Case Digest: Rogelio Reyes vs. NLRC and Universal Robina

ROGELIO REYES

vs

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION GROCERY DIVISION,

G.R. No. 160233,   August 8, 2007

Justice Ynares-Santiago

Labor Law; Labor Standard; 13 month pay;

 FACTS:

Petitioner was employed as a salesman at private respondents Grocery Division in Davao City on August 12, 1977. He was eventually appointed as unit manager of Sales Department-South Mindanao District, a position he held until his retirement on November 30, 1997. Thereafter, he received a letter regarding the computation of his separation pay.

Insisting that his retirement benefits and 13^th month pay must be based on the average monthly salary of P42,766.19, which consists of P10,919.22 basic salary and P31,846.97 average monthly commission, petitioner refused to accept the check issued by private respondent in the amount of P200,322.21. Instead, he filed a complaint before the arbitration branch of the NLRC for, inter alia, 13^th month pay.

The Labor Arbiter held that the sales commission is part of the basic salary of a unit manager.

On appeal, the NLRC modified the decision of the Labor Arbiter by excluding the overriding commission in the computation of the 13^th month pay. Bothe parties MR but was denied. Only petitioner filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals but was dismissed for lack of merit. MR denied hence this petition before the SC (R45)

ISSUE:

Whether the commission is included in the computation of the 13^th month pay as it forms part of the basic salary.

HELD:

NO.

Insofar as what constitutes basic salary, the foregoing discussions equally apply to the computation of petitioners 13^th month pay. As held in San Miguel Corporation v. Inciong:

Under Presidential Decree 851 and its implementing rules, the basic salary of an employee is used as the basis in the determination of his 13th-month pay. Any compensations or remunerations which are deemed not part of the basic pay is excluded as basis in the computation of the mandatory bonus.

Under the Rules and Regulations Implementing Presidential Decree 851, the following compensations are deemed not part of the basic salary:

a)         Cost-of-living allowances granted pursuant to Presidential Decree 525 and Letter of Instruction No. 174;

b)         Profit sharing payments;

c)         All allowances and monetary benefits which are not considered or integrated as part of the regular basic salary of the employee at the time of the promulgation of the Decree on December 16, 1975. (Emphasis supplied)

            Aside from the fact that as unit manager petitioner did not enter into actual sale transactions, but merely supervised the salesmen under his control, the disputed commissions were not regularly received by him. Only when the salesmen were able to collect from the sale transactions can petitioner receive the commissions. Conversely, if no collections were made by the salesmen, then petitioner would receive no commissions at all. In fine, the commissions which petitioner received were not part of his salary structure but were profit-sharing payments and had no clear, direct or necessary relation to the amount of work he actually performed. The collection made by the salesmen from the sale transactions was the profit of private respondent from which petitioner had a share in the form of a commission.

---