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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 94 views

    7 NATU-VS-TORRES Digest

    Uploaded by

    Yvonne Dolorosa
    This case concerns whether cashiers, controllers, and branch managers/OICs of a bank are eligible to join or assist a labor union. The court ruled that while cashiers and controllers are eligible, branch managers/OICs are not because their roles make them managerial employees based on their job descriptions and authority. Managerial employees are ineligible to unionize as they are representatives of the employer and their loyalty must remain with protecting the employer's interests in collective bargaining negotiations.

    Copyright:

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

    7 NATU-VS-TORRES Digest

    Uploaded by

    Yvonne Dolorosa
    94 views2 pages
    This case concerns whether cashiers, controllers, and branch managers/OICs of a bank are eligible to join or assist a labor union. The court ruled that while cashiers and controllers are eligible, branch managers/OICs are not because their roles make them managerial employees based on their job descriptions and authority. Managerial employees are ineligible to unionize as they are representatives of the employer and their loyalty must remain with protecting the employer's interests in collective bargaining negotiations.

    Original Description:

    labrel

    Original Title

    7_NATU-VS-TORRES_Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case concerns whether cashiers, controllers, and branch managers/OICs of a bank are eligible to join or assist a labor union. The court ruled that while cashiers and controllers are eligible, branch managers/OICs are not because their roles make them managerial employees based on their job descriptions and authority. Managerial employees are ineligible to unionize as they are representatives of the employer and their loyalty must remain with protecting the employer's interests in collective bargaining negotiations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    94 views2 pages

    7 NATU-VS-TORRES Digest

    Uploaded by

    Yvonne Dolorosa
    This case concerns whether cashiers, controllers, and branch managers/OICs of a bank are eligible to join or assist a labor union. The court ruled that while cashiers and controllers are eligible, branch managers/OICs are not because their roles make them managerial employees based on their job descriptions and authority. Managerial employees are ineligible to unionize as they are representatives of the employer and their loyalty must remain with protecting the employer's interests in collective bargaining negotiations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    NATU VS TORRES, G.R. No.

    93468 December 29, 1994

    FACTS:

    NATU filed a petition


    representative for certification
    of respondent Bank's election to determine
    employees occupyingthe exclusive bargaining
    supervisory positions.
    Bank moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the supposed supervisory
    employees were actually managerial and/or confidential employees thus ineligible to
    join, assist or form a union, and that the petition lacked the 20% signatory
    requirement under the Labor Code.

    ISSUE:

    WON theand
    Cashiers Department
    ControllersManagers, Assistant
    of respondent Bank Managers, Branch
    are managerial Managers/OICs,
    and/or confidential
    employees hence ineligible to join or assist the union of petitioner.

    RULING

    YES, but only


    Republic the Branch
    Planters Managers/OICs,
    Bank are ineligible toCashiers
    join orand Controllers
    assist of respondent
    petitioner National
    Association of Trade Unions (NATU)-Republic Planters Bank Supervisors Chapter,
    or join, assist or form any other labor organization.

    Art 212 (m) of the Labor Code

    explicitly
    powers or stated that “A
    prerogatives managerial
    to lay down andemployee is (a) one who
    execute management is vested
    policies, with
    or to hire,
    transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees; or
    (b) one who is vested with both powers or prerogatives. A supervisory employee
    is different from a managerial employee in the sense that the supervisory
    employee, in the interest of the employer, effectively recommends such
    managerial actions, if the exercise of such managerial authority is not routinary
    in nature but requires the use of independent judgment.”

    It is the
    given to nature
    his job,ofwhich
    the employee's
    determinesfunctions,
    whether and not rank-and-file,
    he has the nomenclature or title
    supervisory
    or managerial status.

    Among theand
    his duties general dutieswith
    authority andaresponsibilities of a Branch Manager
    high sense of responsibility is "[t]o
    and integrity anddischarge
    shall at
    all times be guided by prudence like a good father of the family, and sound judgment
    in accordance with and within the limitations of the policy/policies promulgated by the
    Board of Directors and implemented by the Management until suspended, superseded,
    revoked or modified". Similarly, the job summary of a Controller states: "Supervises
    the Accounting Unit of the branch; sees to the compliance by the Branch with
    established procedures, policies, rules and regulations of the Bank and external
    supervising authorities; sees to the strict implementation of control procedures. The
    job description of a Cashier does not mention any authority on his part to lay down
    policies, either.

    Subject employees
    established policies do not participate
    to execute in policy-making
    and standard practices tobut are given
    observe, approved
    leaving little orand
    no
    discretion at all whether to implement said policies or not. Neither do the Branch
    Managers, Cashiers and Controllers have the power to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off,
    recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees. The Senior Manager of the Human
    Resource Management Department of respondent Bank, in her affidavit, stated that
    “…Mr. Renato A. Tuates, the Officer-in-Charge/Branch Cashier of the Bank's
    Dumaguete Branch, placed under preventive suspension and thereafter terminated
    the teller of the same branch . . . .
    Likewise, on February
    International 22, 1989,
    Department, Mr. Francis
    assigned Robite,
    the cable Sr., theof Officer-in-Charge
    assistant the Internationalof
    Department as the concurrent FCDU Accountable Forms Custodian."

    While Art. 245


    join, assist or of the any
    form Laborlabor
    Codeorganization,
    singles out managerial
    under the employees
    doctrine as
    of ineligible
    necessary to
    implication, confidential employees are similarly disqualified.

    RATIONALE of RULE:

    In the
    side of collective bargaining
    the employer, process,
    to act as managerial employees
    its representatives, and to seeare
    to supposed to be on the
    it that its interests are
    well protected. The employer is not assured of such protection if these employees
    themselves are union members. Similarly, if confidential employees could unionize in
    order to bargain for advantages for themselves, then they could be governed by their
    own motives rather than the interest of the employers. Moreover, unionization of
    confidential employees for the purpose of collective bargaining would mean the
    extension of the law to persons or individuals who are supposed to act "in the interest
    of" the employers. It is not farfetched that in the course of collective bargaining, they
    might jeopardize that interest which they are duty-bound to protect.

    You might also like