USTFU v.

Bitonio, Jr
G.R. No. 131235 | November 16, 1999 | PANGANIBAN, J.

FACTS:
Private Respondents Marinio et al. were duly elected officers
of USTFU. The union has a subsisting five-year CBA with UST and
is set to expire on May 31, 1998. On October 5, 1996 various UST
club presidents requested a general faculty assembly thus union
and non-union faculty members convened. New set of officers
were elected, violative of the CBL and that the General Assembly
was held with non-union members present. Union officers were
served with a notice to vacate the union office, and CBA was
ratified by an overwhelming majority.
The petitioners questioned before Med-Arbiter, that
COMELEC was not constituted in accordance with USTFU’s
constitution and by-laws (CBL) and that no rules had been issued
to govern the conduct of 05 October 1996 election. Med-Arbiter
issued a TRO. However, a general faculty assembly was held
attended by members of USTFU and, by “non-USTFU members
[who] are members in good standing of the UST Academic
Community Collective Bargaining Unit”. Appellants were elected
as USTFU’s new set of officers by acclamation and clapping of
hands.
Appellees filed nullification of results of 04 October 1996
election and the same violated TRO. Accusing appellants of
usurpation, appellees characterized election as spurious for being
violative of USTFU's CBL, as GA resulting in election of appellants
was not called by Board of Officers of USTFU; no compliance with
10 day notice rule (Section 1, Article VIII of CBL); elections were
conducted without a COMELEC being constituted by Board of
Officers (Section 1, Article IX); elections were not by secret
balloting (Section 1, Article V and Section 6, Article IX), and, GA
was convened by some non-members.
Med-Arbiter declared election violative of CBL while BLR
director Bitonio upheld decision with a ruling that CBL which
constituted the covenant between the union and its members
could not be suspended during the general assembly of all faculty
members, since it has not been authorized by union.

ISSUE:
WON public respondent committed GAD in refusing to
recognize the officers elected during the “general assembly”.

RULING:
The importance of a union’s constitution and bylaws embody
a covenant between a union and its members and constitute
fundamental law governing members’ rights and obligations. As
such, union’s CBL should be upheld, as long as they are not
contrary to law, good morals or public policy. The participation of
non-union members in the election aggravated its irregularity.
 Self-organization is a fundamental right guaranteed by the
Constitution and the Labor Code. Corollary to this right is the
prerogative not to join, affiliate with or assist a labor union.
Therefore, to become a union member, an employee must not
only signify the intent to become one, but also take some positive
steps to realize that intent. The procedure for union membership
is usually embodied in the union’s CBL. An employee who
becomes a union member acquires the rights and he concomitant
obligations that go with the new status and becomes bound by
the union’s rules and regulations.