Sanyo vs. Canizares Digest & Fulltext

 

G.R. No. 101619 July 8, 1992 SANYO PHILIPPINES WORKERS UNION-PSSLU UNION-PSSLU v. !ANI"ARES, #$ %# &'('&#)y ' L'*o+ A+*#)+, ERNARO YAP, RENA/O AYON, SALAOR SOLIEL, ALLAN IS/ERIO, EGARO /ANGKAY, LEONARO IONISIO, ARNEL SALO, REYNALO RI!OHEROSO, ENI/O ALEN!IA, GERARO LASALA AN ALEANER A/ANASIO 3A!/S4 PSSLU %'5 '$ #)#$7 !A #)% S'$yo. /% !A &o$)'#$5 ' u$#o$ &u+#)y &l'u. PSSLU +o) S'$yo )%') )% (+#v') +(o$5$):(loy + $o)#;#5 )%') )%#+ ::*+%#( #)% PSSLU + &'$&ll5 ;o+ '$)#-u$#o$, '&)#v#)#, &o$o:#& '*o)'7, )%+'), &o+&#o$ '$5 #$)#:#5')#o$, 5#loy'l)y '$5 ;o+ &? o; )% L'*o+ !o5 %#&% (+ov#5 )%') &' '+##$7 ;+o: )% #$)+(+)')#o$ o+ #:(l:$)')#o$ #:(l:$)')#o$ o; )% !A %'ll * 5#(o5 o; *y )% l'*o+ '+*#)+ *y +;++#$7 )% ': )o )% 7+#v'$& :'&%#$+y '$5 volu$)'+y '+*#)+')#o$. Nv+)%l, )% L'*o+ A+*#)+ 'u:5 icoher$oso, @ario ?nsay and roilan Pla$enco. The sa$e letter letter infor$ed %anyo that that the sa$e e$ployees refused to sub$it the$selves to the unions !rievance investi!ation co$$ittee +p. 94, Rollo Rollo). ). t appears that $any of these e$ployees ere not $e$bers of P%%L' but of another union, BA@A. n ebruary 15, 1##*, so$e officers of BA@A, hich included =ap, %alvo, 0aybon, %olibel, enato 0aybon, >eynaldo >icoher$oso, %alvador %olibel, 0enito C for ille!al dis$issal. a$ed respondent ere P%%L' and %anyo. n 2une -*, 1##1, P%%L' filed a $otion to dis$iss the co$plaint alle!in! that the Labor Arbiter as ithout  urisdiction over the case, relyin! relyin! on Article Article -1; +c) of P. P.7. 7. 55-, as a$ended by %ection # of of >epublic Act Act o. ";19 hich provides that cases arisin! fro$ the interpretation or i$ple$entation of the collective bar!ainin! a!ree$ents shall be disposed of by the labor arbiter by referrin! the sa$e to the !rievance $achinery and voluntary arbitration. The co$plainants opposed the $otion to dis$iss co$plaint on these !rounds: 1) the series of conferences before the ational Conciliation and @ediation 0oard had been ter$inatedD -) the L>C Labor Arbiter had urisdiction over the case hich as a ter$ination dispute pursuant to Article Article -1; +-) of the Labor CodeD and 4) there as nothin! in the C0A hich needs interpretation or i$ple$entation +pp. 55(5", Rollo Rollo). ). n Au!ust ;, 1##1, the respondent Labor Arbiter issued the first 8uestioned order. t held that: /// /// /// &hile there are see$in!ly contradictory provisions provisions in the aforecited article of the Labor Code, the better interpretation ill be to !ive effect to both, and ter$ination dispute bein! clearly spelled as fallin! under the urisdiction of the Labor Arbiter, the the sa$e shall be respected. The urisdiction of the !rievance $achinery and voluntary arbitration shall cover other controversies. Goever, the resolution of the instant issue shall be suspended until both parties have fully presented their respective positions and the said issue shall be included in the final deter$ination of the above(captioned case. &G?>?>?, the instant @otions to 7is$iss are hereby held pendin!. Conse8uently, the parties are hereby directed to sub$it their position papers and supportin! docu$ents pursuant to %ection -, >ule ules of the Co$$ission on or before the hearin! on the $erit of this case scheduled on Au!ust -#, 1##1 at 11:** a.$. +p. -4, Rollo Rollo))

 

n Au!ust -;, 1##1, P%%L' filed another $otion to resolve $otion to dis$iss co$plaint ith a prayer that the Labor  Arbiter resolve the the issue of urisdiction. urisdiction. n %epte$ber 5, 1##1, the respondent Labor Arbiter issued the second 8uestioned order hich held that it as assu$in! urisdiction over the co$plaint of private respondents, in effect, holdin! that it had urisdiction over the case. n %epte$ber 1#, 1##1, P%%L' filed this petition alle!in! that public respondent Labor Arbiter cannot assu$e  urisdiction over the co$plaint of public respondents because it had no urisdiction urisdiction over the the dispute subect subect of said co$plaint. t is their sub$ission that under Article -1; +c) of the Labor Code, in relation to Article -"1 thereof, as ell as Policy nstruction o. " of the %ecretary of Labor, respondent Arbiter Arbiter has no urisdiction and authority to take co!niance of the co$plaint brou!ht by private respondents hich involves the i$ple$entation of the union security clause of the C0A. The function of the Labor Arbiter Arbiter under the sa$e la and rule is to refer this case to the !rievance $achinery and voluntary arbitration. n its co$$ent, private respondents ar!ue that Article -1;+a) - and 5 of the Labor Code is e/plicit, to it:  Art. -1;. 2urisdiction 2urisdiction of the Labor Labor Arbiters Arbiters and the Co$$ission. Co$$ission. a) ?/cept as otherise provided under this Code, the Labor Arbiters shall have ori!inal and e/clusive urisdiction urisdiction to hear and decide . . . the folloin! cases involvin! all orkers, . . . : /// /// /// -) Ter$ination disputes, /// /// /// 5) Clai$s for actual, $oral, e/e$plary and other for$s of da$a!es arisin! fro$ the e$ployer( e$ployee relations. The private respondents also clai$ed that insofar as %alvo, 0aybon, >icoher$oso, %olibel, A 4"3) and alays ith due process +Tropical Gut ?$ployees 'nion v. Tropical Tropical ood @arket, nc., L(545#9(##, 2an. -*, 1##*). The reference to a Erievance @achinery and A ";19 of referrin! certain !rievances ori!inally and e/clusively to the !rievance $achinery and hen not settled at this level, to a panel of voluntary arbitrators outlined in C0As does not only include !rievances arisin! fro$ the interpretation or i$ple$entation of the C0A but applies as ell to those arisin! fro$ the i$ple$entation of co$pany personnel policies. o other body shall take co!niance of these cases. The last para!raph of Article -"1 enoins other bodies fro$ assu$in! urisdiction thereof: The co$$ission, its >e!ional ffices and the >e!ional 7irectors of the 7epart$ent of Labor and ?$ploy$ent shall not entertain disputes, !rievances or $atters under the e/clusive and ori!inal  urisdiction of the the