G.R. No.

141707 May 7, 2002

CAYO G. GAMOGAMO, petitioner, vs.PNOC SHIPPING AND TRANSPORT CORP., respondent.
Petitioner Cayo F. Gamogamo was first employed with the Department of Health (DOH) as Dental
Aide. He was promoted to the position of Dentist . He remained employed at the DOH for fo!rteen
years !ntil he resigned on " #ovem$er %&&.
On % #ovem$er %&&, petitioner was hired as 'ompany dentist $y (!)on *tevedoring Corporation
((+*,-.-CO), a private domesti' 'orporation. *!$se/!ently, respondent P#OC *hipping and
,ransport Corporation (hereafter 0espondent) a'/!ired and too1 over the shipping $!siness of
(+*,-.-CO, and petitioner was among those who opted to $e a$sor$ed $y the 0espondent.
,h!s, he 'ontin!ed to wor1 as 'ompany dentist. 0espondent ass!med witho!t interr!ption
petitioner2s servi'e 'redits with (+*,-.-CO, $!t it did not ma1e referen'e to nor ass!med
petitioner2s servi'e 'redits with the DOH.
On 3 4!ne %%5, then President Fidel .. 0amos iss!ed a memorand!m approving the privati)ation
of P#OC s!$sidiaries, in'l!ding 0espondent. A''ordingly, 0espondent implemented a 6anpower
0ed!'tion Program to govern employees whose respe'tive positions have $een 'lassified as
red!ndant as a res!lt of 0espondent2s de'rease in operations and the downsi)ing of the
organi)ation d!e to lay7!p and sale of its vessels p!rs!ant to its dire'tion towards privati)ation.
+nder this program, retren'hed employees shall re'eive a two7month pay for every year of servi'e.
-vent!ally, petitioner retired after serving the 0espondent and (+*,-.-CO for & years and 8
months !pon rea'hing his 93
th
$irthday. He re'eived a retirement pay whi'h is e/!ivalent to one
month pay for every year of servi'e and other $enefits.
On 53 A!g!st %%:, 0epondent2s president died was repla'ed $y Dr. #emesio -. Pr!dente. ,he
new president implemented signifi'ant 'ost7saving meas!res. ;n %%9, after petitioner2s retirement,
the 'ases of Dr. <!ena ('ompany do'tor) and 6rs. 0eyes (telephone operator), who were holding
permanent=non7red!ndant positions $!t were willing to $e retren'hed !nder the program were
$ro!ght to the attention of the new president. After a thoro!gh st!dy, 0espondent2s <oard of
Dire'tors re'ommended the approval of the retren'hment. ,hese two employees were retren'hed
and paid a "7month separation pay for every year of servi'e !nder 0espondent2s 6anpower
0ed!'tion Program.
;n view of the a'tion ta1en $y 0espondent in the retren'hment of Dr. <!ena and 6rs. 0eyes,
petitioner filed a 'omplaint at the #(0C for the f!ll payment of his retirement $enefits. Petitioner
arg!ed that his servi'e with the DOH sho!ld have $een in'l!ded in the 'omp!tation of his years of
servi'e. Hen'e, with an a''!m!lated servi'e of 5" years he sho!ld have $een paid a two7month
pay for every year of servi'e per the retirement plan.
,he (a$or Ar$iter dismissed petitioner2s 'omplaint. On appeal, however, the #(0C reversed the
de'ision of the (a$or Ar$iter. 0espondent filed with the Co!rt of Appeals a spe'ial 'ivil a'tion for
certiorari . Co!rt of Appeals set aside the #(0C >!dgment. Hen'e, the petition to the *C.
ISSUE: WON for !" #$r#o%" of &o'#$()* a) "'#+oy"",% r"(r"'") #ay, #r(or %"r-(&"
r")."r". () a *o-"r)'") a*")&y &a) /" a&0". () a). a..". o !" &r".(a/+" %"r-(&" +a"r
a&1$(r". () a *o-"r)'")2o3)". a). &o)ro++". &or#ora(o) 3(!o$ or(*()a+ &!ar"r.
Petitioner maintains that his government servi'e with the DOH sho!ld $e re'ogni)ed and ta'1ed in
to his length of servi'e with 0espondent $e'a!se (+*,-.-CO, whi'h was later $o!ght $y
0espondent, and 0espondent itself, were GOCCs and were, therefore, !nder the Civil *ervi'e (aw.
Prior to the separation of 0espondent from the Civil *ervi'e $y virt!e of the %?& Constit!tion,
petitioner2s length of servi'e was 'onsidered 'ontin!o!s.
Petitioner asserts that with the ta'1ing in of his 8 years of servi'e with the DOH to his & years and
8 months servi'e with (+*,-.-CO and 0espondent, he had 5 years and 8 months 'redita$le
servi'e as $asis for the 'omp!tation of his retirement $enefits. ,h!s, p!rs!ant to 0espondent2s
6anpower 0ed!'tion Program, he sho!ld have $een paid two months pay for every year of his 5
years of servi'e.
Petitioner li1ewise asserts that the prin'iple of ta'1ing is an'hored on 0ep!$li' A't #o. &9%%.
&
@e r!le in the negative the iss!e of whether petitioner2s servi'e with the DOH sho!ld $e in'l!ded in
the 'omp!tation of his retirement $enefits.
,he 'redita$le servi'e referred to in 0espondent2s 0etirement s'heme is the retiree2s 'ontin!o!s
years of servi'e with 0espondent.
0etirement res!lts from a vol!ntary agreement $etween the employer and the employee where$y
the latter after rea'hing a 'ertain age agrees to sever his employment with the former.
"3
*in'e the retirement pay solely 'omes from 0espondent2s f!nds, it is $!t nat!ral that 0espondent
shall disregard petitioner2s length of servi'e in another 'ompany for the 'omp!tation of his
retirement $enefits.
Petitioner was a$sor$ed $y 0espondent from (+*,-.-CO on A!g!st %&%. Ordinarily, his
'redita$le servi'e shall $e re'1oned from s!'h date. However, sin'e 0espondent too1 over the
shipping $!siness of (+*,-.-CO and agreed to ass!me witho!t interr!ption all the servi'e 'redits
of petitioner with (+*,-.-CO,
"
petitioner2s 'redita$le servi'e m!st start when he started wor1ing
with (+*,-.-CO !ntil his day of retirement .
@e 'annot !phold petitioner2s 'ontention that his fo!rteen years of servi'e with the DOH sho!ld $e
'onsidered $e'a!se his last two employers were government7owned and 'ontrolled 'orporations,
and fall !nder the Civil *ervi'e (aw.
;t is not at all disp!ted that while 0espondent and (+*,-.-CO are government7owned and
'ontrolled 'orporations, they have no original 'hartersA hen'e they are not !nder the Civil *ervi'e
(aw.
Petitioner2s 'ontention that the prin'iple of ta'1ing of 'redita$le servi'e is mandated $y 0ep!$li' A't
#o. &9%% is $aseless. *e'tion 5 of 0ep!$li' A't #o. &9%% states that a 'overed wor1er who
transfer(s) employment from one se'tor to another or is employed in $oth se'tors, shall have his
'redita$le servi'es or 'ontri$!tions in $oth systems 'redited to his servi'e or 'ontri$!tion re'ord in
ea'h of the *ystems and shall $e totali)ed for p!rposes of old7age, disa$ility, s!rvivorship, and
other $enefits in 'ase the 'overed employee does not /!alify for s!'h $enefits in either or $oth
*ystems witho!t totali)ationB
O$vio!sly, totali)ation of servi'e 'redits is only resorted to when the retiree does not /!alify for
$enefits in either or $oth of the *ystems. Here, petitioner is /!alified to re'eive $enefits granted $y
the Government *e'!rity ;ns!ran'e *ystem (G*;*), if s!'h right has not yet $een eCer'ised.
;t may also $e pointed o!t that !pon his re'eipt of the amo!nt from 0espondent as retirement
$enefit p!rs!ant to its retirement s'heme, petitioner signed and delivered to 0espondent a 0elease
and +nderta1ing wherein he waives all a'tions, 'a!ses of a'tions, de$ts, d!es, monies and
a''o!nts in 'onne'tion with his employment with 0espondent. ,his /!it'laim releases 0espondent
from any other o$ligation in favor of petitioner.
WHERE4ORE, no reversi$le error on the part of the 0espondent Co!rt of Appeals having $een
shown, the petition in this 'ase is DENIED and the appealed de'ision is here$y A44IRMED.
Costs against petitioner.SO ORDERED.