This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2008-07-21 |
REYES, R.T., J. |
||||
| In Pantranco North Express, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[45] the Court held that Article 287 of the Labor Code "makes clear the intention and spirit of the law to give employers and employees a free hand to determine and agree upon the terms and conditions of retirement,"[46] and that the law "presumes that employees know what they want and what is good for them absent any showing that fraud or intimidation was employed to secure their consent thereto."[47] | |||||
|
2006-05-04 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| The School avers that the retirement of Llagas and Javier was clearly in accordance with a specific right granted under the CBA. The School justifies its actions by invoking our rulings in Pantranco North Express, Inc. v. NLRC[19] and Bulletin Publishing Corporation v. Sanchez[20] that no unfair labor practice is committed by management if the retirement was made in accord with management prerogative or in case of voluntary retirement, upon approval of management. | |||||