TAKATA (PHILIPPINES) CORPORATION V. BLR G.R. No. 196276

Topic: Labor Organization; Government Regulation; Requirements

FACTS:

1)     Petitioner filed with the DOLE a Petition for Cancellation of the Certificate of Union Registration of Respondent Samahang Lakas Manggagawa ng Takata (SALAMAT) on the ground that the latter is guilty of misrepresentation, false statement and fraud with respect to the number of those who participated in the organizational meeting, the adoption and ratification of its Constitution and By-Laws, and in the election of its officers.

Ø  contended that in the May 1, 2009 organizational meeting of respondent, only 68 attendees signed the attendance sheet, and which number comprised only 17% of the total number of the 396 regular rank- and-file employees which respondent sought to represent, and hence, respondent failed to comply with the 20% minimum membership requirement.

Ø  insisted that the document "Pangalan ng mga Kasapi ng Unyon" bore no signatures of the alleged 119 union members; and that employees were not given sufficient information on the documents they signed; that the document "Sama-Samang Pahayag ng Pagsapi" was not submitted at the time of the filing of respondent's application for union registration.

2)     Respondent denied the charge and claimed that the 119 union members were more than the 20% requirement for union registration. The document "Sama-Samang Pahayag ng Pagsapi sa Unyon" which it presented in its petition for certification election supported their claim of 119 members. 

3)     DOLE Regional Director granted the petition for cancellation of respondent's certificate of registration; finding that the 68 employees who attended the organizational meeting was obviously less than 20% of the total number of 396 regular rank-and-file employees which respondent sought to represent, hence, short of the union registration requirement. 

4)     BLR: reversed DOLE RD, finding that petitioner failed to prove that respondent deliberately and maliciously misrepresented the number of rank-and-file employees; that the list of employees who participated in the organizational meeting was a separate and distinct requirement from the list of the names of members comprising at least 20% of the employees in the bargaining unit; and that there was no requirement for signatures opposite the names of the union members.

5)     CA affirmed the decision of the BLR. 

ISSUES: WON respondent obtained the minimum required number of employees for purposes of organization and registration.

RULING: YES. 119 (of 396) employees as union members is even beyond the 20% minimum membership requirement.

Art. 234, Labor Code: Requirements of Registration. - A federation, national union or industry or trade union center or an independent union shall acquire legal personality and shall be entitled to the rights and privileges granted by law to legitimate labor organizations upon issuance of the certificate of registration based on the following requirements:

a)     Fifty pesos (P50.00)registration fee;

b)    The names of its officers, their addresses, the principal address of the labor organization, the minutes of the organizational meetings and the list of the workers who participated in such meetings;

c)     In case the applicant is an independent union, the names of all its members comprising at least twenty percent (20%) of all the employees in the bargaining unit where it seeks to operate;

d)    If the applicant union has been in existence for one or more years, copies of its annual financial reports; and

e)     Four copies of the constitution and by-laws of the applicant union, minutes of its adoption or ratification, and the list of the members who participated in it."

And after the issuance of the certificate of registration, the labor organization's registration could be assailed directly through cancellation of registration proceedings in accordance with Articles 238 and 239 of the Labor Code. 

It does not appear in Article 234 (b) of the Labor Code that the attendees in the organizational meeting must comprise 20% of the employees in the bargaining unit. In fact, even the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Labor Code does not so provide. It is only under Article 234 (c) that requires the names of all its members comprising at least twenty percent (20%) of all the employees in the bargaining unit where it seeks to operate. Clearly, the 20% minimum requirement pertains to the employees’ membership in the union and not to the list of workers who participated in the organizational meeting. Indeed, Article 234 (b) and (c) provide for separate requirements, which must be submitted for the union's registration, and which respondent did submit.

Here, the total number of employees in the bargaining unit was 396, and 20% of which was about 79. Respondent submitted a document entitled "Pangalan ng Mga Kasapi ng Unyon" showing the names of 119 employees as union members, thus respondent sufficiently complied even beyond the 20% minimum membership requirement. Respondent also submitted the attendance sheet of the organizational meeting which contained the names and signatures of the 68 union members who attended the meeting. Considering that there are 119 union members which are more than 20% of all the employees of the bargaining unit, and since the law does not provide for the required number of members to attend the organizational meeting, the 68 attendees which comprised at least the majority of the 119 union members would already constitute a quorum for the meeting to proceed and to validly ratify the Constitution and By-laws of the union. There is, therefore, no basis for petitioner to contend that grounds exist for the cancellation of respondent's union registration. 

DISPOSITIVE: Respondent won.

DOCTRINE: It does not appear in Article 234 (b) of the Labor Code that the attendees in the organizational meeting must comprise 20% of the employees in the bargaining unit. It is only under Article 234 (c) that requires the names of all its members comprising at least twenty percent (20%) of all the employees in the bargaining unit where it seeks to operate. Clearly, the 20% minimum requirement pertains to the employees’ membership in the union and not to the list of workers who participated in the organizational meeting.