View full case

SAINT MARY’S UNIVERSITY v. CA

FACTS:

Respondent Marcelo Donelo started teaching on a contractual basis at St. Mary's University in 1992. In 1995, he was appointed as an Assistant Professor I, and later on, he was promoted to Assistant Professor III. He taught until the first semester of school year 1999-2000 when the school discontinued giving him teaching assignments. Respondent filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against the university. The university argued that respondent was merely a part-time instructor and was under investigation for giving grades to students who did not attend classes. The Labor Arbiter ruled that respondent was lawfully dismissed because he had not attained permanent or regular status. On appeal, the NLRC reversed the decision and ordered the reinstatement of respondent. Petitioner sought reconsideration, but the NLRC denied it. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC's decision. Petitioner now brings the case to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

  1. Was respondent a full-time teacher?

  2. Had he attained permanent status?

  3. Was he illegally dismissed?

RULING:

  1. The Court ruled that respondent was a full-time teacher. The NLRC correctly determined that respondent did not appear to have other regular remunerative employment and was paid on a regular monthly basis. Therefore, respondent qualified as a full-time teacher.

  2. The Court held that respondent had attained permanent status. Even though the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools requires full-time teachers to carry a load of at least 18 units for three consecutive years to qualify as permanent employees, the Court recognized that the university unilaterally controls the load assignment of teachers. Thus, respondent should not be faulted for not carrying the required load.

  3. The Court ruled that respondent was illegally dismissed. The Labor Arbiter erred in finding that respondent was lawfully dismissed because he did not attain permanent status. As a full-time teacher who had taught for more than 3 years, respondent qualified as a permanent employee. Therefore, the twin-notice requirement in terminating his employment should have been complied with.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Full-time teachers who do not have other regular remunerative employment and are paid on a regular monthly basis qualify as full-time teachers.

  • The university's control over the load assignment of teachers may affect their qualification for permanent status.

  • Full-time teachers who have taught for more than 3 years qualify as permanent employees.

  • The twin-notice requirement must be complied with in the termination of employment, even for employees who have not attained permanent status.