GR 196280; (April, 2014) (Digest)
G.R. No. 196280 & 196286, April 2, 2014
UNIVERSIDAD DE STA. ISABEL, Petitioner, vs. MARVIN-JULIAN L. SAMBAJON, JR., Respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Universidad de Sta. Isabel hired respondent Marvin-Julian L. Sambajon, Jr. as a full-time probationary college faculty member under an Appointment Contract dated November 1, 2002, effective until March 30, 2003. After this contract expired, petitioner continued to give respondent teaching loads for the two semesters of School Year (SY) 2003-2004 and the two semesters of SY 2004-2005. In June 2003, after obtaining a Master’s degree, respondent submitted his credentials for a salary adjustment. His salary was increased and he was re-ranked to Associate Professor, effective October 2004. Respondent demanded that the increase be made retroactive to June 2003, which petitioner refused, citing its policy that probationary teachers are not re-ranked. A dispute ensued. On February 26, 2005, respondent received a letter stating that his probationary appointment would not be renewed upon its expiration on March 31, 2005. Respondent filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.
ISSUE
Whether respondent was illegally dismissed.
RULING
Yes, respondent was illegally dismissed. The Supreme Court affirmed the findings of the Labor Arbiter, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), and the Court of Appeals (CA). The Court held that under Article 281 of the Labor Code and the 1992 Manual of Regulations for Private Schools, a probationary faculty member in the tertiary level who is allowed to work after a probationary period of three (3) consecutive regular school years shall be considered a regular employee. Respondent’s first contract covered only the second semester of SY 2002-2003. He was allowed to teach for four more consecutive semesters (SY 2003-2004 and SY 2004-2005). Since he completed more than three consecutive school years of satisfactory service, he attained permanent status. His dismissal, effected through the non-renewal of his contract, was illegal as it was without just or authorized cause and without due process. Petitioner was ordered to pay respondent full backwages, separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, and attorney’s fees.