual employees from PESO Resources Development
    Corporation (PESO) to perform temporary and occasional services in its factory in
    Parang, Marikina City. This prompted respondent Goya, Inc. Employees Union FFW
    (Union) to request for a grievance conference on the ground that the contractual
    workers do not belong to the categories of employees stipulated in the existing
    Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). When the matter remained unresolved, the
    grievance was referred to the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB) for
    voluntary arbitration.

    The Union argued that Goya is guilty of Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) for gross
    violation of the CBA.

    VOLUNTARY ARBITRATOR:

    The voluntary arbitrator dismissed the Unions charge of ULP but Goya was
    directed to observe and comply with the CBA. While the Union moved for partial
    consideration of the VA decision, Goya immediately filed a petition for review before
    the Court of Appeals to set aside the VAs directive to observe and comply with the
    CBA commitment pertaining to the hiring of casual employees.

    COURT OF APPEALS:

    Goya argued that hiring contractual employees is a valid management


    prerogative. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition.

    ISSUE:
    Whether the act of hiring contractual employees is a valid exercise of
    management prerogative

    RULING:

    NO. The petition must fail.

    LABOR LAW: management prerogative; ULP; collective bargaining


    agreement.

    The CA did not commit serious error when it sustained the ruling that the
    hiring of contractual employees from PESO was not in keeping with the intent and
    spirit of the CBA. In this case, a complete and final adjudication of the dispute between
    the parties necessarily called for the resolution of the related and incidental issue of
    whether the Company still violated the CBA but without being guilty of ULP as,
    needless to state, ULP is committed only if there is gross violation of the agreement.
    Goya kept on harping that both the VA and the CA conceded that its engagement of
    contractual workers from PESO was a valid exercise of management prerogative. It is
    confused. To emphasize, declaring that a particular act falls within the concept of
    management prerogative is significantly different from acknowledging that such act is
    a valid exercise thereof. What the VA and the CA correctly ruled was that the
    Company’s act of contracting out/outsourcing is within the purview of management
    prerogative. Both did not say, however, that such act is a valid exercise thereof.

    Obviously, this is due to the recognition that the CBA provisions agreed upon
    by Goya and the Union delimit the free exercise of management prerogative pertaining
    to the hiring of contractual employees. A collective bargaining agreement is the law
    between the parties. A collective bargaining agreement or CBA refers to the
    negotiated contract between a legitimate labor organization and the employer
    concerning wages, hours of work and all other terms and conditions of employment
    in a bargaining unit. As in all contracts, the parties in a CBA may establish such
    stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem convenient provided
    these are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy.
    Thus, where the CBA is clear and unambiguous, it becomes the law between the
    parties and compliance therewith is mandated by the express policy of the law. As
    repeatedly held, the exercise of management prerogative is not unlimited; it is subject
    to the limitations found in law, collective bargaining agreement or the general
    principles of fair play and justice. Petition is DENIED.

    You might also like