Case Summary (G.R. No. 253117)
Applicable Law and Antecedents
The primary legislative basis for the case includes Administrative Order No. 103 and Republic Act No. 1161, which governs the SSS and establishes the framework for compensation of its personnel. A significant resolution involved is Resolution No. 259, issued by the Social Security Commission (SSC) on July 6, 2005, which authorized the granting of CNA incentives to both ACCESS members and a differentiated category labeled as Counterpart CNA Incentives for certain SSS personnel, including those not in the negotiating unit.
Initial Disallowance by COA
The COA, specifically through Notice of Disallowance No. 2010-004, concluded that the payments of Counterpart CNA Incentives to non-rank and file employees contravened existing regulations, specifically citing Section 3(b) of AO 103, which mandates suspension of additional benefits unless specifically allowed under certain presidential issuances. The underlying reasoning refers to prior relevant resolutions that limit CNA Incentives strictly to rank and file employees.
Ruling of the COA Director
The COA's Director IV, Angelina B. Villanueva, upheld the disallowance in Decision No. 2012-15. She argued that the SSC's power to fix compensation does not exempt it from compliance with relevant administrative issuances. Additionally, she highlighted previous COA rulings indicating that Counterpart CNA Incentives paid to non-rank and file employees were clearly prohibited under existing laws, rules, and regulations.
Affirmation by COA Proper
The COA Proper affirmed the Director's decision in Decision No. 2015-280, thereby upholding the disallowance after finding no grave abuse of discretion. The court deliberated over whether the differentiated payments could be considered CNA Incentives or if they fell outside regulated allowances. The core of their ruling was that payments made lacked necessary executive approval and that the SSC should have adhered strictly to the regulations concerning disbursements.
Legal Arguments Presented
The SSS presented multiple arguments highlighting its belief in the legality of the pay structure. It posited that the Counterpart CNA Incentives were legitimately derived from its authority to set employee compensation under RA 1161, claimed misinterpretations of prior rulings on CNA Incentives applied to its specific context, and indicated that good faith should absolve individuals from personal liability for disallowed benefits.
Court's Ruling
Ultimately, the Supreme Court found that the arguments raised by the SSS were insufficient to overturn the COA's ruling. The court reaffirmed that despite the SSC's purported power to determine employee compensation, the authority must still operate within established regulatory frameworks, including obtaining necessary approvals for additional incentives. The disbursement in question was neither categorized as legitimate CNA Incentives nor sanctioned by requisite executive orders.
Liabilit
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 253117)
Case Overview
- The case involves a Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by the Social Security System (SSS) against the Commission on Audit (COA) seeking to annul and set aside COA Decision No. 2015-280 and Notice No. 2017-014.
- The contested decisions affirmed a Notice of Disallowance (ND) amounting to P2,108,213.36 against SSS officials and employees who are not members of the collective negotiation unit.
- The case addresses the legality of the Counterpart Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) Incentives granted by the SSS, particularly in light of existing administrative orders and relevant labor management resolutions.
Antecedents of the Case
- On July 6, 2005, the Social Security Commission (SSC) passed Resolution No. 259, which granted Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) incentives to members of the collective negotiation unit, ACCESS, and Counterpart CNA Incentives to other employees, including confidential, coterminous, contractual employees, and executives.
- From 2006 to 2009, the SSS disbursed Counterpart CNA Incentives amounting to P2,108,213.36.
- The COA disallowed these payments on the grounds they violated Section 3(b) of Administrative Order No. (AO) 103, which prohibits the grant of new or additional benefits to full-time officials and employees unless specifically authorized.
COA's Initial Disallowance
- The COA Supervising Auditor issued ND 2010-004 on October 11, 2010, disallowing the payment of Counterpart CNA Incentives due to non-compliance with AO 103 and related PSLMC resolutions.
- The SSS appealed the disallowance, arguing that the payments were authorized by SSC's power to fix compensation and were n