ILS Discussion Paper Series 2018

EXPLORING THE CASE OF JOB ORDERS AND

CONTRACT OF SERVICE WORKERS IN THE
GOVERNMENT

IVAN CASSIDY F. VILLENA

 Working Paper Series 2018

For Discussion Purposes Only

EXPLORING THE CASE OF JOB ORDERS AND

CONTRACT OF SERVICE WORKERS IN THE GOVERNMENT

IVAN CASSIDY F. VILLENA

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the opinion of the
Institute for Labor Studies and the Department of Labor and Employment.
 Abstract
The study focuses on exploring the different aspects surrounding the employment of
job orders (JOs) and contract of service (COS) workers in the government, particularly
on their working conditions including their rights at work and present situation. It
provides a discussion on various laws, rules and regulations that affects process of
hiring and selection and supervision of the abovementioned class of workers. In order
to collect relevant and timely data and information that could serve as valuable inputs
for the study in drawing a clear picture of the present setting of the condition of job
orders and contract of service workers, the researcher conducted a self-administered
survey to JOs and COS workers employed in selected national government agencies
followed by a brief focused group discussion on their answers. The results of the
survey have led to the following findings: (1) there are different driving forces and/or
motivations why an individual applied as JO or COS worker, although he or she
possessed the appropriate qualifications set by laws, nevertheless, becoming a
regular employee and a civil servant remains the main goal of the respondents; (2)
their entitlement to social security benefits are due to their self-initiative (i.e. voluntary
contribution); (3) the services they provide to their respective employers are essential
in the provision of public services to stakeholders – this is due to the fact that most of
them have their contract renewed multiple times; and (4) regardless of their
employment arrangement, they perceived themselves as ‘job orders.’ Hence, the
study recommends that there should be initiatives which could help JO, COS workers,
and other temporary workers in the government to secure a full and productive regular
employment. Their entitlement to social protection benefits must be taken into
consideration, and their services must be given due recognition by the government.
Keywords: Contract of Service Workers, Job Orders, Social Justice, Self-
determination
Introduction

Background/Rationale

Job Orders (JO) are those defined by the 2016 Revised Implementing Rules and
Regulations of RA 9184, otherwise known as the Government Procurement Reform
Act, as workers who are hired to undertake piece work or intermittent job of short
duration not exceeding six (6) months, and being paid on a daily or hourly basis. These
workers, unlike those who hold regular positions (plantilla), are not covered by Civil
Service laws including its rules and regulations. Because of their exemption in such
laws and policies, their services rendered to their employer, regardless of the number
of years, are not credited as government service.1

Recently, the Civil Service Commission (CSC), Commission on Audit (COA), and
Department of Budget and Management (DBM) issued a new guidelines governing
JOs and Contract of Service Workers (COS) through Joint Circular No. 1 s. 2017.
Issued last 15 June 2017, Section 11.0 (Transitory Provisions) of the circular has been
contested by debates because the renewal of existing contracts of JOs and COS is
until 31 December 2018 only. This means starting 2019, the Government is still
allowed to hire JOs and COS workers, institutionally or individually, but now through
private contractors or service providers, which, at present, is governed by the
Department of Labor and Employment’s rules and regulations on contracting and
subcontracting.

Prior to this issuance, there are pertinent laws, rules, and regulations governing
JOs and COS workers. One of them is the Revised Omnibus Rules on Appointments
and Personnel Actions, where in Rule XI, Section 2(a) states that contract of service
“covers lump sum work or services such as janitorial, security, or consultancy services
where no employer-employee relationship exist”. On the other hand, Section 2(b) of
the same rule maintained that “job order covers piece of work or intermittent job of
short duration not exceeding six (6) months on a daily basis.”

Based on the data released by the CSC in July 2016, there are 592,1622 workers
or almost one-fourth of the 2.4 Million workers in the bureaucracy are under fixed-term
arrangement. Presumably, this number could continue to increase in the coming years
as the number of career service eligibles increase every year. A good number of JOs
and COS workers perform functions intended to be discharged by regular workers (by
virtue of their appointment). This set-up is a deviation from the governing rules
promulgated by the CSC3. Nonetheless, they are strictly bound to adhere with the
Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (RA 6713).

Another concern that has been the focus of discussion regarding JOs and COS
workers is their lack of security of tenure, unlike their regular counterparts who have
the mantle of protection guaranteed by Law4. Reiterating Section 3 of Article XIII of the
1987 Philippine Constitution, which states that the “State shall afford full protection to

1
CSC Memorandum Circular No. 38 s. 1993
2
This figure includes Contract of Service Workers
3
Ibid.
4
Republic Act No. 6656, otherwise known as an Act to Protect the Security of Tenure of Civil Service Officers
and Employees in the Implementation of Government Reorganization
labor, local and overseas, organized and unorganized, and promote full employment
and equality of employment opportunities for all. 5 Since this constitutional provision
does not mention the type of employment arrangements are guaranteed to be
protected, it is presumed that this should be interpreted in its literal meaning, applying
the verba legis or the plain meaning rule in interpretation of statutes 6.

The circumstances encompassing the situation of JOs and COS workers serve
as the author’s rationale to pursue this study. It seeks to identify gaps between the
desired outcomes expected by the previously and recently issued laws and policies
on employing JOs and COS workers to their present situation/condition. After
examining these laws and policies, and implementation gaps are identified, the study
could provide inputs that may somehow help lawmakers to introduce amendments to
current issuances of laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to said working
arrangements in the government, in order for these to be implemented in accordance
with the constitutional provision of the State “providing full protection to labor” whether
in the public or private sector.

Moreover, the study intends to recommend or propose possible interventions to

improve the working conditions of JOs and COS workers engaged in various branches
of the government and its instrumentalities. The researcher believes that providing
decent work is not just a mandate vested to a single entity, but it is a collective
responsibility of all branches of the government, in adherence to the principle of Social
Justice7.

Research Problem

Approximately 600,000 JOs and COS are not considered as employed in

government service. The repercussion of this arrangement is that they are not afforded
the rights and benefits compared to other government personnel with an employer-
employee relationship. Hence, this study is undertaken to explore the employment of
JOs and COS.

Objective/s

The general objective of this study is to explore the issues, concerns, and
circumstances surrounding JOs and COS workers with sex disaggregated information
and analysis.

5
Lopez, et.al vs MWSS (G.R. No. 154472, June 30, 2005), the Supreme Court has used this time-honored
principle mentioned in the preceding paragraph as its basis of its decision to recognize the petitioners as
regular employees of the respondent, a government owned and controlled corporation (GOCC). Also
pronounced in this case is the “repeated rehiring” which indicates the necessity and desirability of their
services, wherein in the said case some of the petitioners have been employees of the respondents for more
than decade. To cut the story short, the Supreme Court emphasized the fact that protection to labor extends
to all, including those in the public sector.
6
Suarez, R. (2007). Statutory Construction. Rex Bookstore Publishing. Manila, Philippines
7
Calalang vs. Williams, G.R. No. 47800, December 2, 1940
 Specifically, this research aims to achieve the following objectives:

1. Determine the factors that motivate people to apply or be employed as

JOs and COS workers;
2. Identify the issues, concerns, and challenges surrounding the
implementation of rules and regulations governing the employment of JOs
and COS; and
3. Provide a comprehensive analysis of the weaknesses in the legal and
policy framework governing the issuance of JOs or Contracts of Service
workers and accordingly recommend policy initiatives and specific
proposals for amendment that will enhance existing or future laws and
issuances governing JOs and COS, either through introduction of possible
amendments or new enactments

Methods

a. Desk Research and Review

Primarily, the study will gather existing data from sources such as
government websites, administrative data, and previous studies. The purpose
of this research method is for the writer to gain broad understanding of the
research problem.

b. Stakeholder Consultation

To validate the initial review of existing literature, a stakeholder forum

was conducted to solicit inputs from social partners. The forum also
strengthened the operational framework of the study and helped firm up the
questionnaire for the survey.

c. Research Sample

In order to obtain new data and information that has not been collected
before, the research intends to use interview guide questions that will be
provided to the key informants and respondents. These key informants and
respondents are the JOs, COS workers, and the Human Resource
Management Officers (HRMOs), who are all employed in any of the three
branches of the government (Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary) including
those from NGAs, LGUs, GOCCs and SUCs.

The researcher ensured that there is gender balance in the research

sample. The number of respondents and the regions were determined after
consultations and meetings with appropriate government agencies, through
their representatives, which has the jurisdiction over the affairs and
performances of JOs and COS workers in the government. Selected Public
Sector Unions (PSUs) and Non-Governmental Agencies (NGAs) also
provided statistics/information regarding the location of the JOs and COS
workers. These data were then subjected to stratified random sampling with
the following parameters: (1) NGAs and regional counterparts are the top 3
 agencies with the most number of JOS and COS; and (2) the regions
identified are those with the highest concentration of JOS and COS.

d. Research Instrument

The questionnaire is designed specifically to be completed without the

intervention of the researcher in-charge with collecting the data. To effectively
gather data and information, the questionnaire will consist of questions
carefully worded and constructed in accordance with the research’s general
and specific objectives.

The questionnaire is consists of seven (7) parts, namely: (1) profile of the
respondent; (2) driver, aspirations, and motivations; (3) hiring and selection;
(4) working conditions; (5) supervision and management; (6) working relations
and environment; and (7) policy recommendations.

e. Data and Information Collection Process

The data and information collection process will include the following:
1. Initial consultation and meetings with partners and stakeholders to
determine possible respondents for the survey, ensuring gender
balance;
2. Series of surveys with the JOs and COS workers themselves using
self-administered survey questionnaires covering equal number of
women and men respondents

2.1. The survey has been conducted in the following regions: (1)
National Capital Region (NCR); (2) Region III (Central
Luzon); (3) Region IV-A (CALABARZON); (4) Region VI
(Western Visayas); (5) Region XI (Davao Region); and (6)
Region XII (SOCCKSARGEN)

2.2. Survey respondents are consist of 170 JOs and COS workers
employed in three (3) selected national government agencies
(NGAs) and one (1) constitutional commission. Table 1
presents the disaggregation of the total number of
respondents by region and agency:

Table 1. Number of Respondents by Region and Agency

Data

I. Security of Tenure in the Public Sector

The law which protects the security of tenure of civil service officers and
employees in the Government is Republic Act No. 6656, otherwise known as “An Act
to Protect the Security of Tenure of Civil Service Officers and Employees in the
Implementation of Government Reorganization,” The law is based on the constitutional
provision found in Article IX, B, Section 38 of the Constitution.

Section 2 of the said law emphasizes that a civil service officer or employee shall
not be removed from the service, except for a valid cause and after complying with its
substantive and procedural due process (notice and hearing). A valid cause for
removal exists when: (1) pursuant to a bona fide reorganization, a position has been
abolished or rendered redundant; (2) there is a need to merge, divide, or consolidate
positions in order to meet the exigencies of the service; or (3) other unlawful causes
allowed by the Civil Service Law.

II. Hiring Process in the Public Sector

Found in Article IX, B, Section 2(2) of the Constitution is the provision which
defines the appointments made in the civil service. Based on the provision, there are
two types of appointments in the civil service: (1) appointments based on merit9 and
fitness to be determined as far as practicable by competitive examinations (i.e. civil
service examinations), or called the “competitive positions”; and (2) appointments to
positions which are policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly-technical, or
classified as “non-competitive positions.”

Competitive positions or those based on merit and fitness are grouped into three
levels: (1) positions requiring less than four (4) years of collegiate studies (sub-
professional); (2) positions requiring at least four years of collegiate studies
(professional); and (3) positions in the Career Executive Service.

III. Types of Employment in the Public Sector

The CSC-COA-DBM Joint Circular No. 1, s. 2017 provides the following types of
employment in the public sector and their respective definition:

a) Contract of Service – refers to the engagement of services of individual

private firm, other government agency, non-governmental agency or
international organization as consultant, learning service provider or
technical expert to undertake special project or job within specific period

8
No officer of employee in the civil service shall be removed or suspended except for cause provided by law
9
The civil service laws of the country are founded on the belief that promotion and hiring of government
employees shall be based on their ability to perform. These laws intend to establish a merit system of fitness
and efficiency as the basis of appointment, not on political considerations, partisanship and personal favoritism
(Meram vs. Edralin, G.R. No. 71228, 24, September 1987 citing Gervais v. New Orleans Police Department, 77 So
2d. 393)
 b) Contractor or Service provider – individual, government agency, private
or non-government entity, duly-registered and recognized by authorized
government agencies to provide consultancy

c) Institutional contract – agreement between the government agency and

contractor or service provider duly-registered and recognized by
authorized government agencies to provide service such as consultancy,
and other support services

d) Job Order – piece work (pakyaw) or intermittent or emergency jobs such

as manual/trade and crafts services such as carpentry or plumbing,
clearing of debris, etc.

e) Support services – may include janitorial, security, driving, data

encoding, equipment and grounds maintenance and other services that
support the day to day operations of the agency

Among the types of employment mentioned in the preceding paragraph, Contract

of Service and Job Order workers are not covered by the Civil Service law and rules
thus, they are not creditable as government service. This means that they are not
entitled to the benefits received by government employees such as leave credits,
Personal Economic Relief Allowance, Representation and Transportation Allowance,
and 13th Month pay.

IV. The Need for Job Orders and Contract of Service Personnel

JOs are workers who receive wages equivalent to daily wage/salary of

comparable positions in government and a premium of up to 20 percent of such
wage/salary. Their wages/salaries shall be charged against the Maintenance and
Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) in the approved agency budget.

On the other hand, contract of service workers are those whose wages/salaries
are equivalent to the prevailing market rates, subject to the provision of RA 9184 and
its implementing rules and regulation. Their wages/salaries are also charged against
the agency’s MOOE, but their enrollment to social benefit programs (i.e. Social
Security Services, PhilHealth, and PAG-IBIG Fund) is a prerogative of the individual
(as self-employed).

In regards on hiring of job orders, Section 7.2 of the CSC-COA-DBM Joint

Circular No. 1, s. 2017 lays down the following conditions to take into consideration on
hiring job orders:

“Hiring of job order workers shall be limited to emergency or

intermittent work, such as clearing of debris on the roads, canal,
waterways, etc. after natural/man-made disasters/occurrences; other
trade and crafts, and manual tasks such as carpentry, plumbing,
painting, electrical, and the like which are not part of the regular
functions of the agency.”
 Similarly, Section 7.1 states the conditions on hiring contract of service workers:

“Hiring under contract of service shall be limited to consultants,

learning service providers, and/or other technical experts to
undertake special project or job within a specific period. The project or
job is not part of the regular functions of the agency, or the expertise
is not available in the agency, or it is impractical or more expensive for
the government agency to directly undertake the service provided by
the individual or institutional contractor.”

Based on the aforementioned provisions, it is implied that a government agency

can only engage the services of job orders and contract of service workers if there is
an emergency or intermittent work that need to be undertaken and when there is a
lack of highly technical personnel who will take part in a special project of job.
Accordingly, job orders require low- and middle-level skills while contract of service
workers are those “expert” who possessed highly-technical knowledge. To conclude,
government agencies hire job orders and contract of service workers to augment their
workforce in order to maintain the continuity of provision of public services.

V. Policy Issuances on Job Orders and Contract of Service Personnel

A. Revised Administrative Code of 1987

Executive Order No. 292, or the Revised Administrative Code of 1987 is the
primary law that authorizes the government or any of its branches or instrumentalities
including government owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) to hire job orders
or contract of service workers. Under Section 58, “Agencies may enter into contracts
with individuals or organizations, both public and private, subject to provisions of law
and applicable guidelines approved by the President: provided, that contracts shall
be for specific services which cannot be provided by the regular staff of the
agency, shall be for a specific period of time, and shall have a definite expected
output; provided, further, that implementing, monitoring and other regular and
recurring agency activities shall not be contracted for, except for personnel
hired on an individual and contractual basis and working as part of the
organization, or as otherwise may be approved by the President: Provided, finally,
that the cost of contracted services shall not exceed the amount that would otherwise
be incurred had the work been performed by regular employees of government, except
as may be authorized under this section.”

The provision explains that government agencies may enter into a contract with
an individual or an organization for specific services (i.e. labor) which cannot be
provided by the regular employees of the agency and the duration of such services
shall be for a specific period of time (i.e. fixed-term, project-based) and shall have a
definite expected output. The services contracted out should not be the same with the
function related to implementation, monitoring and other regular and recurring agency
activities, except for personnel hired on an individual and contractual basis and
working as part of the organization.

Moreover, the Revised Administrative Code of 1987 on the Civil Service

Commission (CSC), which is basically based on the principles governing public
officers found in the former, classifies contractual personnel or those whose
employment is governed by a special contract as non-career service (Section 9(4)),
and this section emphasize that the duration of their employment shall not exceed one
(1) year.

B. Resolution No. 020790 of the Civil Service Commission

Section 1(3) of Resolution No. 020790 (Re: Policy Guidelines for Contract of
Services) issued on 05 June 2002 states that “the contract of services and job order
are not covered by Civil Service law, rules and regulations, but covered by
Commission on Audit (COA) rules. Though contract of service workers and job orders
are not within the jurisdiction of the CSC, the contracts which govern their employment
shall be reviewed and audited by the latter (Sections 5 and 9).

C. Government Procurement Reform Act (RA 9184)

In the said law, Job Orders (JO) are as workers who are hired to undertake
piece work or intermittent job of short duration not exceeding six (6) months, and being
paid on a daily or hourly basis. These workers, unlike those who hold regular positions
(plantilla), are not covered by Civil Service laws including its rules and regulations.
Their services regardless of the number of years, are not credited as government
service.10

Further, the abovementioned law provides the technical definition of the word
“goods” when used in procurement, found in Section 5(r) of the 2016 Revised
Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 9184 which specifically
states:

“Refer to all items, supplies, materials and general support

services, except Consulting Services and infrastructure
projects, which may be needed in the transaction of public
businesses or in the pursuit of any government undertaking, project
or activity, whether in the nature of equipment, furniture, stationery,
materials for construction, or personal property of any kind, including
non-personal or contractual services, such as, the repair and
maintenance of equipment and furniture, as well as trucking, hauling,
janitorial, security, and related or analogous services, as well as
procurement of materials and supplies provided by the Procuring
Entity for such services. The term “related” or “analogous services”
shall include, but is not limited to, lease of office space, media
advertisements, health maintenance services, and other services
essential to the operation of the Procuring Entity”

The Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB) in its policy opinion dated
21 November 2012 sheds light regarding the preceding provision. Expressly stated in
the opinion is that the Republic Act 9184, or otherwise known as “An Act Providing for
the Modernization, Standardization and Regulation of the Procurement Activities of
the Government and for other purposes, and its implementing rules and regulations

10
CSC Memorandum Circular No. 38 s. 1993
applies only to the engagement of individuals or a firm for the purpose of providing
“non-personal services.” In this case, the employer-employee relationship exists
between the contracting firm and the individual workers, not with the procuring entity
(government agency).

Also explained in the same policy opinion is the rule on the engagement of
personnel who will provide “personal services.” The GPPB opined that in case a
government agency wants to engage individuals to perform services under job order
or contract of service, where the selection and evaluation process consider the
individual’s qualification for the purpose of personal service, the ensuing arrangement
partakes the nature of hiring personnel rather than procurement of services. Hence,
the RA 9184 and its IRR do not apply in this specific arrangement.

D. Joint Circular No. 1, s. 2017

Joint Circular No.1, s. 2017 signed by CSC, Commission on Audit (COA), and
Department of Budget and Management (DBM) have instituted new rules and
regulations in hiring JOs and Contract of Service Workers (COS) through Joint Circular
No. 1 s. 2017 issued last 15 June 2017. Section 11.0 (Transitory Provisions) of the
circular has been contested by debates because the renewal of existing contracts of
JOs and COS is until 31 December 2018 only. This means starting 2019, the
Government is still allowed to hire JOs and COS workers, institutionally or individually,
but now through private contractors or service providers, which, at present, is
governed by the Department of Labor and Employment’s rules and regulations on
contracting and subcontracting.

Prior to this issuance, there are pertinent laws, rules, and regulations governing
JOs and COS workers. One of them is the Revised Omnibus Rules on Appointments
and Personnel Actions, where in Rule XI, Section 2(a) states that contract of service
“covers lump sum work or services such as janitorial, security, or consultancy services
where no employer-employee relationship exist”. On the other hand, Section 2(b) of
the same rule maintained that “job order covers piece of work or intermittent job of
short duration not exceeding six (6) months on a daily basis.”

Based on the data released by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) in July
2016, there are 592,16211 workers or almost one-fourth of the 2.4 Million workers in
the bureaucracy are under fixed-term arrangement.

VI. Issues on Job Orders and Contract of Service Workers

A. Issues raised by stakeholders

Social Welfare Employees Association of the Philippines (SWEAP) stated that

job orders (JOs) and contract of service (COS) workers because of their lack of
security of tenure fear that they would be laid off first, especially those who discharge
government frontline services. In his agency, the Department of Social Welfare and

11
This figure includes Contract of Service Workers
Development, “only 10 percent of agency’s workforce are permanent employees while
35 percent are casual and contractual who have no job security but are given benefits
like their plantilla counterparts (permanent).

Those JOs and COS workers in state colleges and universities have also
encountered the same sentiments as discussed in the preceding paragraph. For
instance, JOs are engaged to teach, perform research functions and conduct
extension work along with their regular counterparts. Since their employment are
temporary and their services are desirable to meet the needs of their respective
colleges and universities, their contract are renewed every semester, while the
contracts of the rest of them such as research assistants, utility workers, and other
administrative personnel are renewed every six months.

It is observed that JOs and COS workers although their employment are
temporary in nature, but they attend flag ceremonies, covered by same memorandums
as those received by regular employees, and must observe civil service rules. “They
follow the chain of command; in whatever executive or local unit they have been
“contracted” to serve.”

B. Issues raised by jurisprudence

The provision of security of tenure is founded on “Social Justice” principle

embodied in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. For that purpose, the Constitution has
laid down the following provisions along the imperative of social justice:

a.) “Art. XIII, Sec 1. The Congress shall give highest priority to the
enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all
the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and
political inequalities and remove cultural inequities by equitably
diffusing wealth and political power for the common. To this end,
the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and
disposition of property and its increments”; and

b.) “Art. II, Sec 10. The State shall promote social justice in all
phases of national development.”

The provision social justice (Article XII, Section 1) is the center of discussion in
the case of IMASEN Philippine Manufacturing Corporation vs, Alcon 12. The main issue
in the said case is whether or not the phrase “the right of all the people to human
dignity” cover the right of security of tenure. The Supreme Court in its ruling laid the
scope of social justice provision, wherein it stated that “the law and jurisprudence
guarantee to every employee security of tenure. This textual and the ensuing
jurisprudential commitment to the cause and welfare of the working class proceed from
the social justice principles of the Constitution that the Court zealously implements out
of its concern for those with less in life.”

In relation to social justice is the provision found in Article XIII, Section 3 which
declares that “the State afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, organized
12
G.R. No. 194884, 22 October 2014
and unorganized, and promote full employment and equality of employment
opportunities for all.” What this provision really means is explained in the case of Lopez
vs. MWSS. In this case, the petitioners are composed of dismissed collectors-
contractors, hired through contractual basis, of the respondent (MWSS) filed a petition
before the court asserting that MWSS estopped from denying their employment with
the agency, and invokes the liberal construction of labor laws including implementing
rules and regulations in favor of labor the constitution policy of protection of labor.
MWSS13 denies the existence of employer-employee relationship between itself and
petitioners. Citing CSC Memorandum Circular No. 38 Series of 1993, MWSS avers
that it has the authority to contract the services of another who is considered not its
employee. With respect to the matter of payment of wages, MWSS states that the
commission given to petitioners does not fall within the definition of compensation as
provided in Presidential Degree No. 1146 (P.D. 1146), or in the definition of the term
under the Revised Administrative Code either.

The issue raised in the case at bar is whether or not the terminated collectors-
contractor are employees of MWSS. The Court ruled in favor of the petitioners. The
decision laid by the Court in the said case is founded on the policy of the State to afford
protection to labor. The Court, in the case at hand, stated “Protection to labor, it has
been said, extends to all of labor local and overseas, organized and unorganized, in
the public and private sectors. Besides, there is no reason not to apply this principle in
favor of workers in the government. The government, including government-owned
and controlled corporations, as employers, should set the example in upholding the
rights and interests of the working class.” Obviously, in the said case, it stresses that
Section 3 of Article XIII applies to all kinds of labor, which includes those employed in
the public sector, whether temporary or permanent.

VII. Related Studies and Articles

In the study of Wandera (2011) about the effects of hiring staff on short-term
employment in a government agency, short-term employment results to: unscheduled
turnover in an organization, low staff morale, and low productivity. The study noted
that the very nature of temporary employment increase feelings of divided allegiance
on the part of temporary workers. This had led to reduced level of commitment and
low productivity. Also, the found that the use of temporary workers is due to the
agency’s need to cut down costs of doing business as a result of difficult economic
situations facing the country and to competitively do business globally.

Additionally, one of the policy initiatives suggested by the author (Wandera) to

increase the productivity and alleviate the motivational level of temporary workers is
to have them represented by workers’ organization and included in the collective
bargaining processes and agreements.

Abelido (2017) analyzed the job satisfaction and relative deprivation of the
contractual workers in the University of the Philippines- Los Baños. Most of the
workers answered that they “moderately satisfied” with their current jobs. In terms of
gender, female workers have lower job satisfaction as compared with male workers.

13
Government-owned and controlled corporation created under Republic Act No. 6234
On the other hand, those workers who have the highest job satisfaction with their jobs
are laborers and utility, while research assistant have the lowest job satisfaction.

Similarly, the study of Booth, et.al (2000), where civil servants are among the
respondents of the study, concluded that temporary workers report lower levels of job
satisfaction and receive less work-related training than their counterparts in permanent
employment. However, the study provided evidence that temporary jobs are a
stepping stone to permanent work and the median time before such transition is
between 18 months and three and a half years.

The findings of the study by DeLoria (2001) in which the author examined the
levels of two groups of employees working in the US Federal Government, namely:
(1) core government employee and (2) contract employees, revealed that the two
groups did vary in commitment levels to various work entities. Core government
employees displayed the most commitment to their occupation and least to their
immediate office while contract employees also displayed the most commitment to the
occupation but the least to the government organization (employer).

In the study conducted by Lagura and LIgan (2018) wherein they facilitated an
In-depth Interview (IDI) and Focus Group Discussion with job order street sweepers
working in City Local Government Units in Davao Region, their findings revealed that
these workers are working with no security of tenure, meagerly compensated, and do
not receive benefits. Despite of them being deprived of the said benefits, the workers
are proud and satisfied in doing their job.

The effect of giving fringe benefits to workers’ in the public sector is the
objective of the research by Kamau (2013). Based on the assessment conducted by
the author, fringe benefits such as health protection benefits exert influence to
employees’ productivity. Same with the fringe benefits, employment security of
workers in the public sector have a positive effect on their productivity. Because of
these observations, the author recommends that the government should continue
providing security benefits and health protection benefits to all civil servants in order
to encourage their productivity and loyalty.

Recently, the President Rodrigo Roa Duterte recognized the hard work and
commitment of job orders and contract of service workers through issuing
Administrative Order No. 2 authorizing the grant of gratuity pay not exceeding Php
2,000 each. According to the President, this issuance is a “well-deserved recognition
of their hard work.”

Results14

I. Profile of the Respondents

The average of respondents is 29 years old, and most of them are females (58
out of 170). Further, it is revealed that 154 respondents or majority of them are

14
The results of the survey were analyzed using SPSS ver. 21 and SPSS Text Analytics for open-ended
questions.
 college graduates. There are few graduates (36 respondents) who are
professionals or those who took the licensure examination administered by the
government such as nurses, engineers, and social workers.

The respondents consist of JOs and COS workers who are engaged in
providing administrative and technical functions. Those respondents
discharging administrative functions, the following are their common tasks: (1)
encoding; (2) preparation of reports and memos; (3) updating of various records
and documents (i.e. supplies logbook, flow of communication documents, etc.);
(4) there are others who act as a support personnel to task designated to
regular employees (i.e. secretariat); and (5) secretarial tasks (i.e. making follow-
ups).

On the other hand, those technical JOs and COS workers perform the following
functions: (1) preparation of technical reports; (2) monitoring of programs; and
(3) inspection of materials, particularly to those engaged in fieldwork activities.

The four agency respondents are unionized. However, 77 percent of the

respondents are not members and not covered by the collective negotiation
agreement (CNA).

‘Job order’ is the common term of temporary working arrangement in the

government

When the respondents where ask of what is their working arrangement in their
respective agencies, 135 of them have considered their present arrangement
under a ‘job order’, but in fact, the present employment of the majority are due
to their employment contracts renewed by the agency.

The average number of contract renewals of a JO or COS worker is six (6)

times, ranging from being renewed once to being renewed 20 times. This
particular finding disagrees with the definition provided by the law on ‘job
orders.’ To reiterate, job orders are defined as “piece work (pakyaw) or
intermittent or emergency jobs” that involves manual/trade and crafts services.
The multiple renewal of contracts negates the impression that the respondents
are piece or intermittent workers.

II. Drivers, Aspirations, and Motivations

“Public Service” is the most common reason why a JO or COS worker

aspires to attain regular employment in the government

A large number of respondents (117 out of 170) or 69 percent prior to their

present employment as JO or COS worker have applied for a plantilla position
(regular) in the agency where they are working. According to most of them, “to
serve the public” is the frequently occurring response elicited by the
respondents why they applied for a plantilla position. Other common motives
for applying are: (1) to have a stable career; (2) to gain relevant government
working experience; and (3) to have a high salary and to receive benefits.
 There are other respondents, however, who stated that they preferred or
directly applied as a JO or COS workers, and their common reasons are: (1)
not eligible during the they applied for a regular position; (2) no vacant plantilla
positions; (3) no work experience; (4) working as JO or COS worker receives
higher salary than those entry-level positions in the private sector.

Respondents aspire to become regular employees of the agencies where

they are presently working

Even though they are not regular employees, most of the respondents (154 or
91 percent) intends to work as regular employees of their respective agencies.
And if they have given a chance to become regular employees, they prefer
‘administrative’ position as point of entry to regular employment in the
government. The usual reasons why they opted to occupy administrative
positions are: (1) they already gained working experience; (2) the duties and
responsibilities are the same as what they are presently doing; and (3) they are
already familiar with the functions of the said positions.

Lack of statutory and monetary benefits is the primary disadvantage of

working as JO or COS worker

Almost all of the respondents have stated that the lack of statutory and
monetary benefits as the primary disadvantage of working as JO or COS
worker. Aside from this, other disadvantages include “no employer-employee
relationship”, “no health card”, and “no work, no pay basis.”

On the other hand, there are respondents stated that working as JO or COS
worker is an advantage – because of “less work responsibilities” are assigned
to JO or COS worker. According to them, this is favorable especially to those
who have other responsibilities which are not work related such marital
obligations and business activities. Also, they considered the entitlement to the
full salary (without deductions) as an advantage.

Lack of funds hinders the regularization of JOs and COS workers

Upon asking the respondents if their respective employers-agencies should

regularize them, most of them agreed that they should be regularized and
because their workload is equivalent or more than their regular counterparts.
However, they see this regularization impossible because of current policies of
the government on JOs and COS workers and also to lack of government funds.

III. Hiring and Selection

JOs and COS workers are subjected to the same hiring and selection
process as those undertaken by the regular employees

When the respondents are asked to describe the hiring and selection process
that they hurdled before acquiring they present employment, they stated that
 they have gone through the same scope of pre-employment examination and
same interview process as those hurdled by the regular employees.

There are factors that affect the probability of being hired as a regular
employee

As stated by the respondents, an applicant for a regular position can increase

his chance to be hired as one if he or she: (1) possessed the required career
service professional eligibilities; (2) has the relevant experience; and (3) is
recommended by authorities or has connection in the agency where he or she
applied.

Almost all of them are governed by ‘contracts’

152 out 170 or 89 percent of the respondents have signed an employment

contract and possessed copies of the same.

IV. Working Conditions

In terms of salary, the average amount of salary a respondent receives monthly

ranges from Php 10,000.00 to Php 20,000.00. There are few respondents (9 or
.05 percent) who, aside from the salary, receive other benefits such as
groceries and cash gift.

82 respondents or 48 percent render overtime services, while the remaining do

not. Of those who render overtime work, the average number of overtime hours
rendered in a week is 9 hours, but only few of them receive payment.

There are respondents (62 or 36 percent) who work on holidays and receive
payment for services rendered.

All of the respondents do not receive 13th month pay and do not accumulate
leave credits.

Lack of social protection benefits is prevalent among JOs and COS

workers

Examining the part of the research instrument where the respondents are asked
of their entitlement of social security benefits guaranteed by the law to the
workers, most of them responded in the negative or have written N/A (not
applicable) or ‘No.’ Nevertheless, there are few respondents who because of
their initiative, have social protection benefits. This ‘initiative’ that they refer is
the allotment of a portion of their salary as payment for voluntary contribution
to social security agencies such as social security system, PhilHealth, and
PAG-IBIG.

V. Supervision and Management

The work of all of the respondents are under the control and supervision of a
regular employee with a salary grade ranging from SG18 to SG24. Likewise,
 the agency’s human resource division also imposes control and supervision of
the work of respondents. It also the former and the latter that imposes
disciplinary actions to the respondents.

Same performance evaluation instrument and metrics is used for JOs and
COS workers and regular employees

The common instrument/form used to measure and evaluate the performance

of JOs and COS workers is the Individual Performance Commitment Review
(IPCR). The IPCR is the performance evaluation instrument/form that is being
presently used to measure and evaluate the performance of regular employees
in the government.

VI. Working Relations and Environment

Only 1 out of 4 union provides programs and services to JOs and COS workers
such as: (1) provision of loans; (2) provision of health maintenance
organizations (HMOs); and (3) free civil service examination review sessions.

The level of satisfaction of JOs and COS workers on working with regular
employees that there is a harmonious workplace despite of the difference
in working arrangements

When the respondents are asked to rate the level of working relations with the
regular employees of their respective agencies, the results revealed that 154
respondents or 90 percent are “completely satisfied.”

On the other hand, 149 JOs and COS workers or 88 percent are “somewhat
satisfied” working with each other.

The agencies have implemented initiatives specifically for JOs and COS
workers

As provided by the respondent, the following are some of the initiatives of

agencies that contributes to career growth and development of JOs and COS
workers:
1. Mentoring or coaching;
2. Provision of inclusion to trainings and seminars;
3. Equal and fair treatment;
4. Conduct of meetings to hear out concerns; and
5. Encouragement to apply for a higher position, whether it is in the
agency or other agencies

JOs and COS workers are deprived of their right to self-determination

A large number of respondents (142 or 83 percent) stated that they do not

participate in the agency’s decision and policymaking process, and most of
them (137 or 80 percent) are not able to voice out their grievances and
concerns. Many of the respondents (152 or 89 percent) are not provided with
legal assistance when needed.
Conclusions

Based on the results of the survey, the researcher presents the following
conclusions:

1. Regularization remains the main goal of JOs and COS as evidenced by the
main drivers of being a public servant and wanting to have a stable career.
Being a JO or a COS is but a stepping stone to achieve this goal.
2. NGAs and their regional counterparts acknowledged the indispensable role
of JOs and COS to help achieve their mandates and implement their
programs.
3. The perception of the respondents of their working arrangement is that they
are ‘job orders’, but in fact they are working in their respective agencies for
a specific number of years.
4. In almost every aspect of employment, JOS and COS are being treated as
an employee of the government. The hiring and selection process of JOs
and COS are determined by the government agency. Moreover, placement
of the employee is determined by the Personnel Division of the Human
Resource Department. In terms of duties and responsibilities, JOs and
COS perform functions of regular employees. They are being supervised
and disciplined by a regular employee. What is lacking are the benefits
being afforded to a regular employee. Even the social protection benefits
are on a voluntary basis. Furthermore, there is no mechanism by which
JOs and COS can raise their grievance/s.

Recommendations

Based on the results of the study, the following recommendations could help
improve the present condition of JOs and COS workers:

For the government and public sector unions

1. Conduct of orientation of policies and guidelines affecting the rights,

welfare, and present situation of JOs and COS workers vis-à-vis Joint
Circular No. 1 and related issuances.

For the government

2. Regularization is the main goal of JOs and COS workers. While there are
no issuances deeming them as such, measures must be undertaken to at
least provide them with social protection benefits, and if necessary, the
minimum terms and conditions of employment.

3. In relation to the transition from a JO/COS to regular employment,

measures can be undertaken to formulate a system of equivalency which
will serve as a guide in hiring and selection of JOs and COS workers based
on their duties and responsibilities to make them eligible for regular
employment. Furthermore, crafting/designing of a performance
 measurement instrument specifically for JOs and COS workers can be
undertaken to aid the system of equivalency.

4. Recognize their contribution to the national development and to the

improvement of public services by including them to the various awards
and recognition of the government.

5. Review existing guidelines on JOs and COS workers.

For the Institute for Labor Studies

6. Further researches on JOs, COS workers, and other temporary

employees of the government.
References and Sources:

The 1987 Philippine Constitution

Minutes of Deliberation of the Constitutional Commission, Volume II. Congress of the

Philippines.

Revised Administrative Code of 1987 (Executive Order No. 292)

Revised Administrative Code of 1987 of the Civil Service Commission

Angel Abad vs. Herminio dela Cruz, G.R. No. 207422, 18 March 2015

Alexander Lopez vs. MWSS, G.R. No. 1544472, 30 June 2005

The 2016 Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 9184

GPPB Policy Opinion No. PM 02-2012, 21 November 2012

Cruz, I. (2012) Constitutional Law I and II. Rex Bookstore. Manila, Philippines

Wandera, H.T. (2011). The Effects of Short-term Employment Contract on an

Organization: A Case of Kenya Forest Service. International Journal of Humanities
and Social Science. Vol. 1, No. 21 December 2011.

Booth, A.L., Francesconi, M. and Frank. K. (2000). Temporary Jobs: Stepping Stones
or Dead Ends? Laboratorio R. Revelli Centre for Employment Studies. Retrieved 07
September 2018 from http://www.laboratoriorevelli.it/_pdf/wp8.pdf

Abelido, N.C.V. (2017). Living Through the Daily Grind: Analyzing the Determinants of
Job Satisfaction and Relative Deprivation of Contractual Workers. A research
presented at the DLSU Research Congress 2017. De La Salle University, Manila,
Philippines.

DeLoria, J.E. (2001). A Comparative Study of Employee Commitment: Core and

Contract Employees in a Federal Agency. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of
the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Fall Church, VA, USA.

Lagura and Ligan (2018). What is Life for Job Order Street Sweepers in the City
Government of Davao Region? A Phenomenological Study. International Journal of
Management Execellence. Volume 11 No. 1 June 2018. Retrieved 10 September 2018
from www.ijmeonline.com/index.php/ijme/article/download/442/pdf_119

Kamau, H.N. (2013). Fringe Benefits Effects on Employee Productivity in the Public
Sector (A Case of State Department of Water, Nairobi, Kenya). A Research Submitted
to the School of Business in Partial Requirement for the Award of Masters in Business
Administration, (Human Resources Management), Kenyatta University. Retrieved 10
September 2018 from http://ir-
library.ku.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/123456789/10176/Fringe%20benefits%20effects%
20on%20employee%20productivity%E2%80%A6..pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Business World (2017). Gratuity pay granted to gov’t job order and contract workers.
Retrieved 10 September 2018 from
http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Nation&title=gratuity-pay-granted-
to-gov&8217tbr-job-order-and-contract-workers&id=140479

Pasion, P., (Rappler) (2017). Contractual frontliners fear losing jobs in proposed gov’t
rightsizing. Retrieved 10 September 2018 from
https://www.rappler.com/nation/177612-contractual-frontliners-vulnerable-philippine-
government-rightsizing

Adan, W. (Mindanews) (2015). Turning point: Job Order: Injustice and Anomaly in
Government Service. Retrieved 10 September 2018 from
http://www.mindanews.com/mindaviews/2015/01/turning-point-job-order-injustice-
and-anomaly-in-government-service/

Ople, T. (The Manila Times) (2017). Stop unfair labor practices in the government!.
Retrieved 10 September 2018 from https://www.manilatimes.net/stop-unfair-labor-
practices-government/305903/