University of the Philippines College of Law

2D

Topic RIGHT TO SELF-ORGANIZATION

Case No. GR No. 84433 / JUNE 2, 1992
Case Name ALEXANDER REYES, ALBERTO M. NERA, EDGARDO M. GECA and 138 others vs
CRESENCIANO B. TRAJANO, as Officer-in-Charge, Bureau of Labor Relations, Med.
Arbiter PATERNO ADAP, and TRI-UNION EMPLOYEES UNION, et al.
Ponente NARVASA, cj.

RELEVANT FACTS

 A certification election was authorized to be conducted by the Bureau of Labor Relations among the
employees of Tri-Union Industries Corporation. 141 of the voting employees were members of Iglesia ni
Kristo (INK). The ballots had 3 choices: (a) TUPAS, (b) TUEU-OLALIA and (c) "NO UNION."
 The final tally of the votes showed the following results:
o TUPAS (Trade Union of the Philippines and Allied Services) 1
o TUEU-OLALIA (Tri-Union Employees Union-Organized Labor Association in Line Industries and
Agriculture) 95
o NO UNION 1
o SPOILED 1
o CHALLENGED 141
 The challenged votes were those by the 141 INK members. They were segregated and excluded from the
final count in virtue of an agreement between the competing unions, reached at the pre-election
conference, that the INK members should not be allowed to vote "because they are not members of any
union and refused to participate in the previous certification elections."
 INK employees protested their exclusion by filing a petition to cancel the election, alleging its unfairness
and the result thereof did "not reflect the true sentiments of the majority of the employees."
 The Med-Arbiter denied the petition and certified TEUE-OLALIA as the sole and exclusive bargaining
agent of the rank-and-file employees. He decided the fact that "religious belief was (being) utilized to
render meaningless the rights of the non-members of the INK to exercise the rights to be represented by
a labor organization as the bargaining agent," and that they had no legal since they were not parties to
the petition for certification election.
 Bureau of Labor Relations denied the appeal, stating that they had no legal personality to protest their
alleged disenfrachisement since they are not part of a duly organized labor union. Petitioners also did
not participate in previous certification elections in the company for the reason that their religious
beliefs do not allow them to form, join or assist labor organizations.

ISSUE AND RATIO DECIDENDI

Issue
W/N the members of Iglesia
ni Kristo should be included
in the final count of the
certification election
Ratio
YES
1. The purpose of a certification election is the ascertainment of the
wishes of the majority of the employees: to be or not to be
represented by a labor organization. Their considerations (e.g.
religious) for their votes may not be inquired into at all. The minority
 University of the Philippines College of Law
2D

employees can do nothing but wait for another suitable occasion to

W/N the petitioners have the
legal personality to file this
petition?
petition for a certification election and hope that the results will be
different
2. Guaranteed to all employees is the "right to self-organization and to
form, join, or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for
purposes of collective bargaining," as stated in the law.
3. Logically, the right NOT to join, affiliate with, or assist any union, and
to disaffiliate or resign from a labor organization, is subsumed in the
right to join, affiliate with, or assist any union, and to maintain
membership therein. The right to form or join a labor organization
necessarily includes the right to refuse or refrain from exercising said
right.
4. It is self-evident that just as no one should be denied the exercise of a
right granted by law, so also, no one should be compelled to exercise
such a conferred right. The fact that a person has opted to acquire
membership in a labor union does not preclude his subsequently
opting to renounce such membership.
5. The right to refuse to join or be represented by any labor organization
is recognized not only by law but also in the rules drawn up for
implementation thereof.
YES
1. Neither law, rule nor jurisprudence requires that only employees
affiliated with any labor organization may take part in a certification
election. The law grants the right to vote to all bona fide employees in
the bargaining unit, whether they are members of a labor
organization or not
2. Neither does the contention that petitioners should be denied the
right to vote because they "did not participate in previous
certification elections.” No law, administrative rule or precedent
prescribes forfeiture of such right by reason of neglect to exercise the
right in past certification elections.

RULING

WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is GRANTED; the Decision of the then Officer-in-Charge of the Bureau of
Labor Relations dated December 21, 1987 (affirming the Order of the Med-Arbiter dated July 22, 1988) is
ANNULLED and SET ASIDE; and the petitioners are DECLARED to have legally exercised their right to vote, and
their ballots should be canvassed and, if validly and properly made out, counted and tallied for the choices
written therein. Costs against private respondents.