Case Summary (G.R. No. 85279)
Key Dates
• June 9, 1987 – SSSEA commenced the strike
• June 11, 1987 – SSS filed complaint for damages and sought TRO; RTC issued temporary restraining order
• July 22, 1987 – RTC denied SSSEA’s motion to dismiss and converted TRO into preliminary injunction
• August 14, 1988 – RTC denied reconsideration of injunction order
• March 9, 1988 – Court of Appeals upheld RTC’s exercise of jurisdiction and injunction
• February 6, 1989 – Supreme Court issued TRO against any further SSSEA strike
• July 28, 1989 – Supreme Court promulgated decision in G.R. No. 85279
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution (Art. XIII, Sec. 3; Art. IX-B, Secs. 1–2; Art. III, Sec. 8)
• Executive Order No. 180 (June 1, 1987)
• Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 6, s. 1987
• B.P. Blg. 129 (General jurisdiction of RTC)
• Industrial Peace Act (R.A. 875, Sec. 11 – repealed as to private sector by P.D. 442; still persuasive on public-sector strikes)
Factual Background and Strike Demands
On June 9, 1987, SSSEA officers and members initiated a strike, barricading the SSS building and preventing both non-striking employees and the public from entering. Their demands included implementation of a prior collective bargaining agreement (check-off of union dues), payment of accrued overtime, night differential, holiday pay, conversion of long-serving contractual employees to regular status, and payment of children’s allowances. They also alleged improper salary deductions, discrimination, and unfair labor practices by SSS.
Procedural History
The SSS filed a complaint for damages with a prayer for preliminary injunction on June 11, 1987. The RTC granted a TRO the same day. SSSEA moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; the RTC denied the motion and converted the TRO into a preliminary injunction upon bond posting. SSSEA’s motions for reconsideration were denied. SSSEA then filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition (G.R. No. 79577), which the Supreme Court referred to the Court of Appeals. The CA, in CA-G.R. SP No. 13192, affirmed the RTC’s jurisdiction and injunction. SSSEA’s attempts to recall or reconsider were denied, leading to this petition for review.
Issues Presented
- Whether SSS employees possess a constitutional or statutory right to strike.
- Whether the Regional Trial Court had jurisdiction to hear SSS’s complaint, to enjoin the strike, and to order the strikers back to work.
Constitutional Framework on Public-Sector Strikes
The 1987 Constitution guarantees all workers the right to self-organization, collective bargaining, and peaceful concerted activities, “including the right to strike in accordance with law” (Art. XIII, Sec. 3). It separately provides that government employees shall not be denied the right to self-organization (Art. IX-B, Sec. 2[5]) and the right to form associations (Art. III, Sec. 8). Constitutional Commission debates clarify that the framers intended “self-organization” for public employees without an accompanying right to strike.
Statutory and Executive Regulations
• R.A. 875 (Industrial Peace Act) had expressly prohibited strikes by government employees engaged in governmental functions, allowing only those in proprietary functions to strike.
• The Labor Code excludes government employees from its coverage and defers their employment terms to Civil Service Law.
• E.O. 180 implements the constitutional right to organize but subjects government-employee strikes to existing civil service rules; it directs observance of Memorandum Circular No. 6, which forbids strikes, mass leaves, and disruptive actions.
• No legislation has yet legislatively authorized public-sector strikes.
Analysis – Right to Strike of SSS Employees
SSS is a government-controlled corporation with an original charter; its employees are part of the civil service under Art. IX-B, Sec. 2(1) of the Constitution. In the absence of any legislative authorization for public-sector strikes, Executive and Civil Service rules (E.O. 180 and Memorandum Circular No. 6) prohibit such actions. Therefore, the SSSEA strike was illegal. Public employees cannot resort to strike to secure changes in employment terms that
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 85279)
Facts of the Case
- On June 9, 1987, officers and members of SSSEA staged a strike, barricading SSS building entrances and preventing work and transactions.
- SSS filed a complaint for damages with prayer for writ of preliminary injunction on June 11, 1987, alleging illegal strike and damages.
- SSSEA demands included enforcement of CBA provisions on check-off, payment of accrued overtime, night differential and holiday pay, regularization of certain employees, and children’s allowance.
- SSSEA alleged improper salary deductions, discrimination, and unfair labor practices by SSS.
Procedural Antecedents
- June 11, 1987: RTC Quezon City issued temporary restraining order; SSSEA moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
- July 22, 1987: RTC denied motion to dismiss, converted TRO into preliminary injunction after finding strike illegal.
- August 14, 1987: RTC denied reconsideration of injunction order.
- Petitioners filed certiorari and prohibition (G.R. No. 79577); Supreme Court referred case to CA.
- March 9, 1988: Court of Appeals promulgated decision affirming RTC’s jurisdiction and injunction.
- June 29, 1988: Supreme Court denied motion for reconsideration in G.R. No. 79577 as moot.
- December 13, 1988: Petitioners filed application for preliminary and mandatory injunction before Supreme Court.
- February 6, 1989: Supreme Court issued TRO enjoining new strike notice and maintaining status quo.
Issues Presented
- Whether employees of the Social Security System have a constitutional or statutory right to strike.
- Whether the Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction to hear SSS’s complaint, enjoin the strike, and order strikers back to work.
Applicable Constitutional and Statutory Provisions
- 1987 Constitution, Art. XIII, Sec. 3: Right