Pag-Ibig: Separation pay, not bonus

Screen grab from pagibigfund.gov.ph

MANILA, Philippines—The Home Development Mutual Fund (Pag-Ibig) said the P37 million that was given to its employees in 2012 that the Commission on Audit (COA) disauthorized  was actually the separation pay of those who retired from the Fund that year.

Pag-Ibig was among the 31 government-owned and -controlled corporations (GOCCs) that had been asked by the COA to refund the government a total of P2.3 billion in the form of disallowed bonuses and allowances.

Darlene Marie Berberabe, Pag-Ibig president and CEO, said the COA report on the disallowances did not pertain to bonuses or incentives given to employees or officers or board members.

In a statement sent to the Inquirer, Berberabe said she made the same clarification after the delivery of the midterm report to Pag-Ibig stakeholders at the SMX Convention Center on Wednesday.

She said COA’s basis in disallowing the payment of separation pay to these employees under Pag-Ibig’s early retirement program was the supposed double payment of retirement pay because the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) will also pay out retirement benefits to them after their separation from Pag-Ibig.

“In the COA exit conferences, we have been closely discussing this issue and our position is that the payment should not be disallowed because what the concerned employees received from the Fund [is] not retirement but separation benefits, while what they will receive from the GSIS [is] retirement insurance benefits for which they paid monthly premiums,” she said.

Cap on bonuses

When these employees received their separation benefits from Pag-Ibig, they had not yet received their retirement claims from the GSIS so there was no double retirement payment, she said.

Also, she said it was the GSIS that determined whether the employees concerned were qualified to receive GSIS benefits.

“Given this, the Fund shall request the COA to reconsider its position on this issue,” she said. “We have a legal position that at the time we paid the separation pay, there was no double payment.”

In the House of Representatives, a lawmaker wants a cap on bonuses of GOCC officials to emphasize their public service role.

The bill, filed by Eastern Samar Rep. Ben Evardone, also seeks to limit GOCC officials’ terms in an agency to two years.

Evardone filed his bill in response to the COA report that found that the officials had received fat bonuses in previous years.

His bill states that for every 12 months of incumbency, GOCC officials’ allowances, bonuses or incentive should not exceed the amount equivalent to twice the amount they received as per diem.

In case the officials serve in more than one GOCC, they would be entitled to receive the highest amount of allowance, bonus or incentive given by any of the entities. All other amounts should be remitted to the general fund.

As for the term limits, the bill also states that no GOCC official should serve on the board of directors or trustees for more than a total of 24 months, including reappointment and holdover capacity.—Reports from Cynthia D. Balana and Leila B. Salaverria