Samahang Manggagawa ng Permex (SMP) vs
Secretary of Labor, National Labor Federation
(NFL), Permex
Mendoza, J.
Facts:
January 15, 1991: certification election was
conducted among employees of respondent
Permex.
o Options: 1) National Federation
Union, 2) No Union
o Result: No Union won
March 11, 1991: after the certification
election, some employees of Permex formed
a labor organization known as the
Samahang Manggagawa sa Permex (SMP)
which they registered with the DOLE.
August 16, 1991: SMP wrote the company
requesting recognition as the sole and
exclusive bargaining representative.
October 19, 1991: Permex Producer
recognized SMP and, on December 1,
entered into a collective bargaining
agreement with it.
December 9-10, 1991: CBA was ratified by
the majority of the rank and file employees
of Permex.
December 13, 1991: CBA was certified by
the DOLE.
February 25, 1992: respondent NFL filed a
petition for certification election but this was
dismissed by the Med-Arbiter.
NFL appealed to the Secretary of Labor who
set aside the Med-Arbiter decision. A
certification election was conducted among
the rank and file employees at the Permex
with the following options: 1) NFL, 2) SMP,
3) No Union.
SMP brought this petition for review on
certiorari.
o SMPs argument: Permex has
already voluntarily recognized SMP
as the sole collective bargaining
agent. Therefore, SMP is the sole
collective bargaining agent for the
rank and file employees and the
CBA is valid. Also, of the 763
qualified employee, 479 joined SMP
(63%). Furthermore, 542
employee (71%) ratified the CBA.
such support by the majority of the
employees justifies its finding that
the CBA made by it is valid and
binding
Issue: Whether the employer can declare a union as
the exclusive representative for the purposes of
collective bargaining. No.
Ratio:
Permex should not have given its voluntary
recognition to SMP when the latter asked for
recognition as exclusive collective bargaining agent
of the employees of the company in August 1991.
The company did not have the power to declare the
union the exclusive representative of the workers for
the purpose of collective bargaining.
By virtue of Executive Order No. 111, which became
effective on March 4, 1987, the direct certification
previously allowed under the Labor Code had been
discontinued as a method of selecting the exclusive
bargaining agents of the workers. Certification
election is the most effective and the most
democratic way of determining which labor
organization can truly represent the working force in
the appropriate bargaining unit of a company.
The court also held that 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. A
certification election should have been held.