G.R. No.
151309 October 15, 2008
BISIG MANGGAGAWA SA TRYCO and/or FRANCISCO SIQUIG, as Union
President, JOSELITO LARIÑO, VIVENCIO B. BARTE, SATURNINO EGERA and
SIMPLICIO AYA-AY, petitioners,
vs.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, TRYCO PHARMA CORPORATION,
and/or WILFREDO C. RIVERA, respondents.
Facts
Tryco, a veterinary medicine manufacturer with its main office in Caloocan City, faced
labor disputes involving its employees, who were members of Bisig Manggagawa sa
Tryco (BMT), the company's exclusive bargaining representative. Tryco and BMT had
previously agreed to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) implementing a compressed
workweek schedule. In 1997, the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI) issued a letter
reminding Tryco that its production should be carried out in San Rafael, Bulacan, rather
than in Caloocan City. In response, Tryco issued a memorandum directing its
employees to report to the Bulacan plant. BMT opposed the transfer, arguing that it
constituted unfair labor practice. Subsequently, the employees filed complaints for illegal
dismissal, underpayment of wages, nonpayment of overtime pay, and refusal to bargain.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the case, finding no constructive dismissal or unfair labor
practice, and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed this decision.
The Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the NLRC's ruling, concluding that the transfer was a
valid exercise of management prerogative.
Issues
1. Whether the transfer orders amounted to constructive dismissal.
2. Whether Tryco committed unfair labor practice.
3. Whether petitioners were entitled to their money claims.
Ruling
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the decisions of the lower courts. It
held that the transfer orders did not amount to constructive dismissal, as there was no
evidence to support the petitioners' claim that the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI) letter
was a ploy by Tryco to transfer its employees. The court underscored the company’s
right to effectively manage its business, which included transferring operations.
Furthermore, the court determined that Tryco did not commit unfair labor practice,
acknowledging that while the transfer may have caused some inconvenience to the
employees, it was not intended to undermine the union or discourage union activity. The
transfer was made in compliance with the BAI’s directive and was a valid exercise of
management prerogative. Regarding the petitioners' money claims, the court upheld the
enforceability of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), including the waiver of
overtime pay, and ruled that the petitioners were not entitled to service incentive leave
pay since they were already receiving vacation leave with pay.
Takeaways
Management prerogative: Employers have the right to manage their
businesses effectively, including the right to transfer operations.
Constructive dismissal: To establish constructive dismissal, employees must
prove that the employer's actions made their working conditions so unbearable
that they were forced to resign.
Unfair labor practice: To prove unfair labor practice, employees must show that
the employer's actions were intended to discourage union activity or discriminate
against union members.
Waiver of benefits: Employees can waive benefits in exchange for other
valuable privileges, such as a compressed workweek schedule.
