8/6/2019 kawashima cse

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kawashima-cse 1/6

8/6/2019 kawashima cse

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kawashima-cse 2/6

8/6/2019 kawashima cse

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kawashima-cse 3/6

8/6/2019 kawashima cse

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kawashima-cse 4/6

8/6/2019 kawashima cse

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kawashima-cse 5/6

8/6/2019 kawashima cse

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kawashima-cse 6/6

the employees in their collective bargaining with the employer. [63] The choice of their representative is the exclusive concern of the employees; the employer cannot have

any partisan interest therein; it cannot interfere with, much less oppose, the process by

filing a motion to dismiss or an appeal from it;[64] not even a mere allegation that some

employees participating in a petition for certification election are actually managerial

employees will lend an employer legal personality to block the certificationelection.[65] The employer's only

right in the proceeding is to be notified or informed thereof. [66] 

The amendments to the Labor Code and its implementing rules have buttressed that

  policy even more.

WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The December 13, 2002 Decision and

October 7, 2003 Resolution of the Court of Appeals and the May 17, 2000 Order of Med-Arbiter Anastacio L. Bactin are REVERSED and SET  ASIDE, while the

August 18, 2000 Decision and September 28, 2000 Resolution of the Department of Labor and Employment are REINSTATED.

  No costs.

SO ORDERED.