November 16, 1993
Ponente: Quiason, J.
FACTS
National Mines and Allied Workers Union (NAMAWU-MIF) was the SEBA of all rank and file workers of Quality Container Corporation, a domestic corporation engaged in the metal industry.
On September 27, 1991, or 38 days before the expiration of the CBA between the union and the company, the president of NAMAWU-MIF, Reynito de Pedro, dissaffiliated himself from the union and filed with the DOLE a petition for certification election as representative of a new union, the Free Workers Union-Samahang Manggagawa sa QCC (FFW-SMQCC).
NAMAWU-MIF moved to dismiss the petition of FFW-SMQCC on the grounds that: (a) the required consent to the certification election of at least 25% of the rank and file employees had not been met; (b) the petition was not verified as required by law; and (c) De Pedro had no personality to file the petition on behalf of FFW-SMQCC.
On October 30, 1991, FFW-SMQCC filed a second petition for certification election, this time signed and verified by De Pedro. Subsequently, the Med-Arbiter granted the petition for certification election.
NAMAWU-MIF filed an appeal before the SOLE, who thearefter denied it for lack of merit. Hence, the instant petition.
RULING
Petition is dismissed.
Whether Reynito de Pedro has the legal personality to represent FFW-SMQCC. – YES.
Although Reynito de Pedro was the duly elected president of NAMAWU-MIF, he had disaffiliated himself therefrom and joined FFW-SMQCC before the petition for certification election was filed on September 27, 1991. The eventual dismissal of De Pedro from the company is of no moment, considering that the petition for certification election was filed before his dismissal on August 22, 1992.
Whether the lack of verification in FFW-SMQCC's petition is a fatal formal defect. – NO.
The verification of a pleading is a formal, not jurisdictional requisite. Even if verification is lacking and the pleading is formally defective, the courts may dispense with the requirement in the interest of justice and order of correction of the pleading accordingly. Generally, technical and rigid rules of procedure are not binding in labor cases; and this rule is specifically applied in certification election proceedings, which are non-litigious but merely investigative and non-adversarial in character.
Nevertheless, in the instant case, whatever formal defects existed in the first petition were cured and corrected in the second petition for certification election.
Whether FFW-SMQCC satisfies the requirement for number of signatures. – YES.
Attached to the original petition for certification election was a list of 141 supporting signatures out of the 300 employees belonging to the appropriate bargaining unit to be represented by FFW-SMQCC. Granting, as per QCC's allegations, that 36 signatures were falsified and that 13 were disowned, this would still leave 92 undisputed signatures -- still more than the required 75 QCC employees, or 25% of the total number of company employees required by law to support a petition for certification election.
Moreover, the fact that the list of signatures is undated does not necessarily mean that the signatures were obtained prior to the 60-day period before the expiration of the existing collective bargaining agreement. What is important is that the petition for certification election must be filed during the freedom period and that the 25% requirement of supporting signatures be met upon the filing thereof. These requirements have been complied with by FFW-SMQCC in their first and second petitions.
If indeed there are employees in the bargaining unit who refused to be represented by FFW-SMQCC, with all the more reason should a certification election be held where the employees themselves can freely and voluntarily express by secret ballot their choice of bargaining representative. A certification election is the most effective and expeditious way to determine which labor organization can truly represent the working force in the appropriate bargaining unit of the company.
