Supreme Court decisions on dismissal cases of school personnel: their implications to educational administration / 6
6
Ricardo Teodoro Santiago.
-
-
- xxv, 143 pages 28 cm.
-
-
-
-
- .
- .
- 0 .
- .
- 0 .
Thesis (M.A.) -- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, 1987.;A thesis presented to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences and Education, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree in Master of Arts in Education Major in Educational Administration.
5
ABSTRACT: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: MAIN PROBLEM: This study analyzed the Supreme Court decisions on dismissal cases of school personnel, public and private, and their implications to educational administration. SUB PROBLEMS: 1. What is the distinction between tenure and dismissal as to: 1.1. source 1.2. subject 1.3. status 1.4. coverage 1.5. effect 2. What are the legal rights of the following school personnel during their probationary and tenure period? 2.1. public school personnel 2.2. private school personnel 3. What are the grounds for their dismissal? 4. What is the process of their dismissal? 5. How should their dismissal cases be contested? 6. How do school administrator decisions differ from the decisions of the: 6.1. Labor Arbiters? 6.2. Commissioners? 6.3. Judges? 6.4. Justices? B. What are the implications of the Supreme Court decisions on dismissal cases of school personnel to educational administration? PROCEDURE: The researcher made use of the descriptive survey method. Documentary analysis was used in gathering data for security of tenure and dismissal. The legal documents used are the 1986 Philippine Constitution, Labor Code of the Philippines, Education Act of 1982, the Civil Service Decree of the Philippine, Magna Carta for Public School Teachers and the Labor Code of the Philippines. With regard to implications of dismissal cases to educational administration, Volumes 1 to 143 of the Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA) were reviewed as the decisions rendered by the school administrators, Labor Arbiters, Commissioners, Judges and Justices of the Supreme Court are embodied therein. The participants of this study were seventeen (17) petitioners and forty (40) respondents. TREATMENT OF DATA: The data gathered were recorded, tabulated and analyzed. As the variables were limited, statistical treatment did not warrant thus descriptive analysis. FINDINGS: On the basis of the data gathered, the study obtained the following findings: A.1 Distinction Between Tenure and Dismissal Tenure and dismissal are distinct from each other in source as tenure is bilateral acts of the employer and the employee, whereas, dismissal is a unilateral act of the employer in casting off the employees; in subject as tenure is awarded to deserving employees, whereas, dismissal is imposed against undeserving employees; in status as tenure is a valued mark of status. In fact, regular or permanent status is granted an employee after a trial period, whereas, dismissal is a blot on status. It is dislocation and disruption of the individual's life; in coverage as tenure is from the beginning of service after the execution of a contract and after probationary period, whereas dismissal is from the termination of service from the end of the contract or during tenure appointment; and in effect as tenure is continuous until retirement unless terminated by virtue of a valid just cause, whereas, dismissal is stoppage of employment; lay-off; discharge of an employee from his work. 2. Legal Rights of School Personnel During Their Probationary and Tenure Period The labor rights of public school personnel are governed by the Civil Service Law pursuant to P.D. No. 807 known as the Civil Service Decree of the Philippines, Article IV-Scope of the Civil Service. All such persons must serve a probationary period of six months following their original appointment and shall undergo a thorough character investigation in order to acquire permanent civil service status. Appointment in the career service shall be permanent or temporary, the latter shall not exceed twelve months. The Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, Section 4-Probationary Period stated in essence that no probationary period precedes regular appointment after an efficient, satisfactory service. The Constitutional guarantee of security of tenure applies not only to the regular employees but also to probationary employees as the latter can only be dismissed upon valid or just cause. 3. Grounds for Dismissal of School Personnel Section 36 of P.D. 807, enumerates the grounds for dismissal of public school personnel, to wit: (1) Dishonesty; (2) Oppression; (3) Neglect of Duty; (4) Misconduct; (5) Disgraceful and immoral conduct; (6) Being notoriously undesirable; (7) Discourtesy in the course of official duties; (8) Inefficiency and incompetence in the performance of official duties; (9) Receiving for personal use of a fees; gift or other valuable thing in the course of official duties or in connection therewith when such fees, gift, or other valuable thing is given by any person in the hope or expectation of receiving a favor or better treatment than that accorded other persons, or committing acts punishable under the anti-graft laws; (10) Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; (11) Improper or unauthorized solicitation of contributions from subordinate employees and by teachers or school officials from school children; (12) Violation of existing Civil Service Law and rules or reasonable office regulations; (13) Falsification of official document; (14) Frequent unauthorized absences or tardiness in reporting for duty, loafing or frequent unauthorized absences from duty during regular office hours; (15) Habitual drunkenness; (16) Gambling prohibited by law; (17) Refusal to perform official duty or render overtime service; (18) Disgraceful, immoral or dishonest conduct prior to entering the service; (19) Physical or mental incapacity or disability due to immoral or vicious habits; (20) Borrowing money by superior officers from subordinates or lending by subordinates to superior officers; (22) Lending money at usurious rates of interest; (22) Willful failure to pay just debts or willful failure to pay taxes due to the government; (23) Contracting loans of money or other property from persons with whom the office of the employee concerned has business relations; (24) Pursuit of private business, vocation or profession without the permission required by Civil Service rules and regulations; (25) Insubordination; (26) Engaging directly or indirectly in partisan political activities by one holding non-political office; (27) Conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service; (28) Lobbying for personal interest or gain in legislative halls and offices without authority; (29) Promoting the sale of tickets in behalf of private enterprises that are not intended for charitable or public welfare purposes and even in the latter cases where there is no prior authority; and (30) Nepotism as defined in Section 49 of this Decree. On the other hand, private school personnel may be terminated from the service on the following just causes: (1) serious misconduct; (2) willful disobedience; (3) gross and habitual neglect of duties; (4) willful breach of trust; (5) theft; (6) abandonment; (7) closing or cessation of operation; (8) introduction of labor-saving devices; (9) redundancy; (10) retrenchment; and (11) disease. Other instances of termination or dismissal are: (1) violation of company regulations; (2) conviction of crime; (3) immorality; (4) illegal strike; (5) physical disability; (6) prolonged absence. Moreover, the Labor Code of the Philippines, mandated the following as just causes for dismissal: (1) by the employer, because the employee commits a wrongful act; (2) by the employee, because the employer is at fault or commits a wrongful act against the person of the employee; (3) due to business reverses such as retrenchment, closure of the business, etc.; and, (4) due to disease contracted by a worker. 4. Process of Dismissal of School Personnel Public school personnel may avail of two types of procedure, either formal or non-summary procedure or summary procedure. The formal or non-summary procedure consists of the following steps: (1) Filing of the complaint by a superior of the teacher, or the filing of an open and written complaint by any other person; (2) Notification of the respondent in writing of the charges against him/her; (3) Written response of the respondent to the charges against him or her within 72 hours after receipt of complaint; (4) Conduct of an investigation into the charges of the complaint and respondent's answer; (5) Decision of the case; (6) Appeal in case of unfavorable decision; and, (7) Decision or appeal. In the summary procedure, according to Section 40 of the Civil Service Law: No formal investigation is necessary and the respondent may be immediately removed or dismissed if any of the following circumstances are present: (a) When the charge is serious and evidence of guilt is strong; (b) When the respondent is a recidivist or has been repeatedly charged and there is a reasonable ground to believe that he is guilty of the present charge; and (c) When the teacher is notoriously undesirable. The Magna Carta guarantees safeguard at each stage of any disciplinary procedure such that the teacher shall have: (1) the right to be informed of the charges in writing, (2) the right to full access to the evidence on the case; (3) the right to defend himself and to be defended by a representative of his choice and/or by his organization, adequate time being given to the teacher for the preparation of his defense; and (4) the right to appeal to clearly designated authorities. No publicity should be given to any disciplinary action being taken against a teacher during the pendency of his case. Section 9 of the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers mandated that administrative charges against a teacher shall be heard initially by a committee composed of the corresponding School Superintendent of the division or a duly authorized representative, who should at least have a rank of a division supervisor where the teacher belongs, a chairman, a representative of the local or in its absence, any existing provincial or national teacher's organization, and supervisor of the division, the last two to b