Peoples Homesite and Housing Corporation v.

Court of Industrial Relations

G.R. No. L-31890 (May 29, 1987)
TOPIC: Law
PONENTE: CORTES, J.
CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE:
A perusal of the functions of the PHHC and the NHC indicates that both perform substantially the same functions.
Commonwealth Act No. 648, as amended, provides:
Section 2. The purposes for which the (People's Homesite and Housing Corporation) is created are:
a) The acquisition, development, improvement, construction, leasing and selling of lands and buildings or any interest therein in the cities and populous
towns of the Philippines, with the object of providing decent housing for those who may be found unable otherwise to provide themselves therewith;

b) The promotion of the physical, social and economic betterment of the inhabitants of the cities and populous towns of the Philippines, by eliminating
therefrom slums and dwelling places which are unhygienic or unsanitary and by providing homes at low cost to replace those which may be so eliminated; and,

c) The provision of community and institutional housing for destitute individuals and families and for paupers.
FACTS:
The PHHC seeks a reversal of the Resolution of the CIR en banc in ordering them to pay private respondents wage differential for work. The Philippine
government and World Food Program (WFP) entered into an agreement in a plan for the Sapang Palay resettlement area in the PHHC proposing a self-
help project to be undertaken by the squatter families for the construction of two dams. The undertaking is for the purpose of water irrigation to be used for
additional food production. In recruiting participants to the program, the WFP issued an application form mentioning the voluntary nature of the work to be
rendered. The participants were assigned to work on canals and roads; however, the projects agreed between the PHHC and WFP were never fully
implemented. They were ordered to accomplish a time sheet, which is the basis for the payment of 50 centavos/day and a weekly food ration. They were
also provided with work tools and assigned a work supervisor to manage and administer the Sapang Palay project in which the latter also conducted ocular
inspection in the area. However, the participants went to the Department of Labor complaining about their work and compensation which Secretary Ople
suggest that the workers in the said project must be paid in minimum wage law. After that, petitioner suspended work and the workers assert their minimum
wage and the 50 centavos be paid to them. The petitioner answered before the CIR that they were exercising governmental functions and that they did not
hire private respondents and CIR had no jurisdiction over them. The Court dismissed the action of the petitioner since there was no evidence that private
respondents rendered overtime work. The petitioner moved to reconsider before the CIR but denied the claims. Thus, they elevated the case to the
Supreme Court.
ISSUE(S):
Main issue:
Whether or not the CIR has jurisdiction over PHHC, a government owned and/or controlled corporation performing governmental function.
HELD:
No, the petition is granted and the assailed resolution of the Court of Industrial Relations is SET ASIDE.

RATIO:
The Court ruled that the Court of First Instance had jurisdiction over labor disputes involving GOCC but not the performing governmental functions. Since the
National Housing Association was created, the Philippine government has carried mass housing and resettlement program to meet the needs of Filipinos. The
PHHC is governmental institution performing governmental functions. Thus, the Court grant the petition and set aside the assailed resolution of the Court of CIR.