Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151) - Philippines (Ratification: 2017)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s first report.

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that all Government employees (all branches, instrumentalities and agencies of the Government, including Government-owned or controlled corporations) can form, join or assist employees’ organizations of their own choosing (sections 1 and 2 of the Executive Order No. 180 of 1987 (EO 180)) and that temporary employees of the Government benefit from such protection as may be provided by law (Article IX(B), section 2(6) of the Philippine Constitution). The Committee also notes that the Supreme Court has held that temporary employees in Government service have a right to self-organization but observes that there is no domestic law, rule, or policy pertaining to the right to organize of temporary employees. The Committee further observes that under EO 180 and the Amended Rules and Regulations Governing the Exercise of the Right of Government Employees to Organize, 2004 (Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of EO 180) several categories of workers are excluded from the guarantees of the Convention: firefighters and jail guards are not eligible to form, join or assist any employees’ organization for purposes of collective negotiations, and other personnel who, by the nature of their functions, are authorized to carry firearms, are also excluded from this right, except when there is express written approval from the management. Recalling in this regard that the 2019 Conference Committee on the Application of Standards requested the Government to ensure that all workers without distinction are able to form and join organizations of their choosing in accordance with Article 2 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Committee refers to its detailed comments made on this issue under Convention No. 87.

Registration requirements for trade unions in the public sector. Legislative issues. In its previous comment under Convention No. 87, the Committee requested the Government to inform of the progress made in amending the IRR of EO 180 with regard to the registration requirement for trade unions in the public sector and to provide a copy once issued. The Committee notes the Government’s indication provided to the 2019 Conference Committee that since the 2017 ratification of this Convention, there has been renewed vibrancy in organizing in the public sector and public sector unions, especially in the local government units, have been increasing. While welcoming this information, the Committee observes that the Government does not provide details about whether any other progress has been achieved regarding the previously announced amendments to the IRR of EO 180 to address the concerns expressed by the Center for United and Progressive Workers (SENTRO) that the requirements for union registration in the public sector are overly stringent (a 10 per cent signature support requirement). The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether reform in this regard is still ongoing, and if so, to indicate the progress made.

Article 6. Facilities to be afforded to public employees’ organizations. The Committee notes that the IRR of EO 180 allow public servants’ organizations to collect reasonable dues to finance conduct of seminars on public sector unionism and other relevant activities, as well as to negotiate over communication systems and other social and cultural facilities. The Committee further notes that House Bill No. 8767 (filed in December 2018 and aimed at addressing the gaps in public sector labour relations, particularly on the protection of the right to organize, facilities to be afforded to public sector employees’ organizations, procedures for determining the terms and conditions of employment, civil and political rights, and settlement of disputes arising or in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment) are expected to be refiled in the 18th Congress. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that, in the context of the adoption of the above legislation, public workers’ organizations are meaningfully consulted, and to provide a copy of the above legislation once amended. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in more detail what facilities are afforded to the representatives of recognized public workers’ organizations to enable them to carry out their functions promptly and efficiently.

Article 7. Participation of organizations of public employees in the determination of terms and conditions of employment of their members. The Committee notes that a duly registered employees’ organization which enjoys the support of the majority of the rank-and-file employees in the organizational unit can obtain the status of the sole and exclusive collective negotiating agent, conferred by the Civil Service Commission (sections 9–12 of EO 180, Rule I, section 1(a) of IRR on EO 180). The Committee recalls in this regard that the requirement to obtain support of an absolute majority of all workers in a bargaining unit to be recognized as a bargaining agent may give rise to problems in cases where, if a union fails to secure the absolute majority support, it is denied the possibility of bargaining. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on organizations of public workers that have obtained the status of exclusive negotiating agent, to indicate whether such organizations did, in practice, negotiate their terms and conditions of employment and if so, to provide examples of any agreements concluded. The Committee also requests the Government to clarify whether, in case no union in a specific negotiating unit meets the required threshold of absolute majority to be able to negotiate on behalf of all workers, the existing unions are able to negotiate, jointly or separately, at least on behalf of their own members.

The Committee further notes that under chapter 1, Book V, section 3 of Executive Order No. 292 (1987) the terms and conditions of employment of all Government employees, including those in Government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters, shall be fixed by law and those conditions not fixed by law may be the subject of negotiation between duly recognized employee’s organizations and appropriate Government authorities. Similarly, EO 180 and its IRR provide that the terms and conditions of employment may be the subject of negotiations between duly recognized employee’s organizations and appropriate Government authorities, except those fixed by law, which include increases in salary, allowances and travel expenses (section 13 of EO 180, Rule I, section 1(i) and Rule XII, sections 1–3 of IRR on EO 180). Finally, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that EO 180 establishes the Public Sector Labour-Management Council (PSLMC) and that the National Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (NTIPC) was reconstituted in 2013 as the main consultative and advisory mechanism lodged with the Department of Labour and Employment, in which workers, employers and Government can discuss labour and employment relevant policy and which is mandated to formulate, for submission to the President or Congress, tripartite views, recommendations and proposals on labour, economic and social concerns. The Committee requests the Government to inform about the constitution of any formal mechanisms for public servant organizations to negotiate or participate in the determination of terms and conditions of their employment, in line with Article 7 of the Convention, without limitation of subjects.

Article 8. Settlement of disputes. The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government that the PSLMC is mandated to implement and administer the provisions of EO 180, which includes the settlement of disputes and has the original and exclusive jurisdiction over disputes which arise in collective negotiations or when there is a dead-lock resulting therefrom. Accordingly, if a dispute remains unresolved after exhausting all the available remedies under existing laws and procedures, the parties may jointly refer the dispute to the PSLMC (section 16 of EO 180). The Committee observes, however, that members of the PSLMC are exclusively Government representatives (the Chairperson of the Civil Service Commission (the Chair); the Secretary of the Department of Labour and Employment (Vice-Chair); the Secretary of the Department of Finance; the Secretary of the Department of Justice; and the Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management), while representatives of public servants’ organizations do not have a right to vote in its discussions and deliberations and can only participate during PSLMC deliberations. For this reason, the PSLMC does not seem to constitute an independent and impartial means of solving disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment, as provided for in Article 8 of the Convention. The Committee further notes that the IRR of EO 180 also make reference to conciliation and mediation of disputes by the Personnel Relations Officer of the Civil Service Commission. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of dispute resolution by the PSLMC and the Civil Service Commission, and to indicate whether disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment in the public service can also be referred to other independent mechanisms which benefit from the confidence of the parties involved.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government regarding the establishment and the roles of the Civil Service Commission, the PSLMC and the Departments of Labour and Employment, Finance, Justice and Budget and Management in administering and implementing the rules governing public sector workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the role of the Civil Service Commission and the Department of Budget and Management with respect to giving effect, in practice, to the guarantees of the Convention for public sector workers.

Tribunal decisions. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government regarding one court decision issued by the Supreme Court of the Philippines relating to the application of the Convention, and its statement that there are other similar rulings. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on court decisions relating to questions of principle regarding the application of the Convention.