Title
Galvez vs. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co.
Case
G.R. No. L-16370
Decision Date
Oct 31, 1961
Jose Galvez's widow contested PLDT's pension plan adjustments after his 38-year service; SC upheld finality of CIR's order, awarding her P13,028.64 despite prior P24,000 payment.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-16370)

Background of Employment and Pension Claims

Jose S. Galvez was employed by PLDT from December 1, 1908, until February 7, 1951, when he passed away. During his lifetime, upon the resumption of operations post-World War II, he was reinstated and had served additional years resulting in a cumulative service period that entitled him to pension benefits. In 1951, Mrs. Galvez received P24,000 as death benefits under a pension plan from 1923, which was later subject to contention as more employees sought their respective shares following a discontinuation of the pension plan by PLDT.

Proceedings in the Court of Industrial Relations

In late 1951, a group of former employees, including Crispin Jeturian, initiated proceedings in the Court of Industrial Relations to reclaim their shares from the pension fund, which had been unilaterally discontinued since 1945. The Court rendered a decision on February 23, 1954, favoring the petitioners and later affirmed by the Supreme Court. Subsequently, the Court of Industrial Relations authorized the liquidation of the pension plan, detailing shares owed to various employees, including Jose S. Galvez.

Orders and Appeals Regarding Pension Payments

In January 1959, Mrs. Galvez, representing her late husband, requested payment of his determined share of P13,028.64 based on the examiner’s report, which was granted despite PLDT's objections. PLDT’s argument rested on the assertion that Mrs. Galvez had previously received sufficient pension benefits. Furthermore, in September 1959, the Court affirmed that the overall amount due owed to Mr. Galvez totaled P25,028.64, but since Mrs. Galvez had already received P24,000, the resultant amount due was merely P1,028.64.

Court of Industrial Relations’ Authority and Final Ruling

Mrs. Galvez contested the September 1959 order, claiming it unlawfully altered the already final order from January. The Court of Industrial Relations, while recognizing the equities involved, attempted to adjust the earlier decisions based on perceived errors. However, the Supreme Court held that the lower c

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.