FVC Labor Union – Phil Transport and General Workers Org (FVCLU-PTGWO) vs Sama-samang Nagkakaisang Maggagawa sa FVC-Solidarity of Independent and General Labor Organizations (SANAMA-FVC-SIGLO)

 FVC Labor Union – Phil Transport and General Workers Org (FVCLU-PTGWO) vs 

Sama-samang Nagkakaisang Maggagawa sa FVC-Solidarity of Independent and General Labor Organizations (SANAMA-FVC-SIGLO)

GR No. 176249

November 27, 2009

DOCTRINE: Despite an agreement for a CBA with a life of more than five years, either as an original provision or by amendment, the bargaining union’s exclusive bargaining status is effective only for five years and can be challenged within sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the CBA’s first five years.

FACTS:

Petitioner FVCLU-PTGWO signed a five-year collective bargaining agreement with the company, which should originally run from February 1, 1998 to January 30, 2003. At the end of the 3rd year of the CBA, FVCLU-PTGWO and the company entered into the renegotiation of the CBA and modified, among other provisions, the CBA’s duration.  The renegotiated CBA extended the original five-year period of the CBA by four months. On January 21, 2003, nine days before the expiration of the originally-agreed five-year CBA term, the respondent SANAMA-SIGLO filed before the DOLE a petition for certification election for the same rank-and-file unit covered by the FVCLU-PTGWO CBA.

FVCLU-PTGWO moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the certification election petition was filed outside the freedom period or outside of the 60 days before the expiration of the CBA on May 31, 2003.

Med-Arbiter dismissed the petition on the ground that it was filed outside the 60-day period counted from the May 31, 2003 expiry date of the amended CBA. DOLE set aside the Med-Arbiter’s decision. She ordered the conduct of a certification election in the company.

FVCLU-PTGWO moved for the reconsideration of the Secretary’s decision. The new Acting Secretary set aside the previous decision of the DOLE. The Acting Secretary held that the amended CBA had been ratified by members of the bargaining unit some of whom later organized themselves as SANAMA-SIGLO, the certification election applicant.

The CA found SANAMA-SIGLO’s petition meritorious on the basis of the applicable law and the rules, as interpreted in the congressional debates. It set aside the challenged DOLE Secretary decisions and reinstated her earlier HELD calling for a certification election.

ISSUE/S: 

Whether or not the amendment of the CBA extending its term carry with it an extension on the union’s exclusive bargaining status.

HELD:

No. The negotiated extension of the CBA term has no legal effect on the FVCLU-PTGWO’s exclusive bargaining representation status which remained effective only for five years ending on the original expiry date of January 30, 2003.

While the parties may agree to extend the CBA’s original five-year term together with all other CBA provisions, any such amendment or term in excess of five years will not carry with it a change in the union’s exclusive collective bargaining status. By express provision of Article 253-A of the Labor Code, the exclusive bargaining status cannot go beyond five years and the representation status is a legal matter not for the workplace parties to agree upon. In other words, despite an agreement for a CBA with a life of more than five years, either as an original provision or by amendment, the bargaining union’s exclusive bargaining status is effective only for five years and can be challenged within sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the CBA’s first five years.