CENTRAL BANK EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION V BANGKO SENTRAL NG
PILIPINAS
FACTS:
Almost 8 years after the effectivity of
RA 7653, the Central Bank
Employees Association Inc. filed a
petition against BSP and the
Executive Secretary of the Office of
the President to restrain BSP from
implementing the last proviso in
Section 15(c), Article 2 of RA 7653
on the ground that it is
unconstitutional
The petitioners allege that the
proviso makes an unconstitutional
cut between two classes of
employees in the BSP:
o The BSP officers or those
exempted from the coverage
of the Salary Standardization
Law (SSL) and
o The rank and file class
(Salary Grade (SG) 19 and
below)
Petitioners contend that this
classification is a classic case of
class legislation allegedly not based
on substantial distinctions but solely
on the SG of BSP personnel
o Not germane to the purposes
of Section 15(c), Article 2 of
RA 7653
Petitioners posits that the
classification is not reasonable
arbitrary and capricious, and violates
the equal protection clause of the
Constitution
ISSUE:
WON the last paragraph of Section 15(c),
Article 2 of RA 7653 runs afoul the equal
protection of the laws?
HELD:
Under the present standards of equal
protection, Section 15 (c), Article 2 of RA
7653 is valid.
A law is not invalid because of
simple inequality
All that is required of a valid
classification is that it be reasonable
It is clear in the legislative
deliberations that the exemption of
officers (SG 20 and above) from the
SSL was intended to address the
BSPs lack of competitiveness in
terms of attracting competent
officers and executives
o Not intended to discriminate
against the rank-and-file
The enactment of subsequent laws-
exempting all other rank-and-file
employees of Governmental Financial
Institutions (GFIs) from the SSL- renders
the continued application of the
challenged provision a violation of the
equal protection clause.
A statute valid at one time may
become void at another time
because of altered circumstances
A statute valid when enacted may
become invalid by change in the
conditions to which it is applied
A statute nondiscriminatory on its
face may be grossly discriminatory
in its operation
Eleven years after the amendment
of the BSP charter, the rank-and-file
of seven other GFIs were granted
the exemption that was specifically
denied to the rank-and-file of the
BSP.
o The equal protection clause
does not demand absolute
equality but it requires that all
persons shall be treated
alike, under like
circumstances.
o The challenged proviso
operates on the basis of the
salary grade or officer-
employee status. It is akin to
a distinction based on
economic class and status,
with the higher grades as
recipients of a benefit
specifically withheld from the
lower grades.