GR 141707; (May, 2002) (Digest)
G.R. No. 141707 ; May 7, 2002
CAYO G. GAMOGAMO, petitioner, vs. PNOC SHIPPING AND TRANSPORT CORP., respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Cayo Gamogamo was first employed with the Department of Health (DOH), a government agency, for fourteen years before resigning in 1977. He was subsequently hired by Luzon Stevedoring Corporation (LUSTEVECO), a private domestic corporation, which was later acquired by respondent PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation, a government-owned and controlled corporation (GOCC) without an original charter. Petitioner was absorbed by respondent and worked until his mandatory retirement in 1995. He received retirement pay computed based solely on his 17 years and 4 months of service with LUSTEVECO and respondent.
Petitioner filed a complaint before the NLRC, arguing that his prior 14-year service with the DOH should be tacked to his private sector service for computing his retirement benefits under respondent’s Manpower Reduction Program, which granted two months’ pay per year of service. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, but the NLRC reversed, ordering the inclusion of his DOH service. The Court of Appeals subsequently set aside the NLRC decision, prompting this petition.
ISSUE
Whether petitioner’s prior government service with the DOH can be tacked to his subsequent service with a GOCC without an original charter for the purpose of computing his retirement pay.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals. The legal logic is anchored on the distinct legal personalities and retirement systems governing the different employers. Petitioner’s service with the DOH, a government agency under the Civil Service, is governed by the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS). In contrast, his service with respondent, a GOCC without an original charter, is governed by the Social Security System (SSS) and the company’s own retirement plan. These are separate and distinct systems.
The Court emphasized that portability of benefits, or the crediting of services across different systems, is not automatic and requires specific legal authority. At the time, Republic Act No. 7699 , the Portability Law, was not yet in effect. Furthermore, respondent’s assumption of service credits upon acquiring LUSTEVECO was explicitly limited to petitioner’s service with LUSTEVECO only, not his prior DOH service. The retirement benefit petitioner received was the full amount stipulated in the company plan applicable to his service with respondent. Consequently, there was no legal basis to compel the tacking of his government service for the computation of his retirement pay from a separate corporate entity.