SECOND DIVISION NATIONAL MINES andALLIED WORKERS UNION(NAMAWU), Petitioner, versus MARCOPPER MININGCORPORATION ,Respondent. G.R. No.

174641 Present: QUISUMBING , J.,Chairperson, CARPIO MORALES,TINGA,VELASCO, JR., andBRION, JJ . Promulgated: November 11, 2008x ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x DECISION BRION, J .: W e r e s o l v e i n t h i s D e c i s i o n t h e p e t i t i o n f o r r e v i e w on certiorari [1] f i l e d b y p e t i t i o n e r N a t i o n a l M i n e s a n d A l l i e d W o r k e r s Union ( NAMAWU ) t o a n n u l a n d s e t a s i d e t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e C o u r t o f Appeals ( CA ) in CA- G.R. No. 70875 [2] and its subsequent order denying the petitioners motion for reconsideration. [3] The CA decision nullified theresolution [4] and the order [5] of the National Labor Relations Commission ( NLRC ) denying the appeal filed by Marcopper Mining Corporation( MARCOPPER ) , a n d o r d e r e d t h e N L R C t o g i v e d u e c o u r s e t o MARCOPPERs appeal. THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND

O n A p r i l 1 , 1 9 9 6 , t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a n d N a t u r a l Resources ( DENR ) ordered the indefinite suspension of MARCOPPERs o p e r a t i o n s f o r c a u s i n g d a m a g e t o t h e e n v i r o n m e n t o f the Province of Marinduque by spil l i n g t h e c o m p a n y s m i n e w a s t e o r tailings from an old underground impounding area into the Boac River, inviolation of its Environmental Compliance Certificate ( ECC ). [6] NAMAWU was the exclusive bargaining representative of the rank-and-file workers of MARCOPPER. On April 10, 1996, it filed a complaintw i t h t h e R e g i o n a l A r b i t r a t i o n B r a n c h N o . I V o f t h e N L R C a g a i n s t MARCOPPER for nonpayment of wages, separation pay, damages, andattorneys fees; the case is hereinafter referred to as the environmental incident case. [7] NAMAWU claimed that due to the indefinite suspensionof MARCOPPERs operations, its members were not paid the wages duethem for six months (from April 12, 1996 toOctober 12, 1996) under RuleX, Book III, Section 3(b) of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of theLabor Code. [8] It further claimed that its members are also entitled to be paid their separation pay pursuant to their collective bargaining agreementwith MARCOPPER and pursuant to Book IV, Rule I, 4(b) of the Labor Codes implementing rules. MARCOPPER denied liability, contending that NAMAWU had not been authorized by the individual employees the real parties-in-interest to file the complaint; and that the complaint should be dismissed for lack of certification of non-forum shopping, for the pendency of another action between the same parties, and for lack of factual and legal basis. [9] L a b o r A r b i t e r P e d r o C . R a m o s r u l e d i n N A M A W U s f a v o r i n a decision dated March 14, 2000. [10] He ordered MARCOPPER, John Loneya n d S t e v e R e e d ( P r e s i d e n t a n d G e n e r a l M a n a g e r o f t h e c o m p a ny,