GUIMONG, Benjamin G.

Re: Accreditation of Service

x-------------------- x

RESOLUTION No. 041196

Director IV Annabelle B. Rosell, Civil Service Commission Regional Office No. X, Cagayan de Oro City, has
forwarded to the Commission the request of Atty. Benjamin G. Guimong of Gingoog City, for the accreditation of his
service beyond the compulsory retirement age.

The request states, as follows:

"I have applied for retirement from the government service with my last position being the
secretary to the mayor, Mayor Romulo S. Rodriguez, Jr. of the City of Gingoog.

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 "To deserve the full benefits under the new GSIS Law, I was asked by the GSIS to seek the
accreditation of my years of service after I turned sixty five years of age on May 25, 1998.

"My appointment as secretary to the mayor after turning sixty-five was approved
unconditionally by the Civil Service Commission, Region X, Cagayan de Oro City."

In her transmittal letter, Director Rosell submitted the following observation:

"Nonetheless, we would like to express our opinion on the matter for whatever it may be worth.

"Section 13 of the Government Service Insurance System Act of 1997 (R.A. No. 8291),
provides:

x x x

"Upon the other hand, Section 12 of Rule XIII of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 15, series
of 1999, provides:

x x x

"It may be gleaned from the foregoing provisions that retirement is compulsory at the age of
sixty-five (65) years regardless of employment status. However, upon representation by the head
of office prior to the date of compulsory retirement, the Commission may extend the services of an
employee for a maximum period of one (1) year, to complete the fifteen-year service requirement
for purposes of retirement.

"Atty. Guimong has to his credit twelve (12) years, three (3) months and sixteen (16) days of
government service when he turned sixty-five (65) years on May 25, 1998. Thus, even if his
PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 services were extended for a maximum period of one (1) year, he still cannot meet the fifteen-year
service requirement. Thus, while it is true that one who is more than sixty-five (65) years old may
still be employed in a primarily confidential position, there appears to be no legal basis for
unlimited accreditation for services rendered beyond the compulsory retirement age."

Seemingly straightforward, the request is nothing but simple. From the records of the case, Guimong
compulsorily retired from the government service on May 25, 1998. At that time, his government stint totaled twelve
(12) years, three (3) months and sixteen (16) days. However, despite his compulsory retirement, he continued to
serve as Secretary to the Mayor until December 31, 2002, under coterminous status on an annual rate basis. This
means that his coterminous appointment as Secretary to the Mayor was renewed each year.

In his present request, Guimong seeks to have the service he rendered following his compulsory retirement
accredited to enable him to enjoy full retirement benefits. This is because under existing laws, the service
requirement for retirement is fixed at fifteen (15) years.

The Commission notes that Guimong is focusing his request on service accreditation in order to complete the
needed fifteen years of service. In the ordinary course of things, however, a retiring employee, who falls short of the
service requirement, should have his service extended by the Commission. When so granted, the extended period
shall be tacked into the retiree's actual length of service.

Guimong did not have his service extended by the Commission following his compulsory retirement. Rather,
he continued in the service by virtue of the coterminous appointment issued to him, which was renewed yearly until
December 2002. In effect, through the repeated renewal of his coterminous appointment, Guimong was able to
accumulate more than the sufficient number of years to satisfy what he lacked in government service, without having
PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 to go through the normal process of service extension.

Is the said period of service creditable? The answer that readily suggests itself is that it is. Guimong
rendered the service under a valid appointment. Therefore, the same must necessarily be credited to his favor.

Such a simple reasoning, however, ignores the fact that his coterminous appointment was issued and then
renewed several times when Guimong was already of compulsorily retirement age. It is this attendant factor that
precludes any immediate inference of a clear-cut conclusion.

To its mind, the Commission believes that the disposition of the present request hinges not so much on
service accreditation but rather, more on service extension. For, if the service rendered by Guimong after his
compulsory retirement would partake the character of service extension, then, indeed, the same shall be considered
creditable for retirement.

It is clear, at least from the time of the High Court's ruling in the case of Rabor vs. Civil Service
Commission (244 SCRA 629), that a compulsory retiree may have his service extended for a maximum period of
one year in order to complete the fifteen-year service requirement. However, the service extension is not a matter of
right. Before service extension may be effectuated, it is imperative that the requisite authorization of the
Commission should first be sought. On this point, the head of the agency where the compulsory retiree belongs,
should, as a rule, make the proper representation.

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 In the case of Guimong, it is clear that no such authorization from the Commission, much less any request for
service extension from the City Mayor, obtains. His continuance in office was merely by virtue of a coterminous
appointment, which was renewed yearly until December 2002. In strict legal standpoint, this repeated appointment,
though duly approved, cannot take the place of the Commission's authorization for a service extension.

Nonetheless, it cannot be lost sight of that in 2001, the Commission promulgated CSC Memorandum
Circular No. 27, which stipulates, insofar as it is pertinent to the present case, as follows:

"A person appointed to a coterminous/primarily confidential position who reaches the age of
65 years is considered automatically extended in the service until the expiry date of his/her
appointment or until his/her services are earlier terminated."

The aforequoted rule does away with the necessity of seeking the permission of the Commission with regard
to the service extension of compulsory retirees holding coterminous or primarily confidential positions, like
Guimong. Under the said rule, their service is deemed automatically extended until the expiry date of their
appointment or until their service is sooner terminated.

Now, the abovementioned rule entered into force and effect in 2001 or three (3) years after Guimong reached
his compulsory retirement. As a rule, an administrative regulation or policy, just like a statute, shall not be made to
operate retroactively, unless the intent to do so is manifest. Excepted to this are rules and regulations that are
remedial or curative in character like those pertaining to matters of retirement, which should be liberally construed
and administered in favor of the persons intended to be benefited thereby.

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 The rule enunciated in CSC Memorandum Circular No. 27, s. 2001 is one such curative or remedial measure,
thus, susceptible of retroactive application. It intends to supply defects and abridge superfluities in the existing
policy on service extension of retiring government personnel. Its promulgation is designed to facilitate the extension
of service of a certain class of retirees in order to spare them from the rigors of cumbersome and tedious
administrative regulations. Verily, this is in keeping with the postulate that retirement measures are aimed at
assisting retirees in old age, not at punishing them for having survived . (In Re: Martin, 187 SCRA 477)

From the foregoing disquisition, it may be said that Guimong's service after his compulsory retirement may
be deemed as constituting service extension, for which reason, it is creditable. But to what extent shall the service
be deemed creditable?

The Commission is of the view that Section 12 (a) of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 27, s. 2001 is still
applicable in so far as it limits service extension only to a maximum period of one (1) year. Said section provides
as follows:

"Section 12. a) No person who has reached the compulsory retirement age of 65 years can
be appointed to any position in the government, subject only to the exception provided under
subsection (b) hereof.

"However, in meritorious cases, the Commission may allow the extension of service of a
person who has reached the compulsory retirement age of 65 years, for a period of six (6) months
only unless otherwise stated. Provided, that such extension may be for a maximum period of one
(1) year for one who will complete the fifteen (15) years of service required under the GSIS Law."

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 Under existing Civil Service rules, service extension shall be good only for one (1) year. It is to be understood
that the new rule does not seek to dispense with the said limitation. For otherwise, the new rule would result in the
unbridled and unlimited extension of service, giving rise to the absurd situation contemplated in the Rabor case,
supra:

"Cena laid heavy stress on the interest of retirees or would be retirees, something that is, in
itself, quite appropriate. At the same time, however, we are bound to note that there should be
countervailing stress on the interests of the employer agency and of other government employees
as a whole. The results flowing from the striking down of the limitation established in Civil Service
Memorandum Circular No. 27 may well be 'absurd' and 'inequitable,' as suggested by Mme Justice
Grino-Aquino in her dissenting opinion. An employee who has rendered only three (3) years of
government service at age sixty-five (65) can have his service extended for twelve (12) years and
finally retire at the age seventy-seven (77). This reduces the significance of the general principle of
compulsory retirement at age sixty-five (65) very close to the vanishing point."

Furthermore, to allow the service extension of compulsory retirees appointed to confidential or coterminous
positions to coincide with the duration of their confidential or coterminous appointment would be to accord them
undue preference to the discrimination of retiring employees holding permanent appointments. There is no rhyme or
reason to such an unequal treatment. At best, therefore, the creditable period under the automatic service extension
espoused in the CSC Memorandum Circular No. 27, s. 2001, would be one (1) year. Anything in excess of that shall
not form part of government service.

However, the Commission takes exception to the case of Guimong who, records show, has been paying
GSIS retirement premiums from May 1998 (the date when he is supposed to compulsorily retire) to December
2002. Thus, with this fact alone, the request of Guimong for accreditation of the period from May 1998 to December
2002 should be granted. It would be highly iniquitous if after paying retirement premiums, Guimong should be
denied accreditation, when the request is primarily for the purpose of claiming retirement benefits for the said
period.

In sum, on the grounds of equity, the Commission considers the service rendered by Guimong after his
PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 compulsory retirement as creditable for purposes of retirement because he already paid retirement premiums during
the said period. Be it emphasized that, considering the position of the Commission on this matter, it shall not grant a
similar request for accreditation more than the one year beyond the age of 65.

WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, the request of Atty. Benjamin G. Guimong for accreditation
of his service from May 26, 1998 to December 31, 2002 is hereby GRANTED . His service for the said period is
accredited as part of his government service for the purpose of retirement.

Quezon City, November 4, 2004

(SGD)

J. WALDEMAR V. VALMORES

Commissioner

(SGD)

KARINA CONSTANTINO-DAVID

Chairman

VACANT

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com
 Commissioner

Attested by:

(SGD)

REBECCA A. FERNANDEZ

Director IV

Commission Secretariat and Liaison Office

PRO version Are you a developer? Try out the HTML to PDF API pdfcrowd.com