INDOPHIL TEXTILE petitioner, vs. VOLUNTARY ARBI INDOPHIL TEXTILE Romeo C. Lagman f Borreta, Gutierrez & Mills, Inc. MEDIALDEA, J.: This is a petition fo award issued by the P. Calica dated Dec Article I of the Co Indophil Textile Mil Union-PTGWO doe Acrylic Manufactur expansion of Indoph The antecedent fact Petitioner Indophil legitimate labor o Department of Lab bargaining agent of Textile Mills, Incorpo impleaded in his off the National Con Department of L respondent Indophil in the manufacture, and kinds and of m plants at Barrio Lam In April, 1987, petit PTGWO and priva executed a collect April 1, 1987 to Mar On November 3, Corporation was for Exchange Commis registration with the the 1987 Omnibus approved on a prefe In 1988, Acrylic b according to its own 1989, the workers collective bargaining In 1990 or a year unionized and a CB that the plant facilit considered as an e private respondent C of the CBA, to wit,. c) This Agreement s and installations an (Rollo, p.4) In other words, it is part of the Indophil b The petitioner's cont which submits that from Acrylic. The existing impass to enter into a subm The parties jointly r voluntary arbitrator dispute pertaining provision. After the parties sub replies, the public re award on Decembe provides as follows: PREMISES CONS interpretation and a if we would extend clause of Indophil T made to the effe application of Sec. extend to the em expansion of Indoph Hence, this petition 1. WHETHER OR ERRED IN INTERP CBA BETWEEN PE COMPANY. 2. WHETHER OR N AND DISTINCT EN FOR PURPOSES O 3. WHETHER OR GRAVELY ABUSE LACK OR IN EXCES 4. WHETHER OR VIOLATED PETITI RIGHT TO DUE PR The central issue su operations in Indoph expansion of privat aforementioned issu rank-and-file employ recognized as par bargaining unit. Petitioner maintains erred in interpreting literal meaning witho that the creation o devise of responden CBA between petitio Petitioner stresses t corporations establi same kind of busine yarns of various co kindred character or Contrary to petitio through the Solicito Manufacturing Corp business conduit o separate legitimate General alleges that is to engage in the b counts and kinds an purpose of Indophi wholesale basis, ba yarns of various c respondent, Indophi private respondent c Furthermore, petitio have practically the In fact, of the tota P1,749,970.00 whic total subscription o respondent Compan On this point, priva Labor Federation v. 1980, 10l SCRA 534 be treated as a sing are related. It subm bargaining units as of companies is a p with a legal person separate from other Petitioner notes th establish that Acry private respondent, (a) the two corporat facilities situated in Marilao, Bulacan; (b) many of private dyeing machines, were transferred to the Acrylic plant; (c) the services of a of private responden (d) the employees o manning and servic 13) Private respondent business relationshi is not a proof of be services which are auxiliary services or the actual productio essential services personnel under t managers and supe In sum, petitioner in grave abuse of disc jurisdiction in errone in failing to disregard We find the petition Time and again, W arbitrators are to be measure of finality, not preclude judicia grave abuse of disc substantial justice, o brought to our atten Relations Commiss Division Minute Res v. Romero, G.R. No It should be empha award, the voluntary the U.P. Asian Lab Industrial Relation jurisprudence on respondent's conte public respondent ci the award. Hence discretion. Under the doctrine o valid grounds the corporation is an e and distinct from disregarded. In such as a mere asso stockholders of the corporation, that is and stockholders. T fiction is used to d protect fraud, or def to confuse the legiti mere alter ego or b corporation is so or so conducted as to conduit or adjunct o of Appeals, G.R. No 529, 542) In the case at ba corporate entity of corporation is a de between petitioner While we do not di the businesses of p we inclined to app granting the relief private respondent employees of the p manning and provid Acrylic, and that the situated in the sam that these facts are corporate veil of Acr In the same case o We already empha disregarded only i stockholders directly In the instant case, against the member Furthermore, We al Federation Local 11 grave abuse of disc bargaining unit whe entities with separat Hence, the Acrylic private respondent, Acrylic should not b scope of the petitio private respondent. All premises conside respondent Voluntar discretion in its inte CBA that the Acry private respondent. ACCORDINGLY, th respondent Voluntar SO ORDERED. Narvasa, C.J., Cruz The Lawphil Project - Arella