PHILIPPINE LAND-AIR-SEA LABOR UNION (PLASLU), PETITIONER VS. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

This is a petition to review on certiorari an order of the Court of
Industrial Relations in Case No. 38 MC-Cebu certifying the Allied Workers’
Association of the Philippines, San Carlos Chapter, as the sole collective
bargaining representative of the employees of the San Carlos Milling Co.,
Inc.

The record shows that in said Case No. 38 MC-Cebu the Industrial Court on May
25, 1956 ordered the holding of a certification election to determine which of
the two contending labor unions therein, herein petitioner Philippine
Land-Air-Sea Labor Union (PLASLU) or respondent Allied Workers’ Association of
the Philippines (AWA), shall be the sole collective bargaining agent of the
employees of the San Carlos Milling Co. The pertinent portions of the court’s
order read as follows:

“Considering the history of bargaining relations in this case where there has
only beeta one bargaining unit, and for purposes of effectuating the policies of
the Act, the same should be maintained. In other words, the appropriate
bargaining unit is the Employer unit composed of 602 employees including some
200 piece work (pakiao) workers and stevedores appearing in the Employer’s
payrolls during the milling and off season minus the alleged laborers and
operators of farm tractors who are hired and paid by the sugarcane planters.
(Italics supplied.)

“All the foregoing considered, the Court hereby directs the Department of
Labor to conduct a certification election in the premises of the San Carlos
Milling Company, Ltd. at San Carlos, Negros Occidental for the purpose of
determining, under existing rules and regulations on the matter, which of the
two (2) contending labor unions herein, the PLASLU or the AWA shall be the sole
collective bargaining agent in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The
Employer is hereby ordered to submit a list of employees appearing in its
payroll during milling season for the year 1955 to the Department of Labor
which, together with the ‘Exhibit X-Court’ now part of the records of this case
shall be used as the list of eligible voters minus employees who are
performing functions of supervisors and security guards who are excluded from
participating in said election. (Italics supplied.)

“SO ORDERED.”

Prior to the holding of the election, respondent AWA filed an urgent motion
to exclude 144 employees from participating in the election. The motion,
however, was denied, the Industrial Court holding that the workers sought to be
excluded were eligible to vote since they were actual employees of good standing
of the respondent company during the milling season of 1955 and were included in
the company’s payroll as of that date.

On September 21, 1956, the certification election was held in the premises of
the San Carlos Milling Co., PLASLU receiving 88 votes while AWA garnered 149,
with 390 ballets recorded as challenged, 242 of them by the petitioner PLASLU
and ,148 by the respondent awa. Within 72 ahours after the closing of the
election, as required by the Rules for Certification Election, awa filed with
the Industrial Court a petition contesting the election on the ground of the
ineligibility of the voters who cast the 148 ballots it challenged. Said
respondent awa also alleged that the 242 ballots challenged by PLASLU were cast
by legitimate employees of the company, as they were the votes of “piece work
(pakiao) workers and stevedores appearing in the employer’s payroll during the
milling and off-season” of 1955. PLASLU, on the other hand, in an urgent motion
filed on October 4, 1956, questioned the validity of the 242 ballots cast by the
stevedores and piece workers. The motion was opposed by awa on the ground that
as a protest of the election it was filed late. The Industrial Court, however,
considered the same as an answer to awa’s petition, and on September 4, 1957,
after hearing the arguments of the parties, ordered that all the 390 challenged
ballots be opened and canvassed and the corresponding votes added to those
already credited to the contending labor unions. PLASLU moved for
reconsideration of the order but the motion was denied and pursuant to said
order the challenged ballots were opened. After the canvass, 148 votes
challenged by awa were counted in favor of PLASLU. Of the 242 votes challenged
by PLASLU, 3 were counted in its favor, 228 credited in favor of awa, and 11
declared either for no union or spoiled ballots. Adding the votes to the results
of the certification election, the final count showed that respondent AWA
garnered a total of 377 votes as against 239 for PLASLU. Accordingly, said
respondent was certified by the Industrial Court in its order dated March 12,
1958 as the sole collective bargaining agent of the employees of the San Carlos
Milling Co. As its motion for reconsideration of the order was denied by the
court en banc—with Judge Feliciano Tabigne dissenting—the petitioner
PLASLU filed the present petition for review, contending that the Industrial
Court erred in not excluding the 242 votes challenged by it from the total
number of votes credited to respondent AWA.

We find petitioner’s contention to be meritorious.

In the order of May 25, 1956 authorizing the certification election, the
trial judge of the Industrial Court directed that the “list of employees
appearing in its payroll during milling season for the year 1955 * * * together
with the Exhibit ‘X-Court’ now part of the records of this case shall be used as
the list of eligible voters minus employees who are performing functions of
supervisors, and security guards who are excluded from participating in said
election.” It being undisputed that the challenged votes were cast by casual
employees consisting of stevedores and piece workers who—as stated by Judge
Tabigne in his dissent— “were not included in the list of employees appearing in
the payroll of the company during the milling season for the year 1955 nor did
they appear in the Exhibit ‘X-Court’ which formed portion of the list of
personnel allowed to vote in said certification election”, the said challenged
votes should have been excluded. Citing the declaration of the Industrial Court
that the appropriate bargaining unit is the employer’s unit composed of 602
employees, including the piece workers and stevedores whose votes were
challenged by PLASLU, the respondent AWA argues that the challenged votes were
cast by employees eligible to vote. It will be noted, however, that these
employees whose votes were challenged were hired on temporary or casual basis
and had work of a different nature from those of the laborers permitted to vote
in the certification election. In the case of Democratic Labor Union
vs. Cebu Stevedoring Co., Inc., et al. (G.R. No. L-10321, February 28,
1958) this Court had occasion to rule that in the determination of the proper
constituency of a collective bargaining unit, certain factors must be
considered, among them, the employment status of the employees to be affected,
that is to say, the positions and categories of work to which they belong, and
the unity of employees’ interest such as substantial similarity of work and
duties. The most efficacious bargaining unit is one which is comprised of
constituents enjoying a community or mutuality of interest. And this is so
because the basic test of a bargaining unit’s acceptability is whether it will
best assure to all employees the exercise of their collective bargaining rights.
(See also Alhambra Cigar & Cigarette Manufacturing Co. vs.
Alhambra Employees’ Association, 107 Phil., 23.) It appearing that the 242
stevedores and piece workers, whose votes have been challenged, were employed on
a casual or day to day basis and have no reasonable basis for continued or
renewed employment for any appreciable substantial time—not to mention the
nature of work they perform—they cannot be considered to have such mutuality of
interest as to justify their inclusion in a bargaining unit composed of
permanent or regular employees.

There is nothing to the contention that the order complained of is merely
complementary to the order of the Industrial Court dated September 4, 1957,
which has become final and executory the same not having been appealed. It will
be observed that the said order of September 4, 1957 merely ordered the opening
and canvassing of the challenged ballots. Any appeal taken from said order would
therefore have been premature.

Disregarding the votes cast by the stevedores and piece workers which were
counted in favor of the respondent AWA, the final results of the certification
election show that the petitioner PLASLU garnered a majority of the votes cast
by eligible voters. Consequently, said petitioner should be certified as the
sole collective bargaining representative of the employees of the San Carlos
Milling Co.

Wherefore, the order complained of is reversed and the petitioner PLASLU is
hereby certified as the collective bargaining agent of the employees of the San
Carlos Milling Company. Without costs.

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes,
J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, and Dizon, JJ., concur.

Order reversed.