Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PHILIPS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT v. NLRC

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 164301 2010-08-10	BPI v. BPI EMPLOYEES UNION-DAVAO CHAPTER LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The other cases cited in Justice Carpio's dissent on this point are likewise inapplicable. Basa v. Federacion Obrera de la Industria Tabaquera y Otros Trabajadores de Filipinas,[44] Anucension v. National Labor Union,[45] and Gonzales v. Central Azucarera de Tarlac Labor Union[46] all involved members of the INK. In line with Victoriano, these cases upheld the INK members' claimed exemption from the union security clause on religious grounds. In the present case, the former FEBTC employees never claimed any religious grounds for their exemption from the Union Shop Clause. As for Philips Industrial Development, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Corporation[47] and Knitjoy Manufacturing, Inc. v. Ferrer-Calleja,[48] the employees who were exempted from joining the respondent union or who were excluded from participating in the certification election were found to be not members of the bargaining unit represented by respondent union and were free to form/join their own union. In the case at bar, it is undisputed that the former FEBTC employees were part of the bargaining unit that the Union represented. Thus, the rulings in Philips and Knitjoy have no relevance to the issues at hand.
	GR No. 162025 2010-08-03	TUNAY NA PAGKAKAISA NG MANGGAGAWA SA ASIA BREWERY v. ASIA BREWERY VILLARAMA, JR., J.
In Philips Industrial Development, Inc. v. NLRC,[17] this Court held that petitioner's "division secretaries, all Staff of General Management, Personnel and Industrial Relations Department, Secretaries of Audit, EDP and Financial Systems" are confidential employees not included within the rank-and-file bargaining unit.[18] Earlier, in Pier 8 Arrastre & Stevedoring Services, Inc. v. Roldan-Confesor,[19] we declared that legal secretaries who are tasked with, among others, the typing of legal documents, memoranda and correspondence, the keeping of records and files, the giving of and receiving notices, and such other duties as required by the legal personnel of the corporation, fall under the category of confidential employees and hence excluded from the bargaining unit composed of rank-and-file employees.[20]
	GR No. 161933 2008-04-22	STANDARD CHARTERED BANK EMPLOYEES UNION v. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Finally, in Philips Industrial Development, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[20] the Court designated personnel staff, in which human resources staff may be qualified, as confidential employees because by the very nature of their functions, they assist and act in a confidential capacity to, or have access to confidential matters of, persons who exercise managerial functions in the field of labor relations.