GR 87333; (September, 1991) (Digest)
G.R. No. 87333 September 6, 1991
COLEGIO SAN AGUSTIN, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, CEFERINA J. DIOSANA AND LORELIE H. BELINO, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Colegio San Agustin hired Lorelie H. Belino as a probationary grade school teacher for schoolyear 1984-85, renewing her contract for the next two schoolyears. On March 24, 1987, before the end of the 1986-87 schoolyear, the school’s Rector wrote Belino a letter stating it would be in the best interest of the students that she seek employment elsewhere for the next schoolyear. Belino sought reconsideration, received no reply, and subsequently filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.
The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Belino, ordering her reinstatement as a permanent teacher with backwages. The NLRC affirmed this but modified the award to six months of backwages. The school elevated the case to the Supreme Court via certiorari, arguing it could not be forced to hire a teacher who did not qualify after probation.
ISSUE
Whether a probationary teacher, after completing three schoolyears of service, automatically becomes a permanent employee entitled to reinstatement and backwages upon non-renewal of her contract.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the NLRC. The legal logic centers on the distinction between completing a three-year probationary period and the expiration of fixed-term contracts. Article 280 (now 281) of the Labor Code provides that an employee allowed to work after the probationary period shall be considered regular. For private school teachers, the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools sets the probationary period at three consecutive years of satisfactory service.
The Court held that Belino’s three separate one-year contracts for three schoolyears did not constitute a continuous three-year probationary period as contemplated by law. The law requires three calendar years, not three academic years. Since her last contract expired at the end of schoolyear 1986-87 and the school chose not to renew it for the next schoolyear, there was no dismissal but a mere expiration of a fixed-term contract. The March 24, 1987 letter was a notice of non-renewal, not a termination notice. Consequently, having not completed the legal probationary period, she did not attain permanent status and was not illegally dismissed. The NLRC thus committed grave abuse of discretion in ordering reinstatement and awarding backwages.