Is Government Pro-Labor or Pro-Management?

When I was still connected with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), I did a personal experiment. I conducted an informal survey among the businessmen and labor leaders that I had the chance to meet and talk with during official and social occasions. I asked them only one (1) question, and that is, whether they think the government, the NLRC and the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) in particular, is pro-labor or pro-management. I was only able to survey about 25 businessmen, 10 union officials, and at least 10 assertive workers.

Almost all the businessmen I surveyed strongly believed that the government is pro-labor. On the other hand, almost all the labor sector representatives I asked replied that the government is totally pro-management. Surprised?

I guess when the government tries to please everyone it ends up pleasing no one. And this is quite true in labor-management relations, especially when there is already a labor dispute. It’s a win-lose scenario for the triumphant and defeated litigants. Often times, it’s a lose-lose situation because of the substantial amount of money and other resources spent and the length of time that elapsed before finality or satisfaction of judgment, not to mention the terrible mental and emotional stress that accompany every case under litigation. Just imagine, your case is initially heard and decided by a labor arbiter, whose decision is appealable to the NLRC commission proper, whose decision, in turn, may still be challenged before the Court of Appeals, which however is subject to the final review powers of the Supreme Court. It’s a four (4)-tiered process, which can take years, sometimes more than ten (10) years.

Even when the parties enter into compromise, the hype is that it’s a win-win solution, but in reality, the aggrieved party, whether it’s the employer or the employee, believes that he was somehow denied justice. Why? Because the aggrieved employer thinks he actually owes nothing to his employee and yet he was still made to pay in order to buy peace; while the aggrieved employee believes that, under the law, he is entitled to much more than what he actually received under the compromise agreement. Thus, government policies encouraging, or even advocating, amicable settlement in labor disputes is viewed with suspicion by either side, more particularly by the party who firmly believes in the strength of his case and the justness of his cause.    

Some of the businessmen I interviewed were actually my friends, and so I felt that I had some explaining to do since I was then an NLRC official. I reasoned that the government tries very hard to be impartial and fair to both management and labor sectors. However, the laws and policies that we were tasked to implement and enforce are pro-labor. I would even venture that government is inherently pro-management. But our hands were tied because of the laws protecting labor. You don’t believe me?

Just look at the facts. We are not ruled by a communist party, nor do we consider ourselves as a socialist state. We have an economy patterned after the American capitalist model. Privately-owned enterprises (instead of state-owned) are our primary engines of growth and progress. Private ownership (instead of communal ownership) of capital, whether land, building, machinery, investment money, and other means of revenue or income generation or production, is totally allowed and fully protected. The Filipino’s dream and quest for profit, acquisition, accumulation, and expansion is encouraged in an environment of free competition and open market as a means to generate more and better employment opportunities, increase the supply and improve the quality and delivery of goods and services, promote new and better technologies, lower the prices, and in general, improve the quality of life for all.

Under the capitalist system, who is the economic (and therefore the political) elite? In Tagalog, sino ang bida? Of course, it’s the capitalists, the entrepreneurs, the business-owners, including the hacienderos and big land owners, and the managers (as well as the politicians) who represent them or their interests. Need I say more? Sometimes, it is not good to overstress the obvious.

But within this backdrop, we have many laws likes Article 4 of the Labor Code which provides: “All doubts in the implementation and interpretation of the provisions of this Code, including its implementing rules and regulations, shall be resolved in favor of labor.” We also have many Supreme Court decisions, among them are the cases that essentially rule that it is the defendant-employer who must prove by substantial evidence his defenses against the claims of the complainant-employee who, however, need not prove his bare allegations. 

Hence, my fearless conclusion: The government is inherently pro-management. It is just that we have too many laws and policies that are pro-labor…

[Atty. Pol is the Managing Partner of Parungao, Sangalang & Gapasin, Lawyers, 2180 Chino Roces Ave., Makati City, Tel. 892-1442; former Executive Director, NLRC; graduate, U.P. College of Law. Email: apollosangalang@lawyer.com]