Philhealth asks SC to reverse ruling on ₧83.06-M gifts, allowances flagged by COA
THE Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (Philhealth) has asked the Supreme Court (SC) to reverse its decision affirming the notice of disallowances (NDS) issued by the Commission on Audit (COA) that covers the P83.06 million that Philhealth allotted for educational assistance allowances (EAAS) and birthday gifts to its officials and employees in 2014.
Contrary to the SC ruling which was made public last December 9, 2022, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Eli Dino D. Santos said the allowances were legal.
“We maintain, however, that those allowances were given in good faith, above board, not extravagant and, most of all, well deserved by the hardworking officers and employees of the state-insurer,” Santos said.
The lawyer added that Philhealth filed its motion for reconsideration of the SC decision last December 20, 2022, and assured that it would heed the Court’s decision once the case is decided with finality.
But the Philhealth official noted that the agency has already discontinued the subject allowances after receipt of the NDS issued by the COA.
No fiscal autonomy
THE subsequent benefits given to the employees, according to Santos, have since been aligned with those prescribed under the Salary Standardization Law IV and now with the Compensation and Position Classification System (CPCS) issued by the Governance Commission for Government-owned and Controlled Corporations (GCG).
“We assure the public that Philhealth is prudent in administering its funds, and ensure that meeting our financial obligations, especially the payment of benefit claims, is always our top priority,” he said.
In its decision issued in 2018 and affirmed in 2019, COA said that while selected government entities are exempt from the application of the Salary Standardization Law (SSL), Philhealth’s law under Republic Act (R A) 7875 does not contain the same express exemption.
Furthermore, the COA said Philhealth’s power to fix the compensation of its personnel as provided under Section 16 (n) of its charter, does not expressly grant fiscal autonomy to the agency.
Even if Philhealth was allowed by its charter to have its own position and composition plans, it would still be required to report to the President through the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).
Equal pay, work
THE COA also ruled that the EAAS and birthday gifts do not fall under Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) incentives. These incentives are given for productivity and costsaving efforts by a government agency.
“The granting of benefits and allowances by virtue of the resolutions passed by Philhealth in the exercise of its fiscal autonomy, no matter how long practiced, if done in violation of existing rules and regulations, is still considered unauthorized and should be disallowed,” it said.
In affirming COA’S ruling, the SC declared that Philhealth has not been given a blanket authority to determine the compensation of its personnel. The issue on Philhealth’s claim of fiscal autonomy, according to the SC, has long been settled in its 2016 decision in Philhealth v. COA.
“At this point, there should no longer be any question that Philhealth is not exempted from the application of the SSL. Its power to fix personnel compensation is limited and ‘must necessarily yield to the state policy of ‘equal pay for equal work,’” the SC said.
“Thus, any disbursement or allowances and other forms of employee compensation must conform with prevailing rules and regulations issued by the President of the Philippines and/or the [DBM],” it added.