Cruzvale vs. Laguesma

Cruzvale, Inc. vs. Laguesma
GR No. 107610, November 25, 1994

Facts:
Union of Filipino Workers (UFW) filed a petition for certification election (CE) among the rank-and-file workers of Cruzvale. Cruzvale sought for the denial of such petition, alleging among other things, that the Regional Office No. IV of the Department of Labor and Employment has no jurisdiction over the petition since Cruzvale's place of business is at Cubao, Quezon City, which is under the National Capital Region-DOLE's jurisdiction. Petitioner's basis is Section 1, Rule V, book V of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code, which states:

Where to file. A petition for certification election shall be filed with the Regional Office which has jurisdiction over the principal office of the Employer. The petition shall be in writing and under oath.

Issue:
Whether the venue of the petition for CE must be where it would be convenient for the worker

Held: Yes, it must.
The word "jurisdiction" as used in said provision refers to the venue where the petition for certification must be filed. Unlike jurisdiction, which implies the power of the court to decide a case, venue merely refers to the place where the action shall be brought. Venue touches more the convenience of the parties rather than the substance of the case.

The mentioned provision refers only to cases where the place of work of the employees and the place of the principal office of the employer are within the same territorial jurisdiction of the Regional Office where the petition for certification election is filed. It does not apply where the place of work of the employees and the place of principal office of the employer are located within the territorial jurisdictions of different regional offices. The Court assumes that in the drafting of the Omnibus Rules, the Secretary of Labor and Employment took into consideration the fact that there are many companies with factories located in places different from places where the corporate offices are located.

The worker, being the economically-disadvantaged party whether as complainant, petitioner or respondent, as the case may be, the nearest governmental machinery to settle a labor dispute must be placed at his immediate disposal and the employer must in no case be allowed a choice in favor of another competent agency sitting in another place to the inconvenience of the worker.

Unlike in the Rules governing the procedure before Regional Offices, the New Rules of Procedure of the National Labor Relations Commission prescribes that all cases in which labor arbiters have jurisdiction should be filed in the branch office which has territorial jurisdiction over the "workplace of the complainant/petitioner" (Rule IV, Sec. 1[a]). The NLRC Rules defines the workplace as follows:

For purposes of venue, workplace shall be understood as the place or locality where the employee is regularly assigned when the cause of action arose. It shall include the place where the employee is supposed to report back after a temporary detail, assignment or travel. . . .