No. L-82914. June 20, 1988.

*
Rasidali C. Abdullah ordering a certification elec-tion
KAPATIRAN SA MEAT AND CANNING DIVISION to be conducted among the regular daily paid rank and
(TUPAS Local Chapter No. 1027), petitioner, vs. THE file employees/workers of Universal Robina
HONORABLE BLR DIRECTOR PURA FERRER Corporation-Meat and Canning Division to determine
CALLEJA, MEAT AND CANNING DIVISION which of the contending unions:
369
UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION and MEAT
AND CANNING DIVISION NEW EMPLOYEES AND VOL. 162, JUNE 20, 1988 369
WORKERS UNITED LABOR ORGANIZATION, Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning
respondents. Division vs. Ferrer-Calleja
Labor; Labor Union; Right to self-organization; The
right of members of the Iglesia ni Kristo sect not to join a labor 1. a)Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning Division
union for being contrary to their religious beliefs does not bar TUPAS Local Chapter No. 1027 (or “TUPAS”
the members of that sect from forming their own union; for brevity);
Reason.—After deliberating on the petition and the 2. b)Meat and Canning Division New Employees
documents annexed thereto, We find no merit in the petition.
and Workers United Labor Organization (or
The public respondent did not err in dismissing the
petitioner’s appeal in BLR Case No. A-12-389-87. This
“NEW ULO” for brevity);
Court’s decision in Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope Workers’ 3. c)No union.
Union, 59 SCRA 54, upholding the right of members of the
IGLESIA NI KRISTO sect not to join a labor union for being shall be the bargaining unit of the daily wage rank and
contrary to their religious beliefs, does not bar the members file employees in the Meat and Canning Division of the
of that sect from forming their own union. The public company.
____________
From 1984 to 1987 TUPAS was the sole and
* FIRST DIVISION. exclusive collective bargaining representative of the
workers in the Meat and Canning Division of the
368
Universal Robina Corporation, with a 3-year collective
368 SUPREME bargaining agreement (CBA) which was to expire on
November 15, 1987.
COURT REPORTS
Within the freedom period of 60 days prior to the
ANNOTATED expiration of its CBA, TUPAS filed an amended notice
Kapatiran sa Meat and of strike on September 28, 1987 as a means of
Canning Division vs. Ferrer- pressuring the company to extend, renew, or negotiate
Calleja a new CBA with it.
respondent correctly observed that the “recognition of On October 8, 1987, the NEW ULO, composed
the tenets of the sect x x x should not infringe on the basic mostly of workers belonging to the IGLESIA NI
right of self-organization granted by the constitution to KRISTO sect, registered as a labor union.
workers, regardless of religious affilia-tion.” On October 12, 1987, the TUPAS staged a strike.
Same; Same; Same; Fact that TUPAS was able to ROBINA obtained an injunction against the strike,
negotiate a new CBA with ROBINA does not foreclose the resulting in an agreement to return to work and for the
right of the rival union NEW ULO to challenge TUPAS’ claim parties to negotiate a new CBA.
to majority status.—The fact that TUPAS was able to The next day, October 13, 1987, NEW ULO,
negotiate a new CBA with ROBINA within the 60-day
claiming that it has “the majority of the daily wage
freedom period of the existing CBA, does not foreclose the
right of the rival union, NEW ULO, to challege TUPAS’ claim
rank and file employees numbering 191,” filed a
to majority status, by filing a timely petition for certification petition for a certification election at the Bureau of
election on October 13, 1987 before TUPAS’ old CBA expired Labor Relations (Annex A).
on November 15, 1987 and before it signed a new CBA with TUPAS moved to dismiss the petition for being
the company on December 3, 1987. As pointed out by Med- defective in form and that the members of the NEW
Arbiter Abdullah, a “certification election is the best forum in ULO were mostly members of the Iglesia ni Kristo sect
ascertaining the majority status of the contending unions which three (3) years previous refused to affiliate with
wherein the workers themselves can freely choose their any labor union. It also accused the company of using
bargaining representative thru secret ballot.” Since it has not
the NEW ULO to defeat TUPAS’ bargaining rights
been shown that this order is tainted with unfairness, this
Court will not thwart the holding of a certification election. (Annex B).
On November 17, 1987, the Med-Arbiter ordered
PETITION for certiorari to review the order of the the holding of a certification election within 20 days
Director of the Bureau of Labor Relations. (Annex C).
TUPAS appealed to the Bureau of Labor Relations
The facts are stated in the resolution of the Court. (BLR). In the meantime, it was able to negotiate a new
Alar, Comia, Manalo and Associates for 3-year CBA with ROBINA, which was signed on
petitioner. December 3, 1987 and to expire on November 15, 1990.
370
Danilo Bolos for respondent Robina Corporation.
370 SUPREME COURT
RESOLUTION
REPORTS ANNOTATED
GRIÑO-AQUINO, J.: Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning
Division vs. Ferrer-Calleja
The petitioner, Kapatiran sa Meat and Canning On January 27, 1988, respondent BLR Director Calleja
Division (TUPAS Local Chapter No. 1027) hereinafter dismissed the appeal (Annex D).
referred to as “TUPAS,” seeks a review of the resolution TUPAS’ motion for reconsideration (Annex E) was
dated January 27, 1988 (Annex D) of public respondent denied on March 17, 1988 (Annex F). On April 30, 1988,
Pura Ferrer-Calleja, Director of the Bureau of Labor it filed this petition alleging that the public respondent
Relations, dismissing its appeal from the Order dated acted in excess of her jurisdiction and with grave abuse
November 17, 1987 (Annex C) of the Med-Arbiter
of discretion in affirming the Med-Arbiter’s 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 petitioner’s appeal in BLR Case No. A-
12-389-87. This Court’s decision in Victoriano vs.
Elizalde Rope Workers’ 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-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 TUPAS’ claim to
majority status, by filing a timely petition for
certification election on October 13, 1987 before
TUPAS’ 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——