G.R. No. 82260 - Associated Labor Unions vs. Ferrer-Calleja

The petitioner, Associated Labor Unions (ALU), had an existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with Soriano Fruits Corporation that expired on August 31, 1987.

Prior to the expiration, on June 22, 1987, ALU and the employer executed a renewed CBA, effective September 1, 1987 and valid until August 31, 1990, which was unanimously approved and ratified by the workers.

On August 10, 1987, the National Federation of Labor (NFL) filed a petition for a certification election questioning ALU’s majority status, pursuant to Executive Order 111 and its Implementing Rules.

NFL alleged that more than a majority of the workers expressed doubts regarding the sincerity of ALU's representation.

The Med-Arbiter initially scheduled a hearing on August 21, 1987, but the NFL representative failed to appear despite proper notice.

A subsequent hearing was rescheduled on September 8, 1987, again without representation from NFL.

Both parties were subsequently asked to submit position papers, with ALU bolstering its claim by presenting several petitions signed by its members affirming loyalty and dismissing any challenge to its majority status.

On October 2, 1987, the Med-Arbiter issued an Order dismissing the petition for certification election on the ground of failure to prosecute.

NFL appealed this decision, and on December 22, 1987, the Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations reversed the Med-Arbiter’s Order.

The Director ordered that a certification election be held at Soriano Fruits Corporation following a pre-election conference to verify the list of eligible voters, with the choices being NFL and ALU.

ALU subsequently sought a reconsideration of the Director’s decision to grant the certification election, alleging:

The Director missed the legal intent of Article 257 of the Labor Code as amended by Executive Order 111.

The Director erred in claiming the petition is supported by more than 20% of the rank and file.

The ratification of the renewed CBA renders the certification election moot and academic.

ALU’s petition for certiorari challenges the decision on the grounds of grave abuse of discretion and lack or excess of jurisdiction.

Whether the Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations misapplied Article 257 by not considering its proper scope in an organized establishment.
Whether the petition for certification election, filed by NFL within the prescribed sixty (60) day freedom period before the expiration of the CBA, fulfills the requirements of Article 256 as amended by Executive Order 111.
Whether the ratification and early renewal of the CBA by ALU preempts or renders moot the need for a certification election.
Whether the non-appearance of the NFL representative during the scheduled Med-Arbiter hearings justifies the dismissal of the petition for certification election.