Dairy Queen Products v. Court of Industrial Relations
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: This case concerns a labor dispute initiated by the Dairy Queen Employees Association-CCLU (Union) against Dairy Queen Products Company of the Philippines, Inc. (employer company). The dispute escalated when the Union staged a strike against the employer company on September 2, 1969. Subsequently, the employer company charged the Union and its members with unfair labor practice for allegedly orchestrating an illegal strike, leading to the filing of a complaint by the prosecutor of the Court of Industrial Relations. Procedural History: Following the strike, the Dairy Queen Employees Association-CCLU filed a petition for direct certification as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative for the company's rank-and-file employees. The employer company, instead of directly answering, filed a counter-petition seeking to declare the strike illegal and halt the certification proceedings. The Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) ordered the posting of notices for potential intervenors. The Kasama-Hopeworkers union sought to intervene, claiming affiliation with the original union, but was later excluded due to non-compliance with procedural orders. The CIR proceeded to resolve the representation issue, considering the employer's filing of an unfair labor practice case related to the strike as an abandonment of that issue in the certification case. The CIR ultimately issued an order on December 8, 1971, certifying the Dairy Queen Employees Association-CCLU as the exclusive bargaining representative. The Petition: The Dairy Queen Products Company of the Philippines, Inc. filed this petition for review, arguing that the Court of Industrial Relations committed grave abuse of discretion. The petitioner contends that the CIR erred in disregarding the cancellation of the respondent union's permit and license by the Department of Labor, in failing to consider that the union had lost most of its members and thus lacked majority representation, and in holding that the employer company abandoned the issue of strike illegality by filing a separate unfair labor practice case. The petitioner seeks to overturn the CIR's order certifying the respondent union as the exclusive bargaining representative.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Industrial Relations erred in certifying the Dairy Queen Employees Association-CCLU as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative despite the alleged cancellation of its registration and loss of majority membership. Whether the filing of an unfair labor practice case by the employer company for illegal strike constituted an abandonment of the issue of strike illegality in the certification election case.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Court of Industrial Relations dated December 8, 1971, certifying the Dairy Queen Employees Association-CCLU as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative. The Court found no merit in the petitioner's assigned errors and ruled that the CIR correctly resolved the representation issue.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court found no merit in the petitioner's claim that the CIR erred in certifying the Union. While it was true that the Union's certificate of registration had been cancelled by the Department of Labor on September 20, 1971, this cancellation was not yet final when the CIR issued its order on December 8, 1971. The Union had a grace period to file a motion for reconsideration. More importantly, the Registrar of Labor Organization later rescinded the cancellation decision on September 28, 1972, restoring the Union's legal personality. Regarding the loss of membership, the Court found no effective disaffiliation from the CCLU, as evidenced by the Kasama-Hopeworkers' failure to appear in hearings and the Union's use of old membership forms. The evidence showed that the Union still represented the majority of the regular rank-and-file employees. On Issue 2: The Court held that the CIR correctly considered the employer's filing of an unfair labor practice case (Case No. 5538-ULP) for illegal strike as an abandonment of the issue of strike illegality in the certification election case (Case No. 2540-MC). The employer initially filed a counter-petition in the certification case to declare the strike illegal. However, it was only when the certification case was nearing termination that the employer commenced the separate ULP case. This sequence of events indicated a deliberate attempt by the employer to delay the disposition of the certification election case, and thus, the CIR's conclusion that the issue was abandoned in the context of the certification election was proper.
Main Doctrine
The Court of Industrial Relations correctly certified the Dairy Queen Employees Association-CCLU as the sole and exclusive bargaining representative, finding that it represented the majority of the regular rank-and-file employees. The Court also held that the employer's filing of an unfair labor practice case concerning the strike's illegality was an abandonment of that issue in the certification election proceedings. The validity of the union's registration, despite a temporary cancellation that was later rescinded, did not invalidate the certification.