SC upholds P29,010 minimum monthly base pay for gov't nurses
Published Oct 9, 2019 03:37 pm
By Rey Panaligan
The Supreme Court has declared valid the P29,010 minimum monthly base pay of nurses in government institutions, like hospitals and military camps.
Supreme Court (MANILA BULLETIN)
But the decision, written by Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, came short of ordering its implementation, stating that a separate law is needed from Congress to provide the needed funds.
The decision granted partially the petition filed in 2015 by Ang Nars Party-list, then represented by Rep. Leah Primitiva G. Samaco-Paquiz.
Early this year, the SC conducted oral arguments on the petition, which sought the High Tribunal to compel the government to implement Section 32 of Republic Act 9173, the Philippine Nursing Act of 2002.
Section 32 provides: “In order to enhance the general welfare, commitment to service and professionalism of nurses, the minimum base pay of nurses working in public health institutions shall not be lower than salary Grade 15 prescribed under Republic Act No. 6758, otherwise known as the ‘Compensation and Classification Act of 1989.’”
Before RA 9173 could be implemented, however, Congress issued Joint Resolution No. 4 (JR No. 4) that allowed the President to modify the compensation and classification of civilian personnel, among other things.
The resolution paved the way for the issuance in 2009 of Executive Order No. 811, which among other things, reduced the base pay of nurses from Salary Grade 15 to Salary Grade 11 (P20,179) while the entry base pay is Salary Grade 10 (P18,718).
During the oral arguments, the petitioners told the SC justices that JR No. 4 cannot repeal Section 32 of RA 9173 by a joint resolution of Congress.
“Executive orders, administrative orders or circulars are not laws within the ambit of the Constitution,” they said.
They pointed out that while JR No. 4 attained the status and effect of a law, it did not attain the status of a bill under the purview of Article VI of the Constitution which requires that every bill passed by Congress should only have only one subject expressed in its title and should pass three readings in Congress.
Representing the government, Solicitor General Jose C. Calida asked the SC to dismiss the petition with an argument that the High Court has no jurisdiction over the issues which involve exclusive legislative power of Congress.
Calida said: “The repeal of Section 32 of RA 9173 through Joint Resolution No.4 by Congress constitutes a political question beyond the pale of judicial review.... The intricacies of the lawmaking process are inherent to Congress alone. The passage of laws, except the people’s direct power of initiative and referendum, rests solely with Congress.”
Almost seven months after the submission of the respective memorandum of the parties in the case, the SC handed down its decision.
Since a copy of the decision was not immediately available, the SC’s public information office (PIO) issued a summary of the ruling.
The PIO said:
“In ruling in favor of the petitioners, the Court ruled that Joint Resolution No. 4, being a mere resolution, cannot amend or repeal a prior law such as RA 9173 or the Philippine Nursing Act. The same applies to Executive Order No. 811 which is also not a law, but an executive directive.
Supreme Court (MANILA BULLETIN)
But the decision, written by Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, came short of ordering its implementation, stating that a separate law is needed from Congress to provide the needed funds.
The decision granted partially the petition filed in 2015 by Ang Nars Party-list, then represented by Rep. Leah Primitiva G. Samaco-Paquiz.
Early this year, the SC conducted oral arguments on the petition, which sought the High Tribunal to compel the government to implement Section 32 of Republic Act 9173, the Philippine Nursing Act of 2002.
Section 32 provides: “In order to enhance the general welfare, commitment to service and professionalism of nurses, the minimum base pay of nurses working in public health institutions shall not be lower than salary Grade 15 prescribed under Republic Act No. 6758, otherwise known as the ‘Compensation and Classification Act of 1989.’”
Before RA 9173 could be implemented, however, Congress issued Joint Resolution No. 4 (JR No. 4) that allowed the President to modify the compensation and classification of civilian personnel, among other things.
The resolution paved the way for the issuance in 2009 of Executive Order No. 811, which among other things, reduced the base pay of nurses from Salary Grade 15 to Salary Grade 11 (P20,179) while the entry base pay is Salary Grade 10 (P18,718).
During the oral arguments, the petitioners told the SC justices that JR No. 4 cannot repeal Section 32 of RA 9173 by a joint resolution of Congress.
“Executive orders, administrative orders or circulars are not laws within the ambit of the Constitution,” they said.
They pointed out that while JR No. 4 attained the status and effect of a law, it did not attain the status of a bill under the purview of Article VI of the Constitution which requires that every bill passed by Congress should only have only one subject expressed in its title and should pass three readings in Congress.
Representing the government, Solicitor General Jose C. Calida asked the SC to dismiss the petition with an argument that the High Court has no jurisdiction over the issues which involve exclusive legislative power of Congress.
Calida said: “The repeal of Section 32 of RA 9173 through Joint Resolution No.4 by Congress constitutes a political question beyond the pale of judicial review.... The intricacies of the lawmaking process are inherent to Congress alone. The passage of laws, except the people’s direct power of initiative and referendum, rests solely with Congress.”
Almost seven months after the submission of the respective memorandum of the parties in the case, the SC handed down its decision.
Since a copy of the decision was not immediately available, the SC’s public information office (PIO) issued a summary of the ruling.
The PIO said:
“In ruling in favor of the petitioners, the Court ruled that Joint Resolution No. 4, being a mere resolution, cannot amend or repeal a prior law such as RA 9173 or the Philippine Nursing Act. The same applies to Executive Order No. 811 which is also not a law, but an executive directive.