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 Uniono 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 SMP’s 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.