Title
Supreme Court
Heritage Hotel Manila vs. National Union of Workers in the Hotel, Restaurant and Allied Industries-Heritage Hotel Manila Supervisors Chapter
Case
G.R. No. 178296
Decision Date
Jan 12, 2011
Union's delayed compliance with financial reports upheld; DOLE Secretary's jurisdiction affirmed, emphasizing workers' rights to self-organization and collective bargaining.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 178296)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Union Formation and Certification Election: On October 11, 1995, the National Union of Workers in the Hotel, Restaurant and Allied Industries-Heritage Hotel Manila Supervisors Chapter (NUWHRAIN-HHMSC), a labor union representing supervisory employees of Heritage Hotel Manila, filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor and Employment-National Capital Region (DOLE-NCR). The Med-Arbiter granted the petition on February 14, 1996, ordering a certification election. The DOLE Secretary affirmed this decision on August 15, 1996.
  • Delays and Pre-Election Proceedings: The pre-election conference was delayed and eventually held on February 20, 1998. Petitioner, Grand Plaza Hotel Corporation (owner of Heritage Hotel Manila), moved to dismiss the petition due to respondent's alleged non-appearance. The proceedings were suspended but resumed on January 29, 2000.
  • Petition for Cancellation of Union Registration: On May 19, 2000, petitioner filed a petition to cancel respondent's union registration, citing the union's failure to submit annual financial reports and a list of members since 1995. Petitioner requested the suspension of the certification election pending the resolution of the cancellation petition.
  • Certification Election and Protest: Despite the pending cancellation petition, the certification election proceeded on June 23, 2000, and respondent won. Petitioner filed a protest, arguing that the election results should not be certified until the cancellation petition was resolved. Petitioner also claimed that some union members were ineligible due to their confidential or managerial roles.
  • Regional Director's Decision: The Regional Director denied the petition for cancellation on December 29, 2001, emphasizing the importance of workers' rights to self-organization and noting that respondent had belatedly submitted the required documents.
  • Appeal to DOLE Secretary: Petitioner appealed to the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR), but the BLR Director inhibited himself due to a conflict of interest. DOLE Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas assumed jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal on February 21, 2003, affirming the Regional Director's decision.
  • Court of Appeals Decision: Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which denied the petition on May 30, 2005. The CA ruled that the DOLE Secretary had the authority to resolve the appeal in the absence of the BLR Director and upheld the dismissal of the cancellation petition.
  • Supreme Court Petition: Petitioner appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the DOLE Secretary lacked jurisdiction and that respondent's registration should have been canceled due to non-compliance with statutory requirements.

Issues:

  • Jurisdiction of the DOLE Secretary: Whether the DOLE Secretary had the authority to resolve the appeal from the Regional Director's decision in the absence of the BLR Director.
  • Cancellation of Union Registration: Whether respondent's union registration should have been canceled due to its failure to submit annual financial reports and a list of members as required by law.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, ruling that the DOLE Secretary had the authority to resolve the appeal and that respondent's belated submission of required documents constituted substantial compliance. The Court emphasized the importance of protecting workers' rights to self-organization and collective bargaining, aligning with constitutional and international labor standards.

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.