You are on page 1of 1

17. UNIVERSITY OF PANGASINAN FACULTY UNION v. UNIVERSITY OF PANGASINAN (G.R. o SECTION 5. Allowance for Unworked Days.

SECTION 5. Allowance for Unworked Days.— a) All covered employees


No. L-63122) whether paid on a monthly or daily basis shall be entitled to their daily
20 February 1984 | Gutierrez, Jr, J. living allowance when they are paid their basic wage.
by Kim Michael de Jesus 4. Petitioners cannot be considered to be on leave without pay so as not to be entitled
Emergency Cost of Living Allowances to ECOLA, for, as earlier stated, the petitioners were paid their wages in full for the
months of November and December of 1981, notwithstanding the intervening
PLAINTIFF: University of Pangasinan Faculty Union semestral break. This, in itself, is a tacit recognition of the rather unusual state of
DEFENDANT: University of Pangasinan, NLRC affairs in which teachers find themselves.
5. Although said to be on forced leave, professors and teachers are, nevertheless,
FACTS: burdened with the task of working during a period of time supposedly available for
rest and private matters. There are papers to correct, students to evaluate, deadlines
1. The petitioners (members) are full-time professors, instructors, and teachers of the to meet, and periods within which to submit grading reports.
respondent university. 6. Applying the principle in the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code: Sec. 4.
2. The teachers in the college level teach for a normal duration of 10 months per school Principles in Determining Hours Worked.—The following general principles shall
year, divided into 2 semesters (5 months each), excluding the 2 months summer govern in determining whether the time spent by an employee is considered hours
vacation. worked for purposes of this Rule: (d) The time during which an employee is inactive
3. The teachers are paid their salary at a regular monthly basis. by reason of interruptions in his work beyond his control shall be considered time
4. On November-December 1981, the members were paid their regular salary either if the imminence of the resumption of work requires the employee’s presence
EXCLUDING November 7 to December 5, during the semestral break, they were not at the place of work or if the interval is too brief to be utilized effectively and gainfully
paid their Emergency Cost of Living Allowances (ECOLA). in the employee’s own interest.”
5. The university claims that the semestral break is not part of the school year, and 7. The petitioner’s members in the case at bar, are exactly in such a situation. The
since the teachers did not work at that time, they do not get paid. (NO WORK, NO semestral break scheduled is an interruption beyond petitioner’s control and it
PAY). cannot be used “effectively nor gainfully in the employee’s interest’. Thus, the
6. The petitioner, through its President, Ms. Consuelo Abad, filed a complaint against semestral break may also be considered as “hours worked.” For this, the teachers
the university with the Arbitration branch of the NLRC in Dagupan City seeking: are paid regular salaries and, for this, they should be entitled to ECOLA. Not only do
a. Payment of ECOLA from November 7 to December 5 the teachers continue to work during this short recess but much less do they cease
b. Salary increases from the 60% of the incremental proceeds of increased to live for which the cost of living allowance is intended.
tuition fees; and
c. Payment of salaries for suspended extra loads DISPOSITION:
7. The NLRC ruled in the university’s favor and dismissed the appeal of the members. 1. Petition, GRANTED.
2. Defendant is ordered to pay its regular fulltime teachers/employees emergency cost
ISSUE: W/N the members are entitled to ECOLA during the semestral break, YES of living allowances for the semestral break from November 7 to December 5, 1981
and the undistributed balance of the sixty (60%) percent incremental proceeds from
RULING: PETITION GRANTED. MEMBERS GET THEIR ECOLA FOR SEMBREAK. tuition increases for the same schoolyear as outlined above.
1. Petitioners are full time employees receiving their monthly salaries irrespective of 3. The respondent Commission is sustained insofar as it DENIED the payment of salaries
the number of working days or teaching hours in a month. However, they find for the suspended extra loads on September 21, 1981.
themselves in a peculiar situation where they are forced to go on leave during
semestral breaks. Semestral breaks are in the nature of work interruptions beyond
the employees’ control. Hence, these breaks cannot be considered as absences
within the meaning of the law for which deductions may be made from monthly
allowances. The NO WORK NO PAY principle does not apply here.
2. To a certain extent, the private respondent can specify dates when no classes would
be held. Surely, it was not the intention of the framers of the law to allow employers
to withhold employee benefits by the simple expedient of unilaterally imposing “no
work” days.
3. The university argues that the fact of receiving salary alone should not be the basis
for receiving ECOLA. But this is without merit because the IRR of Wage Order No. 1
states: