You are on page 1of 2

Sugbuanon Rural Bank, Inc. v.

Laguesma (2000) Petitioner: SRBI Respondents: Usec Bienvenido Laguesma, DOLE, Med-Arb Achilles Manit, SBRI- Assoc. of Professional, Supervisory, Office and Technical EES Union TUCP et al. Quisumbing, J. Facts: The union filed a petition for certification election of the supervisory ees of SRBI. The Med-Arb granted the petition and a pre-certification election conference between the bank and the union was set. The bank filed a motion to dismiss on two grounds: 1. members of the union were in fact managerial or confidential ees, thus they are disqualified from forming, joining, or assisting any labor org 2. the Assoc of Labor Unions-TUCP or ALU-TUCP was representing the union, which also sought to represent the rank-and-file ees of SRBI The union filed its opposition to the motion to dismiss arguing that its members were not managerial employees but merely supervisory employees The Med-Arb denied SRBIs motion to dismiss SoLE denied SRBIs appeal for lack of merit and the certification election was ordered The Med-Arb scheduled the holding of certification election. o SRBI motion to suspend proceedings -> denied by Med-Arb o SRBI filed MR -> Med Arb cancelled the certification to give due course to the MR, but later on denied the MR SRBI appealed to the DOLE Regional office denied by Usec Laguesma; MR was also denied The holding of certification elections was again set. Issue: W/M the Med-Arb may validly order the holding of a certification election upon the filing of a petition for certification election by a registered union, despite the petitioners appeal pending before the DOLE Secretary against the issuance of the unions registration Held: Yes. Ratio: One of the rights of a legitimate labor organization under Article 242(b) of the Labor Code is the right to be certified as the exclusive representative of all employees in an appropriate bargaining unit for purposes of collective bargaining. Having complied with the requirements of Art. 234, the SC held that the union is a legitimate labor union. Article 257 of the Labor Code mandates that a certification election shall automatically be conducted by the Med-Arbiter upon the filing of a petition by a legitimate labor organization. Nothing is said therein that prohibits such automatic conduct of the certification election if the management appeals on the issue of the validity of the union's registration. The bank argued that giving due course to respondent union's petition for certification election would violate the separation of unions doctrine. o SC: the petition was filed by APSOTEU- TUCP, a legitimate labor organization. It was not, filed by ALU. Nor was it filed by TUCP, which is a national labor federation of with which respondent union is affiliated. The bank said that respondent union was a mere alter ego of ALU.

SC: The records show nothing to this effect. What the records instead reveal is that respondent union was initially assisted by ALU during its preliminary stages of organization. A local union maintains its separate personality despite affiliation with a larger national federation. The bank also alleged that ALU seeks to represent both respondent union and the rank-and-file union. o SC found nothing in the records to support this bare assertion.