Supreme Court says Pagcor contractual, job order workers are not 'employees' | ABS-CBN
ADVERTISEMENT

Welcome, Kapamilya! We use cookies to improve your browsing experience. Continuing to use this site means you agree to our use of cookies. Tell me more!
Supreme Court says Pagcor contractual, job order workers are not 'employees'
Supreme Court says Pagcor contractual, job order workers are not 'employees'
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, and first lady Liza Araneta Marcos looks at the new logo of the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) with House Speaker Martin Romualdez and PAGCOR Chairman Alejandro H. Tengko during the government owned corporation’s 40th anniversary celebration on July 11, 2023 at the Manila Marriott Hotel in Pasay City. Jonathan Cellona, ABS-CBN News

MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) has stressed that contract of services or job order workers hired by the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (Pagcor) are not considered government employees under the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission (CSC).
MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) has stressed that contract of services or job order workers hired by the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (Pagcor) are not considered government employees under the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission (CSC).
In the decision of the 1st Division promulgated on June 19, 2024, the court ruled that a group of workers who worked for Pagcor in its hotel and restaurant business are not government employees covered by CSC law, rules and regulations.
In the decision of the 1st Division promulgated on June 19, 2024, the court ruled that a group of workers who worked for Pagcor in its hotel and restaurant business are not government employees covered by CSC law, rules and regulations.
The case stemmed from the illegal dismissal complaint filed before the CSC by Mark Abadilla and his fellow workers against Pagcor.
The case stemmed from the illegal dismissal complaint filed before the CSC by Mark Abadilla and his fellow workers against Pagcor.
The contracts of Abadilla’s group were not renewed when Pagcor’s hotel business was transferred from Goldenfield Complex, Bacolod City to L’Fisher Hotel.
The contracts of Abadilla’s group were not renewed when Pagcor’s hotel business was transferred from Goldenfield Complex, Bacolod City to L’Fisher Hotel.
ADVERTISEMENT
In 2014, the CSC dismissed the complaint as the workers were not government employees and not covered by civil service laws and rules.
In 2014, the CSC dismissed the complaint as the workers were not government employees and not covered by civil service laws and rules.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the CSC ruling which prompted Abadilla and others to file a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the CSC ruling which prompted Abadilla and others to file a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court however denied the petition of Abadilla and his fellow workers and upheld the CA decision.
The Supreme Court however denied the petition of Abadilla and his fellow workers and upheld the CA decision.
“While it is recognized that the petitioners are contract of service or job order workers, we find that they are neither confidential employees nor regular employees of PAGCOR,” the court said in the decision penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando.
“While it is recognized that the petitioners are contract of service or job order workers, we find that they are neither confidential employees nor regular employees of PAGCOR,” the court said in the decision penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando.
The Supreme Court however stated that Abadilla’s group are workers and personnel whose humanity must also be recognized.
The Supreme Court however stated that Abadilla’s group are workers and personnel whose humanity must also be recognized.
ADVERTISEMENT
The court noted that based on records, Abadilla and his co-workers were engaged on a “no work, no pay” basis.
The court noted that based on records, Abadilla and his co-workers were engaged on a “no work, no pay” basis.
The workers also complained of undue deprivation of benefits extended to the regular employees of Pagcor including overtime pay, service incentive leave and vacation leave, among others.
The workers also complained of undue deprivation of benefits extended to the regular employees of Pagcor including overtime pay, service incentive leave and vacation leave, among others.
The court gave a reminder to Pagcor as it sought to uphold the constitutional protection afforded to labor.
The court gave a reminder to Pagcor as it sought to uphold the constitutional protection afforded to labor.
“We sternly remind Pagcor and all similar agencies that while their authority to contract services is recognized under applicable civil service rules, such hiring authority should not be used to mistreat or otherwise mismanage contract of service or job order workers,” the court said.
“We sternly remind Pagcor and all similar agencies that while their authority to contract services is recognized under applicable civil service rules, such hiring authority should not be used to mistreat or otherwise mismanage contract of service or job order workers,” the court said.
RELATED VIDEO
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT