8/6/2019 Labor Econ Case Study

1/2

1Submitted by:Marie Sachie Mitsui P. Turiano

Case Study 1: Gamma Philippines, Inc.

AB Economics III

Labor Economics

GAMMA PHILIPPINES, INC.Case Study 1

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

The entity involved is Gamma Philippines, Inc., a branch of a worldwide producer of medicine ordrugs whose mother company is located in Switzerland. Gamma Philippines, Inc. however does not go

into actual making or processing of the drugs. Instead, it reprocesses and repacks drugs shipped from

Switzerland, where the actual processing and manufacturing are done. Reprocessing and repacking are

jobs done by the companys production department.

The production department of Gamma Philippines, Inc. is where the case revolves, headed by

the Production Manager, Mrs. Abigail Santos. She is assisted by eight subordinates: a warehouse

supervisor, four area leaders, and three quality control leaders. This department is where the drugs like

tablets or capsules are repacked one-by-one in labeled aluminum foils.

These four areas are classified into Sample area, Trade 1 Area, Trade 2 Area and Redressing

Area.Each area having distinct assigned tasks abides by the company policies:a) to reach not lower thansix hundred pieces per product or per tablet as the case may be.However, it can be altered to suit the

capacity of the employees; b) to settle unsolved issues among employees in closed doors, in the

presence of the production manager; c)to be extra cautious during work since medicines are delicate

products to handle; d) to pass through daily and at times on-the-spot inspections by the security guards,

where being caught from hiding drugs is subject to immediate termination; and e)to abide by the proper

breaktime periods of the company.

LABOR ISSUE

The person subject to ruling is Eula Mojica, the group leader of Trade 1 Area, which is in charge

of repacking the drugs for sale in the market. She has been working well in the company for eight years.

However, the production manager herself claims the destruction of cooperation among

employees in the department created by her subordinate, Eula Mojica. The following appeals were laid

by the production manager and other employees within the department: a) the employeecreates an

unharmonious work environment among employees through brutal frankness and intrigues that she

informs the production manager from time to time, even accusations to some employees without

proofs; b) the employee imposes too much workload on her subordinates and even preventing them if

possible, from taking snacks on break time hours to surpass the quota; c) with the employees area

(Trade 1 Area) surpassing the quota almost every day, reconciling output from different areas for

uniformity has become difficult after, resulting to the extent of Mrs. Santos doctoring the

results.Moreover, the challenged imposed by the employee to other area leaders have caused too much

workload and pressure among the work teams; d)the employee have causedanother employee, Jorge, a

pending case of termination after shedenies the fact of her ordering of a wrong instruction to her group

member, Jorge- that instead of labeling the sealed boxes with 50x10, the boxes be labeled 40x10.

It is of clear understanding that Eula Mojicahas ethics and conduct issues that reflected potential

conflict within the department workplace. With such misconduct,she failed to avoid latentclash of

8/6/2019 Labor Econ Case Study

2/2

2Submitted by:Marie Sachie Mitsui P. Turiano

Case Study 1: Gamma Philippines, Inc.

AB Economics III

Labor Economics

interest and personal gain or any appearance of a conflict or impropriety, makingher subordinates aswell as work team working beyond quotas but suffering within a work environment with destructedcooperation among employees.(The employee preventing her subordinates from taking break timesnacks is a violation to human rights, considering one of the companys policies which deal with breaktimes. It must be noted that any worker in order to function efficiently needs rest, which shall assuretheir health welfare.)

This scenario has even resulted to the production managers misdemeanor, by doctoringresults. One notable conflict that needs resolution is the latest issue where the person subject to rulingbecomes the appealing party, where despite the fact of her mistake, she denies the fact and appealsfor the termination of her subordinate, deemed only to follow her orders.

RESOLUTION

One legal step to resolve Eula Mojicasworkplace disruption of cooperation through misconductis bythe companys labor policy. The Production Manager as the department head and arbitratorherselfmust initiate a closed door meeting with all the department employeesincluding the person subject toruling.The closed door meeting shall aim to address all unsolved issues within the workplace,benefiting both parties- Eula Mojica and the rest of the department employees. Furthermore, with theProduction Manager taking no side as an arbitrator must make sure that the meeting shall end up with

a condition where all employees will benefit and the company policies and interest will be upheld. EulaMojica must then be given the chance to correct her misbehavior and must be carefully evaluated byall other employees as agreed upon. This shall serve as her path to disciplinary action, if she breachesthe terms that were supposed to solve the workplace conflict. Suspension may be an option if EulaMojica would still appear to act against the terms already set during the meeting.

On the other hand, the second issue is more critical. Jorge as a subordinate has the right toprove himself clear from the accusation and appeal of Mojicaalthough he has the burden of proof.Aclearer view of the scenario can be done with more careful investigation, which can be done in favor of

both parties by the department head.