VILLANUEVA, Armando C.

Re: Coverage of Backsalaries

x---------------------------------------------------x

RESOLUTION NO. 000324

Armando C. Villanueva, Chief Personnel Specialist, Civil Service Commission Regional Office No. II, Tuguegarao, Cagayan,
requests that he be paid back salaries including Representation and Transportation Allowance (RATA), Productivity Incentive
Bonus (PIB) per General Appropriations Act Circular, yearly amelioration, clothing allowances and all other benefits and
allowances. Villanueva's request is anchored on the Court of Appeals' (CA) decision reinstating him to his former position
and ordering the payment of his back salaries not to exceed five (5) years.

Villanueva, in his request, alleges as follows:

"This refers to the implementation of the decision of the Court of Appeals in the case entitled Villanueva vs. CSC, CA-GR No.
37763, whereby the decision of the Honorable Civil Service Commission was reversed and I was totally exonerated from the
charges against me. It may be noted that I was ordered reinstated to my former position with payment of back salaries for a
period not exceeding 5 years. Specifically, the dispositive portion of the Court of Appeals decision dated January 31, 1997
reads:

'IN VIEW THEREFORE, the petition is hereby GIVEN DUE COURSE and is accordingly GRANTED. The assailed
Resolutions Nos. 93-350 dated February 8, 1993 and 93-1540 dated April 22, 1993 issued by the respondent Civil Service
Commission are SET ASIDE. Public respondent is ordered to reinstate petitioner to his former position and to pay his back
salaries nor exceeding five (5) years.'

This was decided with finality by the Supreme Court in Resolution dated February 3, 1998 and became final and executory
on February 23, 1998.

"IN THIS CONNECTION, may I now be paid in full my back salaries for the period as ordered by the decision and the 'back
salaries' shall include the payment of my RATA, PIB per GAA Circular, yearly amelioration , clothing allowances and all
allowances and other benefits that I should have received were it not for the unfortunate decision of the Honorable
Commission to dismiss me from the service, as ruled by the Supreme Court in the leading case of Taada vs. Legaspi, 13
SCRA 586 the dispositive portion of which reads:

'It must be emphasized that when order of dismissal from the service of a government employee has been declared null and
void and reinstatement was later ordered, for all legal intents and purposes, he is considered as not having left his office and
he is entitled to all the rights and priviliges that accrue to him by virtue of that Office he held'. Further, in a Resolution No. 94-
5911 (sic) dated September 27, 1994, the Honorable Civil Service Commission directed the Municipal Mayor of Solana to
PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 pay the back wages of Saturnino Magera (sic). In said resolution, the Honorable Civil Service Commission said:

'WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, the Commission hereby resolves to rule that the Decision dated January 29,
1993 of MSPB ordering the reinstatement of Saturnino Magera (sic) with payment of backwages includes the payment of
Loyalty pay, incentive pay, longevity pay, productivity pay, clothing allowance and salary differential. Accordingly, the
Municipal Mayor Of Solana is directed to pay Magera (sic) the said benefits.'

"IN THE SAME MANNER AS THE HONORABLE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ordered payment of the mentioned benefits
to Saturnino Magera, may it now ORDER its finance officers to effect payment to the undersigned to the same benefits."

At this juncture, it is necessary to emphasize that in the light of the decision of the CA exonerating Villanueva, the latter is
deemed entitled to all the rights and privileges thay may accrue to him during the period of his separation from the service. In
Taada vs. Legaspi (13 SCRA 566), the Supreme Court held that:

"When a government official or employee in the classified civil service has been illegally suspended or illegally dismissed
and his reinstatement has latter been ordered, for all legal purposes he is entitled to all the rights and privileges that accrue
to him by virtue of that office he held."

Thus, the sole issue to be resolved in this case is whether backsalaries Include RATA, PIB, Amelioration and other
allowances.

We distinguish.

As to his RATA - - In the case of Macabuhay vs. Manuel (101 SCRA 834) cited in CSC Resolution No. 980753 (re: Jerry R.
Corpuz), the Supreme Court declared that:

"Well-settled is the rule that government employees who have illegally suspended or terminated, or whose suspension or
separation have been declared in finality as null and void for lack of due process, are allowed to claim for backwages and
other benefits due them during the entire duration of their illegal suspension or separation. This is so because an employee
subject of illegal suspension or termination, is deemed never to have vacated or left his office and Is, therefore entitled to
whatever accrued benefits pertaining to that office, including leave privileges and other pecuniary benefits reckoned from the
date of his illegal suspension or dismissal up to the date of his actual reinstatement."

and in the case of Cesar Moscoso (CSC Resolution No. 96-2411), the Commission held that:

"x x x the term salary covers all compensation for services including RATA. This means withdrawal or non-payment of RATA
results in reduction of salary which cannot be allowed under Civil Service Law and Rules unless the employee agrees thereto
x x x".

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 Hence, in view of the foregoing pronouncements and since RATA is attached to the position of Villanueva, he is entitled to
receive it during the period of his separation from the service.

As to PIB - - In the case of Felicidad R. Cezar (CSC Resolution No. 990731), the Commission ruled that:

"Relevant to the grant of Productivity Incentive Benefit (PIB), National Compensation Circular No. 73 and 73-A dated
December 27, 1994 and March 1, 1995, respectively provide, among other things, as follows:

"3.1. The incentive pay shall be based on individual personnel productivity and performance as evaluated and determined by
the heads of the respective offices/agencies in accordance with the policies and standards set by the Civil Service
Commission.

"3.2. To be entitled to the PIB, officials/employees shall have at least a satisfactory performance rating for the two (2)
semesters immediately preceding the year in which the incentive pay shall be released, and shall have contributed to the
productivity of their office/agency as determined by the respective heads of agency.

"3.3. The amount of incentive that will be paid deserving officials/employees pursuant to this Circular may vary for each
official/employee within an agency depending on their individual performance appraisal.

"Pursuant to the aforequoted provision of law, entitlement to the PIB is based on actual rendition of service. An employee
must have at least a satisfactory rating for the two semesters immediately preceding the year in which the incentive pay is
released. Moreover , he must have contributed to the productivity of his office. Under the present circumstances, Cezar was
on leave without pay for the whole year of 1998. Undoubtedly, she did not render service during the said year, hence, there is
no basis to grant her said benefit." (Emphasis supplied)

As to amelioration pay, worthy of stress is the ruling of the Commission in the aforementioned case, wherein it declared
that:

"On the grant of Amelioration Assistance, Administrative Order No. 365 dated October 10, 1997 of the Office of the
President, provides as follows:

'Section 1. All National Government Agencies, Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCCs) and Government
Financial Institutions (GFIs) and Local Government Units are hereby authorized to grant Amelioration Assistance in the
maximum amount of Seven Thousand Two Hundred Pesos (7,200) each to their personnel, regardless of salary and
appointment status, who have rendered at least four (4) months of service as of the payment of the said benefit except those
serving under service contract. x x x'

On the basis of the aforequoted provisions of law, the grant of Year-end Bonus, Cash Gift and Amelioration Assistance is
based on actual rendition of service. x x x " (Underscoring ours)
PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 As to clothing allowance, the case of Jose Pujalte (CSC Resolution No. 97-4142) applies, where the Commission resolved
that:

"However, as to laundry, clothing and other allowances which may be given by reason of actual occupation of the post, by
their very nature, are not included in the computation of Pujalte"s backsalaries. The reason is not hard to find. He did not
actually render service for the period of his illegal separation and that he did not incur such expenses." (Underscoring ours)

Thus, it cannot be over-emphasized that the Commission has consistently ruled on the basis of existing laws and Supreme
Court decisions that the order of reinstatement necessarily includes the payment of backwages and RATA since the latter is
attached to the position of the employee. However, other allowances and benefits may be granted only when the employee
has rendered actual services to the government.

WHEREFORE, the Commission resolves to hold that Armando C. Villanueva is entitled to the payment of his backwages
and RATA for a period not exceeding five years. However, he is not entitled to the payment of Productivity Incentive Bonus,
Amelioration Assistance and Clothing Allowance.

Quezon City, February 2, 2000

CORAZON ALMA G. DE LEON

Chairman

THELMA P. GAMINDE

Commissioner

JOSE F. ERESTAIN, JR.

Commissioner

Attested by:

ARIEL G. RONQUILLO

Director III

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 CADL-RES/villanueva/NLA/FPG/A2/A5(14)/nde-99-0268

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com