Lacuesta v.

ADMU

FACTS
ADMU hired Lacuesta as part-time English lecturer for 2nd Sem, 88-89 REHIRED for 2 more sems
o Appointed as full-time on probation from 1 June 1990 31 March 1991 REHIRED 2x but
always probationary.
o 27 January 1993: Dean of ADMU CAS told her she would not be renewed because she did not
integrate well with the English Department appealed to Fr. Bernas, president.
Fr Bernas: explained that she was not terminated, her contract merely expired + he could only appoint
as permanent faculty upon reco of Dean and confirmation of Committee on Faculty Rank and
Permanent Appointment. If he appoints, it will be a midnight appointment.
o Also offered job as book editor with same terms as instructor accepted.
o She then applied for clearance to collect final salary + Quitclaim.
o Her editor contract was extended for 2 months then it expired so she applied for clearance
again but her contract was again extended for 4 months then decided to not renew again due to
severe back pain. She did not report to work anymore then submitted her clearance.
Filed a complaint for illegal dismissal + damages; past and present Deans were sued in their capacity
as such
LA: May not be terminated by mere lapse of probie period; Quitclaim does not bar illegal dismissal
claim; ordered reinstatement + back wages
NLRC: reversed; quitclaim is valid; MR denied
CA: affirmed NLRC; Manual for Private Schools regulate faculty

ISSUE + RULING
Was she illegally dismissed?
Lacuesta: Art. 280 (Reg & Casual EE) and 281 (Probationary EE) of LC applies, not Manual
o Since probationary period is only 6 months unless stipulated otherwise, and anything beyond it
renders EE as regular, she should be regularized because her part-time + full-time years = 4.5
years and was necessary and desirable to the usual business of ADMU.
o Quitclaim was not voluntary because unless she signs it, her clearance would not be granted.
ADMU: Manual is controlling full-timers for 3 years of satisfactory service = permanents
o Also, she was not terminated, her contract merely expired and ADMU enjoys freedom to choose
teachers accdg to its standards.
o Quitclaim is binding
SC: Manual is controlling
o Section 93 of the 1992 Manual of Regulations for Private Schools provides that full-time
teachers who have satisfactorily completed their probationary period shall be considered regular
or permanent.
o Moreover, for those teaching in the tertiary level, the probationary period shall not be more than
six consecutive regular semesters of satisfactory service.
o The requisites to acquire permanent employment, or security of tenure, are
(1) the teacher is a full-time teacher;
(2) the teacher must have rendered three consecutive years of service; and
(3) such service must have 16 been satisfactory.
o Only when one has served as a full- time teacher can he acquire permanent or regular status.
The 3 semesters she served as part-time lecturer could not be credited to her in computing the number
of years she has served to qualify her for permanent status.
o She could only qualify to become a permanent employee upon fulfilling the reasonable
standards for permanent employment as faculty
o Probationary employees enjoy security of tenure, but only within the period of probation
Not all quitclaims are per se invalid or against public policy, except (1) where there is clear proof that
the waiver was wangled from an unsuspecting or gullible person, or (2) where the terms of settlement
are unconscionable on their face.