CASE DIGEST: SAMAHANG MANGGAGAWA SA PERMEX VS SECRETARY OF LABOR

SAMAHANG MANGGAGAWA SA PERMEX

VS  

SECRETARY OF LABOR

G.R. No. 107792

[March 2, 1998]

A certification election was conducted among employees of respondent Permex Producer and Exporter Corporation with ‘No Union’ winning [NFL lost]. Later however, some employees of Permex Producer formed a labor organization known as the Samahang Manggagawa sa Permex (SMP) which they registered with the Department of Labor and Employment and then affiliatedwith the Philippine Integrated Industries Labor Union (PIILU). (SMP-PIILU) wrote the respondent company requesting recognition as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative of employees at the Permex Producer and was granted. They then entered into a CBA. A year later, NFL filed gain for a petition for certification election but was dismissed. Two arguments are put forth in support of the petition. First, it is contended that petitioner has been recognized by the majority of the employees at Permex Producer as their sole collective bargaining agent. Petitioner argues that when a group of employees constituting themselves into an organization and claiming to represent a majority of the work force requests the employer to bargain collectively, the employer may do one of two things.

First, if the employer is satisfied with the employees’ claim the employer may voluntarily recognize the union by merely bargaining collectively with it. The formal written confirmation is ordinarily stated in the collective bargaining agreement.

Second, if on the other hand, the employer refuses to recognize the union voluntarily, it may petition the Bureau of Labor Relations to conduct a certification election. If the employer does not submit a petition for certification election, the union claiming to represent the employees may submit the petition so that it may be directly certified as the employees’ representative or a certification election may be held.

HELD

Challenged decision AFFIRMED. The case of Ilaw at Buklod ng Manggagawa v. Ferrer-Calleja is particularly apropos: “. . . Ordinarily, in an unorganized establishment like the Calasiao Beer Region, it is the union that files a petition for a certification election if there is no certified bargaining agent for the workers in the establishment. If a union asks the employer to voluntarily recognize it as the bargaining agent of the employees, as the petitioner did, it in effect asks the employer to certify it as the bargaining representative of the employees — A CERTIFICATION WHICH THE EMPLOYER HAS NO AUTHORITY TO GIVE, for it is the employees’ prerogative (not the employer’s) to determine whether they want a union to represent them, and, if so, which one it should be.” In accordance with this ruling, Permex Producer should not have given its voluntary recognition to SMP-PIILU-TUCP when the latter asked for recognition as exclusive collective bargaining agent of the employees of the company. The company did not have the power to declare the union the exclusive representative of the workers for the purpose of collective bargaining. It is not enough that a union has the support of the majority of the employees. It is equally important that everyone in the bargaining unit be given the opportunity to express himself.

Effect

One Union Only

Share this:

Leave a Reply