General Milling Corporation v. Torres
NEW DOCTRINEFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner General Milling Corporation (GMC) secured an Alien Employment Permit (AEP) for petitioner Earl Timothy Cone, a US citizen, as a sports consultant and assistant coach. Subsequently, Cone's admission status was changed to pre-arranged employee, and GMC requested renewal of his AEP, seeking to employ him as a full-fledged coach. The DOLE Regional Director granted this request, and a new AEP was issued. Procedural History: Private respondent Basketball Coaches Association of the Philippines (BCAP) appealed the AEP issuance. The Secretary of Labor ordered the cancellation of Cone's permit, citing the lack of showing that no competent, able, and willing Filipino could perform the services, nor that Cone's hiring would redound to the national interest. The Acting Secretary of Labor denied GMC's motions for reconsideration. The Petition: Petitioners filed a Petition for Certiorari, alleging grave abuse of discretion by the Secretary of Labor in revoking the AEP and assailing the validity of Section 6(c), Rule XIV, Book I of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code for allegedly exceeding the Labor Code's mandate by allowing the Secretary to determine national interest.
Issue(s)
Whether the respondent Secretary of Labor gravely abused his discretion when he revoked petitioner Cone's alien employment permit. Whether Section 6(c), Rule XIV, Book I of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code is null and void for allegedly violating the enabling law by empowering the Secretary of Labor to determine if the employment of an alien would redound to the national interest; and whether the petition is moot.
Ruling
The Court Resolved to DISMISS the Petition for certiorari for lack of merit. Costs against petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi
On the alleged grave abuse of discretion: The Court found no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Secretary of Labor. The alleged failure to notify petitioners of BCAP's appeal was deemed cured by their subsequent filing of a Motion for Reconsideration. Furthermore, GMC's claim that hiring a foreign coach is an employer's prerogative was dismissed, as Article 40 of the Labor Code requires an employment permit from the DOLE. The Court also clarified that Norman Black, cited for comparison, was a long-time resident and thus not subject to the same provisions as non-resident aliens. On the validity of Section 6(c), Rule XIV, Book I of the Omnibus Rules and the mootness of the petition: The Court held that the Secretary of Labor is indeed empowered to assess whether the employment of an alien would redound to the national interest. While Article 40 of the Labor Code states that an employment permit may be issued after a determination of the non-availability of a competent Filipino worker, the permissive language indicates the exercise of discretion. Moreover, Article 12 of the Labor Code mandates the Secretary to consider objectives such as facilitating free choice of employment and regulating alien employment in conformity with the national interest. Therefore, the implementing rule's inclusion of the national interest assessment is consistent with the Labor Code's objectives and does not exceed the Secretary's authority. Although petitioners manifested that an employment permit had been issued, reversing the earlier decision, the Court found it necessary to resolve the issues raised due to the nature of the questions presented. The basis for the reversal was not on record, and if based on a different legal interpretation, it could be subject to serious legal objections. Thus, the Court proceeded to dismiss the petition on its merits.
Main Doctrine
The Secretary of Labor has the discretion to determine whether the employment of an alien would redound to the national interest, and this authority is derived from the objectives set forth in Article 12 of the Labor Code, which include facilitating free choice of employment in conformity with the national interest and regulating the employment of aliens.