G.R. No. 159553 – 564 Phil. 513 – Labor Law – Labor Relations – Labor Unions; Certification Election – Voting Rights of Dismissed Employees
In November 2001, a certification election was held at Yokohama Tire Philippines, Inc. to certify the Yokohama Employees Union. A total of 401 votes were cast which is broken down in the following manner: 131 in favor of union, 117 in favor of no union, 2 spoiled ballots, and 151 votes not yet counted as they were challenged by both parties. During the election day, Yokohama challenged 78 votes which were cast as it alleged that these 78 votes comprised of dismissed employees who have no rights to vote in the said election. Yokohama filed a formal protest in relation thereto.
On the other hand, the union contested the eligibility of 73 votes cast as it alleged that 5 votes were cast by supervisors and 68 were cast by newly regularized employees whose names were not submitted during the pre-election conference. The union did not formalize its protest but on election day, it already submitted a handwritten manifestation of their contest regarding the said 73 votes. Yokohama later on questioned the procedural validity of the union’s contest regarding the 73 votes.
The case reached the Department of Labor and Employment which ruled against Yokohama. This was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
ISSUE: Whether or not the votes cast by the dismissed employees should be counted.
HELD: Yes. The 78 dismissed employees, in this case, were currently contesting their dismissal as there was a pending illegal dismissal case filed by them against Yokohama. Section 2, Rule XII of the rules implementing Book V of the Labor Code allows a dismissed employee to vote in the certification election if the case contesting the dismissal is still pending.
Anent the issue of the union not formalizing their protest, the Supreme Court ruled that the handwritten manifestation submitted during election day is already substantial compliance to the procedural requirement. But nevertheless, the issue on the 73 votes challenged by the union is already moot because the Med-Arbiter already considered 77 of the 78 challenged votes by Yokohama in favor of the union (pursuant to an order by the Court of Appeals), final tally being: 208 for the union and 121 for no union. So even if the 73 votes are all in favor of “no union”, the union still wins.
