The Supreme Court (SC) has reiterated that illegally dismissed workers are entitled not only to full backwages but also to the remittance of their Social Security System (SSS) contributions from their termination date up to their reinstatement.
In a decision authored by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, the High Court emphasized that wrongfully terminated personnel are legally considered to have maintained continuous employment throughout the backwage period. Consequently, they remain entitled to all rights and benefits that would have accrued during that timeframe.
The High Tribunal cited Article 294 of the Labor Code, which mandates full backwages and benefits for unlawfully dismissed staff, alongside established jurisprudence confirming that such workers are deemed never to have left their posts.
The ruling stems from a denied petition filed by Lopez Sugar Corporation (LSC). Following a final court order to reinstate and pay full backwages to four unlawfully terminated employees—Romeo Perrin Jr., Eduardo Candelario, Leonito Franco, and Rogelio Pabalan—the workers requested that LSC remit their SSS contributions for the period of their illegal dismissal to ensure their eligibility for retirement benefits.
LSC refused, arguing that under the SSS Act of 1997, its duty to remit contributions ceased upon the workers’ separation, regardless of the termination’s legality. However, the Social Security Commission (SSC) rejected this defense, holding that the employer-employee relationship legally persisted during the period the staff were barred from working. The Court of Appeals (CA) later upheld the SSC’s decision.
Affirming the CA’s stance, the SC ruled that LSC remains obligated to settle the unremitted SSS contributions alongside statutory penalties.
“Here, there is no dispute that Perrin et al. were illegally dismissed, as ruled by the NLRC (National Labor Relations Commission) and affirmed by the CA and the Court (SC). Thus, they are deemed to have never left their employment.”
“Consequently, LSC’s obligation to remit Perrin et al.’ s social security contributions did not cease with respect to the period during which Perrin et al. were illegally dismissed.”
“Since LSC failed to remit Perin et al.’s social security contributions, LSC is liable to pay a penalty thereon of three percent (3%) per month from the date the contribution falls due until paid, pursuant to Section 22 of the Social Security Act of 1997.”
“Accordingly, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is denied. The Decision, dated Oct. 14, 2020, and the Resolution, dated April 26, 2022, of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 158759 are affirmed.”