EQUAL DAY FOR EQUAL WORK  When negotiations for a new CBA were held on June 1995, 

ISE, "a legitimate

[22] INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL V. QUISUMBING labor union and the collective bargaining representative of all faculty
June 1, 2000 | KAPUNAN, J. members" of the School, contested the difference in salary rates between
foreign and local-hires. This issue, as well as the question of whether foreign-
Petitioner/s: INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL ALLIANCE OF EDUCATORS (ISAE) hires should be included in the appropriate bargaining unit, eventually caused a
Respondents: HON. LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING (as SOLE); HON. deadlock between the parties.
CRESENCIANO B. TRAJANO (as Acting SOLE); DR. BRIAN MACCAULEY (as  ISE filed a notice of strike. The failure of the National Conciliation and Mediation
Superintendent of International School-Manila); INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, INC. Board to bring the parties to a compromise prompted DOLE to assume
jurisdiction over the dispute. DOLE Acting Secretary, Cresenciano Trajano,
Doctrine: That the local-hires are paid more than their colleagues in other schools is, issued an Order resolving the parity and representation issues in favor of
of course, beside the point. The point is that employees should be given equal pay for the School. Then SOLE Leonardo Quisumbing subsequently denied ISE's
work of equal value. Persons who work with substantially equal qualifications, skill, motion for reconsideration.
effort and responsibility, under similar conditions, should be paid similar salaries.   ISE now seeks relief in this Court. ISE claims that the point-of-hire classification
employed by the School is discriminatory to Filipinos and that the grant of higher
Facts: salaries to foreign-hires constitutes racial discrimination.
 International School, Inc. (“the School”), pursuant to P.D. 732, is a domestic  The School disputes these claims and gives a breakdown of its faculty
educational institution established primarily for dependents of foreign diplomatic members, 38 in all, with nationalities other than Filipino, who have been hired
personnel and other temporary residents. To enable the School to continue locally and classified as local hires. Acting SOLE found that these non-Filipino
carrying out its educational program and improve its standard of instruction, local-hires received the same benefits as the Filipino local-hires. Acting SOLE
Section 2(c) of the same decree authorizes the School to “employ its own upheld the point-of-hire classification for the distinction in salary rates.2
teaching and management personnel selected by it either locally or abroad, from
Philippine or other nationalities, such personnel being exempt from otherwise Issues/Ruling:3
applicable laws and regulations attending their employment, except laws that
2
have been or will be enacted for the protection of employees.” Acting SOLE explained:
 The School hires both foreign and local teachers as members of its faculty, “The principle "equal pay for equal work" does not find application in the present case.
classifying them into (1) foreign-hires and (2) local-hires. The School employs The international character of the School requires the hiring of foreign personnel to deal with different
nationalities and different cultures, among the student population.
four tests to determine whether a faculty member should be classified as a We also take cognizance of the existence of a system of salaries and benefits accorded to foreign hired
foreign-hire or a local hire: personnel which system is universally recognized. We agree that certain amenities have to be provided to
a) What is one's domicile? these people in order to entice them to render their services in the Philippines and in the process remain
competitive in the international market.
b) Where is one's home economy? Furthermore, we took note of the fact that foreign hires have limited contract of employment unlike the local
c) To which country does one owe economic allegiance? hires who enjoy security of tenure. To apply parity therefore, in wages and other benefits would also require
d) Was the individual hired abroad specifically to work in the School and was parity in other terms and conditions of employment which include the employment contract. 
the School responsible for bringing that individual to the Philippines? A perusal of the parties' 1992-1995 CBA points us to the conditions and provisions for salary and professional
compensation wherein the parties agree as follows:
 Should the answer to any of these point to PH, the faculty member is classified All members of the bargaining unit shall be compensated only in accordance with Appendix C
as a local hire; otherwise, he or she is deemed a foreign-hire. hereof provided that the Superintendent of the School has the discretion to recruit and hire
 The School grants foreign-hires certain benefits not accorded local-hires: expatriate teachers from abroad, under terms and conditions that are consistent with
accepted international practice.
housing, transportation, shipping costs, taxes, and home leave travel allowance. Appendix C of said CBA further provides:
Foreign-hires are also paid a salary rate 25% more than local-hires. The new salary schedule is deemed at equity with the Overseas Recruited Staff (OSRS) salary
The School justifies the difference on 2 "significant economic disadvantages" schedule. The 25% differential is reflective of the agreed value of system displacement and
contracted status of the OSRS as differentiated from the tenured status of Locally Recruited Staff
foreign-hires have to endure: (a) "dislocation factor" and (b) limited tenure.1 (LRS).
To our mind, these provisions demonstrate the parties' recognition of the difference in the status of two types
of employees, hence, the difference in their salaries.
1 The Union cannot also invoke the equal protection clause to justify its claim of parity. It is an established
The School explains: principle of constitutional law that the guarantee of equal protection of the laws is not violated by legislation or
“A foreign-hire would necessarily have to uproot himself from his home country, leave his family and friends, private covenants based on reasonable classification. A classification is reasonable if it is based on
and take the risk of deviating from a promising career path — all for the purpose of pursuing his profession as substantial distinctions and apply to all members of the same class. Verily, there is a substantial distinction
an educator, but this time in a foreign land. The new foreign hire is faced with economic realities: decent between foreign hires and local hires, the former enjoying only a limited tenure, having no amenities of their
abode for oneself and/or for one's family, effective means of transportation, allowance for the education of own in the Philippines and have to be given a good compensation package in order to attract them to join the
one's children, adequate insurance against illness and death, and of course the primary benefit of a basic teaching faculty of the School.”
salary/retirement compensation. 3
Because of a limited tenure, the foreign hire is confronted again with the same economic reality after his term: Secondary Issue: W/N foreign-hires belong to the same bargaining unit as local-hires—NO
that he will eventually and inevitably return to his home country where he will have to confront the uncertainty A bargaining unit is "a group of employees of a given employer, comprised of all or less than all of the entire
of obtaining suitable employment after a long period in a foreign land. body of employees, consistent with equity to the employer indicate to be the best suited to serve the reciprocal
The compensation scheme is simply the School's adaptive measure to remain competitive on rights and duties of the parties under the collective bargaining provisions of the law." The factors in
an international level in terms of attracting competent professionals in the field of international education.” determining the appropriate collective bargaining unit are (1) the will of the employees (Globe Doctrine); (2)
W/N point-of-hire classification employed is discriminatory to Filipinos; W/N under similar conditions, should be paid similar salaries. This rule applies
grant of higher salaries to foreign-hires constitutes racial discrimination — to the School, its "international character" notwithstanding.
YES. Employees should be given equal pay for work of equal value.  The School: ISE has not adduced evidence that local-hires perform work
 In the workplace, where the relations between capital and labor are often equal to that of foreign-hires.  SC: If an employer accords employees the
skewed in favor of capital, inequality and discrimination by the employer are all same position and rank, the presumption is that they perform equal work.
the more reprehensible.4 Under the Constitution: This presumption is borne by logic and human experience. If the employer
o Labor is entitled to "humane conditions of work." These conditions are not pays one employee less than the rest, then the employer has
restricted to the physical workplace — the factory, the office or the field — discriminated against that employee; it is for the employer to explain why
but include as well the manner by which employers treat their employees. the employee is treated unfairly.
o State is directed to promote "equality of employment opportunities for  The employer here has failed to discharge this burden. There is no
all." Similarly, the Labor Code provides that the State shall "ensure equal evidence here that foreign-hires perform 25% more efficiently or effectively
work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed." than the local-hires. Both groups have similar functions and
 Discrimination, particularly in terms of wages, is frowned upon by the responsibilities, which they perform under similar working conditions.
Labor Code. Article 135, for example, prohibits and penalizes the payment of  The School cannot invoke the need to entice foreign-hires to leave their
lesser compensation to a female employee as against a male employee for work domicile to rationalize the distinction in salary rates without violating the
of equal value. Article 248 declares it an unfair labor practice for an employer to principle of equal work for equal pay.
discriminate in regard to wages in order to encourage or discourage  "Salary" in Black's Law Dictionary (5th ed.): "a reward or recompense for
membership in any labor organization. services performed." Philippine Legal Encyclopedia states that "salary" is the
 International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, Article 7: "[c]onsideration paid at regular intervals for the rendering of services."
“The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the Songco v.  National Labor Relations Commission: "salary" means a recompense
enjoyment of just and favorable conditions of work, which ensure, in particular: or consideration made to a person for his pains or industry in another man's
a. Remuneration which provides all workers, as a minimum, with: business. Whether it be derived from "salarium," or more fancifully from "sal,"
i. Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction of the pay of the Roman soldier, it carries with it the fundamental idea of
any kind, in particular women being guaranteed conditions of work not inferior to compensation for services rendered.” (Emphasis supplied.)
those enjoyed by men, with equal pay for equal work;”  While we recognize the School’s need to attract foreign-hires, salaries
 The foregoing provisions impregnably institutionalize in this jurisdiction should not be used as an enticement to the prejudice of local-hires. Local-
the long honored legal truism of "equal pay for equal work." Persons who hires perform the same services as foreign-hires and they ought to be paid
work with substantially equal qualifications, skill, effort and responsibility, the same salaries as the latter. For the same reason, "dislocation factor"
and foreign-hires' limited tenure also cannot serve as valid bases for the
distinction in salary rates. The dislocation factor and limited tenure
affinity and unity of the employees' interest, such as substantial similarity of work and duties, or similarity of affecting foreign-hires are adequately compensated by certain benefits
compensation and working conditions (Substantial Mutual Interests Rule); (3) prior collective bargaining accorded them which are not enjoyed by local-hires, such as housing,
history; and (4) similarity of employment status. The basic test of an asserted bargaining unit's acceptability is transportation, shipping costs, taxes and home leave travel allowances.
whether or not it is fundamentally the combination which will best assure to all employees the exercise of their
collective bargaining rights. 
 The Constitution enjoins the State to "protect the rights of workers and promote
It does not appear that foreign-hires have indicated their intention to be grouped together with local-hires for their welfare," "to afford labor full protection." The State, therefore, has the right
purposes of collective bargaining. The collective bargaining history in the School also shows that these groups and duty to regulate the relations between labor and capital. These relations are
were always treated separately. Foreign-hires have limited tenure; local-hires enjoy security of tenure. not merely contractual but are so impressed with public interest that labor
Although foreign-hires perform similar functions under the same working conditions as the local-hires, foreign-
hires are accorded certain benefits not granted to local-hires. These benefits, such as housing, transportation, contracts, collective bargaining agreements included, must yield to the common
shipping costs, taxes, and home leave travel allowance, are reasonably related to their status as foreign-hires, good. Should such contracts contain stipulations that are contrary to public
and justify the exclusion of the former from the latter. To include foreign-hires in a bargaining unit with local- policy, courts will not hesitate to strike down these stipulations.
hires would not assure either group the exercise of their respective collective bargaining rights.
4  Here, we find point-of-hire classification employed by the School to justify
Supporting laws: the distinction in the salary rates of foreign-hires and local hires to be an
 The Constitution (Article on Social Justice and Human Rights) exhorts Congress to "give highest priority invalid classification. There is no reasonable distinction between the
to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all people to human dignity, reduce services rendered by foreign-hires and local-hires. The practice of
social, economic, and political inequalities." Article 19 of the Civil Code requires every person, "in the
exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, [to] act with justice, give everyone his due, the School of according higher salaries to foreign-hires contravenes
and observe honesty and good faith." public policy and, certainly, does not deserve the sympathy of this Court.
 International law likewise proscribes discrimination. General principles of law include principles of equity
(general principles of fairness and justice) based on the test of what is reasonable. The Universal Dispositive
Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural WHEREFORE, the petition is GIVEN DUE COURSE and GRANTED IN PART. The
Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Orders of SOLE dated June 10, 1996 and March 19, 1997 are REVERSED and SET
Convention against Discrimination in Education, the Convention (No. 111) Concerning Discrimination in
Respect of Employment and Occupation — all go against discrimination. PH, through its Constitution,
has incorporated this principle as part of its national laws.
ASIDE insofar as they uphold the practice of respondent School of according foreign-
hires higher salaries than local hires.