FACTS:

The National Federation of Labor Unions (NAFLU) was declared the exclusive bargaining representative of all rank-and-file employees of Viron Garments Manufacturing Co., Inc. (VIRON) by virtue of a Resolution of the Bureau of Labor Relations. Four years later, another union, the Kaisahan ng Manggagawang Pilipino (KAMPIL-Katipunan) filed a petition for certification election among the employees of VIRON, claiming support from more than 30% of the workers. NAFLU opposed the petition, but the Med-Arbiter ordered that a certification election be held as requested by KAMPIL. NAFLU appealed and contended that a bargaining deadlock had arisen and that a notice of strike had been filed, which would bar the petition for election under the law. The Director of Labor Relations set aside the Med-Arbiter's order and dismissed KAMPIL's petition. KAMPIL filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied. KAMPIL then filed a certiorari action before the Supreme Court, questioning the Director's resolution. The Supreme Court held that the one-year prohibition on holding a certification election from the date of the final certification election result did not apply in this case as the certification year had expired. The Court also concluded that there was no evidence of a bargaining deadlock, submission to conciliation or arbitration, or a valid notice of strike before KAMPIL filed its petition. Therefore, the Court nullified and set aside the Director's resolution, ruling that it was a grave abuse of discretion to rule otherwise.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the petition for certification election filed by KAMPIL is barred due to the existence of a bargaining deadlock between VIRON and NAFLU.

2. Whether the activities of NAFLU after the filing of the petition for certification election can be considered as precluding the holding of the certification election.

RULING:

1. The Court held that:

2. The petition for certification election filed by KAMPIL is not barred due to the absence of a bargaining deadlock between VIRON and NAFLU that had been submitted to conciliation or arbitration or had become the subject of a valid notice of strike or lockout. There is no proof that NAFLU had taken any legal action to coerce VIRON to comply with its duty to bargain collectively.

3. The activities of NAFLU after the filing of the petition for certification election cannot be considered as precluding the holding of the certification election.

PRINCIPLES:

• A certification election can be held at any time in the absence of a collective bargaining agreement, provided that certain conditions under the law are not present. (Section 3, Rule V, Book V of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code)

• The prohibition on the holding of a certification election within one year from the date of issuance of declaration of a final certification election result does not apply when the certification year has already expired.