Title
Firestone Tire and Rubber Employees Union vs. Estrella
Case
G.R. No. L-45513-14
Decision Date
Jan 6, 1978
FEU sought certification election; BLR denied due to CBA extension. SC ruled FEU's registration valid, CBA extension uncertified, and schism justified election. FEU won.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-45513-14)

Factual Background

The case involves a petition to annul two Resolutions issued by Hon. Francisco L. Estrella concerning certification matters between unions at the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company. On June 21, 1973, a three-year collective bargaining agreement was certified between ALU and the Company, effective from February 1, 1973, to January 31, 1976. An extension to the agreement was agreed upon by ALU and the Company on February 1, 1974, extending its validity until January 31, 1977. However, this extension was not ratified by the employees nor was it submitted to the Department of Labor for certification.

Employee Resignation and Certification Requests

During the sixty-day period leading up to the original expiry of the bargaining agreement, a significant number of employees resigned from ALU, totaling 276 out of 400 rank-and-file employees. These employees subsequently petitioned for a certificate of registration in favor of FEU, which was granted on January 28, 1976. FEU then filed for a certification election on February 10, 1976, with support from 77% of the bargaining unit members.

Opposition from Respondents

In response, ALU filed a petition for cancellation of FEU's registration certificate, asserting that ALU was the certified bargaining agent at the time FEU's registration was granted. They argued that the existing collective bargaining agreement constituted a valid bar to a certification election. The Firestone Company also opposed the election request, claiming the petition was filed late after the expiration date.

Procedural History

On April 6, 1976, the Med-Arbiter granted FEU's petition for certification election. Both ALU and the Company appealed this decision. Director Carmelo C. Noriel later affirmed the Med-Arbiter's order on September 23, 1976. However, on January 25, 1977, Acting Director Estrella reversed the decision, citing a prejudicial question regarding FEU's legal personality and the existence of the collective bargaining agreement as barriers to conducting a certification election.

Legal Arguments and Contentions

Petitioner contended that the resolution of whether an existing contract barred a certification election should have been addressed by Estrella, asserting that the absence of such pronouncement rendered the cancellation of FEU's registration certificate baseless. Furthermore, FEU argued that the collective bargaining agreement's purported expiry date was invalid due to the lack of certification from the Department of Labor.

Administrative Actions Following the Resolutions

In the interim, ALU pushed for negotiations with the Company for a new collective bargaining agreement, which was entered into on April 1, 1977, after the expiration of the original agreement.

Bureau Decisions on Certification and Representationa

...continue reading

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.