Lepanto Consolidated Mining Co.

vs The Lepanto Capataz Union

G.R. No. 157086, e!"#a"$ 18, %01&, 'e"sa(in, J.
Respondent Lepanto Capataz Union (Union) filed a petition for consent election with the
Industrial Relations Division of the Cordillera Regional Office (CAR) of DOLE Lepanto
opposed the petition! contending that the Union was in realit" see#ing a certification
election! not a consent election! and would $e there$" co%peting with the Lepanto
E%plo"ees Union (LEU)! the current collective $argaining agent
&he 'ed(Ar$iter ruled in favour of the Union! arguing that the capatazes could for% a
separate $argaining unit due to their not $eing ran#(and(file e%plo"ees )aid decision was
affir%ed $" DOLE )ecretar"! which certified the Union as the sole and e*clusive $argaining
agent of all capatazes of Lepanto
)till dissatisfied with the result! $ut without first filing a %otion for reconsideration! Lepanto
challenged in the CA the foregoing decision of the DOLE )ecretar" through a petition for
certiorari &he CA dis%issed Lepanto+s petition for
Certiorari for failure of the petitioner to first file a %otion for reconsideration of the Decision
of the pu$lic respondent $efore instituting the present petition
Lepanto now argues that a %otion for reconsideration was not an availa$le re%ed" due to
the decision of the DOLE )ecretar" $eing alread" classified as final and e*ecutor" under
)ection ,-! Rule .I! /oo# 0 of O%ni$us Rules I%ple%enting the La$or Code! as a%ended $"
Depart%ent Order 1o 2! series of ,223
)**U+, 4hether a %otion for reconsideration was a pre(re5uisite in the filing of its petition
for certiorari
-+L., 6etition .+N)+..
&o start with! the re5uire%ent of the ti%el" filing of a %otion for reconsideration as a
precondition to the filing of a petition for certiorari accords with the principle of e*hausting
ad%inistrative re%edies as a %eans to afford ever" opportunit" to the respondent agenc" to
resolve the %atter and correct itself if need $e
And! secondl"! the ruling in 1ational 7ederation of La$or v Lagues%a reiterates )t 'artin+s
7uneral 8o%e v 1ational La$or Relations Co%%ission! where the Court has pronounced that
the special civil action of certiorari is the appropriate re%ed" fro% the decision of the
1ational La$or Relations Co%%ission (1LRC) in view of the lac# of an" appellate re%ed"
provided $" the La$or Code to a part" aggrieved $" the decision of the 1LRC Accordingl"!
an" decision! resolution or ruling of the DOLE )ecretar" fro% which the La$or Code affords
no re%ed" to the aggrieved
part" %a" $e reviewed through a petition for certiorari initiated onl" in the CA in deference
to the principle of the hierarch" of courts
9et! it is also significant to note that 1ational 7ederation of La$or v Lagues%a also
reaffir%ed the dictu% issued in )t 'artin+s 7uneral 8o%es v 1ational La$or Relations
Co%%ission to the effect that :the re%ed" of the aggrieved part" is to ti%el" file a %otion
for reconsideration as a precondition for an" further or su$se5uent re%ed"! and
thenseasona$l"
avail of the special civil action of certiorari under Rule ;- * * *<
Indeed! the Court has consistentl" stressed the i%portance of the seasona$le filing of a
%otion for reconsideration prior to filing the certiorari petition In )'C =uarr" 4or#ers
Union(7e$ruar" )i* 'ove%ent (7)')! the Court has even warned that a failure to file the
%otion for reconsideration would $e fatal to the cause of the petitioner Due to its
e*traordinar" nature as a re%ed"! certiorari is to $e availed of onl" when there is no appeal!
or an" plain! speed" or ade5uate re%ed" in the ordinar" course of law
&here is no 5uestion that a %otion for reconsideration ti%el" filed $" Lepanto was an
ade5uate re%ed" in the ordinar" course of law in view of the possi$ilit" of the )ecretar" of
>ustice reconsidering her disposition of the %atter! there$" according the relief Lepanto was
see#ing
Under the circu%stances! Lepanto+s failure to ti%el" file a %otion for reconsideration prior to
filing its petition for certiorari in the CA rendered the )epte%$er ,3! ?@@? resolution of the
DOLE )ecretar" $e"ond challenge