NATIONAL MINES AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION V. SECRETARY OF LABOR G.R. No. 106446

Topic: Establishing Union Majority Status; Policy/Rationale

FACTS:

Petitioner National Mines And Allied Workers Union (NAMAWU-MIF) and respondent Federation of Free Workers-Samahang Mangagawa sa Quality Container Corporation (FFW-SMQCC) are local chapters of labor federations duly registered with the DOLE. Petitioner is the exclusive bargaining agent of all the rank and file workers of respondent QCC, a domestic corporation engaged in the metal industry.

38 days before the expiration of the CBA between petitioner and respondent QCC, respondent FFW-SMQCC through Reynito de Pedro filed with the DOLE Industrial Relations Division a petition for certification election. The petition was accompanied by a list of signatures of company employees, who signified their consent to a certification election among the rank and file employees of QCC.

Petitioner herein moved to dismiss the petition of respondent FFW-SMQCC on the grounds that: (a) the required consent to the certification election of at least 25% of the rank and file employees had not been met; (b) the petition was not verified as required by law; and (c) Reynito de Pedro, who was also the president of petitioner, had no personality to file the petition on behalf of FFW-SMQCC.

Respondent FFW-SMQCC, filed a second petition for certification election, this time signed and verified by De Pedro.

Med-Arbiter granted the petition for certification election of respondent. The choices are: Federation of Free Workers (FFW)- Samahang Mangagawa sa Quality Container Corporation Chapter; National Mines and Allied Workers' Union (NAMAWU); and No union 

Secretary of Labor affirmed.

ISSUE: WON the requirements for filing a petition for certification election were complied with.

RULING:

YES. Respondent complied with all the requirements needed in a petition for certification election.

First, although Reynito de Pedro was the duly elected president of petitioner, he had disaffiliated himself therefrom and joined respondent FFW-SMQCC before the petition for certification election was filed on September 27, 1991. The eventual dismissal of De Pedro from the company is of no moment, considering that the petition for certification election was filed before his dismissal on August 22, 1992.

Second, verification of a pleading is a formal, not jurisdictional requisite. Even if verification is lacking and the pleading is formally defective, the courts may dispense with the requirement in the interest of justice and order of correction of the pleading accordingly. Generally, technical and rigid rules of procedure are not binding in labor cases; and this rule is specifically applied in certification election proceedings, which are non-litigious but merely investigative and non-adversarial in character. Nevertheless, whatever formal defects existed in the first petition were cured and corrected in the second petition for certification election.

Third, attached to the original petition for certification election was a list of 141 supporting signatures out of the 300 employees belonging to the appropriate bargaining unit to be represented by respondent FFW-SMQCC. Respondent QCC sought to delete from the list some 36 signatures which are allegedly forged and falsified. Petitioner, likewise, submitted a joint affidavit of 13 employees, disclaiming the validity of the signatures therein.

Granting that 36 signatures were falsified and that 13 was disowned, this leaves 92 undisputed signatures which is definitely more than 75 — i.e., 25% of the total number of company employees required by law to support a petition for certification election. The disclaimer of 13 employees by their respective signatures covers only their own personal participation and cannot in any way be extended to include the rest of those who did not question the same.

Moreover, the fact that the list of signatures is undated does not necessarily mean that the signatures were obtained prior to the 60-day period before the expiration of the existing collective bargaining agreement. What is important is that the petition for certification election must be filed during the freedom period and that the 25% requirement of supporting signatures be met upon the filing thereof. These requirements have been compiled by respondent FFW-SMQCC in their first and second petitions, and it was thus incumbent upon the Med-Arbiter to order a certification election to be conducted among the rank and file employees of the company.

If indeed there are employees in the bargaining unit who refused to be represented by respondent FFW-SMQCC, with all the more reason should a certification election be held where the employees themselves can freely and voluntarily express by secret ballot their choice of bargaining representative. A certification election is the most effective and expeditious way to determine which labor organization can truly represent the working force in the appropriate bargaining unit of the company. 

DISPOSITIVE: Respondent won.

DOCTRINE: The fact that the list of signatures is undated does not necessarily mean that the signatures were obtained prior to the 60-day period before the expiration of the existing collective bargaining agreement. What is important is that the petition for certification election must be filed during the freedom period and that the 25% requirement of supporting signatures be met upon the filing thereof.