FACTS:

This case involves a petition for certiorari seeking to annul and set aside the decision of the respondent Director Cresenciano B. Trajano of the Bureau of Labor Relations, Ministry of Labor and Employment, affirming the order of Med-Arbiter Demetrio Correa giving due course to the petition for certification election filed by the private respondent Federation of Unions of Rizal (FUR) - TUCP.

The factual background of the case is as follows: Petitioner National Congress of Unions filed a motion to intervene in the petition for certification election filed by the private respondent union. The Acting Med-Arbiter dismissed the petition for certification election for lack of merit since it was barred by a pending collective bargaining deadlock.

The private respondent union filed an appeal to the Bureau of Labor Relations, which set aside the order of the Acting Med-Arbiter and remanded the case for further hearings. The Med-Arbiter then issued an order giving due course to the petition and ordering the election.

During the pendency of the appeal, a collective bargaining agreement was executed by the management and the petitioner union, which was subsequently ratified by the rank and file employees. The private respondents were labor organizations duly registered with the Department of Labor and Employment. The private respondent union was the certified exclusive bargaining representative of the rank and file workers.

The petitioner union filed a petition for deadlock in collective bargaining, which resulted in the submission of the dispute to compulsory arbitration. Meanwhile, the private respondent union filed a petition for certification election, alleging that a majority of the employees had disaffiliated from the petitioner union and joined the private respondent union.

The respondent Director, in his decision, affirmed the order of the Med-Arbiter but qualified it by stating that the certification election should be conducted to ascertain the true sentiments of the workers. The decision also stated that the collective agreement should be respected by the winning union in the election. The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, which was later denied.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not private respondent FUR-TUCP has the majority support of the employees.

2. Whether or not a certification election should be conducted to determine the true majority representative.

RULING:

1. Yes, private respondent FUR-TUCP has the majority support of the employees. The fact that more than 75% of the workers disaffiliated from the intervenor, Calinog Refinery Employees Union - NACUSIP-TUCP, and joined the ranks of FUR-TUCP indicates that the latter has the majority support.

2. Yes, a certification election should be conducted to determine the true majority representative. This is the most expeditious, practical, and democratic option to ascertain the true sentiments of the workers and determine which labor organization deserves their loyalty. The 10 September 1983 collective agreement should be respected by the winning union in the election, not only because it is an arbitration award but also because substantial benefits are provided thereunder.

PRINCIPLES:

• The majority support of the employees is a determining factor in recognizing a labor organization as the exclusive bargaining representative.

• Certification elections are conducted to determine the true majority representative and ascertain the true sentiments of the workers.

• Arbitration awards, such as a collective agreement, should be respected and implemented by the winning union in a certification election.