LAGUNA AUTOPARTS AUTOPARTS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION v. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, SECRETARY, DOLE AND LAGUNA AUTOPARTS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OBRERO PILIPINO-LAMCOR CHAPTER Local chapters are not required to acquire independent independent registration registration in order to have legal personality. personality. Facts:
The respondent union filed a petition for certification election before the Department of Labor and Employment. In its petition, the respondent union alleged that Obrero Pilipino was a legitimate labor organ organiza izatio tion n under under a egist egistrat ration ion !erti !ertific ficate ate issued issued by DOLE. DOLE. " copy copy of the the respon responden dentt union# union#ss !ertificate of !reation was attached to the petition. The petition further alleged that the bargaining unit sought to be represented was composed of all the ran$%and%file employees in the petitioner company, more or less, &'( employees. It a)erred that the said bargaining unit is unorganized and that there has been no certification election election conducted for the the past &* months prior prior to the filing of the petition. petition. Petitioner company mo)ed to dismiss the petition for certification election. It claimed that the respondent union was not a legitimate labor organization for failure to show that it had complied with the registration re+uirements. It further asserted that e)en if the respondent union was issued a certificate of registration, it could not file a petition for certification election since its legal personality was at +uestion. ed%"r ed%"rbit biter er "nast "nastasi asio o L. -actin -actin dismi dismisse ssed d the petiti petition on for certif certifica icatio tion n electi election on for the respondent union#s lac$ of legal personality. personality. The ed%"rbiter found that the respondent union had not yet attained the status of a legitimate labor organization because it failed to indicate its principal office on the documents it submitted to the egional Office. e opined that this was a fatal defect tantamount to failure to submit the complete re+uirements, which warranted the dismissal of the petition for certification election. The respondent union appealed the case to the DOLE /ecretary who in turn granted their petition for certification election and set aside the decision of the ed% "rbiter. The DOLE /ecretary denied the otion for econsideration filed by the petitioner company. 0hen the case was ele)ated to the !ourt of "ppeals, the petition was denied and the decision of the DOLE /ecretary was affirmed. The CA stesse! that a "#ca" # cha$te %ee! %#t &e e'(stee! t# &ec#)e a "e'(t()ate "a&# #'a%(*at(#%. It $#(%te! #+t that a "#ca" # cha$te ac+(es "e'a" $es#%a"(t as a "a&# #'a%(*at(#% #) #) the !ate # ("(%' # the c#)$"ete !#c+)e%ts e%+)eate! (% Sect(#% / # R+"e 0I # the I)$"e)e%t(%' R+"es # B##1 0 2as a)e%!e! & De$at)e%t O!e 3D.O.4 N#. 56. The !" also noted that it was the employer which offered the most tenacious resistance to the holding of a certification election among its regular ran$%and%file employees. It opined that this must not be so for the choice of a collecti)e bargaining agent was the sole concern of the employees, and the employer should be a mere bystander.
Iss+es: a.6 7hethe # # %#t the es$#%!e%t +%(#% +%(#% (s a "e'(t()ate "a&# "a&# #'a%(*at(#%. #'a%(*at(#%. &.6 7hethe 7hethe # %#t a cha$te8s cha$te8s "e'a" "e'a" $es#%a"(t $es#%a"(t )a &e c#""atea c#""atea"" "" attac1e! attac1e! (% a $et(t(#% # cet((cat(#% e"ect(#% c.6 He"!:
7hethe # %#t the $et(t(#%e 7hethe $et(t(#%e,, as the e)$"#e e)$"#e,, has the "e'a" sta%!(%' sta%!(%' t# #$$#se #$$#se the $et(t(#% # cet((cat(#% e"ect(#%.
A.6 RESPONDENT UNION IS A LEGITIMATE LABOR ORGANI9ATION. A "#ca" # cha$te %ee! %#t &e (%!e$e%!e%t" e'(stee! t# ac+(e "e'a" $es#%a"(t. Sect(#% , R+"e 0I # the I)$"e)e%t(%' R+"es # B##1 0, as a)e%!e! & D.O. N#. 5 c"ea" states ;
/E!. 1. Ac+(s(t(#% # "e'a" $es#%a"(t & "#ca"
B.6 A CHAPTER8S LEGAL PERSONALITY MAY NOT BE COLLATERALLY ATTAC>ED IN A PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION ELECTION.
/uch legal personality may not be sub7ect to a collateral attac$ but only through a separate action instituted particularly for the purpose of assailing it. This is categorically prescribed by /ection 8, ule 6 of the Implementing ules of -oo$ 6, which states as follows9 /E!. 8. Eect # e'(stat(#%.2 The labor organization or wor$ers# association shall be deemed registered and )ested with legal personality on the date of issuance of its certificate of registration. Such legal personality cannot thereafter be subject to collateral attack but may be questioned only in an independent petition for cancellation in accordance with these Rules. :*&; ence, to raise the issue of the respondent union#s legal personality is not proper in this case. The pronouncement of the Labor elations Di)ision !hief, that the respondent union ac+uired a legal personality with the submission of the complete documentary re+uirement, cannot be challenged in a petition for certification election.
C.6THE PETITIONER, AS THE EMPLOYER, HAS NO LEGAL STANDING TO OPPOSE THE PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION ELECTION
The ruling in San Miguel Foods, Inc.!ebu "Meg Feed #lant $. %aguesma is still sound, thus9 In any case, this !ourt notes that it is petitioner, the employer, which has offered the most tenacious resistance to the holding of a certification election among its monthly%paid ran$%and%file employees. Th(s )+st %#t &e s#, # the ch#(ce # a c#""ect(ve &a'a(%(%' a'e%t (s the s#"e c#%ce% # the e)$"#ees. The #%" e?ce$t(#% t# th(s +"e (s =hee the e)$"#e has t# ("e the $et(t(#% # cet((cat(#% e"ect(#% $+s+a%t t# At(c"e @ # the La&# C#!e &eca+se (t =as e+este! t# &a'a(% c#""ect(ve", =h(ch
e?ce$t(#% (%!s %# a$$"(cat(#% (% the case &e#e +s. Its #"e (% a cet((cat(#% e"ect(#% has a$t" &ee% !esc(&e! (% Trade Unions of the Philippines and Allied Services (TUPAS) v. Trajano, as that # a )ee &sta%!e. It has %# "e'a" sta%!(%' (% a cet((cat(#% e"ect(#% as (t ca%%#t #$$#se the $et(t(#% # a$$ea" the Me!-A&(te8s #!es e"ate! theet#.
