Republic v. Cortez

Facts: A Petition for Mandamus was filed by NECU and NEWU with RTC QC praying that the NAPOCOR be ordered to release the COLA and AA allegedly withheld from them. NECU and NEWU pointed to this Court's pronouncements in De Jesus v. COA, Philippine Ports Authority Employees Hired After July 1, 1998 v. COA, and MWSS v. Bautista, et al. They believed that they were among the government employees whose COLA and AA were not factually integrated into their basic salary upon the implementation of RA No. 6758. The trial court granted their petition. 

OSG and then SBM Andaya separately filed Petitions for Certiorari with the SC. The Court granted the petitions. Respondents’ COLA and AA were already factually integrated into their basic salaries. Hence, this Motion for Reconsideration.

Issue: Whether the Motion for Reconsideration should be granted.

Held: No. Those who were hired after the implementation of RA No. 6758, or after July 1, 1989, did not receive a lesser compensation package than those who were hired before July 1, 1989. To emphasize, respondents NECU's and NEWU's COLA and AA were integrated into their basic salary by virtue of Section 12 of RA No. 6758. Section 12 has never been ineffective or rendered unconstitutional. Thus, all allowances not covered by the exceptions to Section 12 are presumed to have been integrated into the basic standardized pay. The receipt of a transition allowance is not proof that only those who were hired before July 1, 1989 received their COLA and AA. As this Court explained in its February 7, 2017 Decision, the transition allowance was given only to comply with the non-diminution clause of the law. It was never meant as an additional compensation to the standardized pay.