CASE DIGEST: TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS INTERNATIONAL GOLF CLUB INC v. TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS EMPLOYEES UNION-PGTWO

TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS INTERNATIONAL GOLF CLUB INC

VS

TAGAYTAY HIGHLANDS EMPLOYEES UNION-PGTWO

 395 SCRA 699

[January 22, 2003]

NATURE

Petition for Certiorari under Rule 45 THIGCI assailing CA decision denying its petition to annul the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Resolutions of November 12, 1998 and December 29, 1998

FACTS

-October 16, 1997 > Tagaytay Highlands Employees Union (THEU), Philippine Transport and General Workers Organization (PTGWO), Local Chapter No. 776, a legitimate labor organization said to represent majority of the rank-and-file employees of THIGCI, filed a petition for certification election before the DOLE Mediation-Arbitration Unit, Regional Branch No. IV

-November 27, 1997 > opposed petition for certification election because the list of union members submitted by it was defective and fatally flawed as it included the names and signatures of supervisors, resigned, terminated and absent without leave (AWOL) employees, as well as employees of The Country Club, Inc., a corporation distinct and separate from THIGCI; and that out of the 192 signatories to the petition, only 71 were actual rank-and-file employees of THIGCI. Also, some of the signatures in the list of union members were secured through fraudulent and deceitful means, and submitted copies of the handwritten denial and withdrawal of some of its employees from participating in the petition.

-THEU asserted that it complied with all the requirements for valid affiliation and inclusion in the roster of legitimate labor organizations pursuant to DOLE Department Order No. 9, series of 1997, on account of which it was duly granted a Certification of Affiliation by DOLE on October 10, 1997; and that Section 5, Rule V of said Department Order provides that the legitimacy of its registration cannot be subject to collateral attack, and for as long as there is no final order of cancellation, it continues to enjoy the rights accorded to a legitimate organization. Therefore, the Med-Arbiter should, pursuant to Article 257 of the Labor Code and Section 11, Rule XI of DOLE Department Order No. 09, automatically order the conduct of a certification election.

-January 28, 1998 > DOLE Med-Arbiter Anastacio Bactin ordered the holding of a certification election

-DOLE Resolution of November 12, 19981 > setting aside the June 4, 1998 Resolution dismissing the petition for certification election. MFR denied

-CA -denied THIGCI’s Petition for Certiorari and affirmed the DOLE Resolution dated November 12, 1998. It held that while a petition for certification election is an exception to the innocent bystander rule, hence, the employer may pray for the dismissal of such petition on the basis of lack of mutuality of interests of the members of the union as well as lack of employer-employee relationship and petitioner failed to adduce substantial evidence to support its allegations.

ISSUE

WON the withdrawal of some union members from the certification election will affect the result

HELD:

NO

-As for petitioner’ s allegation that some of the signatures in the petition for certification election were obtained through fraud, false statement and misrepresentation, the proper procedure is, as reflected above, for it to file a petition for cancellation of the certificate of registration, and not to intervene in a petition for certification election. Regarding the alleged withdrawal of union members from participating in the certification election, this Court’s following ruling is instructive:

“T]he best forum for determining whether there were indeed retractions from some of the laborers is in the certification election itself wherein the workers can freely express their choice in a secret ballot. Suffice it to say that the will of the rank-and-file employees should in every possible instance be determined by secret ballot rather than by administrative or quasi-judicial inquiry. Such representation and certification election cases are not to be taken as contentious litigations for suits but as mere investigations of a non-adversary, fact-finding character as to which of the competing unions represents the genuine choice of the workers to be their sole and exclusive collective bargaining representative with their employer.”

Disposition

Petition is DENIED. Let the records of the case be remanded to the office of origin, the Mediation-Arbitration Unit, Regional Branch No. IV, for the immediate conduct of a certification election subject to the usual pre-election conference.