Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User
“Employer”
“Employee”
“Dependents”
SSS (RA 8282)
GSIS (RA 8291)
Any person, natural or juridical, domestic or foreign, who carries on in the Philippines any trade, business, industry, undertaking, or activity of any kind and uses the services of another person who is under his orders as regards the employment, except the Government and any of its political subdivisions, branches or instrumentalities, including corporations owned or controlled by the Government: Provided, That a selfemployed person shall be both employee and employer at the same time. Any person who performs services for an employer in which either or both mental or physical efforts are used and who receives compensation for such services, where there is an employer-employee relationship: Provided, That a self-employed person shall be both employee and employer at the same time. The dependents shall be the following:
The national government, its political subdivisions, branches, agencies or instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations, and financial institutions with original charters, the constitutional commissions and the judiciary.
"(1) The legal spouse entitled by law to receive support from the member; "(2) The legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted, and illegitimate child who is unmarried, not gainfully employed, and has not reached twenty-one (21) y ears of age, or if over twenty-one (21) years of age, he is congenitally or while still a minor has been permanently incapacitated and incapable of selfsupport, physically or mentally; and
“Compensation”
Beneficiaries
"(3) The parent who is receiving regular support from the member. All actual remuneration for employment, including the mandated cost-of-living allowance, as well as the cash value of any remuneration paid in any medium other than cash except that part of the remuneration in excess of the maximum salary credit as Provided under Section Eighteen of this Act. Primary beneficiaries 1. The dependent spouse until he or she remarries, 2. the dependent legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted, and illegitimate children, Provided, That the dependent illegitimate children shall be entitled to fifty percent (50%) of the share of the legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted children: Provided, further, That in the absence of the dependent legitimate, legitimated children of the member, his/her dependent illegitimate children shall be entitled to one hundred percent (100%) of the benefits.
Secondary Beneficiaries 1. the dependent parents of the member.
Any person receiving compensation while in the service of an employer as defined herein, whether by election or appointment, irrespective of status of appointment, including barangay and Sanggunian officials;
Dependents shall be the following: (a) the legitimate spouse dependent for support upon the member or pensioner; (b) the legitimate, legitimated, legally adopted child, including the illegitimate child, who is unmarried, not gainfully employed, not over the a ge of majority, or is over the age of majority but incapacitated and incapable of self-support due to a mental or physical defect acquired prior to age of majority; and (c) the parents dependent upon the member for support; The basic pay or salary received by an employee, pursuant to his election/appointment, excluding per diems, bonuses, overtime pay, honoraria, allowances and any other emoluments received in addition to the basic pay which are not integrated into the basic pay under existing laws; Primary beneficiaries- The legal dependent spouse until he/she remarries and the dependent children;
Secondary beneficiaries- The dependent parents and, subject to the restrictions on dependent children, the legitimate descendants;
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User
Coverage/Member ship
In the absence of all the foregoing, any other person designated by the member as his/her secondary beneficiary. Compulsory: a. upon all employees not over sixty (60) years of age and their employers b. household helpers with at least 1,000 monthly pay c. Self- employed including but not limited to the following:
Membership in the GSIS shall be compulsory for all employees receiving compensation who have not reached the compulsory retirement age (65), irrespective of employment status,
1. All self-employed professionals; "2. Partners and single proprietors of businesses; "3. Actors and actresses, directors, scriptwriters and news correspondents who do not fall within the definition of the term "employee” "4. Professional athletes, coaches, trainers and jockeys; and "5. Individual farmers and fishermen.
Voluntary: a. Spouses who devote full time to managing the household and family affairs, unless they are also engaged in other vocation or employment which is subject to mandatory coverage, may be covered by the SSS on a voluntary basis. b. Filipinos recruited by foreign-based employers for employment abroad. c. Employees already separated from employment or those self-employed with no realized income for a given month, who chose to continue with contributions to maintain right to full benefit. Exclusion Coverage
from
a.
Employment purely casual and not for the purpose of occupation or business of the employer
a.
b. b.
Service performed on or in connection with an alien vessel by an employee if he is employed when such vessel is outside Ph
c.
Service performed in the employ of the Philippine Government or instrumentality or agency thereof;
d.
Service performed in the employ of a foreign government or international organization, or
c.
members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police, contractuals who have no employer and employee relationship with the agencies they serve. members of the judiciary and constitutional commissions who shall have life insurance only.
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User their wholly-owned instrumentality: Provided, however, That this exemption notwithstanding, any foreign government, international organization or their whollyowned instrumentality employing workers in the Philippines or employing Filipinos outside of the Philippines, may enter into an agreement with the Philippine Government for the inclusion of such employees in the SSS except those already covered by their respective civil service retirement systems: Provided, further, That the terms of such agreement shall conform with the provisions of this Act on coverage and amount of payment of contributions and benefits: Provided, finally, That the provisions of this Act shall be supplementary to any such agreement; and e.
Effective date of coverage Effect of Separation from Employment/Servi ce
Dispute Settlement Prescriptive period BENEFITS MONTHLY PENSION
Such other services performed by temporary and other employees which may be excluded by regulation of the Commission. Employees of bona fide independent contractors shall not be deemed employees of the employer engaging the service of said contractors. Employer: 1 st day of operation Employee: 1 st day at work Self-employed: Upon registration When an employee under compulsory coverage is separated from employment, his employer's contribution on his account and his obligation to pay contributions arising from that employment shall cease at the end of the month of separation, but said employee shall be credited with all contributions paid on his behalf and entitled to b enefits according to the provisions of this Act. He may, however, continue to pay the total contributions to maintain his right to full benefit. SSC CA [Rule 43; question of law and fact] SC [Rule 45; question of law only] 20 yrs
GSIS CA[Rule 43] SC [Rule 45]; appeal does not stay execution 4 yrs
Shall be the highest of the following amounts:
The amount shall be:
A member separated from the service shall continue to be a member, and shall be entitled to whatever benefits he has qualified to in the event of any contingency compensable under this Act.
1.
300 + [20% x [Ave monthly salary credit]] + [2% x [Ave monthly salary credit ] x [# of cash credited years of service in excess of 10 years]] or
a. 37.5% x [revalued ave. monthly compensation], plus b. 2.5 x [revalued ave. monthly compensation] x [years in service in excess of 15 years]
2.
40% x (ave monthly salary credit) or
The monthly pension shall not exceed 90% of the average monthly compensation.
3.
1,000; provided, that the monthly pension shall in no case be paid for an aggregate amount of less than sixty (60) months.
It shall not be less than P2,400 for those with 20 years of service and not less than P1,300 for everyone else.
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User Note: Notwithstanding the abovementioned, the minimum pension shall be 1,200 for members with at least 10 credited years of service and 2,400 for those with 20 credited years of service.
RETIREMENT BENEFITS
Dependents' Pension. - Where monthly pension is payable on account of death, permanent total disability or retirement, dependents' pension equivalent to: 10% of the monthly pension or P250, whichever is higher, shall also be paid for each dependent child conceived on or before the date of the contingency but not exceeding five (5), beginning with the youngest and without substitution: Provided, That where there are legitimate or illegitimate children, the former shall be preferred. Eligibility requirements: 1. 120 monthly contributions; 2. Age: 65 years old OR a member who has reached 60 years may also avail if he is already separated from employment or has ceased to be self-employed. Benefit- entitlement to monthly pension from retirement until death. The monthly pension shall be suspended upon the reemployment or resumption of self-employment of a retired member who is less than 65 years old.
In case of death of member 1. Primary beneficiaries (PB) as of the date of retirement shall be entitled to receive the monthly pension; OR 2. If no PB and died within 60 months from the start of pension, Secondary Beneficiaries (SB) shall be entitled to a lump sum benefit equivalent to the total monthly pensions corresponding to the balance of the 5 year guaranteed period, excluding the dependent’s pension.
Eligibility requirements: 1. 15 years service 2. 60 years of age; and 3. Not receiving pension benefit permanent total disability.
from
Note: Retirement is compulsory for employees 65 years of age who have rendered at least 15 years of service; if employee has less than 15 years of service, he may be allowed to continue in accordance with Civil Service laws. Benefit- Choice between: a. 60 x [basic monthly pension] lump sum payment at the time of retirement PLUS basic monthly pension payable monthly for life after expiry of the 5-yr guaranteed period which is already covered by the lump sum; OR b. Cash payment equivalent to 18 x [basic monthly pension] PLUS monthly pension for life immediately but with no 5-yr guarantee. Note: subject to periodic adjustment
Lump Sum Alternative- Member may opt to receive his first 18 monthly pensions in lump sum BUT such is discounted at a preferential rate of interest
PERMANENT DISABILITY BENEFITS
*A member who is sixty (60) years old at retirement and who does not qualify for pension benefits under paragraph (a) above, shall be entitled to a lump sum benefit equal to the total contributions paid by him and on his behalf: Provided, That he is separated from employment and is not continuing payment of contributions to the SSS on his own. Eligibility requirement: Member who has paid at least 36 monthly contributions PRIOR to the semester of
Eligibility requirement: A member who suffers permanent disability for reasons not due to his grave misconduct, notorious negligence, habitual
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User
disability shall be entitled to the monthly pension. In case the member dies, it would be given the same treatment as a retiree dying. For PERMANENT PARTIAL DISABILITY , the pension is not lifetime. Also, the monthly pension benefit shall be given in lump sum if it is payable for less than 12 months. For MULTIPLE PARTIAL DISABILITIES , they shall be additive when related or deteriorating-the percentage shall be equal to the number of months the partial disability is entitled to, divided by 75 months. (e.g. loss of sight in 1 eye> 25/75; loss of arm> 50/75; if both occur due to same cause, then 25/75 + 50/75= 100% so treated as if it were permanent total disability.
intoxication, or willful intention to kill himself or another, shall be entitled to the benefits provided Employee is: 1. In service at the time of disability; or 2. Even if separated, he has paid at least 36 monthly contributions within the 5year period immediately prior to disability OR has paid a total of at least 180 monthly contributions prior to disability; and 3. Member is not enjoying old-a ge retirement benefit.
Lump Sum Alternative - monthly pension X the number of monthly contributions paid to the SSS OR 12x monthly pension, whichever is higher. (for members who have not paid at least 36 monthly contributions)
Benefit for Permanent Total Disability Monthly income benefit for life equal to basic monthly pension- This is effective from date of disability; If member is in service at the time of disability and he has paid at least 180 monthly contributions, in addition to the monthly income benefit, he shall receive an additional cash payment of 18 times basic monthly pension.
Note: A member who 1. Has received a lump sum benefit; and 2. Is reemployed not earlier than one y ear from date of disability shall again be subject to compulsory coverage and shall be considered a new member.
To the ineligible- If member has rendered at least 3 years of service, then he shall receive cash payment equal to 100% of ave. monthly compensation for each year of service [essentially total amount of contributions made] or 12,000, whichever is higher.
The following disabilities shall be deemed permanent total:
Permanent Partial Disability He shall receive a cash payment in accordance with a scheduled of disabilities to be prescribed by the GSIS provided that he also satisfies the conditions above.
"1. Complete loss of sight of both eyes; "2. Loss of two limbs at or above the ankle or wrists;
Permanent total cases - same sa SSS "3. Permanent complete paralysis of two limbs; "4. Brain injury resulting to incurable imbecility or insanity; and "5. Such cases as determined and approved by the SSS.
Permanent Partial Cases
Complete and permanent loss of use of One thumb
Number of Months 10
One index finger
8
One middle finger
6
One right finger
5
One little finger
3
One big toe
6
Permanent Partial cases: (1) complete and permanent loss of the use of: (i) any finger (ii) any toe (iii) one arm (iv) one hand (v) one foot (vi) one leg (vii) one or both ears (viii) hearing of one or both ears (ix) sight of both eyes "(2) such other cases as my be determined by the GSIS
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User
TEMPORARY DISABILITY BENEFITS SICKNESS BENEFIT
One hand
39
One arm
50
One foot
31
One leg
46
One ear
10
Both ears
20
Hearing of one ear
10
Hearing of both ears
50
Sight of one eye
25 Similar to sickness
Eligibility requirements and other conditions: 1. Inability to work due to sickness or injury 2. Confined for at least 4 days either in a hospital or elsewhere with SSS approval; 3. At least 3 months of contributions in the 12month period immediately before the semester of sickness or injury has been paid; 4. All company sick leaves with pay for the current year have been used up; 5. Maximum of 120 days per 1 calendar year[maximum permissible for the same sickness confinements is 240 days for 2 consecutive years] 6. Employer has been notified, or, if separated, voluntary or self-employed member, the SSS directly notified within 5 days of confinement; 7. Notice to employer or SSS not needed when confinement is in a hospital; notice to employer not required as well when employee became sick or injured while working or within premises of thee employer. Benefit- daily cash allowance paid for the number of days a member is unable to workdue to sickness or injury equivalent to 90% x [ave daily salary credit] Note: 100% of the daily benefits provided shall be reimbursed by the SSS to said employer upon receipt of satisfactory proof of such payment and legality thereof if the ff conditions are met: 1. Er notified SSS of the confinement within 5 calendar days after receipt of the notification from the Ee 2. If notification is made beyond 5 days, he shall be reimbursed only for each day of confinement starting from the tenth calendar day immediately preceding the date of notification to the SSS
Eligibility requirements 1. Employee must be: In service at the time of disability; or If separated, he has rendered at least 3 years of service and paid at least 6 monthly contributions in the 12 month period immediately prior to disability; 2. All sick leave credits including CBA sick leaves for the current year has been used up; and 3. Maximum of 120 days per 1 calendar year[ so maximum permissible for the same sickness confinements is 240 days for 2 consecutive years] Benefit- 75% of the current daily compensation for everyday or fraction thereof of disability or P70, whichever is higher.
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User 3.
DEATH BENEFITS
SSS shall reimburse the employer or pay the unemployed member only for confinement within the 1-year period immediately preceding the date the claim for benefit or reimbursement is received by the SSS, except confinement in a hospital in which case the claim for benefit or reimbursement must be filed within 1 year from the last day of confinement. Eligibility requirement 36 monthly contributions prior to the semester of death
Benefit- monthly pension to PB; OR a lump sum benefit equivalent to 36 x the monthly pension to SB. To those ineligible- lump sum benefit which shall be higher between the two: Monthly pension x 12; OR Monthly pension x # of monthly contributions
When member dies, the primary beneficiaries are entitled to ONLY ONE of the ff: 1. Survivorship pension a. If he was in the service when he died; or b. Even if separated from the service, he has at least 3 years of service and has paid 36 monthly contributions within the 5 years immediately preceding death; or c. Even if separated from the service, he has paid 180 monthly contributions prior to death. 2.
3.
FUNERAL BENEFITS
12,000 in cash or in kind, to help defray the cost of funeral expenses upon the death of a member, including a permanenetly totally disabled member or retiree.
MATERNITY LEAVE BENEFITS
Eligibility requirements: 1. A female member 2. Paid at least 3 monthly contributions in the 12th month period immediately preceding the semester of her childbirth or miscarriage-
Survivorship pension plus cash payment of 100% ave. monthly compensation for every year of service [essentially, pension plus total contributions made] a. If he was in the service when he died; and b. With 3 yrs of service
Cash payment equivalent to 100% ave monthly compensation for each year of service he paid contributions or 12,000, whichever is higher a. With 3 yrs of service; and b. He has failed to qualify in the prior 2 schemes. The amount of funeral benefits shall be determined and specified by GSIS but shall not be less than 12,000: provided, that it shall be increased to at least 18,000 after 5 years and shall be paid upon the death of: a. An active member; b. Member separated from service but still entitled to funeral benefit; c. Pensioner d. Retiree who at the time of retirement was of pensionable age but opted to retire under RA 1616
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User Shall be paid a daily maternity benefit equivalent to 100% of her ave. daily salary credit for 60 days or 78 days in case of caesarian delivery, subject to the following conditions: (a) Ee shall have NOTIFIED her Er of her pregnancy and the probable date of her childbirth, which notice shall be transmitted to the SSS; "(b) The FULL PAYMENT shall be advanced by the employer within thirty (30) days from the filing of the maternity leave application; "(c) That payment of daily maternity benefits shall be a BAR to the recovery of sickness benefits for the same period; "(d) shall be paid only for the first four ( 4) deliveries or miscarriages; "(e) That the SSS shall immediately reimburse the employer of 100% of the amount of maternity benefits advanced to the employee by the employer upon receipt of satisfactory proof of such payment and legality thereof; and
LOAN
SEPARATION BENEFITS
"(f) That if an employee member should give birth or suffer miscarriage without the required contributions having been remitted for her by her employer to the SSS, or without the latter having been previously notified by the employer of the time of the pregnancy, the employer shall pay to the SSS damages equivalent to the benefits which said employee member would otherwise have been entitled to. SSC Resolution No. 669. Moreover, certain circulars provide for treatment of salary loans and more flexible payment terms or condonation for delinquent payers. SSS website also shows loans.
GSIS website provides for this
Eligibility requirement: 1. 60 years of age, or separated from service with at least 3 years but not over 15 years served; 2. Below 60 yrs of age, but at least 15 yrs of service rendered. Benefit 1. For 60 years of age or separated from service with 3-15 years of service: cash payment of 100% of ave. monthly
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User
UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
SURVIVIORSHIP BENEFITS
LIFE INSURANCE BENEFITS
compensation for each year of service [essentially, total amount of contributions], or 12,000, whichever is higher 2. Below 60 yrs of age and at least 15 yrs of service: cash payment equivalent to 18x monthly pension at the time of resignation or separation plus an old-age pension benefit equal to basic monthly pension. Eligibility requirements 1. Employee separated from service due to abolition of office or position; and 2. Employee has been paying integrated contributions for at least 1 year prior to separation.
Benefit Monthly cash payments of 50% of ave. monthly compensation for a duration which is proportional to years rendered, ranging from 2 months to 6 months. Beneficiaries are entitled to the ff: 1. Basic survivorship pension which is 50% of basic monthly pension; and 2. Dependent children’s pension not exceeding 50% of the basic monthly pension. COMPULSORY LIFE INSURANCE All employees except for members of the AFP and PNP. It shall automatically take effect as follows: 1. For those employed after the effectivity of this act, their insurance shall take effect on the date of their employment; 2. for those whose insurance will mature after the effectivity of this Act, their insurance shall be deemed renewed on the day following the maturity or expiry date of their insurance; 3. for those without any life insurance as of the effectivity of this Act, their insurance shall take effect following said effectivity. DIVIDENDS An annual dividend may be granted to all members of the GSIS whose life insurance is in force for at least 1 yr in accordance with a dividends allocation formula to be determined by the GSIS. OPTIONAL INSURANCE a member may apply for insurance and/or pre-need coverage embracing life, health, hospitalization, education, memorial plans, and such other plans as may be designed by the GSIS, for himself and/or his dependents. Any employer may likewise apply for group insurance coverage for its employees. The payment of the premiums/installments for optional insurance and pre-need products may be made by
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User the insured or his employer and/or any person acceptable to the GSIS.
REINSURANCE GSIS may reinsure any of its interests or part thereof with any private company or reinsurer whether domestic of foreign: Provided, That the GSIS shall submit an annual report on its reinsurance operations to the Insurance Commission. Note: Judiciary and Constitutional Commissions are entitled to life insurance only.
Cena v CSC (july 3, 1992) Facts: Gaudencio Cena worked for 7 years as a Legal Officer of the Law Dep’t of Caloocan City. He was then transferred to the Office of the Congressman where he worked as a Supervising Staff Officer for 3 months. He was then appointed as Registrar of the RD (Register of Deeds ) in Malabon. In total, he has rendered gov’t service for 11 years, 9 months and 6 days. Before reaching his 65th bday, he requested the LRA Administrator that he be allowed to extend his service to complete the 15-year service requirement to enable him to retire with full benefits of old age pension. The LRA Administrator sought a ruling from the CSC. The CSC denied the extension but Cena filed a motion for reconsideration. This time around, CSC granted a 1-yr extension to him. Cena still filed a case against CSC for grave abuse of discretion when it granted an extension of only 1 yr. He contends that the law(Sec 11, PD 1146 also known as Revised Gov’ t Insurance Act) does not limit or specify the maximum number of years the retiree may avail of to complete the 15 -year service. Thus, the CSC has no authority to limit through a memorandum the number of years. In defense, CSC said that since it is the central personnel agency of the gov’t, it is vested with power to grant or allow ex tension of
service beyond retirement age. Issue: Whether or not Cena is a llowed to continue in the service to complete the 15 -year service requirement? Held: Yes. An administrative circular, such as a memorandum of the CSC cannot limit PD 1146, on extension of service of employees who reach 65. While it is true that CSC is given the authority to take appropriate action on all appointments and other personnel matters in the Civil Service, it cannot extend to matters not covered. The CSC’s authority is limited only to carrying into e ffect what PD 1146 says. It cannot go beyond the terms and provisions of the basic law. The CSC Memorandum, being in the nature of an administrative regulation, must be governed by the principle that a regulation must be in harmony with the provisions of the law and should be for the sole purpose of carrying into effect its general provisions. CSC has no power to supply or add perceived omissions in PD 1146. G.R. No. 111812 May 31, 1995
DIONISIO M. RABOR, petitioner, vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, respondent. Petitioner Dionisio M. Rabor is a Utility Worker in the Office of the Mayor, Davao City. He entered the government service as a Utility worker on 10 April 1978 at the age of 55 years. Sometime in May 1991,1 Alma, D. Pagatpatan, an official in the Office of the Mayor of Davao City , advised Dionisio M. Rabor to apply for retirement, considering that he had already reached the age of sixty- eight (68) years and seven (7) months, with thirteen (13) years and one (1) month of government service. Rabor responded to this advice by exhibiting a "Certificate of Membership"2 issued by the Government Service Insurance System ("GSIS") and dated 12 May 1988. At the bottom of this "Certificate of Membership" is a typewritten statement of the following tenor: "Service extended to comply 15 years service reqts." This statement is followed by a non-legible initial with the following date "2/28/91."
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User Thereupon, the Davao City Government, through Ms. Pagatpatan, wrote to the Regional Director of the Civil Service Commission, Region XI, Davao City ("CSRO-XI"), informing the latter of the foregoing and requesting advice "as to what action [should] be taken on this matter." In a letter dated 26 July 1991, Director Filemon B. Cawad of CSRO-XI advised Davao City M ayor Rodrigo R. Duterte as follows: Please be informed that the extension of services of Mr. Rabor is contrary to M.C. No. 65 of the Office of the President, the relevant portion of which is hereunder quoted: Officials and employees who have reached the compulsory retirement age of 65 years shall not be retained the service, except for extremely meritorious reasons in which case the retention shall not exceed six (6) months. IN VIEW WHEREFORE, please be advised that the services of Mr. Dominador [M.] Rabor as Utility Worker in that office, is already nonextend[i]ble.3 Accordingly, on 8 August l991, Mayor Duterte furnished a copy of the 26 July 1991 letter of Director Cawad to Rabor and advised him "to stop reporting for work effective August 16, 1991."4 Petitioner Rabor then sent to the Regional Director, CSRO-XI, a letter dated 14 August 1991, a sking for extension of his services in the City Government until he "shall have completed the fifteen (15) years service [requirement] in the Government so that [he] could also avail of the benefits of the retirement laws given to employees of the Government." The extension he was asking for was about two (2) years. Asserting that he was "still in good health and very able to perform the duties and functions of [his] position as Utility Worker," Rabor sought "extension of [his] service as an exception to Memorandum Circular No. 65 of the Office of the President."5 This request was denied by Director Cawad on 15 August 1991. Petitioner Rabor next wrote to the Office of the President on 29 January 1992 seeking reconsideration of the decision of Director Cawad, CSRO-XI. The Office of the President referred Mr. Rabor's letter to the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission on 5 March 1992. In its Resolution No. 92-594, dated 28 April 1992, the Civil Service Commission dismissed the appeal of Mr. Rabor and affirmed the action of Director Cawad embodied in the latter's letter of 26 July 1991. This Resolution stated in part: In his appeal, Rabor requested that he be allowed to continue rendering services as Utility Worker in order to complete the fifteen (15) year service requirement under P.D. 1146. CSC Memorandum Circular No. 27, s. 1990 provides, in part: 1. Any request for extension of service of compulsory retirees to complete the fifteen years service requirement for retirement shall be allowed only to permanent appointees in the career service who are regular members of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) and shall be granted for a period of not exceeding one (1) year. Considering that as early as October 18, 1988, Rabor was already due for retirement, his request for further extension of service cannot be given due course.6 (Emphasis in the original) On 28 October 1992, Mr. Rabor sought reconsideration of Resolution No. 92-594 of the Civil Service Commission this time invoking the Decision of this Court in Cena v. Civil Service Commission.7 Petitioner also asked for reinstatement with back salaries and benefits, having been separated from the government service effective 1 6 August 1991. Rabor's motion for reconsideration was denied by the Commission. Petitioner Rabor sent another letter dated 16 April 1993 to the Office of the Mayor, Davao City, again requesting that he be allowed to continue rendering service to the Davao City Government as Utility Worker in order to complete the fifteen (15) years service requirement under P.D. No. 1146. This request was once more denied by Mayor Duterte in a letter to petitioner dated 19 May 19 93. In this letter, Mayor Duterte pointed out that, under Cena grant of the extension of service was discretionary on the part of the City Mayor, but that he could not grant the extension requested. Mayor Duterte's letter, in relevant part, read: The matter was referred to the City Legal Offic e and the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, in the a dvent of the decision of the Supreme Court in the Cena vs. CSC, et al. (G.R. No. 97419 dated July 3, 1992), for legal opinion. Both the City Legal Officer and the
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User Chairman of the Civil Service Commission are one in these opinion that extending you an appointment in order that you may be able to complete the fifteen-year service requirement is discretionary [on the part of] the City Ma yor. Much as we desire to extend you an appointment but circumstances are that we can no longer do so. As you are already nearing your 70th birthday may no longer be able to perform the duties attached to your position. Moreover, the position you had vacated was already filled up. We therefore regret to inform you that we cannot act favorably on your request.8 (Emphases supplied) At this point, Mr. Rabor decided to come to this Court. He filed a Letter/Petition dated 6 July 1993 appealing from Civil Service Resolution No. 92-594 and from Mayor Duterte's letter of 10 May 1993. The Court required petitioner Rabor to comply with the formal requirements for instituting a special civil action of certiorari to review the assailed Resolution of the Civil Service Commission. In turn, the Commission was required to comment on petitioner's Letter/Petition.9 The Court subsequently noted petitioner's Letter of 13 September 1993 relating to compliance with the mentioned formal requirements and directed the Clerk of Court to advise petitioner to engage the services of counsel or to ask for legal assistance from the Public Attorney's Office (PAO). 10 The Civil Service Commission, through the Office of the Solicitor General, filed its comment on 16 November 1993. The Court then resolved to give due course to the Petition and required the parties to file memoranda. Both the Commission and Mr. Rabor (the latter through PAO counsel) did so. In this proceeding, petitioner Rabor contends that his claim falls squarely within the ruling of this Court in Cena v. Civil Service Commission. 11 Upon the other hand, the Commission seeks to distinguish this case from Cena. The Commission, through the Solicitor General, stressed that in Cena, this Court had ruled that the employer agency, the Land Registration Authority of the Department of Justice, was vested with discretion to grant to Cena the extension requested by him. The Land Registration Authority had chosen not to exercise its discretion to grant or deny such extension. In contrast, in the instant case, the Davao City Government did exercise its discretion on the matter and decided to deny the extension sought by petitioner Rabor for legitimate reasons. While the Cena decision is barely three (3) years old, the Court considers that it must reexamine the doctrine of Cena and the theoretical and policy underpinnings thereof. 12 We start by recalling the factual setting of Cena. Gaudencio Cena was appointed Registrar of the Register of Deeds of Malabon, Metropolitan Manila, on 16 July 1987. He reached the compulsory retirement age of sixty-five (65) years on 22 January 1991. By the latter date, his government service would have reached a total of eleven (11) years, nine (9) months and six (6) days. Before reaching his 65th birthday, Cena requested the Secretary of Justice, through the Administrator of the Land Registration Authority ("LRA") that he be allowed to extend his service to complete the fifteenyear service requirement to enable him to retire with the full benefit of an Old-Age Pension under Section 11 (b) of P.D. No. 1146. If Cena's request were granted, he would complete fifteen (15) years of government service on 15 April 1994, at the age of sixty-eight (68) years. The LRA Administrator sought a ruling from the Civil Service Commission on whether or not Cena's request could be granted considering that Cena was covered by Civil Service Memorandum No. 27, Series of 1990. On 17 October 1990, the Commission allowed Cena a one (1) year extension of his service from 22 January 1991 to 22 January 1992 under its Memorandum Circular No. 27. Dissatisfied, Cena moved for reconsideration, without success. He then came to this Court, claiming that he was entitled to an extension of three (3) years, three (3) months and twenty-four (24) days to complete the fifteen-year service requirement for retirement with full benefits under Section 11 (b) of P.D. No. 1146. This Court granted Cena' s petition in its Decision of 3 July 1992. Speaking through Mr. Justice Medialdea, the Court held that a government employee who has reached the compulsory retirement age of sixty-five (65) years, but at the same time has not yet completed fifteen (15) years of government service required under Section 11 (b) of P.D. No. 1146 to qualify for the Old-Age Pension Benefit, may be granted an extension of his government service for such period of time as may be necessary to "fill up" or comply with the fifteen (15)-year service requirement. The Court also held that the authority to grant the extension was a discretionary one vested in the head of the agency concerned. Thus the Court concluded:
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User Accordingly, the Petition is GRANTED. The Land Registration Authority (LRA) and Department of Justice has the discretion to allow petitioner Gaudencio Cena to extend his 11 years, 9 months and 6 days of government to complete the fifteen-year service so that he may retire with full benefits under Section 11, paragraph (b) of P.D. 1146.13 (Emphases supplied) The Court reached the above conclusion primarily on the basis of the "plain a nd ordinary meaning" of Section 11 (b) of P .D. No. 1146. Section 11 may be quoted in its entirety: Sec. 11 Conditions for Old-Age Pension. — (a) Old-Age Pension shall be paid to a member who (1)
has at least fifteen (15) years of service;
(2)
is at least sixty (60) years of age; and
(3)
is separated from the service.
(b) unless the service is extended by appropriate authorities, retirement shall be compulsory for an employee at sixty-five-(65) years of age with at least fifteen (15) years of service; Provided, that if he has less than fifteen (15) years of service, h e shall he allowed to continue in the service to completed the fifteen (15) years. (Emphases supplied) The Court went on to rely upon the canon of liberal construction which has often been invoked in respect of retirement statutes: Being remedial in character, a statute granting a pension or establishing [a] retirement plan should be liberally construed and administered in favor of persons intended to be benefitted thereby. The liberal approach aims to achieve the humanitarian purposes of the law in order that efficiency, security and well-being of government employees may be enhanced.14 (Citations omitted) While Section 11 (b) appeared cast in verbally unqualified terms, there were (and still are) two (2) administrative issuances which prescribe limitations on the extension of service that may be granted to an employee who has reached sixty-five (65) years of age. The first administrative issuance is Civil Service Commission Circular No. 27, Series of 1990, which should be quoted in its entirety: TO : ALL HEADS OF DEPARTMENTS, BUREAUS AND AGENCIES OF THE NATIONAL/LOCAL GOVERNMENTS INCLUDING GOVERNMENT- OWNED AND/OR CONTROLLED CORPORATIONS WITH ORIGINAL CHARTERS. SUBJECT : Extension of Service of Compulsory Retiree to Retirement Purposes.
Complete the Fifteen Years Service Requirement
for
Pursuant to CSC Resolution No. 90-454 dated May 21, 1990, the Civil Service Commission hereby adopts and promulgates the following policies and guidelines in the extension of services of compulsory retirees to complete the fifteen years service requirement for retirement purposes: 1. Any request for the extension of service of compulsory retirees to complete the fifteen (15) years service requirement for retirement shall be allowed only to permanent appointees in the career service who are regular members of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), and shall be granted for a period not exceeding one (1) year. 2. Any request for the extension of service of compulsory retiree to complete the fifteen (15) years service requirement for retirement who entered the government service at 57 years of age or over upon prior grant of authority to appoint him or her, shall no longer be granted. 3. Any request for the extension of service to complete the fifteen (15) years service requirement of retirement shall be filled not later than three (3) years prior to the date of compulsory retirement. 4. Any request for the extension of service of a compulsory retiree who meets the minimum number of years of service for retirement purposes may be granted for six (6) months only with no further extension. This Memorandum Circular shall take effect i mmediately. (Emphases supplied) The second administrative issuance — Memorandum Circular No. 65 of the Office of the President, dated 14 June 1988 — provides:xxx xxx xxx
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User WHEREAS, this Office has b een. receiving requests for reinstatement and/or retention in the service of employees who have reached the compulsory retirement age of 65 years, despite the strict conditions provided for in Memorandum Circular No. 163, dated March 5, 1968, as amended. WHEREAS, the President has recently adopted a policy to adhere more strictly to the law providing for compulsory retirement a ge of 65 years and, in extremely meritorious cases, to limit the service beyond the age of 65 years to six (6) months only. WHEREFORE, the pertinent provision of Memorandum Circular No. 163 or on the retention in the service of officials or employees who have reached the compulsory retirement age of 65 years, is hereby amended to read as follows: Officials or employees who have reached the compulsory retirement age of 65 years shall not be retained in the service, except for extremely meritorious reasons in which case the retention shall not exceed six (6) months. All heads of departments, bureaus, offices and instrumentalities of the government including government-owned or controlled corporations, are hereby enjoined to require their respective offices to stri ctly comply with this circular. This Circular shall take effect immediately. By authority of the President Manila, June 14, 1988.15 (Emphasis supplied)
Medialdea, J. resolved the challenges posed by the above two (2) administrative regulations by, firstly, considering as invalid Civil Service Memorandum No. 27 and, secondly, by interpreting the Office of the President's Memorandum Circular No. 65 as inapplicable to the case of Gaudencio T. Cena. We turn first to the Civil Service Commission's Memorandum Circular No. 27. Medialdea, J. wrote: The Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 27 being in the nature of an administrative regulation, must be governed by the principle that administrative regulations adopted under legislative authority by a particular department must be in harmony with the provisions of the law, and should be for the sole purpose of carrying into effect its general provisions (People v. Maceren, G.R. No. L-32166, October 18, 1977, 79 SCRA 450; Teoxon v. Members of the Board of Administrators, L-25619, June 30, 1970, 33 SCRA 585; Manuel v. General Auditing Office, L-28952, December 29, 1971, 42 SCRA 660; Deluao v. Casteel, L-21906, August 29, 1969, 29 SCRA 350). . . . . The rule on limiting to one the year the extension of service of an employee who has reached the compulsory retirement age of sixty-five (65) years, but has less than fifteen (15) years of service under Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 27, S. 1990, cannot likewise be accorded validity because it has no relationship or connection with any provision of P.D. 1146 supposed to be carried into effect. The rule was an addition to or extension of the law, not merely a mode of carrying it into effect. The Civil Service Commission has no power to supply perceived omissions in P.D. 1146. 16 (Emphasis supplied) It will be seen that Cena, in striking down Civil Service Commission Memorandum No. 27, took a very narrow view on t he question of what subordinate rule-making by an administrative agency is permissible and valid. That restrictive view must be contrasted with this Court's earlier ruling in People v. Exconde, 17 where Mr. Justice J.B.L. Reyes said: It is well established in this jurisdiction that, while the making of laws is a non-delegable activity that corresponds exclusively to Congress, nevertheless, the latter may constitutionally delegate authority and promulgate rules and regulations to implement a given legislation and effectuate its policies, for the reason that the legislature often finds it impracticable (if not impossible) to anticipate and provide for the multifarious and complex situations t hat may be met in carrying the law into effect. All that is required is that the regulation should be germane to the objects and purposes of the law; that the regulation be not in contradiction with it, but conform to standards that the law prescribes.18 (Emphasis supplied) In Tablarin v. Gutierrez, 19 the Court, in sustaining the validity of a MECS Order which established passing a uniform admission test called the National Medical Admission Test (NMAT) as a prerequisite for eligibility for admission into medical s chools in the Philippines, said: The standards set for subordinate legislation in the exercise of rule making authority by an administrative agency like the Board of Medical Education are necessarily broad and highly abstract. As explained by then Mr. Justice Fernando in Edu v. Ericta (35 SC RA 481 [1970]) — The standards may be either expressed or implied. If the former, the non-delegation objection is easily met. The Standard though does not have to be spelled out specifically. It could be implied from the policy and purpose of the act considered as a whole. In the Reflector
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User Law, clearly the legislative objective is public safety. What is sought to be attained in Calalang v. William is "safe transit upon the roads." We believe and so hold that the necessary standards are set forth in Section 1 of the 1959 Medical Act: "the standardization and regulation of medical education" and in Section 5 (a) and 7 of the same Act, the body of the statute itself, and that these considered together are sufficient compliance with the requirements of the non-delegation principle.20 (Citations omitted; emphasis partly in the original and partly supplied) In Edu v. Ericta, 21 then Mr. Justice Fernando stressed the abstract and very general nature of the standards which our Court has in prior case law upheld as sufficient for purposes of compliance with the requirements for validity of subordinate or a dministrative rulemaking: This Court has considered as sufficient standards, "public welfare," (Municipality of Cardona v. Municipality of Binangonan, 36 Phil. 547 [1917]); "necessary in the interest of law and order," (Rubi v. Provincial Board, 39 Phil. 660 [1919]); "public interest," (People v. Rosenthal, 68 Phil. 328 [1939]); and "justice and equity and substantial merits of the case," (International Hardwood v. Pangil Federation of Labor, 17 Phil. 602 [1940]). 22 (Emphasis supplied) Clearly, therefore, Cena when it required a considerably higher degree of detail in the statute to be implemented, went against prevailing doctrine. It seems clear that if the governing or enabling statute is quite detailed and specific to begin with, t here would be very little need (or occasion) for implementing administrative regulations. It is, however, precisely the inability of legislative bodies to anticipate all (or many) possible detailed situations in respect of any relatively complex subject matter, that makes subordinate, delegated rule-making by administrative agencies so important and unavoidable. All that may be reasonably; demanded is a showing that the delegated legislation consisting of administrative regulations are germane to the general purposes projected by the governing or enabling statute. This is the test that is appropriately applied in respect of Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 27, Series of 1990, and to this test we now turn.
We consider that the enabling statute that should appropriately be examine d is the present Civil S ervice law — found in Book V, Title I, Subtitle A, of Executive Order No. 292 dated 25 July 1987, otherwise known as the Administrative Code of 1987 — and not alone P.D. No. 1146, otherwise known as the "Revised Government Service Insurance Act of 1977." For the matter of extension of service of retirees who have reached sixty-five (65) years of age is an area that is covered by both statutes and not alone by Section 11 (b) of P.D. 1146. This is crystal clear from examination of many provisions of the present civil service law. Section 12 of the present Civil Service law set out in the 1987 Administrative Code provides, in relevant part, as follows: Sec. 12 Powers and Functions. — The [Civil Service] Commission shall have the following powers and functions:xxx
xxxxxx
(2) Prescribe, amend and enforce rules and regulations for carrying into effect the provisions of the Civil Service Law and other pertinent laws; (3) Promulgate policies, standards and guidelines for the Civil Service and adopt plans and programs to promote economical, efficient and effective personnel administration in the government;xxx xxx xxx (10) Formulate, administer and evaluate programs relative to the development and retention of a qualified and competent work force in the public service;xxx xxx xxx (14) Take appropriate action on all appointments and other personnel matters in the Civil Service including extension of service beyond retirement age;xxx xxx xxx (17) Administer the retirement program for government officials and employees, and accredit government services and evaluate qualifications for retirement;xxx xxx xxx (19) Perform all functions properly belonging to a central personnel agency and such other functions as may be provided by law. (Emphasis supplied) It was on the bases of the above quoted provisions of the 1987 Administrative Code that the Civil Service Commission promulgated its Memorandum Circular No. 27. In doing so, the Commission was acting as "the central personnel agency of the government
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User empowered to promulgate policies, standards and guidelines for efficient, responsive and effective personnel administration in the government." 23 It was also discharging its function of "administering the retirement program for government officials and employees" and of "evaluat[ing] qualifications for retirement." In addition, the Civil Service Commission is charged by the 1987 Administrative Code with providing leadership and assistance "in the development and retention of qualified and efficient work force in the Civil Service" (Section 16 [10]) and with the "enforcement of the constitutional and statutory provisions, relative to retirement and the regulation for the effective implementation of the retirement of government officials and employees" (Section 16 [14]). We find it very difficult to suppose that the limitation of permissible extensions of service after an employee has reached sixty-five (65) years of age has no reasonable relationship or is not germane to the foregoing provisions of the present Civil Service Law. The physiological and psychological processes associated with ageing in human beings are in fact related to the efficiency and quality of the service that may be expected from individual persons. The policy considerations which guided the Civil Service Commission in limiting the maximum extension of service allowable for co mpulsory retirees, were summarized by Griño-Aquino, J. in her dissenting opinion in Cena: Worth pondering also are the points raised by the Civil Service Commission that extending the service of compulsory retirees for longer than one (1) year would: (1) give a premium to late-comers in the government service and in effect discriminate against those who enter the service at a younger age; (2) delay the promotion of the latter and of next-in-rank employees; and (3) prejudice the chances for employment of qualified young civil service applicants who have already passed the various government examination but must wait for jobs to be vacated by "extendees" who have long passed the mandatory retirement age but are enjoying extension of their government service to complete 15 years so they may qualify for old-age pension. 24 (Emphasis supplied). Cena laid heavy stress on the interest of retirees or would be retirees, something that is, in itself, quite appropriate. At the same time, however, we are bound to note that there should be countervailing stress on the interests of the employer agency and of other government employees as a whole. The results flowing from the striking down of the limitation established in Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 27 may well be "absurd and inequitable," as suggested by Mme. Justice Griño-Aquino in her dissenting opinion. An employee who has rendered only three (3) years of government service at age sixty-fi ve (65) can have his service extended for twelve (12) years and finally retire at the age of seventy-seven (77). This reduces the significance of the general principle of compulsory retirement at age sixty-five (65) very close to the vanishing point. The very real difficulties posed by the Cena doctrine for rational personnel administration and management in the Civil Service, are aggravated when Cena is considered together with the case of Toledo v. Civil Service Commission. 25 Toledo involved the provisions of Rule III, Section 22, of the Civil Service Rules on Personnel Action and Policies (CSRPAP) which prohibited the appointment of persons fifty-seven (57) years old or above in government service without prior approval of the Civil Service Commission. Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1983 provided that a person fifty-seven (57) years of age may be appointed to the Civil Service provided that the exigencies of the government service so required and provided that the appointee possesses special qualifications not possessed by other officers or employees in the Civil Service and that the vacancy cannot be filled by promotion of qualified officers or employees of the Civil Service. Petitioner Toledo was appointed Manager of the Education and Information Division of the Commission on Elections when he was almost fifty-nine (59) years old. No authority for such appointment had been obtained either from the President of the Philippines or from the Civil Service Commission and the Commission found that the other conditions laid down in Section 22 of Rule III, CSRPAP, did not exist. The Court nevertheless struck down Section 22, Rule III on the same ex ceedingly restrictive view of permissible administrative legislation that Cena relied on.26 When one combines the doctrine of Toledo with the ruling in Cena, very strange results follow. Under these combined doctrines, a person sixty-four (64) years of age may be appointed to the government service and one (1) year later may demand extension of his service for the next fourteen (14) years; he would retire at age seventy-nine (79). The net effect is thus that the general statutory policy of compulsory retirement at sixty-five (65) years is heavily eroded and effectively becomes unenforceable. That general statutory policy may be seen to embody the notion that there should be a certain minimum turn-over in the government service and that opportunities for government service should be distributed as broadly as possible, specially to younger peo ple, considering that the bulk of our population is below thirty (30) years of age. That same general policy also reflects the life expectancy of our people which is still significantly lower than the life expectancy of, e.g., people in Northern and Western Europe, North America and Japan. Our conclusion is that the doctrine of Cena should be and is hereby modified to this extent: that Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 27, Series of 1990, more specifically paragraph (1) thereof, is hereby declared valid and effective. Section 11 (b) of P.D. No. 1146
Social Legislation 1st exam | Windows User must, accordingly, be read together with Memorandum Circular No. 27. We reiterate, however, the holding in Cena that the head of the government agency concerned is vested with discretionary authority to allow or disallow extension of the service of an official or employee who has reached sixty-five (65 ) years of age without completing fifteen (15) years of government service; this discretion is, nevertheless, to be exercised conformably with the provisions of Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 27, Series of 1990. We do not believe it necessary to deal specifically with Memorandum Circular No. 65 of the Office of the President dated 14 June 1988. It will be noted from the text quoted supra (pp. 11-12) that the text itself of Memorandum Circular No. 65 (and for that matter, that of Memorandum Circular No. 163, also of the Office of the President, dated 5 March 1968) 27 does not purport to apply only to officers or employees who have reached the age of sixty- five (65) years and who have at least fifteen (l5) years of government service. We noted earlier that Cena interpreted Memorandum Circular No. 65 as referring only to officers and employees who have both reached the compulsory retirement age of sixty-five (65) and completed the fifteen (15) years of government service. Cena so interpreted this Memorandum Circular precisely because Cena had reached the conclusion that employees who have reached sixtyfive (65) years of age, but who have less than fifteen (15) years of government service, may be allowed such extension of service as may be needed to complete fifteen (15) years of service. In other words, Cena read Memorandum Circular No. 65 in su ch a way a s to comfort with Cena's own conclusion reached without regard to that Memorandum Circular. In view of the conclusion that we today reached in the instant case, this last ruling of Cena is properly regarded as merely orbiter. We also do not believe it necessary to determine whether Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 27 is fully compatible with Office of the President's Memorandum Circular No. 65; this question must be reserved for detailed analysis in some future justiciable case. Applying now the results of our reexamination of Cena to the instant case, we believe and so hold that Civil Service Resolution No. 92 594 dated 28 April 1992 dismissing the appeal of petitioner Rabor and affirming the action of CSRO-XI Director Cawad dated 26 July 1991, must be upheld and affirmed. ACCORDINGLY, for all the foregoing, the Petition for Certiorari is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit. No pronouncement as to costs. SO ORDERED.
