THE Commission on Audit (COA) has thrown out the petition for review filed by the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation–Cordillera Administrative Region (PhilHealth-CAR) seeking relief from its disallowance of its payment of P23.3 million cash perks to personnel in 2012 and 2014.
In a 19-page en banc decision, the COA sustained the position of the COA Corporate Government Sector-Cluster 6 that the payment of P18.99 million hazard pay, P3.92 million subsistence allowance, and P392,100 laundry allowance to PhilHealth-CAR officials and employees lacked legal basis.
Held liable in the Notices of Disallowance issued in 2015 were PhilHealth-CAR regional vice president Elvira Ver, management services division chief Imelda Cristeta Villamar, administrative officer Leizle Anongos, and fiscal controllers Lilibeth Palaci, Mirasol Adrias, and Felina Llagas.
In their petition, the PhilHealth-CAR officials argued that the allowances and benefits were lawful since PhilHealth enjoys fiscal autonomy that authorizes it to “fix the compensation of its personnel.”
They pointed out that the PhilHealth board approved payout of the cash benefits.
They likewise invoked good faith, saying agency personnel cannot be compelled to refund the sums they received even if the disallowance is sustained.
In its ruling, the COA en banc agreed that the Supreme Court had already declared PhilHealth personnel as public health workers (PHWs) which entitles them to receive extra compensation that other PHWs enjoy.
However, it clarified that under the Magna Carta of Public health Workers (RA 7305) and its implementing rules and regulations, as well as related issuances from the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and the Department of Health (DOH), such entitlement is not absolute.
The commission explained that there should be sufficient evidence to classify the PhilHealth employees as high risk or low risk in terms of work-related hazards.
High risk employees are those who are exposed to contagious or communicable diseases or radiation by virtue of their work assignments in hospitals, leprosaria, infirmaries, and laboratories that use X-ray.
Also classified under high risk are those assigned to chemical and medical laboratories, prison camps or institutions for mental health, drug-abuse rehabilitation centers, and areas hit by calamities.
Low-risk assignments include those in support roles with less degree of peril to life, or physical hardships such as employees assigned at DOH offices and health-related establishments where they have minimal contact with hazards.
The COA also explained that laundry allowance is extended to PHWs who have to wash their clothes to comply with requirements for uniforms in public health institutions.
“In view of the foregoing, this Commission finds it proper to affirm the disallowance pertaining to the Hazard Pay, Subsistence Allowance and Laundry Allowance, in the total amount of P23,300,625.85 and to sustain its contested decision,” the COA en banc declared.
It rejected the claim of good faith noting that the laws and rules requiring prior approval from the Office of the President and the DBM were already in effect even before the disallowed cash perks were approved.
“They cannot feign ignorance of the presidential directives or laws in granting the unauthorized allowances and benefits. Thus, the approving and certifying officers shall be solidarily liable to refund the total disallowance less the actual amount refunded by the recipient payees who are liable to return the amounts they actually received” the COA said.
