G.R. No.

156225, J-nu-ry
29, 2008
LETRAN CALAMBA
FACULTY -nd EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION, Petitioner,
vs. NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS COMMISSION
-nd COLEGIO DE SAN JUAN
DE LETRAN CALAMBA, INC.,
Respondents.
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.:
FACTS: On October 8, 1992,
the Letr-n C-l-mb- F-culty
-nd Employees Associ-tion
(petitioner) filed with
Region-l Arbitr-tion Br-nch
No. IV of the N-tion-l L-bor
Rel-tions Commission
(NLRC) - Compl-int -g-inst
Colegio de S-n Ju-n de
Letr-n, C-l-mb-, Inc.
(respondent) for collection
of v-rious monet-ry cl-ims
due its members.
Subsequently, these three
c-ses were consolid-ted.
 
The L-bor Arbiter (LA)
dismissed both the money
cl-ims of the petitioners -nd
the petition to decl-re strike
illeg-l filed by respondent.
Both p-rties -ppe-led to the
NLRC -nd CA who both
-ffirmed the decision of LA.
 
Petitionerʼs Contention:
Since the p-y for excess
lo-ds or overlo-ds does not
f-ll under -ny of the
enumer-ted exclusions in
the comput-tion of b-sic
p-y of -n employee (such
-s c-sh equiv-lents of
unused v-c-tion -nd sick
le-ve credits, overtime,
premium, night differenti-l,
holid-y p-y -nd cost-of-
living -llow-nces); -nd
considering th-t the s-id
overlo-ds -re being
performed within the norm-l
working period of eight
hours - d-y, it only follows
th-t the overlo-ds should be
included in the comput-tion
of the f-culty membersʼ
13th-month p-y.
 
Respondentʼs Contention:
Contr-ry to the -ssever-tion
of petitioner, prior to the
issu-nce of the DOLE Order,
the prev-iling rule is to
exclude excess te-ching
lo-d, which is -kin to
overtime, in the comput-tion
of - te-cherʼs b-sic s-l-ry
-nd, ultim-tely, in the
comput-tion of his 13th-
month p-y.
 
ISSUE: Whether or not -n
overlo-d must be included
for the purposes of
computing the 13th month
p-y of - te-cher.
 
RULING: NO. An overlo-d
p-y, owing to its very n-ture
-nd definition, m-y not be
considered -s p-rt of -
te-cherʼs regul-r or b-sic
s-l-ry, bec-use it is being
p-id for -ddition-l work
performed in excess of the
regul-r te-ching lo-d.
 
“Overlo-d work” is
sometimes misunderstood
-s synonymous to “overtime
work” -s this term is used
-nd understood in the L-bor
Code. These two terms -re
not the s-me bec-use
overtime work is work
rendered in excess of
norm-l working hours of
eight in - d-y (Art. 87, L-bor
Code). Considering th-t
overlo-d work m-y be
performed either within or
outside eight hours in - d-y,
overlo-d work m-y or m-y
not be overtime work.
 
Any te-ching lo-d in excess
of the norm-l or regul-r
te-ching lo-d sh-ll be
considered -s overlo-d -nd
does not form p-rt of the
regul-r or b-sic p-y.
 
In -ccord-nce with Article
83 of the L-bor Code of the
Philippines, -s -mended,
the norm-l hours of work of
school -c-demic personnel
sh-ll not exceed eight (8)
hours - d-y. Any work done
in -ddition to the eight (8)
hours d-ily work sh-ll
constitute overtime work.
 
Under the L-bor Code of the
Philippines. To cite - few
provisions:
 
“Art. 87 – Overtime work.
Work m-y be performed
beyond eight (8) hours -
d-y provided th-t the
employee is p-id for the
overtime work, -ddition-l
compens-tion equiv-lent to
his regul-r w-ge plus -t
le-st twenty-five (25%)
percent thereof.”
 
It is cle-r th-t overtime p-y
is -n -ddition-l
compens-tion other th-n
-nd -dded to the regul-r
w-ge or b-sic s-l-ry, for
re-son of which such is
c-tegoric-lly excluded from
the definition of b-sic s-l-ry
under the Supplement-ry
Rules -nd Regul-tions
Implementing Presidenti-l
Decree 851.
 
Simil-rly, even if -n overlo-d
is performed within the
norm-l eight-hour working
d-y, -n overlo-d is still -n
-ddition-l or extr- te-ching
work which is performed
-fter the regul-r te-ching
lo-d h-s been completed.
Hence, -ny p-y given -s
compens-tion for such
-ddition-l work should be
considered -s extr- -nd not
deemed -s p-rt of the
regul-r or b-sic s-l-ry.