SOLIDOR, Leonila D.
Re: Demotion; Appeal
x---------------------------x
Leonila D. Solidor, employee of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Tacloban City, appeals her alleged demotion for having been deprived of the 10% across the board increase effective January 2000 by virtue of the reclassification of her position from Economist III to Economist II as a result of reorganization.
In her appeal, Solidor stated, as follows:
x x x
“Our office DENR Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), Region 8 Tacloban
undergone a nationwide Bureau Reorganization last January 1998 which my
position Economist III was reclassified to Economist II, Salary Grade-15 but I
still receive the same salary of P15,517.00 and deprived of the 10% across the
board increase effective January 2000. Could it be possible under the CSC Law
that I could be demoted without a cause? I know demotion requires a waiver and
consent of the appointee. There was no proper
dissemination/explanation/information of concerned person and that even the
Management keep on hiding all the approved position and only to find out as
announced that it was approved by Central Office MGB and DBM. I don't know why
it was done without my knowledge. I am the only employee affected during the
Reorganization MGB, Region 8. Verbally, our Regional Director was telling me
that my salary will not be affected but only to find out last March 2000, our
office, MGB Region 8 has given differential of the 10% increase but I was not
included being demoted in rank without a cause at all. Under the National
Budget Circular (NBC) dated March 21, 2000, provides that I am entitled to
receive the 10% increase of my present salary-SG-18 under the 6th
step and whatever salary received as of December 1999 will be given 10%
increase (attached xerox copy).”
x x x
When asked to comment, the Director of Mines and Geosciences Bureau, through Regional Director Eligio Z. Ariate of MGB Region 8, averred, as follows:
“1. On the demotion without
a cause
“Please be informed
that there was no deliberate intention in the demotion in rank as the personnel
action of this office was based on the approved DBM – Notice of Organization,
Staffing and Compensation Action (NOSCA) dated March 26, 1998 and the
Memorandum of the MGB Director dated June 17, 1998.
“The NOSCA was issued
due to the reorganization of the Mines and Geosciences Sector (MGB) of the
Department of Natural Resources (DENR) to a line bureau, the Mines and
Geosciences Bureau under DENR Administrative Order No. 97-11 dated April 11,
1997 and pursuant to RA No. 7942, the Philippine Mining Act.
“It could be gleaned
from the NOSCA, that there is an Economist II position created under the Office
of the Regional Director with Salary Grade 15 while the Economist III (the
position held by Ms. Solidor) was among the positions abolished under the
Mining Services and Mineral Land Management and Control Division (please refer
to page 38 of 53 of NOSCA dated March 26, 1998).
“In the implementation
of the NOSCA, the guidelines and mechanics of MGB Memo dated June 17, 1998 were
followed. Notice of Change in Item No. was issued to Ms. Solidor, and furnished
the Civil Service Commission (CSC), Regional Office 8, Candahug, Palo, Leyte.
To date, this Office did not received (sic) any notice of discrepancy from said
Office, hence it was presumed that the Notice of Change of item of Ms. Solidor
was in order.
“2. On
the allegation that she has no knowledge on the DBM approved positions.
“Please be informed that the Office published the approved positions, which were considered vacant then, in the Tacloban Star which appeared June 15-21, 1998 issue (please refer to the attached copy of the publication) in compliance with the provisions of RA 7041 and its implementing guidelines.
“It could also be
mention that there was an informal general briefing of said approved positions
called by then Regional Director Pedro L. de Leon prior to preparation of the
notices/appointments. Incidentally, there was no recorded minutes of the
meeting but this could be confirmed by the personnel of this Office who were
present during the briefing.
“Furthermore, her 7th
sentence in the 2nd paragraph of the letter dated July 20, 2000 to
the CSC, Quezon City which states that ‘Verbally, our Regional Director was
telling me that my salary will not be affected ...’ confirms that she was
previously informed of the status of her position. It cannot be denied that she
was informed of the abolition of the Economist III position and the creation of
a new position which is the Economist II with salary grade 15.
“In addition, she was
not offered a vacant position higher or same level than her previous position
because of the nature of the work which requires highly technical skills and
should have passed a licensure examination as technical reports require the
signature of personnel conducting investigation/studies as mandated in the
performance of Office function such as chemist, forester, mining engineers and
geologist. Sad to say, after the official evaluation, Ms. Solidor does not
possess these qualifications.
“3. On
the allegation that she was deprived of the 10% across the board increase
“Please be informed that we have sought clarification from DBM Regional Office 8, Tacloban City regarding this matter. Attached are the documents submitted to our local DBM with their reply together with a copy of their reply to the query made by Ms. Solidor for your ready reference.”
x x x
Records show that Solidor formerly held the Economist III position Salary Grade 18 step 6 at the Mining Services and Mineral Lands Management and Control Division, Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Tacloban City. This position was among the positions abolished due to the reorganization of the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) under DENR Administrative Order No. 97-11 dated April 11, 1997 and pursuant to RA No. 7942, the Philippine Mining Act. Solidor’s Economist III position was reclassified as Economist II with Salary Grade 15. Solidor was duly notified and she continued to receive her salary of Grade 18 step 6 in the amount of P15,517.00 per month.
Subsequently, the Mines and Geosciences Bureau received advice pursuant to a National Budget Circular dated March 21, 2000 which set the guidelines for the grant of the ten percent (10%) salary adjustment to all government personnel effective January 1, 2000. Paragraph 5.1.3 of the said guidelines provides, as follows:
“5.1.3 The
transition allowance shall be considered as advance entitlement of the salary
increase herein authorized. Any excess thereafter shall be deducted from
whatever salary adjustments that such employee may be authorized in the
future.”
In a
Memorandum dated June 17, 1998 of Director Horacio C. Ramos, Mines and Geosciences
Bureau which provides for the “Guidelines and Mechanics on Placement of
Personnel to Implement DBM-NOSCA”, relevant portions of paragraph III provide,
as follows: “In cases where the
incumbents are demoted in terms of salary grade or rank, they shall continue to
receive their present salary rates including all applicable salary adjustments
that they are entitled to receive in the future.”
Director Ariate then sought the opinion of the DBM, Regional Office No. 8, Tacloban City, on the entitlement of Solidor to the ten percent (10%) across the board increase or to the difference in her actual salary and her authorized salary per salary schedule for Civilian Personnel effective January 1, 2000 and whether the same may be treated as transition allowance.
In answer thereto, DBM, through Director Manuel Bernal, stated, as follows:
“Our initial evaluation of documents presented, as well as additional
data requested and submitted immediately, established the following:
“Based on NOSCA No. 00098-03-068, Mrs.
Solidor’s position, that of Economist III SG 18, step 5, was reclassified to
Economist II, SG 15, step 1, effective March 26, 1998;
“However, according to the prepared NOSA
(deferred) for the 10% salary increase in CY 2000, Mrs. Solidor’s salary as of
December 31, 1999 was at the 8th step of SG 15 which was P15,517.00;
“Mrs. Solidor also received a Transition
Allowance of P1,829.00 which was the difference between the NBC 458 Annex B
table salary (for SG15, 8th step) at P13,688 and P15,517 (for SG 18,
6th step).
x x x
“Clearly, there is no conflict between the legal issuances i.e. EO 219 and NBC 468, and Mr. Ramos’s memorandum because Ms. Solidor is still entitled to the salary increase. However, since Ms. Solidor’s salary since her reclassification (from SG 18 to SG 15) is still substantially bigger than what she is entitled to in the current salary schedule, the transition allowance subsequently reflects the substantial difference. Another way of looking at it is that it would appear that she was already paid in advance her salary increase, which was absorbed by her hefty transition allowance.”
On a query made by Solidor on the same issue, DBM, through Director Bernal, replied, as follows:
x x x
“What is the basis for the computation of the 10% salary increase –
SG 15 or SG 18?
“According to the NOSCA or Notice of Organization, Staffing and
Compensation Action, the Economist III (SG 18, Step 5) item which you were
previously holding, was reclassified on March 26, 1998 to Economist II (SG 15,
Step 1). Since NBC 468 takes effect January 1, 2000, the 10% across the board
increase will be computed on your salary grade 15, as indicated on the NOSCA
and NOSA for the salary increase, if any;
“Is the salary difference of Economist III and Economist II
considered transition allowance?
“Republic Act 6758 or An Act Prescribing a Revised Compensation and
Position Classification System in the Government, otherwise known as the Salary
Standardization Act, prescribes under Sec. 17, ‘Incumbents of positions
presently receiving salaries and additional compensation/fringe benefits x x x,
the aggregate of which exceeds the standardized salary rate as herein
prescribed, shall continue to receive such excess compensation, which shall be
referred to as transition allowance (emphasis ours). The transition
allowance shall be reduced by the amount of salary adjustment that the
incumbent shall receive in the future.’
“Apparently the intent of the issuance is to rationalize the salary
rates, including those excess compensation as a result of downgrading with no
corresponding salary diminution as guaranteed by Section 13 (a) therein.
Furthermore, Section 3 of Executive Order No. 219 or the Grant of Salary
Adjustment to All Government Personnel, which took effect last January 1, 2000,
likewise provides for the integration of the Transition Allowance, ‘the salary
rates contained in the
Salary Schedule marked
as Annex A
shall include transition allowance presently authorized to be received
by incumbents.’ Similarly, NBC 468,
dated March 21,
2000, implementing EO 219, also
provides under Item 5.1.3, ‘the transition allowance shall be considered as
advance entitlement of the salary increase herein authorized. Any excess
thereafter shall be deducted from whatever salary adjustments that such employee
may be authorized in the future.’
“How will the implementing guidelines of DBM-NOSCA allowing the
payment of all salary adjustment in the future be reconciled with the
interpretation as per position of Administrative & Finance Officer
disallowing payment of the 10% increase?
“A perusal of the available documents indicate that while your are
currently receiving a salary equivalent to that being received by a SG 15 8th
step position, a NOSA implementing EO 219/NBC 468 was withheld pending
resolution of this complaint.
“As indicated in our letter to the MGB Regional Director, we find
nothing irregular in the MGB action except perhaps where some discrepancies
have cropped up regarding the implementation of the step increments in your
behalf as indicated in available documents. We reiterate our position that the
substantial transition allowance which you are currently receiving has already
absorbed the 10% across the board salary increase under E0 219.”
We find the appeal devoid of merit.
Demotion has been defined as the movement of an employee from one position to another with reduction in duties, responsibilities, status or rank which may or may not involve reduction in salary.
Solidor was not demoted since her former position, Economist III, was among the positions abolished in the reorganization of the MGB. Records show that she was previously informed of the abolition of the Economist III position and the creation of a new position which is Economist II with Salary Grade 15. It may be said that Solidor was reappointed to the Economist II position and she continued to receive her salary of Grade 18 step 6 in the amount of P15,517.00. Thus, it may not be said that she was demoted.
On the matter of the 10% salary increase in CY 2000, records show that the same was already absorbed in the transition allowance of Solidor, as succinctly pointed out by the DBM. Hence, Solidor was not demoted by virtue of the reclassification of her position from Economist III to Economist II pursuant to the Reorganization.
WHEREFORE, the appeal of Leonila D. Solidor is hereby dismissed for lack of merit.
Quezon City, March 22, 2001
(SIGNED)
JOSE F. ERESTAIN, JR.
Commissioner
(SIGNED)
Chairman
(SIGNED)
Commissioner
Attested
by:
(SIGNED)
ARIEL G. RONQUILLO
Director
III
Solidor
0 00-0347