CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION v.

SALAS
FACTS:
On October 7, 1989, Rafael M. Salas was appointed by the PAGCOR
Chairman as Internal Security Staff Member (ISS) and assigned to the Casino at
the Manila Pavilion Hotel. ISS members do not directly report to the Office of the
Chairman, and
issubject to the control and supervision of an Area Supervisor who onlyimplemen
ts the directives of the Branch Chief Security Officer.
The BOD of PAGCOR terminated him on Dec. 3, 1991 grounds:
loss of confidence. Salas was allegedly engaged in proxy betting in affidavits of
2 customers, claiming to have been used as gunners.CA reversed finding that
Salas is not a confidential employee and cannot be
dismissed on that ground, applying the proximily rule enunciated in Case 63:
Grino V. CSC & Case 60: De los Santos V. Mallare 10. CA also held that PD
1869 Section 16 has been repealed by Section 2 (1),Article IX-B of the
Constitution.

ISSUE/S:
1. Whether Salas is a confidential employee?
2. Whether the Pinero doctrine is still applicable?
HELD:
Every appointment implies confidence, but more more than ordinary
confidence is reposed in the occupant of a position that is primarily
confidential. The latter phrase denotes not only confidence in the aptitude of the
appointee for the duties of the office, but primarily close intimacy which insures
freedom of intercourse without embarrassment or freedom from misgivings of
betrayals of personal trust or confidential matters of the State.
In Pinero, et. al. V. Hechanova, et. al. since the enactment of RA 2260:
the 1959 Civil Service Act, it is the nature of the position which finally determines
whether a position is: a.)primarily confidential, b.)policy determining or c.)highly
technical. Senator Tanada: in the 1
st
instance, it is the appointing power that
determines the nature of the position. In case of conflict, then it is the Court that
determines whether the position is primarily confidential or not.-Employees
occupying various positions in the Port Patrol Division of the Bureau of Customs,
which is part of the Customs police force, is not in itself sufficient indication that
there positions are primarily confidential.

1. No. Salas position is the lowest in the chain of command. His job description
is ordinary, routinary and quotidian in character. His pay is only P2,200
permonth.He does not enjoy that primarily close intimacy which characterizes a
confidential employee. Where the position occupied is remote from that of the
appointing authority, the element of trust between them is no longer predominant.
Citing Case Tria V. Sto. Tomas, the fact that sometimes, private respondent
may handle ordinarily confidential matters or papers which are somewhat
confidential in nature does not suffice to characterize his position as primarily
confidential.

2. Yes. PD 1869 can be no more than initial determinations that are not
conclusive in cases of conflict.1986 Constitutional Commission Records The
primary purpose of the framers of the 1987 Constitution in providing for the
declaration of a position as a.)primarily confidential, b.)policy determining o
rc.)highly technical is to exempt these categories from competitive examinations
as a means for determining merit and fitness. It must be stressed further that
these positions are covered by the security of tenure, although they are
considered non-competitive only in the sense
thatappointees thereto do not have to undergo competitive examinations forpurp
oses of determining merit and fitness.CSC Resolution 91-
830 does not make PAGCOR employees confidential,merely reiterates
exemption from civil service eligibility requirement .In reversing the decision of
the CSC, the CA opined that the provisions of Section 16, PD 1869 may no
longer be applied in the case at bar because the same is deemed to have been
repealed in its entirety by Section 2 (1), Article IX-B of the 1987 Consti. This is
not completely correct. On this point, we approve the more logical interpretation
advanced by the CSC to the effect that Section 16 of PD
1869insofar as it exempts PAGCOR
positions from the provisions of the CivilService Law & Rules has been amended,
modified or deemed repealed by the1987 Consti & EO 292: Administrative Code
of 1987.

However, the same cannot be said with respect to the last portion of Section16
which provides that All employees of the casinos and related
servicesshall be classified as Confidential appointees. While such executivede
claration emanated merely from the provisions of Implementing Rules of the Civil
Service Act of 1959 Rule XX Section 2 The power to declare a position as:
a.)primarily confidential, b.)policy determining or c.)highly technical,as defined
therein has subsequently been codified and incorporated in EO 292:
Administrative Code of 1987 Book V. Civil Service Commission Section 12. The
Commission shall have the ff powers and functions: (9).
Declare positions in the Civil Service as may properly be primarilyconfidential,
highly technical or policy determining. This later enactment only serves to bolster
the validity of the categorization made under Section 16 PD 1869.Be that as
it may, such classification is not absolute and all-encompassing. Prior to the
passage of the Civil Service Act of 1959, there were 2 recognized instances
when a position may be declared primarily confidential: 1:when the President,
upon recommendation of the Commissioner of Civil Service, has declared the
position to be primarily confidential;2:in the absence of such declaration, when by
the nature of the functions of the office, there exists close intimacy between the
appointing power which ensures freedom of intercourse without embarrassment
of freedom from misgivings of betrayals of personal trust or confidential matters
of the State.
RA 2260: Civil Service Act (June 19, 1959)
Section 5.
The non-competitive or unclassified service shall be composed
of positions expressly declared by law to be in the non-
competitive orunclassified service or those which are policy determining, primaril
yconfidential or highly technical in nature.
General Rules Implementing PD 807: Civil Service RulesSection 1.
appointments to the Civil Service, except as to those which are policy
determining, primarilyconfidential, or highly technical in nature, shall be made
only according to merit and fitness to bedetermined as far as practicable by
competitive examinations.