Case Digest (A.M. No. 03-9-02-SC)
Facts:
Entitlement to Hazard Pay of SC Medical and Dental Clinic Personnel, A.M. No. 03-9-02-SC, November 27, 2008, the Supreme Court En Banc, Tinga, J., writing for the Court. Eleven members of the Supreme Court Medical and Dental Services (SCMDS) Division requested that the Court amend Administrative Circular No. 57-2004 (the subject Circular) governing hazard pay for SCMDS personnel so that its allocation would conform to Department of Health Administrative Order No. 2006-0011 (A.O. No. 2006-0011).The antecedent administrative and agency actions began with the Court’s Resolution of 9 September 2003, which declared SCMDS personnel entitled to hazard pay under Republic Act No. 7305 (RA 7305, the Magna Carta of Public Health Workers). Pursuant thereto the Court issued A.C. No. 57-2004 on 11 November 2004, which classified SCMDS personnel into high- and low-risk exposure groups and prescribed differentiated hazard-pay percentages that varied by salary grade (e.g., 27%/7% for high-risk employees and 25%/5% for low-risk employees depending on Salary Grade 19 and below or 20 and above).
After a technical review by the Department of Health (DOH), the DOH directed that all SCMDS personnel be entitled to a uniform hazard-pay rate irrespective of nature of risk, but retained dual 25% and 5% rates. On 21 January 2005 eleven SCMDS personnel (most occupying Salary Grade 20 or higher) wrote the Chief Justice complaining that A.C. No. 57-2004 produced anomalous results—higher hazard pay for lower-ranked staff—and asked that the Circular be reexamined so that hazard pay be based on degree of exposure rather than salary grade.
Before the Court acted, the DOH issued A.O. No. 2006-0011 (effective 1 July 2006), prescribing amended guidelines that established a 25% hazard pay rate for health workers with Salary Grade 19 and below but fixed the hazard allowance of those occupying Salary Grade 20 and above at P4,989.75 (i.e., a predetermined cash amount rather than a percentage). On 19 December 2007 some SCMDS personnel asked the Chief Justice to amend A.C. No. 57-2004 to conform to that A.O. Atty. Eden Candelaria (Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief Administrative Officer) recommended amendment on 15 January 2008, and the matter was referred to the Fiscal Management and Budget Office (FMBO) and the Office of the Chief Attorney (OCAT) for comment on 22 January 2008.
OCAT opposed amendment, arguing (inter alia) that A.O. No. 2006-0011 did not conform to Section 21 of RA 7305 and that its mechanics were of doubtful validity and not binding on the Court because not duly published. FMBO supported amendment on equity grounds and recommended...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May Administrative Circular No. 57-2004 be amended to conform to DOH A.O. No. 2006-0011?
- Did the DOH have authority under R.A. No. 7305 and its implementing rules to fix a predetermined exact cash amount for hazard pay of public health workers in Salary Grade 20 and above, instead of applying the 5% rate pres...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)