Bargaining Agent DIGEST - TH Shopfitters v. TH Shopfitters Union

G.R. No. 191714

February 26, 2014

T & H SHOPFITTERS CORPORATIONGIN !"EEN CORPORATION, STINNES H"ANG, #EN H"ANG a$% ROGEIO 'A(RIAGA, Petitioners, vs. T & H SHOPFITTERS CORPORATIONGIN !"EEN )OR*ERS "NION, EPI(IO +A(IAR, (ARI OS GON+AES, )IIA' (O'INGO, #O##- CASTIO, I''- '. PASC"A, GER'ANO '. #AO, RICO . 'AN+ANO, AAN . CAORINA, RO'EO #ANCO, GI#ERT '. GARCIA, CAROS F. GERIO, E("AR(O E("AR(O A. GRAN(E, GRAN(E, E(I#RAN E(I#RAN(O (O 'ARTICIO 'ARTICIO,, IENCI IENCIO O S"SANO, S"SANO, ROAN(O ROAN(O GARCIA, GARCIA, R., 'ICHAE FA#A#IER, RO)E 'A(RIAGA, PRESNI TOENTINO, 'ARIN ENT"RA, FRANCISCO RIARES, PACI(O TOENTINO a$% ROAN(O RO'ERO,  Respondents. (OCTRINE/ A (OCTRINE/  A certificatio certification n election is is the sole concern concern of the the workers, workers, save when when the employer employer itself has has to file the petition, but even after such filing, its role in the certification process ceases and becames merely a bystander. Petitioner-companies had no business persuading and/or assisting its employees in their legally protected independent process of selecting their exclusive bargaining representative. o interfere ! "#P FACTS/ he workers union filed their $omplaint for "#P against %& 'hopfitters and (in )ueen before the #abor #abor Arbiter Arbiter.. *n their their desire desire to improve improve their their working working conditio conditions, ns, respond respondents ents and other other employe employees es of  petitioners held their first formal meeting to discuss the formation of a union. he following day, + employees were barred from entering entering petition petitioners ers factory premises premises located located in $astille $astille0os, 0os, 1ambales 1ambales,, and ordered ordered to transfer to %& 'hopfitters warehouse at 'ubic purportedly because of its expansion. Afterwards, the said seventeen + employees were repeatedly ordered to go on forced leave due to the unavailability of work. Respond Respondents ents contend contended ed that the affecte affected d employe employees es were were not given given regular regular work assignme assignments, nts, while while subcontractors subcontractors were continuously hired to perform their functions. 2uring mediation, Petitioners agreed to give priority to regular employees in the distribution of work assignments. Respondents averred, however, that petitioners never complied. he "nion filed a petition for certification election. An order was issued to hold the certification election in both %& 'hopfitters and (in )ueen.  A day day preceding preceding the certification certification election, election, Petitioners Petitioners sponsored sponsored a field trip to *ba, *ba, 1ambales, for for its employees. employees. he officers and members of the &'-() "nion were purportedly purportedly excluded from the field trip. 3n the evening of the field trip, a sales officer of petitioners, campaigned against the union in the forthcoming certification election. he following day, the employees were escorted from the field trip to the polling center in 1ambales to cast their votes. 2ue to the heavy pressure exerted by petitioners, the votes for 4no union4 prevailed. he "nion filed its protest with respect to the certification election proceedings. #A5 2ismissed respondents "6*36s complaint and all their money claims for lack of merit. 6#R$5 6#R$5 Reversed Reversed and ruled ruled in favor favor of respond respondents ents.. *t reasone reasoned5 d5 he respond respondents ents 7herein petitioners petitioners88 committed "#P acts consisting in interfering with the exercise of the employees right to self-organi9ation +specifically, sponsoring a field trip on the day preceding the certification election, warning the employees of  dire conse:uences should the union prevail, and escorting them to the polling center and discriminating in regard to conditions of employment in order to discourage union membership +assigning union officers and active union members as grass cutters on rotation basis. $A5 'ustained the 6#R$ ruling. *''";5 +? the active campaign by the sales officer of petitioners against the union prevailing as a bargaining agent during the field trip> +@ escorting its employees after the field trip to the polling center> + the continuous hiring of subcontractors performing respondents functions> +B assigning union members to the $abangan site to work as grass cutters> and +C the enforcement of work on a rotational basis for union members, all reek of interference on the part of  petitioners. *ndubitably, the various acts of petitioners, taken together, reasonably support an inference that, indeed, such were all orchestrated to restrict r espondents free exercise of their right to self-organi9ation. he $ourt is of the considered view that petitioners undisputed actions prior and immediately before the scheduled certification election, while seemingly innocuous, unduly meddled in the affairs of its employees in selecting their exclusive bargaining representative. *n &oly $hild $atholic 'chool v. &on. Patricia 'to. omas, the $ourt ruled that a certification election was the sole concern of the workers, save when the employer itself had to file the petition, but even after such filing, its role in the certification process ceased and became merely a bystander. &ere, petitioners had no business persuading and/or assisting its employees in their legally protected independent process of selecting their exclusive bargaining representative. he fact and peculiar timing of the field trip sponsored by petitioners for its employees not affiliated with &'-() "nion, although a positive enticement, was undoubtedly extraneous influence designed to impede respondents in their :uest to be certified. his cannot be countenanced. 6ot content with achieving a 4no union4 vote in the certification election, petitioners launched a vindictive campaign against union members by assigning work on a rotational basis while subcontractors performed the latters functions regularly.