You are on page 1of 2

www.howardscasedigests.webs.

com

G.R. No. 161933: STANDARD CHARTERED BANK EMPLOYEES UNION (SCBEU-


NUBE) vs STANDARD CHARTERED BANK and ANNEMARIE DURBIN, in her
capacity as Chief Executive Officer, Philippines
22 April 2008 l Labor Standards
Confidential Employees – Exclusion as Appropriate Bargaining Unit

The 1998-2000 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the Standard Chartered Bank
employees Union and the Standard Chartered Bank expired so the parties tried to
renew it but then a deadlock ensued. Under the old CBA, the following are excluded as
appropriate bargaining unit:

A. All covenanted and assistant officers (now called National Officers)

B. One confidential secretary of each of the:

1. Chief Executive, Philippine Branches

2. Deputy Chief Executive/Head, Corporate Banking Group

3. Head, Finance

4. Head, Human Resources

5. Manager, Cebu

6. Manager, Iloilo

7. Covenanted Officers provided said positions shall be filled by new


recruits.

C. The Chief Cashiers and Assistant Cashiers in Manila, Cebu and Iloilo, and in
any other branch that the BANK may establish in the country.

D. Personnel of the Telex Department

E. All Security Guards

F. Probationary employees, without prejudice to Article 277 (c) of the Labor


Code, as amended by R.A. 6715, casuals or emergency employees; and

G. One (1) HR Staff


1

But then in the renewal sought by SCBEU-NUBE, they only wanted the exclusion to
Page

apply only to the following employees from the appropriate bargaining unit – all
www.howardscasedigests.webs.com

managers who are vested with the right to hire and fire employees, confidential
employees, those with access to labor relations materials, Chief Cashiers, Assistant
Cashiers, personnel of the Telex Department and one Human Resources (HR) staff.

SCBEU-NUBE also averred that employees assigned in an acting capacity for at least a
week should be given salary raise.

A notice of strike was given to the Department of Labor due to this deadlock. Then
DOLE Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas issued an order dismissing the Union’s plea.

ISSUE: Whether or not the confidential employees sought to be removed from the
exclusion as appropriate bargaining unit by SCBEU-NUBE holds ground.

HELD: No. Whether or not the employees sought to be excluded from the appropriate
bargaining unit are confidential employees is a question of fact, which is not a proper
issue in a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. SCBEU-NUBE insists
that the foregoing employees are not confidential employees; however, it failed to
buttress its claim. Aside from its generalized arguments, and despite the Secretary's
finding that there was no evidence to support it, SCBEU-NUBE still failed to substantiate
its claim. SCBEU-NUBE did not even bother to state the nature of the duties and
functions of these employees, depriving the Court of any basis on which it may be
concluded that they are indeed confidential employees.

With regards to the salary increase of employees in acting capacities, the Supreme
Court agreed with the Court of Appeals that a restrictive provision would curtail
management's prerogative, and at the same time, recognized that employees should
not be made to work in an acting capacity for long periods of time without adequate
compensation. The usual rule that “employees in acting capacities for at least a month
should be given salary raise” is upheld.

2
Page

You might also like