Title
Boy Scouts of the Philippines vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 80767
Decision Date
Apr 22, 1991
BSP employees challenged transfer and dismissal; SC ruled BSP a government-controlled corporation, placing employees under Civil Service Law, voiding NLRC jurisdiction.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 80767)

Facts:

  1. Parties Involved:

    • Petitioner: Boy Scouts of the Philippines (BSP).
    • Respondents: National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Fortunato Esguerra, Roberto Malaborbor, Estanislao Misa, Vicente Evangelista, and Marcelino Garcia (private respondents).
  2. Employment Context:

    • Private respondents were rank-and-file employees of BSP stationed at the BSP Camp in Makiling, Los Baños, Laguna.
  3. Transfer Orders:

    • On 19 October 1984, the BSP Secretary-General issued Special Orders Nos. 80, 81, 83, 84, and 85, transferring private respondents to the BSP Land Grant in Asuncion, Davao del Norte, effective 20 November 1984.
    • Private respondents opposed the transfer, citing economic instability and family concerns.
  4. Pre-Transfer Briefing:

    • On 6 November 1984, BSP conducted a pre-transfer briefing, assuring private respondents of no salary diminution and offering a relocation allowance equivalent to one month’s basic pay.
    • Private respondents remained opposed to the transfer.
  5. Legal Action:

    • On 13 November 1984, private respondents filed a complaint (NLRC Case No. 16-84J) for illegal transfer with the Ministry of Labor and Employment.
    • On 21 November 1984, BSP issued a Memorandum requiring private respondents to explain their refusal to comply with the transfer orders.
  6. Suspension and Termination:

    • In January 1985, BSP imposed a five-day suspension on private respondents for insubordination.
    • On 12 February 1985, BSP terminated private respondents’ services effective 15 February 1985.
  7. Amended Complaint:

    • On 22 February 1985, private respondents amended their complaint to include charges of illegal dismissal and unfair labor practice.
  8. Labor Arbiter’s Decision:

    • On 31 July 1985, the Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack of merit.
  9. NLRC’s Decision:

    • On 27 February 1987, the NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision, ruling that private respondents were illegally dismissed and ordering their reinstatement with backwages.
  10. BSP’s Argument:

  • BSP claimed it is a civic, non-stock, non-profit organization under Commonwealth Act No. 111, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 460.
  1. Jurisdictional Issue:
  • The central issue was whether BSP is a government-owned or controlled corporation, determining whether the NLRC had jurisdiction over the case.

Issue:

  1. Whether the BSP is a government-owned or controlled corporation under Article IX (B) (2) (1) of the 1987 Constitution.
  2. Whether the NLRC had jurisdiction over the complaint filed by private respondents.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court ruled that:

  1. The BSP is a government-controlled corporation with an original charter, falling under the Civil Service as defined in Article IX (B) (2) (1) of the 1987 Constitution.
  2. Consequently, the NLRC had no jurisdiction over the case, as the employees of BSP are governed by the Civil Service Law and Regulations.
  3. The Decision of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC’s Decision and Resolution were set aside for lack of jurisdiction.

Ratio:

  1. BSP’s Legal Status:

    • The BSP was created under Commonwealth Act No. 111, as amended, and is designated as a "public corporation."
    • Its functions, though not political or governmental, have a public aspect, focusing on youth development and nation-building, which aligns with constitutional principles.
  2. Government Control:

    • The composition of the BSP’s National Executive Board includes seven Cabinet Secretaries, with appointments subject to ratification by the President of the Philippines.
    • This substantial government participation in governance qualifies BSP as a government-controlled corporation.
  3. Civil Service Coverage:

    • Under the 1987 Constitution and the Administrative Code of 1987, BSP is classified as a government instrumentality and a government-controlled corporation with an original charter.
    • Its employees are therefore covered by the Civil Service Law, excluding them from the jurisdiction of the NLRC.
  4. Jurisdictional Issue:

    • Since BSP employees fall under the Civil Service, the NLRC lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the case.
    • The Court emphasized that jurisdiction is a matter of law and can be raised motu proprio.
  5. Precedent:

    • The Court cited National Housing Corporation v. Juco (1985), which held that employees of government-owned or controlled corporations are governed by the Civil Service Law.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.