Contract of Services/Job Orders Employment in Government Service

Dear Sir/Mam:

Good day.

Before I ask questions regarding my concern, I would like to share the surrounding circumstances about my current employment in our Provincial Government. This is my first work experience in our government. I just got hired about two weeks ago as a “Job Order – employee” responsible for proofreading certain pre-legal documents. But my designated job position and salary grade, as stated in the PRF or Personal Reference Form (Not quite sure if that is what PRF means) are, namely; “Clerk II and Salary Grade IV,” respectively.

There are four of us who work as Job Order employees, and two more have been working for over a year as Casual employees in our office. And as far as I know, two of us have earned the Career Service Professional Eligibility among the Job Order and Casual employees in our office. From an informal conversation I had with a colleague last Friday, I came to know there are job positions with corresponding plantilla items still available in our office, but allegedly they are subject to the discretion of our agency head as to whom he/she will appoint into with as such. I would like to ask the following questions, given the foregoing circumstances:


1. Can the agency head or head of the office put on-hold an available plantilla item, in his/her office, for as long and as for whom he/she like?

Please cite, as much as possible, some rules/laws/legal jurisprudence/personal insights for references, regardless either you affirm or not.


2. If proven there is or there are available plantilla items in the said office; and given that I am currently employed as Job Order therein; I have a Career Service Professional Eligibility; and I am qualified for the said vacant plantilla item, could I somehow technically and legally assert myself circumventing the alleged discretionary means of the agency head in the appointment of available plantilla items therein?

Please cite, as much as possible, some rules/laws/legal jurisprudence/personal insights for references, regardless either you affirm or not.


3. In reference to “Item No. 2 under Article V. Contract of Services/Job Orders of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 38, Series of 1993,” if supposing my Contract of Services/Job Order has intermittently exceed six months rendering work on the prescribed working hours, could I perhaps invoke then the ruling of the “Four-fold Test” in accordance with legal jurisprudence?

Please cite, as much as possible, some rules/laws/legal jurisprudence/personal insights for references, regardless either you affirm or not.


I apologize if this topic seems to be immature and poorly conveyed, but I would really appreciate it if some of you could educate me on this matter at your spare and convenient time. Thank you very much, and may God Bless you.


Respectfully yours,
helbry630

Same shoes here Brother, hopefully there could be answers to counter these defects but really loosing hope. The only one I could ever think of to stop this is the passage of the House Bill 4396 or the "REGULAR EMPLOYMENT BILL" and other propose bill related to securities of tenure and benefits, bottom line "Contractualization" is common norm in work regime nowadays. We need such bill that is pending on the House Committee to be a law of the land.

No one has really the answer, because the laws allows it, DOLE 18-A even makes it legally coated. It would always boil down that Contractualization is the normal working condition now than promoting regularization. We have to support really the House Bill 4396 pending on the House Committee.

Thank you for taking cognizance of this topic. I hope and wish House Bill No. 4396 or the "REGULAR EMPLOYMENT BILL," and other proposed bill related to securities of tenure and benefits will be ratified into law any time soon.

Keep you posted, I am still revising the change.org petition, per suggestion of a friend that I have to include some ill effects of contractualization both in private and public sector. Yeah, I really do hope this laudable bill and other bills being proposed to protect the rights of every Filipino workers to decent lives would pass. But for now it is just wishful thinking.