Government, too harsh on others, too lenient on itself?

Why is the government too harsh, excessively unforgiving and even unusually cruel to private contractors and manpower agencies and their principals, which private companies on the issue of job contracting, while at the same time, government agencies and all echelons of government including LGUs are maintaining millions of casuals, contractuals, job order workers, who are denied security of tenure and all benefits after working for 10 to 20 years?

Come on, let's call a spade a spade. Go to any government agencies, even the courts, the police, the prosecution service and also any provincial, city or municipal government. There are thousands of casual workers who had been there for many years, job order employees who were hired, rehired and never regularized from administration to administration. Job order workers are disowned in the very contracts they signed whereby the agencies using theis services unabashedly declare in writing that these people have no employer-employee relationship with the government.

As such, when these job order workers become sick, disabled or die while on duty, they do not have any SSS or GSIS safety nets. They are left on their own to paddle their own  canoes in such murky waters of government bureaucracies. And yet, the government compels private companies to absorb employees of agencies as if management has no more prerogatives to decide for themselves on hiring people. The Labor Code was promulgated under Martial Law, but democracy was restored in 1986. DOLE officials and courts decide as if we are still under a dictator. The unkindest cut of all is that the government refuses to apply the law on itself. Follow what it dictates, do not follow what it does.

In a long line of cases decided by the Supreme Court, licensed agencies  were declared labor-only contractors and their workers have been ordered absorbed by the principal employees as their regular employees. Big conglomerates who are well known as commendable corporate citizens,  and highly prestigious companies were directed to swallow hook, line and sinker, so to say, by compelling them to accept, against their better judgment, workers who were recruited by legitimate manpower contractors, paid salaries by the these agencies and managed, supervised by the latter.

As a long-term professor of Labor Laws in a number of university law schools, I have a complete listing of these honorable companies like San Miguel Corporation, Coca Cola, Petron, Procter and Gamble. I worked in San Miguel for more than 12 years, in Petron for more than five years, and in Pepsi Cola for almost six years, and I can say that they all lead and manage their human capital with honor and integrity. These are not fly-by-night firms. They have been around for decades and even hundred years. They do not violate labor laws. They treat their people in fair and honest ways. But the law and the jurisprudence had been very unkind to them.

On August 6, 2025, the Supreme Court ordered many employees of two agencies, Red System and Macslink to be absorbed as regular employees of Coca Cola in ca no GR 275357. On July 31, 2024, the Court ordered many workers of Nozomi Fortune Services to be absorbed by Samsung Electronics in GR 221043. On February 26, 2024, the Court likewise ordered a number of agency workers to be absorbed by Philippine Pizza Inc. On February 14, 2024, on Valentines Day, the High Court also ordered PLDT to absorb thousands of workers hired by multiple agencies. In fairness, however, the Court scolded the DOLE in the hurriedly done inspection and the denial to PLDT of due process.

Coca Cola was ordered to absorb thousands of workers in the following many cases: first, the famous Quintanar case, GR 210565 in 2016; the Lingat case GR 205688 in 2018; in the Ricky dela Cruz case, GR 184977 in the Eddie Pacquing case, GR 157966 in 2008; the Prudencio Bartolino case, GR 153660 in 2003, and uin many other Coca Cola cases. On June 9, 2014, the Supreme Court ordered Pteron to absorb Avelino Malilin and others177592 in GR . On June 15, 2015, Petron was compelled to absorb the employees of contractor Armz Caberte in GR 182255. I have many more cases but there is not enough time and space.

The bottomline of all these is: there is nothing wrong with assuring security of tenure of workers. Our take on this pure and simple: Why is the government exempting itself from this principle? Why is that which is good for the goose not deemed good for the gander? Is this not a blatant illustration of discrimination? Is this not a clear violation of the equal protection clause? I pause for a reply.