ChanRobles Virtual law Library

chanrobles.com - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT RESOLUTIONS - ON-LINE

cralaw_scresolutions_separator.NHAD

[G.R. No. 149470. August 13, 2003]

FFW vs. CA

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 13 2003.

G.R. No. 149470 (Federation of Free Workers - Davao Memorial Park Unit, petitioner, vs. Court of Appeals (Third Division) and Davao Memorial Park, Inc., respondents.)

Before us is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, assailing the Decision [1] cralaw and Resolution dated April 18, 2001 and July 3, 2001, respectively, of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 46606, entitled Davao Memorial Park vs. FFW-Davao Memorial Park Unit, reversing and setting aside the Decision [2] cralaw dated November 11, 1997 of the Office of the Voluntary Arbitrator in V.A. Case No. 099-XI-05.

In its petition, the Federation of Free Workers-Davao Memorial Park Unit (FFW-DMPU), alleged that it is a legitimate labor organization based in Davao City and affiliated with the Federation of Free Workers of Manila. Since 1976, petitioner is the bargaining agent of all regular and permanent rank-and-file employees of Davao Memorial Park, Inc. (DMPI), private respondent, which is engaged in the business of selling burial lots in Davao City.

During the effectivity of the parties' Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), which started in 1987 and renewed every three years thereafter, the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board-XI, Davao City issued the following wage orders: (a) Wage Order No. RTWPB-XI dated October 30, 1990 -increasing the statutory minimum wage rate of all workers and employees in the private sector by P15.00 per day; (b) Wage Order No. RTWPB-XI-02 dated January 29, 1991 - providing for an emergency assistance to workers in the private sector; (c) Wage Order No. RTWPB-XI-03 dated October 22, 1993 -providing for a cost of living allowance (COLA) of P25.00 per day to the workers in the private sector; (d) Wage Order No. RTWPB-XI-04 dated December 10, 1994 - increasing the statutory minimum wage rate in Region XI by P15.00 per day. Private respondent paid petitioner all these pay increases as mandated by law.

Again, on December 16, 1996, the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board-XI of Davao City issued Wage Order No. RTWPB-XI-05, [3] cralaw increasing further the minimum wage rate, thus:

"Section 1. COVERAGE

"a. Upon the effectivity of this Wage Order, the regional minimum wage rate applicable to all workers in the private sector is increased by P10.00 per day on January 3, 1997 and P6.00 on June 1, 1997;"

Accordingly, petitioner union demanded from private respondent the implementation of the above Wage Order. But private respondent refused on the ground that it is not covered by the Wage Order because its employees have been receiving more than the minimum wage provided under the previous Wage Orders.

On August 19, 1997, when the issue was not settled at the grievance level, the parties submitted the matter to the Office of the Voluntary Arbitrator, docketed as VA Case No. 099-XI-05.

On September 16, 1997, the Voluntary Arbitrator conducted a hearing and later, the parties submitted their respective position papers.

On November 11, 1997, the Voluntary Arbitrator rendered a Decision [4] cralaw in favor of petitioner and against private respondent. The decretal portion of the Decision reads:

"WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, Judgment is hereby rendered:

"1. Ordering Respondent Company, DAVAO MEMORIAL PARK, INC. to pay the increase of TEN (P10.00) PESOS beginning January 3, 1997 and the additional SIX (P6.00) per day increase from June 1, 1997 to all Complainant members of the Union up to October 31, 1997, and to integrate thereafter the SIXTEEN (P16.00) per day increase in the Complainant members' salary.

"2. That the above required payment be made on or before the Twenty Fifth (25) day after receipt of this order.

"SO ORDERED."

Private respondent elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 46606, entitled Davao Memorial Park, Inc. vs. FFW-Davao Memorial Park Unit.

On April 18, 2001, the Court of Appeals rendered a Decision reversing and setting aside the Voluntary Arbitrator's Decision, thus:

"WHEREFORE, finding the petition meritorious, we REVERSE and SET ASIDE the decision dated November 11, 1997 of the Voluntary Arbitrator in VA Case No. 099-XI-05. Another judgment is entered declaring petitioner (now respondent) exempted from implementation of Wage Order No. RTWPB-XI-05.

"No costs.

"SO ORDERED."

In so ruling, the appellate court made the following disquisition:

"The Wage Order is specifically for the purpose of increasing the minimum wage then prevailing and not for a general increase of the salaries of the workers. It is not disputed that the employees of petitioner are receiving higher than the minimum wage prescribed under Wage Order No. RTWPB-XI-05. Clearly therefore, petitioner is exempt from complying with the subject Wage Order. To emphasize, said Wage Order does not provide for a general increase of wages of employees but it specifically refers to the increase of the minimum wage. Where the law is clear and categorical, there is no room for construction, only application. No other interpretation can be given to the Wage Order as it is explicitly expressed therein that it refers to an increase in the 'regional minimum wage.' Petitioner is not bound to give the increase under said Wage Order as its workers are already receiving more than the minimum wage as increased by said Wage Order."

Petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied by the Court of Appeals in its Resolution dated July 3, 2001. On July 11, 2001 , it received a copy of the said Resolution.

Instead of filing within the 15-day reglementary period a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, petitioner resorted to the instant petition for certiorari under Rule 65, claiming that the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals are "contrary to law, the facts and the evidence" and the same were issued "with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction." [5] cralaw It should be emphasized that this petition was filed on September 6, 2001, or after 57 days from petitioner's receipt of a copy of the Resolution dated July 3, 2001 of the Appellate Court.

We cannot entertain petitioner's present recourse which is obviously being resorted to as a substitute for a lapsed appeal. This is a fatal infirmity and procedurally impermissible. [6] cralaw

An appeal is a statutory privilege and it may only be exercised in the manner provided by law. [7] cralaw Besides, certiorari is not a remedy for errors of judgment which petitioner are raising. Errors of judgment are correctible only by appeal. [8] cralaw

WHEREFORE , the petition is DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.)JULIETA Y. CARREON
Clerk of Court



Endnotes:

[1] cralaw Penned by Justice Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, concurred in by Justices Hilarion L. Aquino and Jose L. Sabio, Jr., Rollo at 26-30.

[2] cralaw Rollo at 118-122.

[3] cralaw Rollo at 102-103.

[4] cralaw Annex "P," Petition, Rollo at 118-122.

[5] cralaw Petition, Rollo at 6.

[6] cralaw National Irrigation Administration vs. Court of Appeals, 376 Phil. 362 (1999); Heirs of Marcelino Pagobo vs. Court of Appeals, 345 Phil. 1119 (1997).

[7] cralaw em> Mito vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 126099, March 12, 2001, 354 SCRA 180.

[8] cralaw Ongsitco vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 121527, March 29, 1996, 255 SCRA 703.


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com