G.R. No. 167141 March 13, 2009
SAMAHAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA SAMMA-LAKAS SA INDUSTRIYA NG KAPATIRANG HALIGI NG ALYANSA (SAMMA-LIKHA), Petitioner, vs. SAMMA CORPORATION, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner SAMMA-LIKHA, a local chapter of the LIKHA Federation, filed a petition for certification election on July 24, 2001, in the DOLE Regional Office IV, seeking to represent all rank-and-file employees of respondent Samma Corporation. Respondent moved to dismiss the petition on grounds including lack of legal personality of LIKHA Federation, failure to prove petitioner’s existence as a local chapter, failure to attach a certificate of non-forum shopping, and having a prohibited mixture of supervisory and rank-and-file employees. The med-arbiter dismissed the petition on November 12, 2002, citing these grounds. Petitioner moved for reconsideration on November 29, 2001, which the Regional Director forwarded to the Secretary of Labor. Acting Secretary Manuel G. Imson, treating the motion as an appeal, reversed the med-arbiter’s order on January 17, 2003, ruling that a union’s legal personality could only be questioned in an independent cancellation proceeding and directed a certification election. Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied by Secretary Patricia A. Sto. Tomas on April 3, 2003. Meanwhile, on April 14, 2003, the DOLE Regional Office IV revoked petitioner’s charter certificate on the ground of prohibited mixture of employees. Respondent filed a petition for certiorari in the CA, which reversed the Secretary of Labor’s decision, holding that a certificate of non-forum shopping was required, the appeal lacked proof of service, and petitioner lacked legal standing due to the mixture of employees. The CA denied reconsideration on February 15, 2005.

ISSUE

1. Whether a certificate of non-forum shopping is required in a petition for certification election.
2. Whether petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, treated as an appeal by the Secretary of Labor, should not have been given due course for failure to attach proof of service on respondent.
3. Whether petitioner had the legal personality to file the petition for certification election.

RULING

1. No, a certificate of non-forum shopping is not required in a petition for certification election. The Supreme Court held that such proceedings are non-adversarial, investigative, and fact-finding in character, not litigation involving a claim for relief. The rationale for the requirement—to avoid forum shopping and conflicting decisions—is not present, as certification election petitions are filed in the specific Regional Office with jurisdiction, and multiple petitions are automatically consolidated. Neither the Labor Code nor its implementing rules (D.O. No. 9 and D.O. No. 40-03) require such a certificate.
2. The Secretary of Labor correctly treated the motion for reconsideration as an appeal and gave it due course. The motion was verified under oath, contained the grounds and arguments, and included a notation indicating personal delivery to respondent, which substantially complied with the proof of service requirement under the rules. The rules should be liberally construed to serve their objective of determining the employees’ true choice of bargaining representative.
3. Petitioner had the legal personality to file the petition. The Supreme Court ruled that the legitimacy of a labor organization and its legal personality cannot be collaterally attacked in a certification election proceeding but can only be questioned through an independent petition for cancellation of union registration. At the time the petition was filed, petitioner was a legitimate labor organization, having reported its creation to the Bureau of Labor Relations, which issued a certificate of creation. Any question regarding its legitimacy due to a mixture of supervisory and rank-and-file members should be raised in a separate cancellation proceeding, not as a ground to dismiss the certification election petition.