Social Security System Employees Association v. CA Facts: On 9 June 1987, the officers and members of Social Security System Employees Association (SSSEA) staged a strike and barricaded the entrances to the SSS Building, preven preventi ting ng non-st non-strik riking ing employ employees ees from from report reporting ing for work work and SSS SSS member members s from from transacting business with the SSS. The SSSEA went on strike after the SSS failed to act on the union's demands, which included: implementation of the provisions of the old SSSSSSEA SSSEA collectiv collective e bargainin bargaining g agreemen agreementt (CBA) (CBA) on check-off check-off of union union dues; dues; payment payment of accrued overtime pay, night differential pay and holiday pay; conversion of temporary or contract contractual ual employees employees with 6 months months or more of service service into regular regular and permanent permanent employees and their entitlement to the same salaries, allowances and benefits given to other regular employees of the SSS; and payment of the children's allowance of P30.00, and after the SSS deducted certain amounts from the salaries of the employees and allegedly allegedly committ committed ed acts of dis discrim criminati ination on and unfair labor labor practices practices.. The strike strike was reported reported by the Social Social Security Security System (SSS) to the Public Sector Labor-Man Labor-Managem agement ent Council, which ordered the strikers to return to work. The strikers refused to return to work. On 11 June 1987, the SSS filed with the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City a complaint for damages with a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction against against the SSSEA, Dionisio Dionisio T. Baylon, Baylon, Ramon Ramon Modesto, Modesto, Juanito Juanito Madura, Madura, Reuben Zamora, Zamora, Virgilio Virgilio De Alday, Alday, Sergio Araneta, Placido Agustin, and Virgilio Magpayo, praying that a writ of preliminary injunction be issued to enjoin the strike and that the strikers be ordered to return to work; that SSSEA, et. al. be ordered to pay damages; and that the strike be declared illegal. On 11 June 1987, the RTC issued a temporary restraining order pending resolution of the application for a writ of preliminary injunction. In the meantime, the SSSEA, et. al. filed a motion to dismiss alleging the trial court's lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter. On 22 July 1987, the court a quo denied the motion to dismiss and converted the restraining order into an injunction upon posting of a bond, after finding that the strike was illegal. As the SSSEA's motion for the reconsideration of the order was also denied on 14 August 1988, SSSEA ,et. al. filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction before the Supreme Court (GR 79577). In a resolution dated 21 October 1987, the Court, through the Third Division, resolved to refer the case to the Court of Appeals. SSSEA, et. al. filed a motion for reconsideration thereof, but during its pendency the Court of Appeals on 9 March 1988 promulgated its decision on the referred case. SSSEA, et. al. moved to recall the Court of Appeals' decision. In the meantime, the Court on 29 June 1988 denied the motion for reconsideration in GR 97577 for being moot and academic. SSSEA, et. al.'s motion to recall the decision of the Court of Appeals was also denied in view of the Suprem Supreme e Court' Court's s denial denial of the motio motion n for recons reconside iderat ration ion.. SSSEA SSSEA filed filed the petiti petition on to review the decision of the Court of Appeals. Issue: Whether SSS employees, in furtherance of labor interests, may conduct a strike. Held: The 1987 Constitution, in the Article on Social Justice and Human Rights (Art. XIII, Sec. Sec. 3), 3), prov provid ides es that that the the Stat State e "sha "shall ll guar guaran ante tee e the the righ rights ts of all all work worker ers s to self self-organiza organization, tion, collectiv collective e bargainin bargaining g and negotiatio negotiations, ns, and peaceful peaceful concerted concerted activities activities,, including the right to strike in accordance with law." By itself, this provision would seem to recognize the right of all workers and employees, including those in the public sector, to strike. But the Constitution itself fails to expressly confirm this impression, for in the Sub-
Article on the Civil Service Commission, it provides, after defining the scope of the civil service as "all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters," that "the right to self-organization shall not be denied to government employees." Parenthetically, the Bill of Rights also provides that "the right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not abridged" [Art. III, Sec. 8]. Thus, while there is no question that the Constitution recognizes the right of government employees to organize, it is silent as to whether such recognition also includes the right to strike. Resort to the intent of the framer framers s of the organi organic c law becom becomes es helpf helpful ul in unders understan tandin ding g the meani meaning ng of these these provisions. A reading of the proceedings of the Constitutional Constitutional Commission that drafted the 1987 Constitution would show that in recognizing the right of government employees to organize, organize, the commiss commissioner ioners s intended intended to limit limit the right to the formation formation of unions unions or associations only, without including the right to strike. Statutorily, it will be recalled that the Industrial Peace Act (CA 875), which was repealed by the Labor Code (PD 442) in 1974, expressly banned strikes by employees in the Government, including instrumentalities exercisin exercising g governmen governmental tal functions functions,, but excludin excluding g entities entities entrusted entrusted with propriet proprietary ary functi functions ons.. Unders Understan tandab dably, ly, the Labor Labor Code Code is silen silentt as to wheth whether er or not govern governme ment nt employees may strike, for such are excluded from its coverage. But then the Civil Service Decree (PD 807), is equally silent on the matter. Thus, on 1 June 1987, to implement the constitutional guarantee of the right of government employees to organize, the President issued iss ued EO 180 which provide provides s guide guidelin lines es for the exerci exercise se of the right to organ organize ize of government employees. In Section 14 thereof, it is provided that "the Civil Service law and rules rules gover governin ning g conce concerte rted d activi activitie ties s and strike strikes s in the govern governme ment nt servic service e shall shall be observed, subject to any legislation that may be enacted by Congress." The President was apparently referring to Memorandum Circular No. 6, series of 1987 of the Civil Service Commission under date 12 April 1987 which, "prior to the enactment by Congress of applic applicab able le laws laws concer concernin ning g strike strike by govern governme ment nt employ employees ees enjoin enjoins s under under pain pain of administ administrati rative ve sanction sanctions, s, all governmen governmentt officers officers and employees employees from staging staging strikes, strikes, demonstrations, demonstrations, mass leaves, walk-outs and other forms of mass action which will result in tempor temporar ary y stoppa stoppage ge or dis disru rupti ption on of public public servic service." e." The air was thus thus cleare cleared d of the the confusion. At present, in the absence of any legislation allowing government employees to strike, recognizing their right to do so, or regulating the exercise of the right, they are prohibited from striking, by express provision of Memorandum Circular 6 and as implied in EO 180. The Court is of the considered view that the SSS employees are covered by the prohibition against strikes. Considering that under the 1987 Constitution "the civil service embraces all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters" and that the SSS is one such government-controlled corporation with an original charter, having been created under RA 1161, its employees are part of the civil service and are covered by the Civil Service Commission's memorandum prohibiting strikes. This being the case, the strike staged by the employees of the SSS was illegal. In fine, government employees may through their unions or associations, either petition the Congress for the betterment of the terms and conditions of employment which are within the ambit of legislation or negotiate with the appropriate government agencies for the improvement of those which are not fixed by law. If there be any unresolved grievances, the dispute may be referred to the Public Sector Labor-Management Council for appropriate action. But employees in the civil service may not resort to strikes, walkouts and other temporary work stoppages, like workers in the private sector, to pressure the Government to accede to their demands. As now provided under Sec. 4, Rule III of the Rules and Regulations to Govern the Exercise of
the Right Right of Govern Governmen mentt Emplo Employee yees s to Self-O Self-Orga rganiz nizati ation on,, which which took took effect effect after after the the present present dispute arose, "the terms and condition conditions s of employme employment nt in the government, government, including any political subdivision or instrumentality thereof and government-owned and controlled corporations with original charters are governed by law and employees therein shall not strike for the purpose of securing changes thereof."
