GSIS Family Bank Employees Union v. Villanueva, Benitez, and Berberabe-Martinez
**Facts:**
1. **Formation and History of Royal Savings Bank:** Royal Savings Bank was incorporated on July 22, 1969, as a thrift bank and began operation on February 8, 1971.
2. **Conservatorship and Receivership:** On June 28, 1984, the Royal Savings Bank applied for conservatorship to the Central Bank, which was denied on July 6, 1984, leading to its receivership.
3. **Settlement Agreement and Renaming:** To settle disputes, the Royal Savings Bank was reopened and rehabilitated by transferring its shares to the Commercial Bank of Manila and renamed Comsavings Bank.
4. **Ownership Transfer:** Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) took control following the acquisition of the Commercial Bank of Manila by the Boston Bank in December 1987.
5. **Memorandum of Agreement:** On July 19, 1993, GSIS and Comsavings Bank signed an agreement infusing P2.5 billion into the bank. As a result, GSIS owned 99.55% of Comsavings Bank, which was renamed GSIS Family Bank in July 2001.
6. **Regulatory Opinions on Status:** In 2004, BSP’s General Counsel opined that GSIS Family Bank was not a government bank but a private corporation.
7. **Policy Enactments:** In 2010 and 2011, Executive Order No. 7 and Republic Act No. 10149 imposed a moratorium on salary and benefit increases in government-owned corporations.
8. **Governance Commission’s Opinion:** In 2012 and 2013, GSIS Family Bank sought and received clarification from the Governance Commission that it was categorized as a government financial institution and unauthorized to negotiate collective bargaining terms.
9. **Demand and Response:** In December 2013, GSIS Union demanded a Christmas bonus per the CBA, which GSIS Family Bank rejected, prompting the Union to file complaints before different labor forums.
10. **Supreme Court Petition:** In January 2014, the Union filed a Petition for Certiorari in the Supreme Court, arguing that GSIS Family Bank was a private bank and hence not governed by Republic Act No. 10149.
**Issues:**
1. **Appropriateness of Certiorari:** Whether a Petition for Certiorari was the correct remedy to challenge the Governance Commission’s advisory opinion.
2. **Mootness:** Whether the closure of GSIS Family Bank rendered the petition moot.
3. **Applicability of RA 10149:** Whether GSIS Family Bank, a non-chartered government-owned or controlled corporation, could negotiate collective bargaining agreements under Republic Act No. 10149.
**Court’s Decision:**
1. **Certiorari Incorrect Remedy:** The Supreme Court held that the Governance Commission did not exercise judicial or quasi-judicial functions, making a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 inappropriate.
2. **Mootness:** The closure of GSIS Family Bank by the BSP in May 2016, which prohibited it from conducting business, rendered the petition moot.
3. **Applicability of RA 10149:** The Court found that GSIS Family Bank, classified as a government-owned or controlled corporation (GOCC), was subject to the Compensation and Position Classification System under RA No. 10149 and thus could not negotiate economic terms of a collective bargaining agreement with its employees.
**Doctrine:**
– Government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs), whether chartered or non-chartered, are subject to standardized compensation frameworks under the Compensation and Position Classification System. They cannot negotiate economic terms of collective bargaining agreements with their employees.
– Jurisdictional Authority: Certiorari is not appropriate against entities not exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
**Class Notes:**
– **GOCC:** Defined as stock or non-stock corporations either created by special law or organized under the general corporation law with government ownership or control.
– **Compensation and Position Classification System:** Applicable to all GOCCs including those regulated by RA 10149.
– **Labor Relations in GOCCs:** Employees subject to civil service regulations, and economic terms are not negotiable under CBAs.
– **Certiorari:** Under Rule 65, directed against tribunals or officers with judicial or quasi-judicial functions only.
– **Mootness:** Courts generally dismiss cases where controversy ceases due to supervening events unless exceptions like paramount public interest apply.
**Historical Background:**
– The case arose following a series of governmental reforms aimed at regulating and standardizing the compensation of employees in government-controlled entities. The transformation of GSIS Family Bank through various ownership changes highlights the complexities in categorizing it under public or private sector regulations. The enactment of RA 10149 was part of broader governance reforms initiated to address the disparities in compensation and benefits among government personnel, thereby leading to conflicts over the applicability of labor laws to such institutions.
Leave a Reply