KAPATIRAN VS. CALLEJA

Topic: Right to Self-organization – Extent and scope of right

FACTS:

1984-1987: TUPAS (Kapatiran) was the sole and exclusive collective bargaining representative of the workers in the Meat and Canning Division of the Universal Robina Corp, with a 3-yr collective bargaining agreement which was to expire on November 15, 1987

Within the freedom period of 60 days prior to the expiration of its CBA, TUPAS filed an amended notice of strike as a means of pressuring the company to extend, renew, or negotiate a new CBA with it

The NEW ULO (composed mostly of workers belonging to the INC sect) registered as a labor union

TUPAS staged a strike

ROBINA obtained obtained an injunction against the strike, resulting in an agreement to return to work and for the parties to negotiate a new CBA

The NEW ULO filed a petition for a certification election at the BLR

TUPAS moved to dismiss the petition

- for being defective in form and

- the members of the NEW ULO were mostly members of INC sect which 3 yrs previous refused to affiliate with any labor union

-  accused company of using the NEW ULO to defeat TUPAS’ bargaining rights

Med-Arbiter ordered the holding of a certification election with 20 days

TUPAS appealed to BLR; In the meantime, it was able to negotiate a new 3-yr CBA with ROBINA, which was signed on December 3, 1987 and to expire on November 15, 1990

BLR Director Calleja dismissed the appeal. TUPAS’ MR was denied. Hence, this petition alleging that BLR acted in excess of her jurisdiction and with grave abuse of discretion in affirming the Med-Arbiter’s order for a certification election

ISSUES:

1.     Whether or not the formation of NEW ULO as a labor union was proper

2.     Whether or not the petition filed by TUPAS was proper

RULING:

1.     YES, because This Court's decision in Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope Workers' Union, upholding the right of members of the IGLESIA NI KRISTO sect not to join a labor union for being contrary to their religious beliefs, does not bar the members of that sect from forming their own union. The public respondent correctly observed that the "recognition of the tenets of the sect ... should not infringe on the basic right of self-organization granted by the constitution to workers, regardless of religious affiliation."

2.     YES, because the fact that TUPAS was able to negotiate a new CBA with ROBINA within the 60-day freedom period of the existing CBA, does not foreclose the right of the rival union, NEW ULO, to challenge TUPAS' claim to majority status, by filing a timely petition for certification election on October 13, 1987 before TUPAS' old CBA expired on November 15, 1987 and before it signed a new CBA with the company on December 3, 1987. As pointed out by Med-Arbiter Abdullah, a "certification election is the best forum in ascertaining the majority status of the contending unions wherein the workers themselves can freely choose their bargaining representative thru secret ballot." Since it has not been shown that this order is tainted with unfairness, this Court will not thwart the holding of a certification election

DISPOSITIVE: TUPAS won.

DOCTRINE:

Upholding the right of members of the IGLESIA NI KRISTO sect not to join a labor union for being contrary to their religious beliefs, does not bar the members of that sect from forming their own union. The "recognition of the tenets of the sect ... should not infringe on the basic right of self-organization granted by the constitution to workers, regardless of religious affiliation."

A "certification election is the best forum in ascertaining the majority status of the contending unions wherein the workers themselves can freely choose their bargaining representative thru secret ballot."