FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 129049. August 6, 1999]
BALTAZAR G. CAMPOREDONDO, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL
LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (NLRC), Fifth Division, Cagayan de Oro City, THE
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL RED CROSS (PNRC), represented by GOVERNOR ROMEO C. ESPINO and
DR. CELSO SAMSON, respondents.
D E C I S I O N
PARDO,
J.:
At issue in this case is
whether the Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC for short) is a government
owned and controlled corporation or it has been “impliedly converted to a
private organization” subject to the jurisdiction of labor tribunals in a
complaint filed by petitioner, a former PNRC chapter administrator in Surigao
del Norte, for illegal dismissal and damages, as he was forced to
"retire" after he was required to restitute shortages and unremitted
collections in the total sum of P135,927.78.
Having obviously no
merit, we dismiss the petition.
All suitors must come to
court with clean hands. This is
especially true of paid staff of the Philippine National Red Cross. Like its unpaid volunteers, they must be men
of unquestioned honesty and integrity serving in selfless manner to aid the
sick and wounded of armed forces in time of war, acting in voluntary relief in
time of peace and war, maintaining a system of national and international relief
in meeting emergency relief needs caused by typhoons, floods, fires,
earthquakes, and other natural disasters, and promoting such service in time of
peace and war to improve the health, safety and welfare of the Filipino people.[1] Paid staff of the PNRC are government
employees who are members of the Government Service Insurance System and
covered by the Civil Service Law.
Unlike government service in other agencies, Red Cross service demands
of its paid staff uberrima fides, the utmost good faith and dedication
to work.
Since 1980, petitioner
was employed with the PNRC, and until his early "retirement" on
December 15, 1995, he was administrator of the Surigao del Norte Chapter,
Philippine National Red Cross.[2]
In July, 1995, a field
auditor of the PNRC conducted an audit of the books of account of the Surigao
del Norte Chapter headed by petitioner and found him short in the total sum of
P109,000.00.[3]
On November 21, 1995, Dr.
Celso Samson, Secretary General of the PNRC wrote petitioner requiring him to
restitute within seventy two (72) hours from notice, the total sum of
P135,927.78 representing cash shortage, technical shortage and unremitted
collections.[4]
On December 15, 1995,
petitioner applied for early retirement from the service, and later wrote Dr.
Samson requesting for a re-audit by an independent auditor of his
accounts. However, Dr. Samson denied
the request.[5]
On May 28, 1996,
petitioner filed with the National Labor Relations Commission, Sub-Regional
Arbitration Branch X, Butuan City, a complaint for illegal dismissal, damages
and underpayment of wages against the Philippine National Red Cross and its key
officials.[6]
On June 14, 1996,
respondent Philippine National Red Cross filed with the Surigao del Norte
provincial office, Department of Labor and Employment, a motion to dismiss the
complaint for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case because
the PNRC is a government corporation whose employees are members of the
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), and embraced within the Civil Service
Law and regulations.[7]
On July 25, 1996,
petitioner filed an opposition to motion to dismiss arguing that there was
between the PNRC and its duly appointed paid staff, an employer-employee
relationship, governed by the Labor Code of the Philippines.[8]
On October 11, 1996, the
Labor Arbiter issued an order dismissing the complaint for lack of
jurisdiction, finding that the Philippine National Red Cross is a government
corporation with an original charter, having been created by Republic Act No.
95.[9]
On November 12, 1996, the
Labor Arbiter denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration filed on October
14, 1996.[10]
On November 20, 1996,
petitioner filed a notice of appeal and appeal memorandum with the National
Labor Relations Commission.[11]
On March 21, 1997, the
National Labor Relations Commission, Fifth Division, issued a resolution
dismissing the appeal and confirming the decision of the Labor Arbiter that
dismissed petitioner's complaint for lack of jurisdiction.[12]
Hence, this recourse.
On July 7, 1997, we
resolved to require respondents to comment on the petition within ten (10) days
from notice.[13]
On August 7, 1997,
respondent Philippine National Red Cross filed its comment.[14] On November 7, 1997, the Solicitor General
filed its comment.[15]
Resolving the issue set
out in the opening paragraph of this opinion, we rule that the Philippine
National Red Cross (PNRC) is a government owned and controlled corporation,
with an original charter under Republic Act No. 95, as amended. The test to determine whether a corporation
is government owned or controlled, or private in nature is simple. Is it created by its own charter for the
exercise of a public function, or by incorporation under the general
corporation law? Those with special
charters are government corporations subject to its provisions, and its
employees are under the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission, and are
compulsory members of the Government Service Insurance System. The PNRC was not "impliedly converted
to a private corporation" simply because its charter was amended to vest
in it the authority to secure loans, be exempted from payment of all duties,
taxes, fees and other charges of all kinds on all importations and purchases
for its exclusive use, on donations for its disaster relief work and other
services and in its benefits and fund raising drives, and be alloted one
lottery draw a year by the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office for the
support of its disaster relief operation in addition to its existing lottery
draws for blood program.
Having served in the
Philippine National Red Cross for a number of years since his initial
employment, he must know that it is a government corporation with its own
charter and that he was covered by compulsory membership in the Government
Service Insurance System, which is why he could apply, as he did, for
"early" retirement from the service under Presidential Decree No. 1146
or Republic Act No. 1616.[16]
WHEREFORE, the Court hereby DISMISSES the petition,
and AFFIRMS the ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission.
Double costs taxed
against petitioner.
SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr., C.J.,
(Chairman), Puno, Kapunan, and
Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.
[1] Section
3, Rep. Act No. 95.
[2] Par. 2,
Complaint, Annex "A" Petition, Rollo, p. 15.
[3] Par. 3, idem. Rollo, p. 16.
[4] Par.
10, idem. Rollo, p. 18.
[5] Pars.
11-12, idem. Rollo, pp.
18- 19.
[6] Petition,
Rollo, p. 4; Annex "A", Rollo, pp. 15-21.
[7] Petition,
Rollo, p. 4, Annex "B", Rollo, pp. 22-35.
[8] Petition,
Rollo, p. 5; Annex "C", Rollo, pp. 36-39.
[9] Petition,
Rollo, p. 5; Annex "F", pp. 64-69.
[10] Petition,
Rollo, p. 5; Annex "I", Rollo, p. 94.
[11] Petition, Rollo, p. 5, Annexes
"J", "J-1", Rollo, pp. 95-103.
[12] Petition,
Rollo, p. 5; Annex "L", pp. 111-114.
[13] Rollo,
p. 116.
[14] Rollo, pp. 119-134.
[15] Rollo, pp. 159-176.
[16] Republic Act No. 8291, enacted on May 30,
1997, expanded the retirement rights of government workers.