Philippine Land-Air-Sea Labor Union v. Court of Industrial Relations
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The Philippine Land-Air-Sea Labor Union (PLASLU) filed a petition for review on certiorari of an order from the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR). The CIR had ordered a certification election to determine the sole collective bargaining representative for the employees of San Carlos Milling Co., Inc. The CIR's order specified that the appropriate bargaining unit would be the employer unit, comprising 602 employees, including piece workers (pakiao) and stevedores appearing on the employer's payrolls during milling and off-seasons, excluding farm tractor operators hired by planters and supervisory/security personnel. Procedural History: Prior to the election, the respondent Allied Workers' Association of the Philippines (AWA) moved to exclude 144 employees, but this was denied by the CIR. A certification election was held, resulting in PLASLU receiving 88 votes and AWA receiving 149 votes, with 390 ballots challenged. PLASLU challenged 242 ballots, and AWA challenged 148. PLASLU contested the election, arguing that the voters who cast the 148 ballots challenged by AWA were legitimate employees. AWA also filed a petition contesting the election, which PLASLU opposed as late. The CIR ordered the opening and canvassing of all 390 challenged ballots. After canvassing, 148 votes challenged by AWA were counted for PLASLU. Of the 242 votes challenged by PLASLU, 3 were for PLASLU, 228 for AWA, and 11 were for no union or spoiled. The final tally showed AWA with 377 votes and PLASLU with 239. AWA was certified as the sole collective bargaining agent. PLASLU's motion for reconsideration was denied by the CIR en banc. The Petition: PLASLU filed the present petition for review, contending that the CIR erred in not excluding the 242 votes challenged by PLASLU from the total votes credited to AWA.
Issue(s)
Whether the CIR erred in including the votes of casual employees (stevedores and piece workers) in the certification election. Whether the CIR erred in considering its order of September 4, 1957, which ordered the opening and canvassing of challenged ballots, as final and executory, thereby precluding an appeal on the eligibility of voters.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The order of the Court of Industrial Relations is reversed, and PLASLU is certified as the sole collective bargaining agent.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of including casual employees' votes: The Supreme Court found the petitioner's contention meritorious. The CIR's order authorizing the certification election specified that the list of eligible voters would be based on employees appearing on the company's payroll during the 1955 milling season and Exhibit "X-Court," excluding supervisors and security guards. It was undisputed that the 242 challenged votes were cast by casual employees, consisting of stevedores and piece workers, who were not included in the company's payroll for the 1955 milling season nor in Exhibit "X-Court." The Court cited its ruling in Democratic Labor Union vs. Cebu Stevedoring Co., Inc., et al., emphasizing that in determining a bargaining unit, factors such as employment status, categories of work, and unity of interest must be considered to best assure the exercise of collective bargaining rights. The Court held that these casual employees, hired on a temporary or day-to-day basis with no reasonable basis for continued employment, lacked the mutuality of interest necessary for inclusion in a bargaining unit composed of permanent or regular employees. Therefore, their votes should have been excluded. On the finality of the CIR's September 4, 1957 order: The Court dismissed the contention that the order of September 4, 1957, which merely directed the opening and canvassing of challenged ballots, had become final and executory. The Court reasoned that any appeal from that specific order would have been premature, as it was merely a procedural step leading to the final determination of the election results. The substantive issue of voter eligibility remained open for review until the final order determining the bargaining agent.
Main Doctrine
Casual employees, such as stevedores and piece workers hired on a day-to-day basis with no reasonable basis for continued or renewed employment, cannot be considered to have the mutuality of interest required for inclusion in a bargaining unit composed of permanent or regular employees.