Myline Cordial

FACTS: All company factory workers of Sime Darby Pilipinas, Inc., manufacturer of automotive tires, tubes and other rubber products,  in Marikina including members of private respondent union, Sime Darby Salaried Employees Association (ALU-TUCP),  worked from 7:45 a.m. to 3:45 p.m. with a 30-minute paid on-call lunch break. On August 14, 1992, the petitioner issued a memorandum to all factory-based employees advising all its monthly salaried employees in its Marikina Tire Plant a change in work schedule. The new schedule extends to 9 hours with two 10-minute paid coffee break and 1-hour unpaid and undisturbed lunch break. The Warehouse and Quality Assurance Department working on shifts, are excluded from this change in work schedule.

Private respondent, which is an association of monthly salaried employees of petitioner at its Marikina factory, filed on behalf of its members a complaint with the Labor Arbiter for unfair labor practice, discrimination and evasion of liability.

The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint on the ground that the change in the work schedule and the elimination of the 30-minute paid lunch break of the factory workers constituted a valid exercise of management prerogative and that the new work schedule, break time and one-hour lunch break did not have the effect of diminishing the benefits granted to factory workers as the working time did not exceed eight (8) hours.

NLRC sustained the decision of Labor Arbiter but upon motion for reconsideration by private respondent, the NLRC, having two new commissioners, reversed its earlier decision.

ISSUE: Whether or not the act of management in revising the work schedule of its employees and eliminating their paid lunch break constitutes unfair labor practice?

RULING: The Court held that the employer has the right to exercise its management prerogatives. Management is free to regulate, according to its own discretion and judgment, all aspects of employment, including hiring, work assignments, working methods, time, place and manner of work, processes to be followed, supervision of workers, working regulations, transfer of employees, work supervision, lay off of workers and discipline, dismissal and recall of workers. Management retains the prerogative, whenever exigencies of the service so require, to change the working hours of its employees. So long as such prerogative is exercised in good faith for the advancement of the employers interest and not for the purpose of defeating or circumventing the rights of the employees under special laws or under valid agreements.

In this case, the new work schedule set by the employer fully complies with the daily work period of eight (8) hours without violating the Labor Code. Although the old work schedule included a 30-minute paid lunch break, the employees were on call and could be called upon to do jobs during lunch break. With the new schedule, they can take one-hour lunch break without any interruption from their employer.

Moreover, this act was not discriminatory as the new schedule applies to all employees in the factory similarly situated whether they are union members or not.