PHILIPPINE LAND-AIR-SEA LABOR UNION (PLASLU), PETITIONER, VS. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND CEBU PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY, RESPONDENTS.

Review under Rule 44 of the Rules of Court of an order entered on 21
January 1953 by the Court of Industrial (644 PHILIPPINE REPORTS
Philippine Land-Air-Sea, Labor Union vs. Court of Industrial Relations,
et al. Relations dismissing an incidental motion filed on 17 September
1956 by the Philippine Land-Air-Sea Labor Union (PLASLU) (Annex E),
which prayed for the reinstatement with back salary of Marieta Tapia to
her former position as receptionist in the Cebu Portland Cement Company
(Annex A) and of its resolution en banc dated 10 April 1958 (Annex H)
denying the union’s motion for reconsideration of the order of
dismissal (Annex F) (case No. 241-V-17).

It appears that on 26 June 1951 Marieta Tapia, a member of the
PLASLU, was appointed clerk at F4.00 a day in the Naga Cement Plant of
the Cebu Portland Cement Company in Cebu; on 1 July 1951 was designated
laborer in the hospital department of the plant; on 12 March 1953 was
detailed with the same compensation in the paymaster’s office of the
plant; on 9 November. 1953 was appointed clerk-receptionist at P5.00 a
day; on 1 December 1954 not being a civil service eligible was
appointed a receptionist under section 682 of the Revised
Administrative Code, the appointment to be renewed every three months.
On 4 January 1956 she had a quarrel with Matilde Lorico, a co-employee,
whom she slapped for describing as “sideline” her (Tapia’s) giving of a
Christmas gift to Constantino Abenden, a janitor in the plant. A
committee created by tti&l Coinpany investigated the incident.
Finding Marieta Tapia guilty of misconduct in office for slapping and
inflicting less serious physical injuries on Matilde Lorico, the
committee recommended that the former be severely reprimanded. On 5
April 1956 the CEPOC Board of Directors passed a resolution to the
affect that it would not object if Marieta Tapia’s appointment be not
renewed. On 31 January 1956 Marieta Tapia was notified that her
appointment as receptionist already had expired and that it would not
be renewed.

On 17 September 1956 the Philippine Land-Air-Sea Labor Union
(PLASLU) filed an incidental motion alleging-that in the main case No.
241-V the Court of Industrial Relations had rendered a judgment which
declared—

x x x that all employees and laborers who have
worked with the company for a period of Three (3) Months be made
permanent x x x on condition that said employees and laborers were
hired intentionally for permanent position. x x x;

that Marieta Tapia’s dismissal from the service was without cause
and contrary to the aforequoted* judgment; and praying that she be
reinstated with back salary to her former position as receptionist
(case No. 241-V[17], Annex A).

On 9 January 1957 the Cebu Portland Cement Company filed an answer
alleging that Marieta Tapia’s appointment as clerk on 26 June 1951, as
laborer on 1 July 1951, as clerk-receptionist on 9 November 1953 and as
receptionist on 1 December 1954, was temporary, the last appointment
having been made under section 682 of the Revised Administrative Code
because she was not a civil service eligible. The answer also set up
the affirmative defenses that the Court of Industrial Relations had no
jurisdiction over the incidental motion, because the judgment rendered
in the main case No. 241-V already had terminated it, and that Marieta
Tapia’s appointment being for a fixed period of time the Court could
not extend it nor compel the Company to appoint her anew if her
services were no longer necessary. It prayed that the incidental motion
be dismissed (Annex B).

The company filed a memorandum dated 7 June 1957 (Annex C) and the
labor union, on 19 June 1957 (Annex D). After hearing, on 21 January
1958 the Court of Industrial Relations entered an order dismissing
the incidental motion for lack of merit (Annex E).

On 3 March 1958 the labor union moved for reconsideration of the
order of dismissal (Annex F). On 10 April 1958 the Court denied it.

Hence, this petition for review.

Section 2 of Republic Act No. 422, effective 6 January 1950,
authorizes the President of the Philippines “to effect by executive
order from time to time, for a period not exceeding one year from the
date of the approval of this Act”, x x x “such reforms and changes in
the different executive departments, bureaus, offices, agencies and
other instrumentalities of the Government including the corporations
owned or controlled by the government as he may deem necessary,” x x x
“and do whatever is necessary and / desirable to effect economy and
promote efficiency in the government service.” In pursuance thereof,
the President issued Executive Order No. 399, series of 1951, known as
the Uniform Government Corporate Charter, providing that—

All officers and employees of the corporation shall
be subject to the Civil Service Law, rules and regulations, except
those whose positions may, upon recommendation of the Board of
Directors and the Administrator of Economic Coordination, be declared
by the President of the Philippines as policy-determining, primarily
confidential or technical in nature. (Section 14.)

Section 4 of Republic Act No. 422 expressly provides that “any
action taken by the President pursuant to the provisions of this Act” x
x x “shall be valid and subsisting until Congress shall provide
otherwise.” As Congress has not invalidated Executive Order No. 399,
its legality and validity may no longer be doubted. Hence, the legality
of placing the respondent Cebu Portland Cement Company under the
provisions of Civil Service Law, rules and regulations cannot be
assailed. And as if to remove all doubt on the subject Congress passed
Republic Act No. 2260, approved 19 June 1959, expressly providing that
“The Philippine Civil Service shall embrace” x x x “government owned or
controlled corporations.”

The application of the Civil Service Law, rules and regulations does
not infringe upon the Magna Charta of Labor or the Termination of
Employment Act.2 The Civil Service Law and the two labor laws can stand
together. The philosophy behind the Civil Service Law is to engage the
service of only those who are fit and meritorious. The aim is to curb
out or minimize the evils of favoritism, patronage or spoils system.
And the whole, scheme rests on the postulate that public welfare and
interest is best served when only the fit and meritorious are chosen
and appointed.

As in the judgment rendered in the, main case No. 241-V, herein above
quoted, the Court of Industrial Relations made permanent those
employees who had worked in the Cebu Portland Cement Company for three
months, provided they were hired intentionally for permanent positions,
the labor union contends that Marieta Tapia’s appointment was
permanent, she having been employed by the Company for more than four
years. The judgment invoked expressly excludes “Employees and laborers
hired for x x x a specified period of time.” Her employment as
receptionist was for a fixed period of three months.

The labor union urges that Marieta Tapia be retained to afford her a
chance to qualify for automatic civil service eligibility, as provided
for by Republic Act No. 186, which took effect on 21 June 1947. Section
2 thereof provides that—

Officials or employees holding civil service
positions in any branch of the Government service other than that
provided for in the preceding section, continuously for at least ten
successive years, shall be considered civil service eligibles with
permanent status under the following classification:

x x x

Third-Grade—Those possessing any education at the time of appointment.

x x x

The provision just quoted cannot be invoked by Marieta Tapia, for
the reason that she had been in the service not for ten years but more
than four years only.

The orders under review are affirmed, with costs against the petitioner.

Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, and De Leon, JJ., concur.
Reyes, J.B.L., J., took no part.