top of page
Search
BULGAR

Retirement benefits, ‘di maapektuhan kung magtrabaho uli

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | Dec. 28, 2024



Magtanong kay Attorney ni Atty. Persida Acosta

Dear Chief Acosta,


Dalawampung taon na akong nagtatrabaho sa aming kumpanya. Ayon sa aking kontrata, maaari akong magretiro at makatanggap ng retirement benefits matapos ang 15 taon na aking serbisyo. Naiisip ko nang magretiro upang sumubok naman ng ibang trabaho. Kaya naman, nais kong tanungin kung makakaapekto ba sa aking optional retirement ang muling pagtatrabaho pagkatapos kong magretiro mula sa kasalukuyan kong kumpanya? — Angie


 

Dear Angie,


Ang benepisyo sa pagreretiro o retirement benefit ay isang uri ng gantimpala para sa katapatan at serbisyo ng isang empleyado sa isang employer. Ito ay nakukuha sa ilalim ng mga umiiral na batas, collective bargaining agreement (CBA), kontrata sa pagtatrabaho, o patakaran ng kumpanya.


Sa kasong Carissa E. Santo vs. University of Cebu, G.R. No. 232522, ika-28 ng Agosto 2019, ipinahayag ng ating Korte Suprema, sa pamamagitan ni Kagalang-galang na Kasamang Mahistrado Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, na ang Retirement Pay Law ay hindi nagbabawal sa isang retiradong empleyado na maghanap ng kabuhayan o magpraktis ng isang propesyon, pagkatapos makatanggap ng mga benepisyo sa pagreretiro:


The Retirement Pay Law does not bar a retired employee from pursuing a livelihood or practicing a profession after receiving retirement benefits.


In reversing the labor arbiter’s ruling, both the NLRC and the Court of Appeals ruled that the retirement benefits under Article 287 of the Labor Code, as amended, is not applicable to petitioner’s case.  For it was supposedly not intended to benefit petitioner who voluntarily resigned not to rest in the twilight years of her life but to actively engage in the practice of the legal profession.


We disagree.


Indeed, retirement benefits are intended to help the employee enjoy the remaining years of his or her life, releasing the retiree from the burden of worrying for his or her financial support.  Petitioner’s situation, however, is not unusual. The Court has long recognized retirement plans which set the minimum retirement age of employees below sixty (60). In one case, the Court even upheld the compulsory retirement of two (2) employees at the ages of forty-five (45) and thirty-eight (38) for being consistent with Article 287 of the Labor Code.


Clearly then, petitioner’s age at forty-two (42) years coupled with her admission that she intends to practice law after retiring as a college instructor, do not affect, nay, diminish her entitlement to retirement benefits under the law. Sixteen (16) years is more than an ideal length of service an employee can render to his or her employer. A retirement plan entitling an employee to retire after fifteen (15) years of service and accordingly collect retirement benefits is “reward for services rendered since it enables an employee to reap the fruits of her labor - particularly retirement benefits, whether lump-sum or otherwise, at an earlier age, when said employee, in presumably better physical and mental condition, can enjoy them better and longer.”


All told, the New Retirement Pay Law intends to give the minimum retirement benefits to employees not otherwise entitled thereto under the collective bargaining and other agreements.  Its coverage also applies to establishments with existing collective bargaining or other agreements or voluntary retirement plans whose benefits are less than those prescribed by the law, as in this case. Thus, retirement plans under any employment contract or agreement are not absolutely beyond the ambit of judicial review. A retirement plan, as a labor contract, is not merely contractual in nature but impressed with public interest. If the retirement provisions of the company run contrary to law, public morals, or public policy, such provisions may be reviewed and even voided. Neither will the Court sustain a retirement clause that entitles the retiring employee to benefits less than what is guaranteed under the law.”


Ang optional retirement ay isang gantimpala na nagbibigay-daan sa isang empleyado na magretiro pagkatapos ng tiyak na bilang ng taon ng serbisyo at makakolekta ng mga benepisyo sa pagreretiro. Binibigyang-daan nito ang isang empleyado na umani ng mga bunga ng kanyang paggawa sa mas maagang edad, kung saan ang nasabing empleyado ay nasa mas mahusay pang kondisyon, upang kanyang matamasa ang kanyang mga benepisyo nang mas mahusay at mas matagal.


Samakatuwid, ayon sa nabanggit na kaso at upang sagutin ang iyong katanungan, hindi maapektuhan ang iyong optional retirement benefits kung mapagpasyahan mong muling magtrabaho pagkatapos ng iyong retirement. 


Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay. 


Maraming salamat sa iyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


Disclaimer : The views and opinions expressed on this website or any comments found on any articles herein, are those of the authors or columnists alike, and do not necessarily reflect nor represent the views and opinions of the owner, the company, the management and the website.

RECOMMENDED
bottom of page