Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 821 views

    Gamogamo Vs PNOC

    Uploaded by

    KM Surtida
    Petitioner worked for 14 years at the Department of Health before resigning and being hired by LUSTEVECO as a company dentist. LUSTEVECO was later acquired by respondent PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation, where petitioner served for 17 years and 4 months before retiring. Petitioner requested to be included in respondent's retrenchment program but was denied. Upon retiring, petitioner's retirement pay only included his years of service with respondent, not his prior 14 years with the Department of Health. The court held that respondent's retirement plan only considers continuous years of service with respondent, as the retirement pay comes solely from respondent's funds. Petitioner's contention that his government service should be included was rejected, as respondent and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Gamogamo Vs PNOC

    Uploaded by

    KM Surtida
    821 views2 pages
    Petitioner worked for 14 years at the Department of Health before resigning and being hired by LUSTEVECO as a company dentist. LUSTEVECO was later acquired by respondent PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation, where petitioner served for 17 years and 4 months before retiring. Petitioner requested to be included in respondent's retrenchment program but was denied. Upon retiring, petitioner's retirement pay only included his years of service with respondent, not his prior 14 years with the Department of Health. The court held that respondent's retirement plan only considers continuous years of service with respondent, as the retirement pay comes solely from respondent's funds. Petitioner's contention that his government service should be included was rejected, as respondent and

    Original Description:

    Labor Case Digest

    Original Title

    Gamogamo vs PNOC

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Petitioner worked for 14 years at the Department of Health before resigning and being hired by LUSTEVECO as a company dentist. LUSTEVECO was later acquired by respondent PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation, where petitioner served for 17 years and 4 months before retiring. Petitioner requested to be included in respondent's retrenchment program but was denied. Upon retiring, petitioner's retirement pay only included his years of service with respondent, not his prior 14 years with the Department of Health. The court held that respondent's retirement plan only considers continuous years of service with respondent, as the retirement pay comes solely from respondent's funds. Petitioner's contention that his government service should be included was rejected, as respondent and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    821 views2 pages

    Gamogamo Vs PNOC

    Uploaded by

    KM Surtida
    Petitioner worked for 14 years at the Department of Health before resigning and being hired by LUSTEVECO as a company dentist. LUSTEVECO was later acquired by respondent PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation, where petitioner served for 17 years and 4 months before retiring. Petitioner requested to be included in respondent's retrenchment program but was denied. Upon retiring, petitioner's retirement pay only included his years of service with respondent, not his prior 14 years with the Department of Health. The court held that respondent's retirement plan only considers continuous years of service with respondent, as the retirement pay comes solely from respondent's funds. Petitioner's contention that his government service should be included was rejected, as respondent and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    141707

    May 7, 2002

    CAYO G. GAMOGAMO, petitioner,


    vs.
    PNOC SHIPPING AND TRANSPORT CORP., respondent.
    Facts:
    On 23 January 1963, Petitioner was first employed with the Department of Health
    (DOH) as Dental Aide. He remained employed at the DOH for fourteen years until he
    resigned. On 9 November 1977, petitioner was hired as company dentist by LUSTEVECO,
    a private domestic corporation. Subsequently, respondent PNOC Shipping and Transport
    Corporation acquired and took over the shipping business of LUSTEVECO, and petitioner
    was among those who opted to be absorbed by the Respondent. Sometime in 1995,
    petitioner requested to be included in the next retrenchment schedule. However, his
    request was turned down. Eventually, petitioner retired after serving the Respondent and
    LUSTEVECO for 17 years and 4 months upon reaching his 60 th birthday. He received a
    retirement pay which is equivalent to one month pay for every year of service and other
    benefits. The cases of Dr. Rogelio T. Buena and Mrs. Luz C. Reyes, who were holding
    permanent/non-redundant positions but were willing to be retrenched under the program
    were retrenched and paid a 2-month separation pay for every year of service under
    Respondents Manpower Reduction Program. In view of the action taken by Respondent
    in the retrenchment of Dr. Buena and Mrs. Reyes, petitioner filed a complaint at the
    National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) for the full payment of his retirement
    benefits.
    Issue:
    Whether or not petitioners service with the DOH should be included in the
    computation of his retirement benefits.
    Held:
    No. Respondents Retirement scheme pertinently provides:
    SEC 4.1. Normal Retirement Date/Eligibility. -- The normal retirement date of
    an employee shall be the first day of the month next following the
    employees sixtieth (60th) birthday. To be eligible for the retirement benefit
    described under Sec. 4.2, the employee must have rendered at least ten
    (10) years of continuous service with the Company. In case the retiring
    employee has rendered less than ten (10) years of service with the
    Company, he shall be entitled to one (1) months final monthly basic salary
    (12/12) for every year of service.
    It is clear therefrom that the creditable service referred to in the Retirement Plan is
    the retirees continuous years of service with Respondent. Since the retirement pay
    solely comes from Respondents funds, it is but natural that Respondent shall disregard
    petitioners length of service in another company for the computation of his retirement
    benefits. We cannot uphold petitioners contention that his fourteen years of service with
    the DOH should be considered because his last two employers were government-owned
    and controlled corporations, and fall under the Civil Service Law. It is not at all disputed
    that while Respondent and LUSTEVECO are government-owned and controlled
    corporations, they have no original charters; hence they are not under the Civil Service
    Law. Obviously, totalization of service credits is only resorted to when the retiree does

    not qualify for benefits in either or both of the Systems. Here, petitioner is qualified to
    receive benefits granted by the Government Security Insurance System (GSIS).x

    You might also like