SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 162 21/01/2020, 1'25 PM

VOL. 162, JUNE 20, 1988 367

Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning Division vs. Ferrer-
Calleja

*
No. L-82914. June 20, 1988.

KAPATIRAN SA MEAT AND CANNING DIVISION

(TUPAS Local Chapter No. 1027), petitioner, vs. THE
HONORABLE BLR DIRECTOR PURA FERRER
CALLEJA, MEAT AND CANNING DIVISION
UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION and MEAT AND
CANNING DIVISION NEW EMPLOYEES AND
WORKERS UNITED LABOR ORGANIZATION,
respondents.

Labor; Labor Union; Right to self-organization; The right of

members of the Iglesia ni Kristo sect not to join a labor union for
being contrary to their religious beliefs does not bar the members of
that sect from forming their own union; Reason.·After deliberating
on the petition and the documents annexed thereto, We find no
merit in the petition. The public respondent did not err in
dismissing the petitionerÊs appeal in BLR Case No. A-12-389-87.
This CourtÊs decision in Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope WorkersÊ
Union, 59 SCRA 54, upholding the right of members of the IGLESIA
NI KRISTO sect not to join a labor union for being contrary to their
religious beliefs, does not bar the members of that sect from forming
their own union. The public

____________

* FIRST DIVISION.

368

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016fc688c6feeb63f614003600fb002c009e/p/APP589/?username=Guest Page 1 of 6
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 162 21/01/2020, 1'25 PM

368 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning Division vs. Ferrer-Calleja

respondent correctly observed that the „recognition of the tenets of

the sect x x x should not infringe on the basic right of self-
organization granted by the constitution to workers, regardless of
religious affilia-tion.‰
Same; Same; Same; Fact that TUPAS was able to negotiate a
new CBA with ROBINA does not foreclose the right of the rival
union NEW ULO to challenge TUPASÊ claim to majority status.·
The fact that TUPAS was able to negotiate a new CBA with
ROBINA within the 60-day freedom period of the existing CBA,
does not foreclose the right of the rival union, NEW ULO, to
challege TUPASÊ claim to majority status, by filing a timely petition
for certification election on October 13, 1987 before TUPASÊ old CBA
expired on November 15, 1987 and before it signed a new CBA with
the company on December 3, 1987. As pointed out by Med-Arbiter
Abdullah, a „certification election is the best forum in ascertaining
the majority status of the contending unions wherein the workers
themselves can freely choose their bargaining representative thru
secret ballot.‰ Since it has not been shown that this order is tainted
with unfairness, this Court will not thwart the holding of a
certification election.

PETITION for certiorari to review the order of the Director

of the Bureau of Labor Relations.

The facts are stated in the resolution of the Court.

Alar, Comia, Manalo and Associates for petitioner.
Danilo Bolos for respondent Robina Corporation.

RESOLUTION

GRIÑO-AQUINO, J.:

The petitioner, Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning Division

(TUPAS Local Chapter No. 1027) hereinafter referred to as
„TUPAS,‰ seeks a review of the resolution dated January
27, 1988 (Annex D) of public respondent Pura Ferrer-

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016fc688c6feeb63f614003600fb002c009e/p/APP589/?username=Guest Page 2 of 6
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 162 21/01/2020, 1'25 PM

Calleja, Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations,

dismissing its appeal from the Order dated November 17,
1987 (Annex C) of the Med-Arbiter Rasidali C. Abdullah
ordering a certification elec-tion to be conducted among the
regular daily paid rank and file employees/workers of
Universal Robina Corporation-Meat and Canning Division
to determine which of the contending unions:

369

VOL. 162, JUNE 20, 1988 369

Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning Division vs. Ferrer-
Calleja

a) Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning Division TUPAS

Local Chapter No. 1027 (or „TUPAS‰ for brevity);
b) Meat and Canning Division New Employees and
Workers United Labor Organization (or „NEW
ULO‰ for brevity);
c) No union.

shall be the bargaining unit of the daily wage rank and file
employees in the Meat and Canning Division of the
company.
From 1984 to 1987 TUPAS was the sole and exclusive
collective bargaining representative of the workers in the
Meat and Canning Division of the Universal Robina
Corporation, with a 3-year collective bargaining agreement
(CBA) which was to expire on November 15, 1987.
Within the freedom period of 60 days prior to the
expiration of its CBA, TUPAS filed an amended notice of
strike on September 28, 1987 as a means of pressuring the
company to extend, renew, or negotiate a new CBA with it.
On October 8, 1987, the NEW ULO, composed mostly of
workers belonging to the IGLESIA NI KRISTO sect,
registered as a labor union.
On October 12, 1987, the TUPAS staged a strike.
ROBINA obtained an injunction against the strike,
resulting in an agreement to return to work and for the
parties to negotiate a new CBA.
The next day, October 13, 1987, NEW ULO, claiming

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016fc688c6feeb63f614003600fb002c009e/p/APP589/?username=Guest Page 3 of 6
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 162 21/01/2020, 1'25 PM

that it has „the majority of the daily wage rank and file
employees numbering 191,‰ filed a petition for a
certification election at the Bureau of Labor Relations
(Annex A).
TUPAS moved to dismiss the petition for being defective
in form and that the members of the NEW ULO were
mostly members of the Iglesia ni Kristo sect which three (3)
years previous refused to affiliate with any labor union. It
also accused the company of using the NEW ULO to defeat
TUPASÊ bargaining rights (Annex B).
On November 17, 1987, the Med-Arbiter ordered the
holding of a certification election within 20 days (Annex C).
TUPAS appealed to the Bureau of Labor Relations
(BLR). In the meantime, it was able to negotiate a new 3-
year CBA with ROBINA, which was signed on December 3,
1987 and to expire on November 15, 1990.

370

370 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning Division vs. Ferrer-
Calleja

On January 27, 1988, respondent BLR Director Calleja

dismissed the appeal (Annex D).
TUPASÊ motion for reconsideration (Annex E) was
denied on March 17, 1988 (Annex F). On April 30, 1988, it
filed this petition alleging that the public respondent acted
in excess of her jurisdiction and with grave abuse of
discretion in affirming the Med-ArbiterÊs order for a
certification election.
After deliberating on the petition and the documents
annexed thereto, We find no merit in the petition. The
public respondent did not err in dismissing the petitionerÊs
appeal in BLR Case No. A-12-389-87. This CourtÊs decision
in Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope WorkersÊ Union, 59 SCRA
54, upholding the right of members of the IGLESIA NI
KRISTO sect not to join a labor union for being contrary to
their religious beliefs, does not bar the members of that
sect from forming their own union. The public respondent
correctly observed that the „recognition of the tenets of the
sect x x x should not infringe on the basic right of self-

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016fc688c6feeb63f614003600fb002c009e/p/APP589/?username=Guest Page 4 of 6
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 162 21/01/2020, 1'25 PM

organization granted by the constitution to workers,

regardless of religious affiliation.‰
The fact that TUPAS was able to negotiate a new CBA
with ROBINA within the 60-day freedom period of the
existing CBA, does not foreclose the right of the rival
union, NEW ULO, to challenge TUPASÊ claim to majority
status, by filing a timely petition for certification election
on October 13, 1987 before TUPASÊ old CBA expired on
November 15, 1987 and before it signed a new CBA with
the company on December 3, 1987. As pointed out by Med-
Arbiter Abdullah, a „certification election is the best forum
in ascertaining the majority status of the contending
unions wherein the workers themselves can freely choose
their bargaining representative thru secret ballot.‰ Since it
has not been shown that this order is tainted with
unfairness, this Court will not thwart the holding of a
certification election (Associated Trade Unions [ATU] vs.
Noriel, 88 SCRA 96).
WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is denied, with
costs against the petitioner.
SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, Cruz, Gancayco and Medialdea, JJ.,

concur.

Petition denied.

371

VOL. 162, JUNE 21, 1988 371

Negros Stevedoring Co., Inc. vs. Court of Appeals

Note.·Collective bargaining which is defined as

negotiations towards a collective agreement, is one of the
democratic frameworks under the New Labor Code,
designed to stabilize the relation between labor and
management and to create a climate of sound and stable
industrial peace. (Kiok Loy vs. National Labor Relations
Commission, 141 SCRA 179.)

··o0o··

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016fc688c6feeb63f614003600fb002c009e/p/APP589/?username=Guest Page 5 of 6
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 162 21/01/2020, 1'25 PM

© Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016fc688c6feeb63f614003600fb002c009e/p/APP589/?username=Guest Page 6 of 6