1/12/2016

G.R.No.L48347

TodayisTuesday,January12,2016

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
SECONDDIVISION
G.R.No.L48347October3,1978
SCOUTRAMONV.ALBANOMEMORIALCOLLEGE,petitioner,
vs.
HON.CARMELOC.NORIEL,andFEDERATIONOFFREEWORKERS(ScoutRamonV.AlbanoMemorial
CollegeChapter),respondents.
MartinianoA.Valdisimoforpetitioner.
JaimeD.Lauronforprivaterespondent.
SolicitorGeneralEstelitoP.MendozaAssistantSolicitorGeneralReynatoS.PunoandSolicitorJesusV.Diazfor
thePublicRespondent.

FERNANDO,ActingC.J.:
The grave abuse of discretion imputed to respondent Director of Labor Relations Carmelo C. Noriel, when he
orderedacertificationelectionattheinstanceofprivaterespondent,FederationofFreeWorkers,washisalleged
failuretoabidebypreviousrulingsoftheDepartmentofLabor.Assurringsuchtobethecase,thepointraisedis
notdecisiveofthiscontroversy,AswasmadeapparentintheCommentofSolicitorGeneralEstelitoP.Mendoza,
1thechallengedorderconformstothedecisionsofthisCourt.Wherethelawisconcerned,itisthisTribunalthatspeaks

authoritatively.Petitionerhasfailedtomakeoutacase.Wedismiss.

ThecontroversybeganwiththefilingofapetitionforcertificationelectiononSeptember22,1977bytheScout
RamonV.AlbanoMemorialCollegeChapterofprivaterespondentlaborunion.Itallegedthatthewrittenconsent
of 67 employees out of an alleged total working force of 200, more or less, had been secured. There was, on
October21,1977,amotiontodismissthepetitionfiledbytheemployer,thepresentpetitioner.Itwasbasedon
the lack of the 30% consent requirement as there were 250 employees, the required thirty percent of the said
workforcebeing75.Withthefigureoftheactualnumberofemployeesintheschoolestablishmentthussupplied,
privaterespondentsubmittedonOctober26,1977theadditionalsignaturesof22employeesinsupportofitsplea
foracertificationelection.Therewasanoppositiononthepartofthepresentpetitioner.ItwasfiledonNovember
2,1977.Thencame,fifteendayslater,anorderfromtheMedArbiterassignedtothecasedismissingthepetition
forcertificationonthegroundthatthecompliancewiththe30%requirementmustbeshownasofthetimeofits
filing.PrivaterespondentappealedtotheBureauofLaborRelationssuchorderoftheMedArbiterdismissingits
petition. Respondent Noriel on February 8, 1978 sustained the appeal, ordering a certification election at the
Scout Ramon V. Albano Memorial College within twenty (20) days from receipt thereof, with the following as
contendingunions:1.FFW(ScoutRamonV.AlbanoMemorialCollegeChapter):2.NoUnion,Petitionermoved
foritsreconsideration,butitdidnotsucceed.AnappealtotheSecretaryofLaborwaslikewiseofnoavailHence
thispetition.
Assetforthattheoutset,there,isnomerittothispetition.
1.ThepresentLaborCodedidnottakeeffectuntilNovember1,1974. 2 The day before, on October 31, 1974 this
Court, speaking through Justice E. Fernandez now retired, in Confederation of Citizens Labor union vs. National Labor
Relations Commission, 3 held fast to the existing doctrine emphasizing the significance of a certification election in a
regimeofcollectivebargaining.Theninthefirstdecisionafteritseffectivity,UnitedEmployeesUnionofGelmartIndustries
v.Noriel,4Itwaspointedout:Theconstituteionofcollectivebargainingis.torecallCoxaprimemanifestationofindustrial
democracy at, work. The two parties to the relationship, tabor and management, make their own rules b coming to terms.
Thatistogovernthemselvesinmattersthatreally,count.Aslabor,however,iscomposedofanumberofindividuals,itis
indispensable that they be represented by a labor organization of their choice. Thus may be discerned how crucial is a
certification election. So our decisions from the earliest case of PLDT Employees Union v. PLDT Co. Free Telephone
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1978/oct1978/gr_48347_1978.html

1/3

1/12/2016

G.R.No.L48347

Workers Union to the latest, Philippine Communications, Electronics & Electricity Workers' Federation PCWF v. Court of
IndustrialRelations,hadmadeclear." 5Thesameprinciplewasagaingivenexpressioninlanguageequallyemphaticinthe
subsequentcaseofPhilippineAssociationofFreeLaborUnionsv.BureauofLaborRelations:6"Petitionerthusappearsto
bewoefullylackinginawarenessofthesignificanceofacertificationelectionforthecollectivebargainingprocess.Itisthe
fairest and most effective way of determining which labor organization can truly represent the working force. It is a
fundamental postulate that the will of the majority given expression in an honest election with freedom on the part of the
voterstomaketheirchoice,iscontrolling.Nobetterdevicecanassuretheinstitutionofindustrialdemocracywiththetwo
partiestoabusinessenterprise,managementandlabor,establishingaregimeofselfrule.7Thatistoaccordrespecttothe
policy of the Labor Code, indisputably partial to the holding of a certification election so as to arrive in a manner definitive
andcertainconcerningthechoiceofthelabororganizationtorepresenttheworkersinacollectivebargainingunit.8

2. Conformably to the above basic concept, this Court, in the aforesaid Philippine Association of Free Labor
Unionsdecision,recognizedthattheBureauofLaborRelations,intheexerciseofsounddiscretion,mayordera
certificationelectionnotwithstandingthefailuretomeetthe30%requirement.Oncethatrequisiteiscompliedwith,
however,theCodemakes,clearthat"itshallbemandatoryfortheBureautoconductaIdentificationelectionfor
thepurposeofdeterminingtherepresentativeoftheemployeesintheappropriatebargainingunitandcertifythe
winnerastheexclusivecollectivebargainingrepresentativeofalltheemployeesintheunit."9Necessarilythen,the
argumentofpetitionerastotheinabilityofprivaterespondenttocomeupwiththerequiredsignatureswhenthepetitionwas
first filed falls to the ground. At any rate, additional signatures were subsequently secured. The allegation that there was
thereafter a retraction on the part of a number of such signatories lends added support to the decision arrived at by
respondentNorielthattheonlywayofdeterminingwithaccuracythetruewillofthepersonnelinvolvedinthebargainingunit
is to conduct a certification petition At any rate. that s a factual matter, the resolution of which by respondent Noriel is
entitledtorespectbythisTribunal.10

3. There is relevance likewise to this excerpt from MonarkInternational,Inc.v.Noriel, cited in the Comment of
SolicitorGeneralMendoza:"Thereisanotherinfirmityfromwhichthepetitionsuffers.Itwasfiledbytheemployer,
theadversaryinthecollectivebargainingprocess.Precisely,theinstitutionofcollectivebargainingisdesignedto
assure that the other party, labor, is free to choose its representative. To resolve any doubt on the matter, a
certificationelection,torepeat,isthemostappropriatemeansofascertainingitswill.Itistruethattheremaybe
circumstanceswheretheinterestoftheemployercallsforitsbeingheardonthematter.Anobviousinstanceis
where it invokes the obstacle interposed by the contractbar rule. This case certainly does not fall within the
exception.Soundpolicydictatesthatasmuchaspossible,managementistomaintainastrictlyhandsoffpolicy.
Forifitdoesnot,itmaylenditselftothelegitimatesuspicionthatitispartialtooneofthecontendingunions.That
is repugnant to the concept of collective bargaining. That is against the letter and spirit of welfare legislation
intendedtoprotectlaborandtopromotesocialjustice.Thejudiciarythenshouldbethelasttolookwithtolerance
at such efforts of an employer to take part in the process leading to the free and untrammeled choice of the
exclusivebargainingrepresentativeoftheworkers."11
WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is dismissed, with Costs. This decision is immediately executory. The
restrainingorderisherebylifted.Acertificationelectionmustbeconductedforthwith.
Barredo,AntonioAquinoConcepcionJr.andSantos,JJ.,concur.

Footnotes
1HewasassistedbyAssistantSolicitorGeneralReynatoS.PunoandSolicitorJesusV.Diaz.
2PresidentialDecreeNo.570A,Sec.64
3L3895556,October31,1974,60SCRA450.
4L40810,October3,1975,67SCRA267
5Ibid,273.PLDTEmployeesUnionisreportedin97Phil.424,a1955decision.ThePhilippine
Electronicsdecision,1,34531,promulgatedonMarch29,1974,isfoundin,56SCRA480.,
6L42115,January27,1976,69SCRA132.
7Ibid,139.
8Cf.FederacionObrerav.Noriel,L41937,July6,1976,72SCRA24UEAutomotiveEmployees
andWorkersUnionTradeUnionsofthePhilippinesandAlliedServicesv.NorielL44350,Nov.25,
1976,74SCRA72PhilippineLaborAllianceCouncilv.BureauofLaborRelations,L41288,Jan.
31,1977,75SCRA162Today'sKnittingFreeWorkersUnionv.Noriel,L45057,Feb.28,1977,75
SCRA450BenguetExplorationMiner'sPortionv.Noriel,L44110,March29,1977,76SCRA107
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1978/oct1978/gr_48347_1978.html

2/3

1/12/2016

G.R.No.L48347

Kapisananv.NorielL45475,June20,1977,77SCRA414RowellLaborUnionTradeUnionsofthe
Philippinesv.Ople,I,42270,July29,1977.78SCRA166VassarIndustriesemployeesUnionvs.
Estrella44652,March31,1978NationalMinesaridAlliedWorkersopinionv.Luna,I,46722,June
15,1978:GeneraltextilesAlliedWorkersAssociationv.DirectorofBureauofLaborRelations,L
45719,July31,1978.
9Article258oftheLaborCodereadsinhill"Requisitesforcertificationelection.Anypetitionfor
certificationelectionfiledbyanylegitimatetabororganizationshallbesupportedbythewritten
consentofatleastthirtypercent(30%)ofalltheemployeesinthebargainingunit.Uponreceiptand
verificationofsuchpetition,itshallbemandatoryfortheBureautoconductacertificationelectionfor
thepurposeofdeterminingtherepresentativeoftheemployeesintheappropriatebargainingunit
andcertifythewinnerastheexclusivecollectivebargainingrepresentativeofalltheemployeesinthe
unit."
10Cf.AntipoloHighwayLinesv.Inciong,L38523,June27,1975,64SCRA441Jacqueline
Industriesv.NationalLaborRelationsCommission,L37034,Aug.29,1975,66SCRA397
FederationObrerav.Noriel,L41937,July6,1976,72SCRA24KapisananngmgaManggagawav.
Noriel,L45475.June20.1977,77SCRA414MonarkInternational,Inc.v.Noriel'L4757071,
May11,1978.waspromulgatedonMay11,1978.Cf.ConsolidatedFarms,Inc.,II,v.NorielL
47752,July31,1978.
1183SCRAp.118.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1978/oct1978/gr_48347_1978.html

3/3