You are on page 1of 1

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES VS.

COURT OF APPEALS and THE NATIONAL PARKS DEVELOPMENT


SUPERVISORY ASSOCIATION & THEIR MEMBERS
G.R. No. 87676. 20 December, 1989. First Division (Grino-Aquino, J.)

Topic: Non-applicability of the Labor Code (Art. 6, LC) The Civil Service Law embraces all branches,
subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies of the Government, including GOCCs with original chapter, hence,
employees thereof are civil service employees.

Facts

National Parks Development Committee (NPDC, for brevity) was originally created in 1963 under Executive
Order No. 30, as the Executive Committee for the development of Quezon Memorial, Luneta and other national
parks. The Committee was registered with the SEC as a non-stock and non-profit corporation.
However, in 1987, due to failure to comply with SEC requirements (i.e. to submit General Information Sheet
and Financial Statements from 1981 to 1987; to register its Corporate Books; and to operate for a continuous
period for at least 5 years since 1967) NPDC was attached to the Ministry of Tourism. Pursuant thereto, Civil
Service Commission notified NPDC that all appointments and other personnel actions shall be submitted to the
former.

The Rizal Park Supervisory Employees Association was organized, and it affiliated with the Trade Union of the
Philippines and Allied Service (TUPAS, for brevity) under Certificate No. 1206. However, NPDC entered into a
separate CBA with NPDCEA (TUPAS Local Chapter No. 967), and NPDCSA (TUPAS Chapter No. 1206) for a
period of two (2) years. Pursuant thereto, these unions staged a strike alleging unfair labor practices by NPDC.

Contention of the NPDC: The strike is illegal on ground that the strikers, being government employees, the
strikers have no right to strike, although they may form a union.

Ruling of the Trial Court and CA: Complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, to wit: (1) there exists an
employer-employee relationship between NPDC and the strikers; (2) the acts complained of falls under par 5,
Art. 217, in relation to Art. 265 of the Labor Code. Hence, the case properly falls under the jurisdiction of DOLE.
On appeal, CA affirmed the decision of the trial court.

Issue

WON the NPDC Employees are covered by the Civil Service Law.

Ruling

NPDC is a government agency, and its employees are covered by the Civil Service Rules and Regulations.

Citing the case of Jesus P. Perlas vs. People of the Philippines (G.R. No. 84637-39), NPDC remained under the Office
of the President despite an attempt to transfer it to the Bureau of Forest Development, DENR in 1975. Further,
since 1977 to 1981, the annual appropriations decrees listed NPDC as a regular government agency under the
Office of the President.

Pursuant thereto, NPDC employees are allowed under the 1987 Constitution to organize and join unions of
their choice, that notwithstanding, there is as yet no law permitting them to strike.

Anent the issue on WON the labor dispute is cognizable by DOLE, the Court held that In case of a labor dispute
between the employees and the government, Section 15 of Executive Order No. 180 dated June 1, 1987 provides
that the Public Sector Labor- Management Council, not the Department of Labor and Employment, shall hear
the dispute.

You might also like