Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 38 views

    98 PAFLU V Hon. Calleja

    Uploaded by

    Ramil Garcia
    The Supreme Court ruled that the requirement for a union to submit written consent from 20% of employees when filing a petition for certification election does not apply to motions to intervene in such proceedings. It found the 20% requirement aims to ensure the petitioning union has substantial support for representation, but a motion to intervene only seeks to participate in the proceedings to determine representation, not mandate an election. Thus, as long as the motion to intervene is timely and does not cause injustice, it should be allowed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    98 PAFLU V Hon. Calleja

    Uploaded by

    Ramil Garcia
    38 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the requirement for a union to submit written consent from 20% of employees when filing a petition for certification election does not apply to motions to intervene in such proceedings. It found the 20% requirement aims to ensure the petitioning union has substantial support for representation, but a motion to intervene only seeks to participate in the proceedings to determine representation, not mandate an election. Thus, as long as the motion to intervene is timely and does not cause injustice, it should be allowed.

    Original Description:

    LABOR LAW CASE

    Original Title

    98_PAFLU_v_Hon._Calleja.docx (1)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the requirement for a union to submit written consent from 20% of employees when filing a petition for certification election does not apply to motions to intervene in such proceedings. It found the 20% requirement aims to ensure the petitioning union has substantial support for representation, but a motion to intervene only seeks to participate in the proceedings to determine representation, not mandate an election. Thus, as long as the motion to intervene is timely and does not cause injustice, it should be allowed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    38 views1 page

    98 PAFLU V Hon. Calleja

    Uploaded by

    Ramil Garcia
    The Supreme Court ruled that the requirement for a union to submit written consent from 20% of employees when filing a petition for certification election does not apply to motions to intervene in such proceedings. It found the 20% requirement aims to ensure the petitioning union has substantial support for representation, but a motion to intervene only seeks to participate in the proceedings to determine representation, not mandate an election. Thus, as long as the motion to intervene is timely and does not cause injustice, it should be allowed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Phil. Association of Free Labor Unions v.

    Ferrer-Calleja
    1. Date: January 26, 1989
    2. Petitioner: PAFLU (September Convention)
    3. Respondent: BLR Director Pura Ferrer-Calleja, Kalipunan ng Manggagawang Pilipino (KAMAPI),
    Malayang Samahan ng mga Mangagawa sa Hundred Island Chemical Corporation (Samahan), and
    Hundred Islands Corporation
    4. Ponente: Paras
    5. Facts:
     Samahan filed a Petition for Certification Election among the Rank-and-File of Hundred
    Islands Corporation with the BLR
    - 2 Motions to Intervene were filed by:
    o PAFLU, accompanied by the WRITTEN CONSENT of 20% of the Rank-and-File
    o KAMAPI, but NOT ACCOMPANIED by a written consent
     PAFLU Moved for the STRIKING OUT of KAMAPI’s intervention die to lack of written consent
     Med-Arbiter – PAFLU’s Motion to Intervene GRANTED. KAMAPI’s Motion to Intervene DENIED
     BLR – Med-Arbiter MODIFY. BOTH Motions to Intervene are GRANTED
    - Only way to know if KAMAPI has the support of the rank-and-file is to allow it to intervene

    m
    6. Issue:

    er as
     W/N KAMAPI should be allowed to participate through intervention without prior showing that it has

    co
    the required written support of at least 20% of employees? (YES)

    eH w
    7. Ratio:

    o.
     It is clear in Sec. 6, Rule V, of the IRR of EO 1111 and Sec. 7 of EO 1112 that the requisite written
    rs e
    consent of 20% of the workers applies to Petitions for Certification Election ONLY and NOT to
    ou urc
    Motions for Intervention
    - There is NO MENTION that the same requirement applies to Motions for Intervention either in
    the above provisions or in the IRR of the Labor Code
    o

     Reason for the 20% requirement is to ensure that the Petitioning Union has a Substantial
    aC s

    Interest in the Representation Proceedings and that a Considerable Number of workers Desire
    vi y re

    their representation by the union for COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PURPOSES


    - Hence, the mere fact that 20% of workers signify their support for the petition makes it
    MANDATORY on the Med-Arbiter to ORDER the holding of a certification election in an
    UNORGANIZED ESTABLISHMENT
    ed d

    o Such a 20% requirement is PECULIAR to Petitions for Certification Election


    ar stu

     Thus, KAMAPI must be allowed to participate since the essence of a certification election is to
    SETTLE which union is preferred
    - As long as the Motion is Timely Filed and the intervention will NOT Cause Injustice, it should
    NOT BE DENIED
    is

    8. Dispositive:
    Th

     Petition DISMISSED
    sh

    1 SEC. 6.PROCEDURE. Upon receipt of a petition, the Regional Director shall assign the case to a Med-Arbiter for appropriate action. The Med-
    Arbiter shall have twenty (20) working days within which to grant or dismiss the petition. In a petition filed by a legitimate organization involving an
    unorganized establishment, the Med-Arbiter shall grant the petition upon verification that the same is supported by the written consent of at least
    twenty (20%) of all the employees in the collective bargaining unit, the twenty (20%) support shall be satisfied upon the filing of the petition for
    certification election, otherwise, the petition shall be dismissed. In either case, he shall cite the ground.
    2 SEC. 7.Articles 257 and 258 of the Labor Code of the Philippines are hereby amended to read as follows:
    xxx xxx xxx
    'Art. 258. Petitions in unorganized establishments. — In any establishment where there is no certified bargaining agent, the petition for certification
    election filed by a legitimate labor organization shall be supported by the written consent of at least twenty (20%) percent of all the employees in
    the bargaining unit. Upon receipt of such petition, the Med-Arbiter shall automatically order the conduct of a certification election.'
    This study source was downloaded by 100000753595826 from CourseHero.com on 04-17-2021 05:31:16 GMT -05:00

    https://www.coursehero.com/file/50610286/98-PAFLU-v-Hon-Callejadocx/
    Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

    You might also like