CEBU, PHILIPPINES — The Cebu City Council, through a majority vote, has requested a legal opinion from the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) regarding the legality and propriety of differing workweek schedules between the executive and legislative departments of the Cebu City Government.
An 8-7 vote capped a heated session last Tuesday marked by objections, clarifications, and lengthy manifestations from several councilors, reflecting tensions between energy conservation goals and the demand for consistent frontline service delivery.
The controversy stemmed from Cebu City’s adoption of a compressed four-day workweek last month.
In April 2026, Mayor Nestor Archival issued Executive Order No. 069, aligning with a Malacañang directive encouraging government agencies to conserve energy amid rising fuel costs and power shortages.
Under the arrangement, City Hall employees worked only from Monday to Thursday, from 8 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. The Human Resource Development Office later extended the pilot implementation until April 30, citing reduced electricity and water consumption.
Essential services such as health, sanitation, police, and disaster response remained on regular schedules.
Starting this month, however, Archival lifted the compressed schedule and restored the five-day workweek. Vice Mayor Tomas Osmeña, meanwhile, issued a separate memorandum directing all offices under the legislative department to continue observing the four-day workweek schedule.
The dual arrangement has since caused confusion among citizens and disrupted coordination between offices.
Councilor Pastor M. Alcover Jr. raised the issue in a privilege speech, stressing that the public does not distinguish between executive and legislative offices.
“The complaints are coming from the people… they do not understand why one office is open while another is closed,” he said.
Alcover moved to seek a DILG legal opinion to settle the matter once and for all.
Osmeña objected, arguing that the legislative department is “not a frontline function… basically a backroom.”
He defended the four-day schedule as beneficial, saying it allows councilors more time to visit barangays.
Osmeña also highlighted his 24/7 government service hub initiative.
“I am the only one in the Philippines doing 24/7… you want to pay for services in government, it’s open 24/7. To say we are not interested in frontline services is not true—we’re number one in the country,” he said.
He maintained that the arrangement was “nothing personal” and left the decision to the council.
Councilor Alvin Arcilla questioned Alcover’s claim of a disconnect, noting that both departments still comply with the required 40-hour workweek.
He asked what transactions truly require overlap between executive and legislative offices.
Councilor Sisinio Andales, a lawyer, also opposed the referral, asserting that there was no legal conflict since the Local Government Code clearly separates executive and legislative authority.
“Mandatory hours have been complied with… I do believe there’s no conflict,” he said, urging the council to resolve the matter internally.
Andales argued that repeatedly seeking DILG opinions undermines the council’s own authority.
Councilor Joel Garganera supported Alcover, noting that Cebu City’s decision could influence other local government units.
“For all we know, the other LGUs are looking at us… if okay diri sa atoa, then favorable, they will follow,” he said.
Councilor Dave Tumulak, the majority floor leader, said Alcover’s motion posed “no harm” and that it would ultimately be up to the DILG to decide.
Arcilla also questioned whether the Malacañang memorandum on compressed workweeks remains valid, stressing that the arrangement was temporary and linked to energy conservation during power shortages.
Andales reiterated that complaints could instead be addressed through computerized reporting systems, while Councilor Philip Zafra, who presided over the session, ruled that parliamentary procedure required dividing the house following objections from Osmeña and Andales.
Alcover refused to withdraw his motion despite the objections, insisting the matter needed clarification for the public.
“Get the DILG’s opinion para once and for all, ma settle ni siya,” he said.
After prolonged debate, the council voted with eight members in favor of Alcover’s motion and seven against, including Zafra.
The approved resolution directs the council secretariat to furnish copies to the Offices of the Mayor, Vice Mayor, and the DILG for appropriate action.
| Written by Caecent No-ot Magsumbol/FPL
