CENTRAL BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION vs.

BANGKO SENTRAL NG
PILIPINAS
G.R. No. 148208; December 15, 2004
PUNO, J.
DOCTRINE:
Equal protection clause does not demand absolute equality but it requires that all persons
shall be treated alike, under like circumstances and conditions both as to privileges conferred and
liabilities enforced. Favoritism and undue preference cannot be allowed.

FACTS:
The Central Bank (now BSP) Employees Association Inc, filed a Petition for Prohibition
against BSP and the Executive Secretary of the Office of the President, to restrain respondents
from further implementing the last proviso in Section 15 (c), Article II of RA No 7653, on the
ground that it is unconstitutional. It provides that compensation and wage structure of employees
whose positions fall under salary grade 19 and below shall be in accordance with the rates
prescribed under RA No 6758.
Respondent contends that the provision does not violate the equal protection clause and
can stand the constitutional test, provided it is construed in harmony with other provisions of the
same law, such as fiscal and administrative autonomy of BSP

ISSUE:
Whether or not the last paragraph of Section 15 (c), Article II of RA No 7653, runs afoul
of the constitutional mandate that “No person shall be … denied equal protection of the laws”

RULING:
Unconstitutional. 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, Considering
that majority, if not all, the rank-and-file employees consist of people whose status and rank in life
are less and limited, especially in terms of job marketability, it is they - and not the officers - who
have the real economic and financial need for the adjustment This is in accord with the policy of
the Constitution "to free the people from poverty, provide adequate social services, extend to them
a decent standard of living, and improve the quality of life for all. Any act of Congress that runs
counter to this constitutional desideratum deserves strict scrutiny by this Court before it can pass
muster.
The BSP rank-and-file employees merit greater concern from this Court. These BSP rank-
and-file employees represent the politically powerless and they should not be compelled to seek a
political solution to their unequal and iniquitous treatment