LIM, DANIELLE

Article III. Section 1. Equal Protection of Law

GMC v. Torres 196 SCRA 216
FACTS:
On 1 May 1989, the Department of Labor and Employment issued Alien Employment Permit No. M-0689-3-535 for
petitioner Earl Timothy Cone, a United States citizen. He was hired as a sports consultant and assistant coach for
petitioner General Milling Corporation (GMC). GMC and Cone, later, entered into a contract of employment to hire
the latter as coach of GMC's basketball team. The Board of Special Inquiry of the Commission on Immigration and
Deportation approved Cone's application for a change of admission status from temporary visitor to pre-arranged
employee.
In 1990, GMC requested 1) a renewal of Cone's alien employment permit and 2) that it be allowed to employ Cone
as full-fledged coach. These requests were granted. However, respondent Basketball Coaches Association of the
Philippines ("BCAP") appealed the issuance of said alien employment permit to the respondent Secretary of Labor,
who ordered the cancellation of Cone's employment permit because there was no showing that 1) there is no other
person in the Philippines who is competent, able and willing to perform the services required of Cone nor 2) that the
hiring of Cone would redound to the national interest
ISSUES/HELD:
1. W/N the petitioner can invoke the equal protection clause in this case
Article 40 of the Labor Code reads as follows:
Art. 40. Employment per unit of non-resident aliens. Any alien seeking admission to the Philippines for
employment purposes and any domestic or foreign employer who desires to engage an alien for
employment in the Philippines shall obtain an employment permit from the Department of Labor.
The employment permit may be issued to a non-resident alien or to the applicant employer after a
determination of the non-availability of a person in the Philippines who is competent, able and willing at
the time of application to perform the services for which the alien is desired.
For an enterprise registered in preferred areas of investments, said employment permit may be issued upon
recommendation of the government agency charged with the supervision of said registered enterprise.
(Emphasis supplied)
Based on the provision above, petitioners cannot invoke the equal protection clause of the Constitution in this
situation. Petitioners refer to Mr. Norman Black to support Cones situation but the Solicitor-General said that no
comparison could be made between the two. Unlike Cone, Norman Black is a long time resident of the country so
Article 40, which refers to "non-resident aliens," does not apply to him.
2. W/N respondent Secretary has the power to determine 1) the availability of local workers and 2) if the
employment of an alien would redound to national interest
The Labor Code empowers respondent Secretary to determine the availability of the services of a "person in the
Philippines who is competent, able and willing at the time of application to perform the services for which an alien
is desired." The Department of Labor is generally the agency with the power to determine the question of
availability of local workers. The Secretary of Labor is authorized to take into account the question of whether or
not employment of an alien applicant would "redound to the national interest". The second paragraph of Article 40
says: "The employment permit may be issued to a non-resident alien or to the applicant employer after a
determination of the non-availability of a person in the Philippines who is competent, able and willing at the time of
application to perform the services for which the alien is desired." The word, may, in the provision indicates the
exercise of discretion on the part of the issuing authority.