Ruling of the Court of Appeals Petitioner, then, elevated the case to the CA via a petition for certiorari. Their employment contracts merely expired and since the petitioner did not wish to renew their contracts, then there is no illegal dismissal to speak of. Accordingly, the dispositive portion of the CA Decision reads:
The petition is devoid of merit. The dismissal of Teresita Palacio, Calibod, Laquio, Santander, and Montederamos was premature and defeated their right to security of tenure. Sailes dismissal has legal basis for lack of the required qualification needed for continued practice of teaching.
Pertinent provisions of RA provide: Examination, Registration and License Required. Except as otherwise specifically allowed under the provisions of this Act, all applicants for registration as professional teachers shall be required to undergo a written examination which shall be given at least once a year in such places and dates as the Board may determine upon approval by the Commission.
A valid certificate of registration and a valid professional license from the Commission are required before any person is allowed to practice as a professional teacher in the Philippinesexcept as otherwise allowed under this Act.
Upon approval of the application and payment of the prescribed fees, the certificate of registration and professional license as a professional teacher shall be issued without examination as required in this Act to a qualified applicant, who at the time of the approval of this Act, is: Provided, That they shall be given two 2 years from the organization of the Board for professional teachers within which to register and be included in the roster of professional teachers: Provided, further, That those incumbent teachers who are not qualified to register without examination under this Act or who, albeit qualified, were unable to register within the two-year period shall be issued a five-year temporary or special permit from the time the Board is organized within which to register after passing the examination and complying with the requirements provided in this Act and be included in the roster of professional teachers: Provided, furthermore, That those who have failed the licensure examination for professional teachers shall be eligible as para-teachers and as such, shall be issued by the Board a special or temporary permit, and shall be assigned by the Department of Education, Culture and Sports DECS to schools as it may determine under the circumstances.
Inhibition Against the Practice of the Teaching Profession. Except as otherwise allowed under this Act, no person shall practice or offer to practice the teaching profession in the Philippines or be appointed as teacher to any position without having previously obtained a valid certificate of registration and a valid professional license from the Commission.
All incumbent teachers in both the public and private sector not otherwise certified as professional teachers by virtue of this Act, shall be given five 5 years temporary certificates from the time the Board for Professional Teachers is organized within which to qualify as required by this Act and be included in the roster of professionals.
Pursuant to RAthe PRC formulated certain rules and regulations relative to the registration of teachers and their continued practice of the teaching profession. Specific periods and deadlines were fixed within which incumbent teachers must register as professional teachers in consonance with the essential purpose of the law in promoting good quality education by ensuring that those who practice the teaching profession are duly licensed and are registered as professional teachers.
Consequently, the deadline was moved to September 19, As respondents are categorized as those not qualified to register without examination, the law requires them to register by taking and passing the licensure examination. It is undisputed that respondents were all non-board passers when they were dismissed by petitioner on March 31, Thus, she is still unqualified to teach in the high school level.
All the others, except respondent Saile who is not qualified to take the LET, failed the examination. Petitioner harps on the fact that even if respondents were to take the LET in August ofthe results could not be known in time to meet the September 19, deadline.
However, it is to be noted that the law still allows those who failed the licensure examination between and to continue teaching if they obtain temporary or special permits as para-teachers.
Petitioner claims that it terminated respondents employment as early as March because it would be highly difficult to hire professional teachers in the middle of the school year as replacements for respondents without compromising the operation of the school and education of the students. Also, petitioner reasons out that it could not enter into written contracts with respondents for the period June to September 19, without violating the DECSs policy requiring contracts of yearly duration for elementary and high school teachers.
Petitioners contentions are not tenable. First, even if respondents contracts stipulate for a period of one year in compliance with DECSs directive, such stipulation could not be given effect for being violative of the law.
Provisions in a contract must be read in conjunction with statutory and administrative regulations. This finds basis on the principle that an existing law enters into and forms part of a valid contract without the need for the parties expressly making reference to it.
Petitioners intention and desire not to put the students education and school operation in jeopardy is neither a decisive consideration for respondents termination prior to the deadline set by law. Again, by setting a deadline for registration as professional teachers, the law has allowed incumbent teachers to practice their teaching profession until September 19,despite being unregistered and unlicensed.
The prejudice that respondents retention would cause to the schools operation is only trivial if not speculative as compared to the consequences of respondents unemployment. Because of petitioners predicament, it should have adopted measures to protect the interest of its teachers as regular employees.
As correctly observed by the CA, petitioner should have earlier drawn a contingency plan in the event there is need to terminate respondents services in the middle of the school year. Incidentally, petitioner did not dispute that it hired and retained other teachers who do not likewise possess the qualification and eligibility and even allowed them to teach during the school year an act amending certain secs of republic act numbered seventy-eight hundred and thirty-six (r.a.
no. ), otherwise known as the “philippine teachers professionalization act of ” Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled. WHEREAS, the passage into law of Republic Act No.
, otherwise known as the Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of 1 , as amended, paved the way for the professionalization of the practice of teaching in the country;.
The Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of Republic Act is also known as the "Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of " 1. Board of Professional Teachers 2. Examination and Registration of Teachers Republic Act Stated under this act, in Article II, is the process of appointing board members, their.
—Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 26, 27 and 28 of Republic Act No. , otherwise known as the “Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of ″, the DepED and private education institutions shall hire, as may be relevant to the particular subject. 43 provisions of Sections 26, 27 and 28 of Republic Act No.
, otherwise known as the 44 Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of , the DepEd and private education 4S institutions may hire, as may be relevant to the particular subject.
Sep 29, · republic act no. (an act to strenghten the regulation and supervision of the pratice teaching in the phillipines and prescribing a licensure examination for teachers and for other purpose) Known as the Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of