G.R. No. 172699; July 27, 2011
ELECTROMAT MANUFACTURING AND RECORDING CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. HON. CIRIACO LAGUNZAD, in his capacity as Regional Director, National Capital Region, Department of Labor and Employment; and HON. HANS LEO J. CACDAC, in his capacity as Director of Bureau of Labor Relations, Department of Labor and Employment, Public Respondents. NAGKAKAISANG SAMAHAN NG MANGGAGAWA NG ELECTROMAT-WASTO, Private Respondent.

FACTS

The private respondent Nagkakaisang Samahan ng Manggagawa ng Electromat-WASTO (union), a charter affiliate of the labor federation WASTO, applied for registration with the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR). The BLR issued the union a Certification of Creation of Local Chapter pursuant to Department Order No. (D.O.) 40-03. The petitioner Electromat Manufacturing and Recording Corporation (company) filed a petition for cancellation of the union’s registration certificate, arguing that the union failed to comply with the requirements under Article 234 of the Labor Code and that D.O. 40-03 is an unconstitutional diminution of those statutory requirements. The DOLE Regional Director and the BLR Director dismissed the petition. The company elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals via certiorari, which affirmed the BLR’s dismissal. The company filed the present petition, contending that D.O. 40-03, particularly Section 2(E), Rule III, which requires only a charter certificate for the creation of a local chapter, invalidly amended Article 234 of the Labor Code by delisting several of its requirements.

ISSUE

Whether Department Order No. 40-03 is a valid exercise of the rule-making power of the Department of Labor and Employment.

RULING

Yes, Department Order No. 40-03 is a valid exercise of the DOLE’s rule-making power. The Supreme Court ruled in the affirmative, citing its earlier decision in Progressive Development Corporation v. Secretary, Department of Labor and Employment. In that case, the Court upheld similar provisions in the old implementing rules which provided that a local or chapter becomes a legitimate labor organization upon submission of its charter certificate to the BLR, notwithstanding the omission of several requirements listed in Article 234 of the Labor Code (such as the submission of officers’ addresses, minutes of organizational meetings, and the list of members who participated in the adoption of the constitution and by-laws). The Court affirmed that this implementing policy, now embodied in D.O. 40-03, is a valid interpretation and implementation of the Labor Code, issued pursuant to the DOLE’s delegated authority. The Court found no grave abuse of discretion in the Court of Appeals’ decision affirming the union’s registration. The petition was denied.