Labor Law Digest

G.R. Nos.
171594-96, September 18, 2013
ASIA BREWERY, INC., Petitioner, v. TUNAY NA PAGKAKAISA NG MGA

MANGGAGAWA SA ASIA (TPMA), Respondent.
Facts:
 [Respondent union] Tunay Na Pagkakaisa ng mga Manggagawa sa Asia

(TPMA) is a legitimate labor organization, certified as the sole and
exclusive bargaining agent of all regular rank and file employees of
[petitioner corporation] Asia Brewery, Incorporated (ABI).
 The [petitioner corporation], on the other hand, is a company engaged

in the manufacture, sale and distribution of beer, shandy, glass and
bottled water products.
 The parties had been negotiating for a new CBA for the years 2003-2006
since the old CBA expired on July 2003. After about 18 sessions or
negotiations, the parties were still unable to reconcile their differences
on their respective positions on most items, particularly on wages and
other economic benefits.
 On October 21, 2003, TPMA declared deadlock and thereafter filed a

notice of strike with the NCMB but did not come to terms even before the
Board.
 On November 18, 2003, TPMA conducted a strike vote. Out of the 840
union members, 768 voted in favor of holding a strike.
 On November 20, 2003, Asia Brewery then petitioned the Secretary of

DOLE to assume jurisdiction over the parties’ labor dispute, invoking
Article 263 (g) of the Labor Code. TPMA opposed the assumption of
jurisdiction on the ground that the business of Asia Brewery is not
indispensable to the national interest.
 On December 2, 2003, TPMA filed before the CA enjoining the Secretary

of DOLE from assuming jurisdiction.
 On December 19,2003, Secretary of DOLE issued an order assuming

jurisdiction over the labor dispute on the ground that it affects national
interest. The decision resolved the deadlock and granted arbitral awards
based on unaudited financial statements.
CA Decision: Affirmed with modification the arbitral award of the Secretary

of Labor and remanded the case to the Secretary as to the issue of wage
increases basing on the company’s financial statements.
Issues/Ruling:
1. Whether or not the Secretary of Labor gravely abused its

discretion in awarding wage increase?
- YES. Jurisprudence state that the Statement of Profit and Losses to

prove its alleged losses, without the accompanying signature of a certified
public accountant or audited by an independent auditor, are nothing but
self-serving documents which ought to be treated as a mere scrap of paper
devoid of any probative value. Not only did this violate the December 19,
2003 Order of the Secretary of Labor herself to petitioner corporation to
submit its complete audited financial statements, but this may have resulted
to a wage award that is based on an inaccurate and biased picture of
petitioner corporation's capacity to pay — one of the more significant factors
in making a wage award. Thus, we rule that the Secretary of Labor gravely
abused her discretion when she relied on the unaudited financial statements
of petitioner corporation in determining the wage award because such
evidence is self-serving and inadmissible.
2. Whether it was proper to the remand of the case to the Secretary

of labor as to the issue of wage increase.
-YES. The Supreme Court has recognized the Secretary of Labor’s distinct
expertise in the study and settlement of labor disputes falling under his
compulsory arbitration. It is also well-settled that factual finding of labor
administrative officials, if supported by substantial evidence, are entitled
not only to great respect but even to finality. The appellate court, thus,
correctly remanded this case to the Secretary of Labor for the proper
determination of the wage award which should utilize, among others, the
audited financial statements of petitioner corporation and state with
sufficient clarity the facts and law on which the wage award is based.
Ratio: In cases of compulsory arbitration before the Secretary of labor

pursuant to Article 263(g) of the labor Code, the financial statements of the
employer must be properly audited by an external and independent auditor
in order to be admissible in evidence for purposes of determining the proper
wage award.

Labor Law Digest

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Labor Law Digest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Labor Law Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. Nos.

171594-96, September 18, 2013

ASIA BREWERY, INC., Petitioner, v. TUNAY NA PAGKAKAISA NG MGA

 [Respondent union] Tunay Na Pagkakaisa ng mga Manggagawa sa Asia

 The [petitioner corporation], on the other hand, is a company engaged

 On October 21, 2003, TPMA declared deadlock and thereafter filed a

 On November 20, 2003, Asia Brewery then petitioned the Secretary of

 On December 2, 2003, TPMA filed before the CA enjoining the Secretary

 On December 19,2003, Secretary of DOLE issued an order assuming

CA Decision: Affirmed with modification the arbitral award of the Secretary

1. Whether or not the Secretary of Labor gravely abused its

- YES. Jurisprudence state that the Statement of Profit and Losses to

2. Whether it was proper to the remand of the case to the Secretary

Ratio: In cases of compulsory arbitration before the Secretary of labor

You might also like