G.R. No. L-42270, July 29, 1977
Rowell Labor Union-Trade Unions of the Philippines and Allied Services (Local Chapter No. 569), petitioner, vs. Honorable Blas F. Ople, Rowell Workers Union-UOEF No. 59; Rowell Industrial Corporation, respondents.

FACTS

The petitioner, Rowell Labor Union-TUPAS, filed a petition with the then National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) seeking to be directly certified as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for the rank-and-file employees of Rowell Industrial Corporation. The NLRC, instead of ordering direct certification, issued an order calling for a certification election. This order was appealed by the intervenor union, Rowell Workers Union-UOEF No. 59, to the Secretary of Labor, Blas F. Ople. Concurrently, a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the respondent company and the respondent union UOEF No. 59 was certified by the NLRC. On January 9, 1975, the Secretary of Labor rendered a decision reversing the NLRC’s order for a certification election, thereby dismissing the petitioner’s petition. The Secretary found that the petitioner failed to comply with jurisdictional requirements under the governing implementing instructions.

ISSUE

Whether the Secretary of Labor committed grave abuse of discretion in setting aside the NLRC’s order for a certification election due to the petitioner’s failure to comply with procedural requirements for a representation case.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Secretary of Labor. The Court upheld the Secretary’s factual findings that the petitioner’s pleading was fatally defective for non-compliance with Implementing Instructions No. 2. Specifically, the petition failed to state the description of the bargaining unit, the approximate number of employees, and the names of other legitimate labor organizations within it. It also failed to serve copies of the petition to the interested parties as required. Furthermore, the petition did not sufficiently establish that it was supported by at least ten percent of the workers in the bargaining unit, a mandatory requirement under Republic Act No. 875 . These omissions were deemed jurisdictional. The Court emphasized that factual findings of administrative agencies, when supported by evidence, are accorded respect and finality. The subsequent ratification of a CBA by a majority of the employees in favor of the respondent union further undermined the petitioner’s claim. The remedy of certiorari was found to be improper as the assailed order was based on a valid exercise of discretion grounded on the petitioner’s procedural lapses, not on arbitrariness.