By Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes III
After the filing of their certificates of candidacy, the candidates running for elective posts for the May 12, 2025 Mid Term Elections are looking forward to the official campaign period slated on March 28, 2025 until May 10, 2025 excluding April 17, 2025 which is Maundy Thursday and April 18, 2025, Good Friday.
There will surely be a surfeit of campaign promises and enticements to woo the voters and get their nod on the ballots. Some would be well-meaning; but others, just mere empty promises.
Yet still, the worst kind is dangling a job offer for contractual service in the government just as a form of manipulation or ruse for election purposes.
What is a contract of service?
In Mark Abadilla, et al. v. Philippine Amusement & Gaming Corporation, G.R. No. 258658, which came down on June 19, 2024, it was explained that “However, not all personnel hired by PAGCOR are considered government employees governed by applicable civil service laws and rules as discussed above. Other personnel hired by PAGCOR are considered contract of service or job order workers who are not government employees and are not under the jurisdiction of the CSC.”
Thus, it was stressed that job order workers are not protected by the mantle of the Civil Service Rules and Regulations.
Instead, “X x x Workers under contracts of services and job orders are not considered to have rendered service for the government, covers lump sum work or services where no employee-employer relationship exist, exists for a period of short duration not exceeding six months on a daily basis, are not covered by Civil Service Law, Rules, and Regulations, but by the Commission on Audit (COA) rules, and do not enjoy the benefits enjoyed by government employees. X x x.” (Mark Abadilla, et al. v. Philippine Amusement & Gaming Corporation, G.R. No. 258658, June 19, 2024).
Too, job hires are neither confidential employees nor regular employees. They don’t enjoy security of tenure as their work is for a limited period provided for in their contract of service. Thus,
“They are not confidential employees as determined by law and jurisprudence through the nature of their functions, their organizational ranking, and their compensation level. They are also not regular employees nor government employees because of various government issuances limiting their contracts. x x x.” (Mark Abadilla, et al. v. Philippine Amusement & Gaming Corporation, G.R. No. 258658, June 19, 2024).
Legally, therefore, job hires cannot complain of illegal dismissal when their contract has ended.
However, that is not the point.
The point is what impels a would-be political candidate to promise a contract of service. On this score, the Supreme Court gave a stern reminder to agencies authorized by law to roll-out contracts of service or job orders, thus:
“At the core of it all, Abadilla et al. are workers and personnel whose humanity must also be recognized. This Court seeks 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.” (underscoring supplied). (Mark Abadilla, et al. v. Philippine Amusement & Gaming Corporation, G.R. No. 258658, June 19, 2024).
At the end of the day (or of the contract), we cannot detract from the fact that “labor is honor.” And therefore, each contract of service, albeit temporary, is still a contract of humanity, after all.
(The author is the senior partner of ET Reyes III & Associates (ETRIIILaw)- a law firm based in Iloilo City. He is a litigation attorney, law professor, MCLE lecturer, bar reviewer and book author. His website is etriiilaw.com).
