Complaint against brgy. A manager over unpaid wages was trashed

MORE than 100 work order (JO) workers of Barangay Umapad, Mandaue City are seeking justice after the city prosecutor dismissed their criminal complaint against Barangay councilor Libertine Lumapas, citing insufficient evidence.

Lumapas, who chairs the budget committee, was accused of withholding their salaries, but prosecutors ruled her actions were justified and met legal requirements.

Mandaue City Prosecutor Mary Francys Daquipil agreed with Associate Prosecutor Chauncey Boholst’s recommendation to dismiss the complaint, concluding that Lumapas acted within the law.

Prosecutors ruled that his refusal to sign payroll documents did not constitute a violation of anti-bribery and corruption law, as his actions were carried out in good faith and without malice.

The complaint was filed by five JO workers, Gemma Mata Ortega, Girlie Reyes Gabisan, Lea Gabisan Jimenez, Lima Sotchesa Orogan and Erwina Batulan Caño, who accused Lumapas of violating articles 3(e) and 3(f) of the Republic Law (RA). 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

They alleged that although they performed their duties under the Clean and Green program from January to April 2024, they were denied their P5,000 monthly honorarium because Lumapas refused to certify the payroll .

The workers claimed that Lumapas imposed additional requirements, including submission of daily time records, oaths of office and proof of barangay council agreement, which they said were unnecessary. They accused her of abusing her authority and called her refusal to sign an act of oppression.

In his defense, Lumapas admitted to withholding his signature, but argued that his actions were consistent with the Local Government Code and Commission on Audit (COA) regulations.

She said the payroll documents lacked essential approvals, including the barangay captain’s signature and council agreement, which are necessary to ensure transparency.

Meanwhile, Barangay Captain Reb Cortes disagreed with Lumapas, saying workers’ remuneration falls under maintenance and other operational expenses and does not need the agreement of the advice.

“Initially, these employees did not need the board’s approval because they are not barangay officials but are just part of the barangay programs,” Cortes said in an interview on Tuesday, October 22, 2024.

Cortes said that although the council agreed in September, it was informed that workers’ salaries would not be retroactive to the months before the resolution passed.

“Initially we thought approving workers’ appointments would allow them to be paid from January to September, but now we are being told that retroactive payments are not allowed,” Cortes said.

Orogan, one of the plaintiffs, expressed frustration, saying their only demand was the compensation they earned through their hard work.

“All we wanted was the fee we worked for. We didn’t ask for anything more,” Orogan said in Cebuano.

He added: “We are now in debt because we rely on our salary to repay our loans, but without that, how can we repay what we owe? »

In its resolution, the prosecutor’s office found that Lumapas’ insistence on complying with regulatory requirements was consistent with COA Circular 2023-004 and a 2021 notice from the Department of the Interior and Local Government.

The attorney noted that these guidelines require proper documentation and board approval for work order appointments to be valid.

The findings concluded that Lumapas had no intention to personally gain or discriminate against the plaintiffs. The delay in processing salaries was attributed to administrative procedures rather than professional misconduct.

“There is no evidence demonstrating that the Respondent acted with negligence, bad faith or manifest bias that would justify an indictment under Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corruption Law,” the court said. resolution.

“The refusal to sign the pay slip was justified and the allegations lacked sufficient evidence to establish criminal liability,” the text adds.

The case was ultimately dismissed for failure to meet the legal standards required by RA 3019.

Cortes said he sympathizes with workers, especially as the holiday season approaches.

“I feel sorry for them because Christmas is coming and they have nothing to put on the table,” he said. He revealed that the stress had taken a toll on him and his family.

“My wife even advised me to resign because the problems in the barangay are starting to affect our family,” he added.

Lumapas clarified that the workers’ salaries were only approved starting in September, following the council’s official approval through Barangay Resolution 21 on September 13.

As a result, she argued that the workers could not claim fees for the months preceding the resolution.

On October 14, employees, including tanods, Clean and Green staff, Lupon members and drivers, staged a silent protest in the barangay to demand payment of their 10-month unpaid salaries.