Case Summary (G.R. No. 84433)
Procedural History
At the pre-election conference, the two unions agreed to exclude INK members’ votes because they were not affiliated with any union. The Med-Arbiter upheld this exclusion and certified TUEU-OLALIA. On appeal, the Bureau of Labor Relations affirmed, finding petitioners lacked legal personality. The petitioners escalated the matter to the Supreme Court via certiorari.
Issue
Whether excluding bona fide employees’ ballots on the basis of their religious refusal to join or form labor organizations constitutes grave abuse of discretion and violates the right to self-organization under the 1987 Constitution and the Labor Code.
Relevant Law
• The Constitution ensures the right of workers to form, join, or assist labor organizations, and by implication, the right not to do so.
• The Labor Code grants all employees the right to self-organization without distinction.
• Implementing rules allow a “NO UNION” choice, reflecting the right not to be represented or to refrain from union affiliation.
Court’s Analysis
- Right to Self-Organization Includes Negative Aspect
– A right must encompass both exercise and non-exercise (Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers’ Union).
– Employees may refuse union membership or withdraw at any time, including for religious reasons. - Eligibility to Vote in Certification Elections
– All rank-and-file employees in the bargaining unit are entitled to vote (Art. 255, Labor Code).
– No statute limits voting rights to union members only. - Pre-Election Agreement Excluding INK Votes
– Agreement to exclude ballots of non-union members is not grounded in law or rules.
– Such exclusion disenfranchises employees and thwarts the election’s purpose of ascertaining majority will. - Effect of “NO UNION” Votes
– A majority “NO UNION” vote bars certification of any union, protecting
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 84433)
Procedural History
- Petitioners (141 members of the Iglesia ni Kristo employed by Tri-Union Industries Corporation) challenged the exclusion of their votes in a certification election before the Med-Arbiter and the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR).
- At the pre-election conference, the two contending unions agreed to exclude INK members on the ground that they were not union members and had abstained from prior elections.
- The Med-Arbiter denied the petition to cancel the election and certified TUEU-OLALIA as sole bargaining agent by Order dated December 21, 1987.
- Petitioners appealed to the Officer-in-Charge of the BLR, who, by Decision dated July 22, 1988, likewise denied the appeal for lack of legal personality.
- Petitioners elevated the matter by special civil action of certiorari to the Supreme Court, which granted the petition, annulled and set aside the lower decisions.
Facts
- A certification election conducted on October 20, 1987 among 348 eligible voters produced 240 actual ballots.
- Ballots allowed three choices: (a) TUPAS, (b) TUEU-OLALIA, and (c) NO UNION.
- Final tally: TUPAS – 1; TUEU-OLALIA – 95; NO UNION – 1; Spoiled – 1; Challenged – 141 (INK members).
- Challenged ballots were segregated and excluded pursuant to an agreement between TUPAS and TUEU-OLALIA that INK members, as non-unionists, could not vote.
- INK members protested, filed a petition to cancel the election for unfairness and misrepresentation of the employees’ true sentiments.
- The Med-Arb