ULTRA VIRES: IRR should NOT expand or limit law
On August 6, 2004, petitioner Larao, in her own behalf and as attorney-in-fact of the MWSS retirees, filed before the Court this petition assailing the decision and resolution of respondent COA that the payment by the MWSS of retirement benefits under RA No. 1616 to petitioner and other retirees who were previously paid their benefits under the Revised ERIP of MWSS constitutes double compensation.
Pertinent to the determination of petitioners right or entitlement to their retirement benefits under RA No. 1616 over and above the benefits they already received from the Revised ERIP of MWSS are (1) Sec. 7 of RA No. 8041, (2) Sec. 6 of EO No. 286, (3) the April 17, 1996 Revised ERIP submitted by MWSS and (4) the July 10, 1996 Memorandum by then Executive Secretary Torres as approved by then President Ramos on July 19, 1996. It is emphasized here that what must be established are the rights of a specific class of claimants, i.e., officials and employees of MWSS who are qualified to retire under RA No. 1616.
Sec. 7 of RA No. 8041 authorized the President of the Republic to reorganize MWSS and LWUA. Pursuant to this mandate, then President Ramos issued EO No. 286 to reorganize MWSS and LWUA wherein Sec. 6 thereof provided for the payment of such benefits as may be determined by existing laws to any official or employee who may be phased out by reason of the reorganization. The same provision directed MWSS, LWUA and DBM to study and propose schemes or measures to provide personnel who shall voluntarily resign from the service incentives and other benefits, including the possibility of accelerating the application of the revised compensation package under the Salary Standardization Law, Republic Act No. 6758.
Pursuant to the directive that included a provision that the recommendation be submitted to the President within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of EO No. 286, MWSS submitted to then Executive Secretary Torres on April 17, 1996 its Revised ERIP for approval of the President. The relevant provisions thereof state:
x x x x
A. Officials and employees who may be affected by the Reorganization shall be paid the ERIP on the basis of the monthly basic salary at the designated salary step as of December 31, 1995 based on the full implementation of the salary rates authorized under Joint Senate and House of Representatives Resolution (JR) No. 1, s. 1994 (SSL II), computed in accordance with existing retirement laws as follows:
1-20 years = 1.0 x Basic Pay
21-30 years = 1.5 x Basic Pay
31 and above = 2 x Basic Pay
The National Water Crisis Act expressly provides for payment of separation pay benefits as may be determined by existing laws to any official or employee who may be affected by the Reorganization
Full implementation of the Salary Standardization Law II (SSL II) on the designated salary step as of December 31, 1995 under JR No. 1 is hereby proposed as the basis of the ERIP.The National Power Corporation (NPC) was allowed to adopt its own separation package based on its new pay plan, way ahead of the SSL II implementation.
x x x x
C. Additional premium of 0.50 month p[er] year of service based on standardized salary rate at the designated salary step as of December 31, 1995 shall be granted to affected regular officials and employees. To ensure smooth implementation of their respective reorganization, other GOCCs and GFIs such as the National Power Corporation (NPC), Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), and Philippine National Bank (PNB) were earlier allowed to adopt their own separation packages with incentives and premium over and above the existing retirement benefits. (Copy of matrix attached).
Under item A of the proposed Revised ERIP, it is clear that separation pay shall be paid to officials and employees who may be affected by the reorganization at the rates of 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 times basic pay for services rendered from the corresponding number of years: 1-20, 21-30, and 31 and above, respectively. In addition, Item C authorizes payment of premium of 0.5 month per year of service to affected regular officials and employees, with emphasis on allowance for other GOCCs and GFIs in adopting their own separation packages with incentives and premium over and above the existing retirement benefits.
Both premiums under Items A and C refer to separation pay for affected regular officials and employees.
This proposed Revised ERIP was recommended for approval by then Executive Secretary Torres on July 10, 1996 and approved by then President Ramos on July 19, 1996. The words of recommendation as approved were categorical, thus:
8. After review, taking into consideration the similar incentive/separation benefits granted by the NPC, DBP, CB and PNB, we find the within ERIP proposal of MWSS to be in order.Hence, we recommend its approval by the President.
Indubitably, the proposed Revised ERIP of MWSS, as recommended by the Executive Secretary and approved by the President insofar as it concerned petitioners, referred only to separation benefits to affected officials and employees of MWSS. Consequently, officials and employees entitled to be paid their retirement benefits are those (1) affected by the reorganization of MWSS who had availed themselves of and paid the Revised ERIP and (2) qualified to retire under existing laws such as RA No. 1616.
That the guidelines implementing the Revised ERIP contained a provision that [t]he ERIP to be paid by MWSS to officials and employees qualified to retire shall be the difference between the incentive package and the retirement benefit under any existing retirement law (RA 1616, 1146 or 660) is not contrary to this pronouncement. The provision applies to MWSS officials and employees qualified to retire but not affected by the reorganization, in consonance with the directive in EO No. 286 to study and propose schemes or measures to provide personnel who shall voluntarily resign from the service incentives and other benefits. Nevertheless, even assuming otherwise, it must be emphasized that, as guidelines, they should not and could not change the correct and clear import of the provisions of the law from which they are based. Well-settled is the rule that implementing guidelines cannot expand or limit the provision of the law it seeks to implement. Otherwise, it shall be considered ultra vires.
In fine, officials and employees of MWSS who were affected by its reorganization and qualified to retire under existing laws such as RA No. 1616 are entitled to claim retirement benefits, notwithstanding their receipt of benefits under the Revised ERIP of MWSS. Whereas, officials and employees of MWSS who were not affected by its reorganization but voluntarily retired, being qualified for retirement, are entitled to receive the incentive under the Revised ERIP to the extent of its difference from the retirement benefit under any existing retirement law such as RA No. 1616. This does not run contrary to the provision on Exclusiveness of Benefits under the GSIS law:
Whenever other laws provide similar benefits for the same contingencies covered by this Act, the member who qualifies to the benefits shall have the option to choose which benefits will be paid to him. However, if the benefits provided by the law chosen are less than the benefits provided under this Act, the GSIS shall pay only the difference.
The provision applies to the second category of MWSS officials and employees, i.e., those who were qualified to retire but not affected by its reorganization.
Petitioners herein alleged that they already received their benefits under the Revised ERIP of the MWSS. Necessarily, what must be determined now is what the records do not show -- who among them were affected by the reorganization of the MWSS, and who were not affected but nonetheless opted to retire. In other words, what must be shown through competent documents/evidence are the positions phased out by reason of the reorganization, and who among herein petitioners were holding the positions. This must be done, notwithstanding that subsequent to its reorganization, MWSS ceased to exist. Petitioners, at the time of the reorganization, acquired rights that had attained vested status rights that may not be lawfully taken away from them.
Verily, petitioners affected by the reorganization who are claiming retirement benefits under RA No. 1616 must hereafter submit their claims to the GSIS with proper bases; i.e., that their positions in MWSS were phased out or otherwise affected by the reorganization and that, through the presentation of their service records, they are entitled to retirement benefits under RA No. 1616. (G.R. No. 164542; December 18, 2007)
Pertinent to the determination of petitioners right or entitlement to their retirement benefits under RA No. 1616 over and above the benefits they already received from the Revised ERIP of MWSS are (1) Sec. 7 of RA No. 8041, (2) Sec. 6 of EO No. 286, (3) the April 17, 1996 Revised ERIP submitted by MWSS and (4) the July 10, 1996 Memorandum by then Executive Secretary Torres as approved by then President Ramos on July 19, 1996. It is emphasized here that what must be established are the rights of a specific class of claimants, i.e., officials and employees of MWSS who are qualified to retire under RA No. 1616.
Sec. 7 of RA No. 8041 authorized the President of the Republic to reorganize MWSS and LWUA. Pursuant to this mandate, then President Ramos issued EO No. 286 to reorganize MWSS and LWUA wherein Sec. 6 thereof provided for the payment of such benefits as may be determined by existing laws to any official or employee who may be phased out by reason of the reorganization. The same provision directed MWSS, LWUA and DBM to study and propose schemes or measures to provide personnel who shall voluntarily resign from the service incentives and other benefits, including the possibility of accelerating the application of the revised compensation package under the Salary Standardization Law, Republic Act No. 6758.
Pursuant to the directive that included a provision that the recommendation be submitted to the President within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of EO No. 286, MWSS submitted to then Executive Secretary Torres on April 17, 1996 its Revised ERIP for approval of the President. The relevant provisions thereof state:
x x x x
A. Officials and employees who may be affected by the Reorganization shall be paid the ERIP on the basis of the monthly basic salary at the designated salary step as of December 31, 1995 based on the full implementation of the salary rates authorized under Joint Senate and House of Representatives Resolution (JR) No. 1, s. 1994 (SSL II), computed in accordance with existing retirement laws as follows:
1-20 years = 1.0 x Basic Pay
21-30 years = 1.5 x Basic Pay
31 and above = 2 x Basic Pay
The National Water Crisis Act expressly provides for payment of separation pay benefits as may be determined by existing laws to any official or employee who may be affected by the Reorganization
Full implementation of the Salary Standardization Law II (SSL II) on the designated salary step as of December 31, 1995 under JR No. 1 is hereby proposed as the basis of the ERIP.The National Power Corporation (NPC) was allowed to adopt its own separation package based on its new pay plan, way ahead of the SSL II implementation.
x x x x
C. Additional premium of 0.50 month p[er] year of service based on standardized salary rate at the designated salary step as of December 31, 1995 shall be granted to affected regular officials and employees. To ensure smooth implementation of their respective reorganization, other GOCCs and GFIs such as the National Power Corporation (NPC), Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), and Philippine National Bank (PNB) were earlier allowed to adopt their own separation packages with incentives and premium over and above the existing retirement benefits. (Copy of matrix attached).
Under item A of the proposed Revised ERIP, it is clear that separation pay shall be paid to officials and employees who may be affected by the reorganization at the rates of 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 times basic pay for services rendered from the corresponding number of years: 1-20, 21-30, and 31 and above, respectively. In addition, Item C authorizes payment of premium of 0.5 month per year of service to affected regular officials and employees, with emphasis on allowance for other GOCCs and GFIs in adopting their own separation packages with incentives and premium over and above the existing retirement benefits.
Both premiums under Items A and C refer to separation pay for affected regular officials and employees.
This proposed Revised ERIP was recommended for approval by then Executive Secretary Torres on July 10, 1996 and approved by then President Ramos on July 19, 1996. The words of recommendation as approved were categorical, thus:
8. After review, taking into consideration the similar incentive/separation benefits granted by the NPC, DBP, CB and PNB, we find the within ERIP proposal of MWSS to be in order.Hence, we recommend its approval by the President.
Indubitably, the proposed Revised ERIP of MWSS, as recommended by the Executive Secretary and approved by the President insofar as it concerned petitioners, referred only to separation benefits to affected officials and employees of MWSS. Consequently, officials and employees entitled to be paid their retirement benefits are those (1) affected by the reorganization of MWSS who had availed themselves of and paid the Revised ERIP and (2) qualified to retire under existing laws such as RA No. 1616.
That the guidelines implementing the Revised ERIP contained a provision that [t]he ERIP to be paid by MWSS to officials and employees qualified to retire shall be the difference between the incentive package and the retirement benefit under any existing retirement law (RA 1616, 1146 or 660) is not contrary to this pronouncement. The provision applies to MWSS officials and employees qualified to retire but not affected by the reorganization, in consonance with the directive in EO No. 286 to study and propose schemes or measures to provide personnel who shall voluntarily resign from the service incentives and other benefits. Nevertheless, even assuming otherwise, it must be emphasized that, as guidelines, they should not and could not change the correct and clear import of the provisions of the law from which they are based. Well-settled is the rule that implementing guidelines cannot expand or limit the provision of the law it seeks to implement. Otherwise, it shall be considered ultra vires.
In fine, officials and employees of MWSS who were affected by its reorganization and qualified to retire under existing laws such as RA No. 1616 are entitled to claim retirement benefits, notwithstanding their receipt of benefits under the Revised ERIP of MWSS. Whereas, officials and employees of MWSS who were not affected by its reorganization but voluntarily retired, being qualified for retirement, are entitled to receive the incentive under the Revised ERIP to the extent of its difference from the retirement benefit under any existing retirement law such as RA No. 1616. This does not run contrary to the provision on Exclusiveness of Benefits under the GSIS law:Whenever other laws provide similar benefits for the same contingencies covered by this Act, the member who qualifies to the benefits shall have the option to choose which benefits will be paid to him. However, if the benefits provided by the law chosen are less than the benefits provided under this Act, the GSIS shall pay only the difference.
The provision applies to the second category of MWSS officials and employees, i.e., those who were qualified to retire but not affected by its reorganization.
Petitioners herein alleged that they already received their benefits under the Revised ERIP of the MWSS. Necessarily, what must be determined now is what the records do not show -- who among them were affected by the reorganization of the MWSS, and who were not affected but nonetheless opted to retire. In other words, what must be shown through competent documents/evidence are the positions phased out by reason of the reorganization, and who among herein petitioners were holding the positions. This must be done, notwithstanding that subsequent to its reorganization, MWSS ceased to exist. Petitioners, at the time of the reorganization, acquired rights that had attained vested status rights that may not be lawfully taken away from them.
Verily, petitioners affected by the reorganization who are claiming retirement benefits under RA No. 1616 must hereafter submit their claims to the GSIS with proper bases; i.e., that their positions in MWSS were phased out or otherwise affected by the reorganization and that, through the presentation of their service records, they are entitled to retirement benefits under RA No. 1616. (G.R. No. 164542; December 18, 2007)
