New Union Registration During Existing CBA: Is It Allowed?

TLDR: This case clarifies that a new labor union can be organized and registered even during the lifetime of an existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA), provided it doesn’t disrupt certification election rules or violate the rights of employees to self-organization.

G.R. No. 104692, September 05, 1997

Introduction

Imagine a workplace where employees feel unheard, leading them to seek new representation despite an existing union. This scenario raises a critical question: Can a new labor union be formed and registered while another union’s collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is still in effect? This issue affects not only workers’ rights but also the stability of labor relations within a company.

The Supreme Court case of Katipunan ng mga Manggagawa sa Daungan (KAMADA) vs. Hon. Pura Ferrer-Calleja and Associated Skilled and Technical Employees Union (ASTEUO) delves into this very question. The case revolves around a dispute between two unions in Ocean Terminal Services, Inc. (OTSI): KAMADA, the existing bargaining agent, and ASTEUO, a newly formed union seeking registration. The central legal question is whether ASTEUO’s registration should be cancelled because it occurred during the lifetime of KAMADA’s CBA.

Legal Context

Philippine labor law aims to balance the rights of workers to self-organization with the need for stable labor relations. Key legal provisions and principles are at play in this case:

• Freedom of Association: The Philippine Constitution guarantees the right of employees to form unions or associations for purposes not contrary to law (Article III, Section 8 and Article XIII, Section 3).
• Labor Code: Article 245 of the Labor Code allows supervisory employees (not performing managerial functions) to form their own unions, which means more than one union can exist in a company.
• Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code: Section 3, Rule V, Book V, prohibits holding a certification election within one year from the date of a final certification election result. This rule aims to prevent constant challenges to a union’s status shortly after it has been certified.
• PD 1391: This decree, specifically paragraph 6, states that petitions for certification election, intervention, or disaffiliation are only entertained within the 60-day freedom period before a CBA’s expiration.

The “freedom period” is crucial here. It refers to the 60-day window before the expiry date of a CBA, during which employees can challenge the incumbent union’s representation through a certification election.

Section 5, Rule II, Book V of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code, enumerates the grounds for the denial of registration to local unions. The existence of another union is not one of these grounds.

The Supreme Court, in Knitjoy Manufacturing, Inc. vs. Ferrer-Calleja, recognized exceptions to the “one company-one union” policy, acknowledging the right of employees to form unions for purposes not contrary to law, self-organization, and collective bargaining negotiations.

Case Breakdown

Here’s a breakdown of the events that led to the Supreme Court’s decision:

1. KAMADA, as the existing bargaining agent for OTSI workers, had a CBA with the company.
2. In September 1990, ASTEUO, allegedly composed of OTSI workers, was registered as a union.
3. KAMADA filed a suit to cancel ASTEUO’s registration, arguing that its members were already covered by the existing CBA.
4. The Med-Arbiter cancelled ASTEUO’s registration, stating that organizing another union covering the same workers was not a protected labor activity.
5. ASTEUO appealed to the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR).
6. BLR Director Pura Ferrer-Calleja reversed the Med-Arbiter’s decision and reinstated ASTEUO’s registration.
7. KAMADA filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied.
8. KAMADA then elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for certiorari.

The Court emphasized that the timing of ASTEUO’s registration was crucial. The BLR Director noted, “nowhere does the law contemplate or even intimate that once a union of a bargaining unit has registered with the DOLE, this prevents all other would-be union from registering.”

The Court also highlighted that the prohibition on union registration is tied to certification elections, not the mere existence of a CBA. Specifically, the Court stated that “applications for union registration are not valid if filed within one year from certification elections and/or are done during the effectivity of a CBA unless filed within the freedom period.”

The Supreme Court ultimately sided with ASTEUO, dismissing KAMADA’s petition. The Court reasoned that ASTEUO’s registration occurred before the final proclamation of certification election results and before KAMADA’s new CBA was signed. The Court also underscored that the issue of which union truly represents the working force should be raised during the certification election, not during the registration period.

Practical Implications

This ruling has significant implications for both employers and employees:

• Employees’ Rights: It reinforces the right of employees to form and join unions of their choice, even if another union already exists.
• Union Competition: It allows for healthy competition among unions, potentially leading to better representation for workers.
• Employer Neutrality: Employers must remain neutral and not interfere with employees’ rights to self-organization.
• Certification Elections: The case underscores the importance of certification elections as the primary mechanism for determining which union represents the majority of employees.

Key Lessons

• A new union can be registered even during an existing CBA, as long as it doesn’t violate certification election rules or employees’ rights to self-organization.
• The “freedom period” is the crucial window for challenging an incumbent union’s representation.
• Certification elections are the primary means of determining which union represents the majority of employees.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q: Can a company have more than one union?

A: Yes, the Labor Code and jurisprudence recognize exceptions to the “one company-one union” policy, particularly for supervisory employees and when employees’ rights to self-organization are at stake.

Q: What is the “freedom period”?

A: The freedom period is the 60-day window before the expiry date of a CBA, during which employees can challenge the incumbent union’s representation through a certification election.

Q: When is a union registration prohibited?

A: Union registration is generally prohibited within one year from a certification election or during the effectivity of a CBA, unless it falls within the freedom period.

Q: What is a certification election?

A: A certification election is a process where employees vote to determine which union, if any, will represent them in collective bargaining.

Q: What should an employer do if a new union tries to organize during an existing CBA?

A: Employers should remain neutral and avoid interfering with employees’ rights to self-organization. They should ensure that any actions taken comply with labor laws and regulations.

Q: What are the grounds for denying union registration?

A: The grounds for denying union registration are primarily related to non-compliance with the requirements outlined in Section 4 of Rule II, Book V of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code. The existence of another union is not one of these grounds.

ASG Law specializes in Labor Law. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.