Universidad de Sta. Isabel v. Marvin-Julian L.

Sambajon
G.R. Nos. 196280 & 196286
Villarama, Jr., J.
Facts
-PET hired RESP as a full-time college faculty member on probation from Nov. 1, 02
to March 30, 03, for one sem (CONTRACT 1)
-CONTRACT 1 expired but RESP continued to be given teaching loads and remained
a full-time faculty member for 4 consecutive semesters (2 sems in SY 03-04; 2 sems
in SY 04-05)
-Another contract (CONTRACT 2) was signed, effective Nov. 1, 03-March 31, 04
-in June 03, after RESP completed his MA in Educ., he requested PET that his salary
be adjusted. It was granted, but only from Oct. 04.
-In another letter (LETTER 2) addressed to President of PET, RESP argued that his
salary increase should be made effective as of June 03, not from Oct. 04 only, and
he demanded payment of salary differential
-School admin did not grant, saying that adjustment is done every two years, and
that those on probation cannot be re-ranked
-A dialogue was held, where RESP claimed that school admin decided to shorten his
probationary period. It was denied by President of PET.
-in Feb. 05, RESP received his letter of termination.
-RESP filed complaint for illegal dismissal. LA decided in his favour. NLRC affirmed,
saying that since RESPs employment continued beyond the period in CONTRACT 1
and lasted for a total of 5 semesters, he has acquired permanent status. CA
affirmed, adding that since the word probationary no longer appears CONTRACT 2,
RESP is already a regular.
Issue
W/N RESPs probationary employment was validly terminated by PET? No.
Held
1st sub-issue: since he was allowed to work after expiration of CONTRACT 1, and
CONTRACT 2 did not indicate probationary, he is already a permanent EE.
Court: CONTRACT 2 explicitly provided that unless renewed in writing, RESPs
appointment automatically expires at the end of stipulated period of employment.
And RESP also admitted still being under probation in LETTER 2.
2nd sub-issue: Probationary period of 3 years was shortened by PET, thus already
regular EE.
Court: Not proven. And Certificate of Employment simply stated full time faculty
member but no description of employment as regular. Also, RESP still has to render
one semester to complete the 3rd consecutive year required to become permanent
EE.

3rd sub-issue: PET says that probationary period expires after each semester RESP
has contracted to teach, hence PET is not obligated to renew his services at the end
of 5th sem of probationary employment
Court: Where the school year is divided into semesters, the school utilizes fixedterm contracts as convenient arrangement dictated by the semestral system and
not because the parties really intended to limit the period of their relationship to
any fixed term and to finish the relationship at the end of that term. This is not
illegitimate.
But this system of fixed-term contract is still subject to terms of Art. 281. Otherwise,
school may freely choose not to renew contracts simply because their terms have
expired.
Doctrine: Where the probationary status overlaps with a fixed-term contract, Art.
281 should assume primacy, and the fixed-period character of the contract must
give away.
No just or authorized cause was given by PET in terminating his services. Thus,
illegal dismissal.