24 Philtranco Services Enterprises Vs BLR

[BASIC CONCEPTS AND DOCTRINES: ONE COMPANY – ONE UNION]  Arbiter Paterno Adap: Petition is dismissed.
biter Paterno Adap: Petition is dismissed. If there are still individual

Philtranco Services Enterprises vs BLR members of the herein petitioner eligible to join a labor organization, it is
JUNE 28, 1989 | GUTIERREZ, JR., J. hereby directed that all should be included/incorporated in the existing
bargaining unit.
Petitioner/s: Philtranco Service Enterprises  BLR: reversed the resolution of the Med-Arbiter. A motion for reconsideration
Respondents: Bureau Of Labor Relations and Kapisanan Ng Mga Kawani, Assistant, was denied in an order
Manggagawa At Konpidensiyal Sa Philtranco
Issues/Ruling:
Doctrine: As held in the case of General Rubber and Footwear Corp. v. Bureau of W/N there is a need for the formation of another union in PHILTRANCO – NO,
Labor Relations (155 SCRA 283 [1987]): xxx It has been the policy of the Bureau to qualified members of the KASAMA KO may join the NAMAWU-MIF if they want to be
encourage the formation of an employer unit 'unless circumstances otherwise require. union members, and to be consistent with the one-union, one-company policy of the
Department of Labor and Employment, and the laws it enforces.
The proliferation of unions in an employer unit is discouraged as a matter of policy
 We are constrained to disallow the formation of another union. There is no
unless there are compelling reasons which would deny a certain class of employees dispute that there exists a labor union in the company, herein intervenor, the
the right to self-organization for purposes of collective bargaining. This case does not NAMAWU-MIF which is the collective bargaining agent of the rank and file
fall squarely within the exception. employees in PHILTRANCO.
 Article 2 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between PHILTRANCO and
Facts: NAMAWU-MIF under the sub-title Appropriate Bargaining Unit provides:
 Case: petition for certiorari to review the order of the BLR o Section 1 -The appropriate bargaining unit covered by this agreement
 Philtranco Service Enterprises, Inc. is a land transportation company consists of all regular rank- and file employees of the company.
engaged in the business of carrying passengers and freight. The company Managerial, confidential, casuals, temporary, probationary and
employees included field workers consisting of drivers, conductors, coach contractual employees as well as trainees, apprentices, security
drivers, coach stewards and mechanics and office employees like clerks, personnel and foreman are excluded from the bargaining unit and
cashiers, programmers, telephone operators, etc. therefore, not covered by this AGREEMENT. The job description
 Kapisanan ng mga Kawani, Assistant, Manggagawa at Konpidensyal sa outside the bargaining unit are enumerated in the list hereto attached
Philtranco (KASAMA KO), a registered labor organization filed a petition for as Annex '1' and made an integral part hereof (Emphasis supplied;
certification election with the Department of Labor and Employment, alleging Rollo, p. 27)
among others that  We see no need for the formation of another union in PHILTRANCO. The
o 3. Petitioner desires to represent all professional, technical, qualified members of the KASAMA KO may join the NAMAWU-MIF if they
administrative, and confidential employees personnel of respondent at want to be union members, and to be consistent with the one-union, one-
its establishments in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao for purposes of company policy of the Department of Labor and Employment, and the laws it
collective bargaining; enforces. As held in the case of General Rubber and Footwear Corp. v.
o 4. The aforementioned employees were always expressly excluded Bureau of Labor Relations (155 SCRA 283 [1987]):
from participating in the certification election conducted among the o xxx It has been the policy of the Bureau to encourage the formation of
rank and file employees (drivers, conductors, coach drivers, coach an employer unit 'unless circumstances otherwise require. The
stewards, and mechanics) of respondent and are excluded from the proliferation of unions in an employer unit is discouraged as a matter
bargaining unit covered by the CBA between respondent and its rank of policy unless there are compelling reasons which would deny a
and file employees. In addition, there exist substantial differences in certain class of employees the right to self-organization for purposes
the terms and conditions of employment between the above- of collective bargaining. This case does not fall squarely within the
mentioned employees, hence, the former are covered by another exception.
appropriate bargaining unit which is separate and distinct from that of  There are no compelling reasons in this case such as a denial to the
the rank and file employees of respondent and; which has been KASAMA KO group of the right to join the certified bargaining unit or
recognized by the Bureau of Labor Relations and upheld by the substantial distinctions warranting the recognition of a separate group of
Honorable Supreme Court. Attached hereto as Annex 'A' and Annex rank and file workers. Precisely, NAMAWU-MIF intervened to make it clear it
'B' are copies of the decision of the BLR and the Supreme Court in has no objections to qualified rank and file workers joining its union.
support thereof; xxx
 National Mines and Allied Workers Union (NAMAWU-MIF) filed a motion for Dispositive
intervention alleging that it is the bargaining agent of the workers at WHEREFORE, the decision of the Bureau of Labor Relations, dated September 5,
Philtranco and as such it has a substantial interest in the outcome of the 1988 and the Order dated October 10, 1988 are hereby SET ASIDE. The resolution
petition. of the Med-Arbiter dated April 4, 1988 is REINSTATED. The restraining order issued
by the Court on November 7, 1988 is made permanent. SO ORDERED.

24 Philtranco Services Enterprises Vs BLR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

24 Philtranco Services Enterprises Vs BLR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

24 Philtranco Services Enterprises Vs BLR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

[BASIC CONCEPTS AND DOCTRINES: ONE COMPANY – ONE UNION]  Arbiter Paterno Adap: Petition is dismissed.

biter Paterno Adap: Petition is dismissed. If there are still individual

You might also like