GR 84272; (November, 1991) (Digest)
G.R. No. 84272 November 21, 1991
BACOLOD-MURCIA MILLING COMPANY, INC., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and ELENA CANETE, respondents.
FACTS
Private respondent Elena Canete was employed by petitioner Bacolod-Murcia Milling Company for thirty-four years. Her service comprised twenty-five years as a seasonal cane scaler and nine subsequent years as a permanent family planning motivator. Upon her retirement, the company computed her retirement pay using the “mixed service credit” formula under Section 9, Article XVII of the governing Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). This computation resulted in a payment of P21,457.00.
Canete filed a complaint for underpayment, contending her benefits should have been calculated under Section 7 of the same CBA article. This provision grants permanent employees with thirty or more years of service 100% of one month’s base pay for every year of service. Applying this, she claimed an entitlement of P38,872.20, leaving a differential of P17,415.20. The Labor Arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission ruled in her favor, ordering the company to pay the differential.
ISSUE
Whether the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in computing Canete’s retirement benefits under Section 7 of the CBA, rather than applying the “mixed service credit” formula under Section 9.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition and reversed the NLRC resolution. The legal logic centers on the binding nature of the CBA and the material distinction between seasonal and permanent service for retirement computation. While jurisprudence may deem seasonal workers as regular employees for purposes of employer-employee relationship and security of tenure, this principle does not automatically extend to retirement benefits where the actual length and continuity of service rendered within a year are materially different.
The CBA explicitly recognized three employee classifications: seasonal, regular, and those with mixed service. Section 9 was precisely crafted for employees like Canete, who had both seasonal and permanent service. To compute her benefits solely under Section 7 for permanent employees would unjustly equate her 25 years of seasonal work—performed only during milling seasons—with year-round permanent service. This would negate the CBA’s distinct formula and render Section 9 superfluous. A CBA, as the law between the parties, must be given effect when not contrary to law, morals, or public policy. The Court emphasized that while protection of labor is paramount, it cannot sanction an interpretation that causes clear injustice to management, which is equally entitled to protection under the law. Canete’s complaint was accordingly dismissed.