Title
Bacolod City Water District vs. Bayona
Case
G.R. No. 168780
Decision Date
Nov 23, 2007
BACIWA employee Bayona retired at 60 per CBA, conflicting with Civil Service Law's 65. SC upheld CSC rulings, ordering back pay for illegal termination.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 193902)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

Background of the Case
  • Bacolod City Water District (BACIWA) is a corporation created under Presidential Decree No. 198 (Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973), and its employees are covered by the Civil Service Law, not the Labor Code.
  • On September 13, 1991, the Supreme Court ruled in *Davao Water District vs. Civil Service Commission* that water district employees are civil servants. This decision became final on March 12, 1992.

Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)

  • Unaware of the Supreme Court ruling, BACIWA entered into a CBA with its employees on October 1, 1991, setting a compulsory retirement age of 60 years, unless extended by the Board.
  • A tripartite committee (comprising the Secretary of Budget and Management, CSC Chairman, and Local Water Utilities Administrator) agreed in September 1993 that benefits under CBAs executed before March 12, 1992, would continue until their expiry dates.

Juanito Bayona's Retirement

  • Juanito Bayona, BACIWA’s General Services Division Manager, turned 60 on May 16, 1994. He sought clarification on the applicable retirement age.
  • The Civil Service Provincial Office responded that water district employees could retire at 65, but BACIWA’s CBA set the retirement age at 60.
  • BACIWA’s Board passed Resolution No. 046, extending Bayona’s term until December 31, 1995, shortened by salary standardization or Board discretion.
zh- On August 14, 1995, Bayona wrote to the CSC seeking clarification on the compulsory retirement age, given the conflict between the CBA (60 years) and the Civil Service Law (65 years).
  • On November 29, 1995, BACIWA amended Bayona’s retirement date to November 30, 1995, paid him retirement benefits, and separated him from service.

CSC Rulings

  • On August 5, 1996, the CSC ruled that the compulsory retirement age for BACIWA employees is 65 years, with an option to retire at 60. This decision did not mention Bayona’s reinstatement.
  • On August 5, 1997, the CSC denied BACIWA’s motion for reconsideration, reiterating that the CBA could not shorten the statutorily fixed retirement age of 65.
  • On May 26, 2000, the CSC ruled in Resolution No. 001281 that Bayona should be paid back salaries and benefits from January 1, 1996, to May 16, 1999.
  • On November 20, 2000, the CSC modified Resolution No. 001281 in Resolution No. 002606, ordering BACIWA to pay Bayona from December 1, 1995, to May 16, 1999.

Issues:

  • Whether the CSC violated BACIWA’s right to due process by failing to notify it of Bayona’s letter requesting reinstatement and back salaries.
  • Whether the award of back salaries and benefits to Bayona was proper, given their omission in the earlier CSC resolutions.
  • Whether BACIWA acted in good faith in retiring Bayona at 60 based on the CBA.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.