Scribd
Upload
159 views1 page

Salenga V CA Facts: in A Case For Illegal Dismissal and Money Claims Against Clark Development Corporation (CDC), The Labor

1) Antonio Salenga filed a case against Clark Development Corporation (CDC) for illegal dismissal and money claims. The labor arbiter ruled in Salenga's favor but CDC appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). 2) Salenga argued that the appeal was invalid because it was not accompanied by a board resolution authorizing the appeal. 3) Additionally, Salenga claimed his retirement benefits should include his 40 years of government service, while CDC said it should be limited to his employment with CDC. 4) The court ruled that CDC and its employees are covered by the Labor Code, not the Civil Service Law, as CDC was incorporated under

Uploaded by

Ashley Candice
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
159 views1 page

Salenga V CA Facts: in A Case For Illegal Dismissal and Money Claims Against Clark Development Corporation (CDC), The Labor

1) Antonio Salenga filed a case against Clark Development Corporation (CDC) for illegal dismissal and money claims. The labor arbiter ruled in Salenga's favor but CDC appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). 2) Salenga argued that the appeal was invalid because it was not accompanied by a board resolution authorizing the appeal. 3) Additionally, Salenga claimed his retirement benefits should include his 40 years of government service, while CDC said it should be limited to his employment with CDC. 4) The court ruled that CDC and its employees are covered by the Labor Code, not the Civil Service Law, as CDC was incorporated under

Uploaded by

Ashley Candice
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Salenga v CA

Facts: In a case for illegal dismissal and money claims against Clark Development Corporation (CDC), the labor
arbiter rendered a decision in favor of petitioner Antonio P. Salenga. From the decision, the Office of the
Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC), on behalf of respondent CDC and its president/chief executive officer
(CEO) Rufo Colayco, filed an appeal with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) via a Memorandum of
Appeal verified and certified by Hilana Timbol-Roman, the executive vice president of respondent CDC.

Timbol-Roman and OGCC lawyer Roy Christian Mallari also executed a Joint Affidavit of Declaration, where they
swore that they were the respective authorized representative and counsel of the respondent corporation. The
petitioner opposed the appeal on the ground that the Memorandum of Appeal and Joint Affidavit were not
accompanied by a board resolution from respondents board of directors authorizing either Timbol-Roman or Atty.
Mallare, or both, to pursue the case or to file the appeal on behalf of respondent.

Meanwhile, pending the Motions for Reconsideration of the NLRCs Decision, another issue arose with regard to
the computation of the retirement benefits of petitioner. Salenga claimed that the computation of his retirement
benefits should also include the forty (40) years he had been in government service in accordance with Republic
Act No. (R.A.) 8291, or the GSIS Act, and should not be limited to the length of his employment with respondent
corporation only, as the latter insisted.
Issue: Is CDC and its employees covered by the Civil Service Law? What is the coverage of Salengas retirement
benefits?

Ruling:

Respondent CDC owes its existence to Executive Order No. 80 issued by then President Fidel V. Ramos. It was meant to
be the implementing and operating arm of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) tasked to manage
the Clark Special Economic Zone (CSEZ). Expressly, respondent was formed in accordance with Philippine corporation
laws and existing rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC pursuant to Section 16 of Republic Act (R.A.) 7227.1 [44]
CDC, a government-owned or -controlled corporation without an original charter, was incorporated under the
Corporation Code. Pursuant to Article IX-B, Sec. 2(1), the civil service embraces only those government-owned or -
controlled corporations with original charter. As such, respondent CDC and its employees are covered by the Labor
Code and not by the Civil Service Law.

Thus, petitioner Salenga is entitled to receive only his retirement benefits based only on the number of years he
was employed with the corporation under the conditions provided under its retirement plan, as well as other
benefits given to him by existing laws.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy