G.R. No. 205735 , February 4, 2015
CONCEPCION A. VILLENA, Petitioner, vs. BATANGAS II ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. and GEORGE A. DIN, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Concepcion A. Villena was hired by respondent BATELEC II in 1978 and was promoted to Finance Manager in 1985. In 1994, she was demoted to Auditor, prompting her to file a complaint for constructive dismissal. The Labor Arbiter dismissed her complaint, but the NLRC reversed this, declaring her illegally dismissed and ordering her reinstatement as Finance Manager with payment of salary differentials. The NLRC’s decision was silent on allowances, benefits, and attorney’s fees. Villena moved for reconsideration, which was denied. She elevated the matter to the CA, which, in a Decision dated August 31, 2001, modified the NLRC Resolution, declaring Villena entitled to the salary difference plus “allowances and any other benefits pertaining to the position of Finance Manager” from her removal until actual reinstatement, plus attorney’s fees. The case was remanded to the NLRC for computation.
During computation, the LA awarded Villena salary differentials, 13th month pay, unused sick leave, and leave of absence, but excluded claims for bonus, representation allowance, transportation benefits, and attorney’s fees, and denied separation pay. Villena received the awarded amount but appealed the exclusions. Meanwhile, BATELEC II issued Policy No. 03-003 on September 20, 2003, providing retirement benefits.
In a Resolution dated March 22, 2007, the NLRC granted Villena’s appeal, holding that reinstatement was no longer possible and awarding separation pay in lieu of reinstatement equivalent to one month pay for every year of service, salary differentials, “other benefits,” and attorney’s fees. This resolution attained finality. Villena moved for execution.
The Executive Labor Arbiter, in an Order dated November 24, 2009, found Villena entitled to various benefits including salary differentials, allowances (representation, transportation, cellular phone), separation pay, retirement pay, and attorney’s fees. BATELEC II appealed to the NLRC, which, in a Resolution dated February 28, 2011, excluded representation, transportation, and cellular phone allowances, as well as retirement pay, from the computation. Villena moved for partial reconsideration. The NLRC, in a Resolution dated May 17, 2011, partly granted it, deleting the award for separation pay and ordering payment of retirement pay instead. Villena filed a petition for certiorari before the CA.
The CA, in a Decision dated October 18, 2012, reversed the NLRC’s May 17, 2011 Resolution, pointing out that the August 31, 2001 CA Decision and the March 22, 2007 NLRC Resolution had become final and executory and were immutable. The CA found the NLRC acted beyond its authority in modifying these final judgments by awarding retirement pay instead of separation pay. However, the CA affirmed the exclusion of representation, transportation, and cellular phone usage allowances, reasoning Villena did not perform her duties as Finance Manager as she was not a certified public accountant, a required qualification. Villena filed the present petition.

ISSUE

Whether or not (a) retirement pay, and (b) representation, transportation, and cellular phone usage allowances should be awarded in favor of Villena.

RULING

The petition is partly meritorious.
A. On Retirement Pay: Retirement pay is not included in the “other benefits” mentioned in the final and executory August 31, 2001 CA Decision and March 22, 2007 NLRC Resolution. The “other benefits” adjudged were relative to Villena’s illegal dismissal complaint, which contained no specific cause of action for retirement pay. For her retirement pay claim to be considered, her complaint should have contained substantial allegations showing she had applied for it and met the entitlement requirements under the company’s retirement plan (Policy No. 03-003), which was issued after the August 31, 2001 CA Decision had attained finality. Her illegal dismissal complaint sought reinstatement, salary differentials, benefits and allowances as Finance Manager, attorney’s fees, and damages. Since her entitlement to retirement pay was not an issue in the finally decided illegal dismissal case, her “contemporaneous” claim for retirement pay during the execution phase cannot be granted under the phrase “other benefits.”
B. On Transportation, Representation, and Cellular Phone Usage Allowances: These allowances should be included in the “other benefits pertaining to the position of Finance Manager” awarded to Villena under the final and executory CA Decision and NLRC Resolution. BATELEC II’s pleadings and submissions indicate that representation allowance, transportation allowance, and cellular phone usage allowance are given to the Finance Manager/Department Manager as part of their benefits. Unlike retirement pay, which requires a separate application, these allowances are inherent to the position. With the award of “other benefits pertaining to the position of Finance Manager” in the August 31, 2001 CA Decision having become final and immutable, it may no longer be modified. The CA erred in considering, ruling upon, and varying this previous ruling on Villena’s entitlement to these allowances. Therefore, her claim for these allowances is granted.
DISPOSITIVE:
The petition is PARTLY GRANTED. The Decision dated October 18, 2012 and the Resolution dated February 7, 2013 of the Court of Appeals are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION ordering the payment of representation, transportation, and cellular phone usage allowances to petitioner Concepcion A. Villena, in accordance with the Order dated November 24, 2009 of the Executive Labor Arbiter.