The views and opinions expressed in this forum are those of the online action officers and not necessarily those of the Office for Legal Affairs or the Commission on CSC laws, rules and regulations. Also, be reminded that the views of the action officer is a mere advice that does not bind the office.

When posting, you agree that the administrator has the right to delete your posts or ban your account without prior warning in case of non-observance of any of the guidelines.
Guidelines to clients:

1. Please browse the frequently asked questions first to see if there are already the same or related questions that were asked on your query/ies;
2. Official response to issues shall be provided by the concerned office of the Commission, not through this forum;
3. Requests for the status of the case is not allowed in this forum;
4. Questions regarding the scheduled CSC examination will be deleted;
5. This forum is categorized according to subject matter. Please post your queries in appropriate category;
6. Post a descriptive topic name. Give a short summary of your problem/s;
7. No spam in this forum. Your posts will be deleted and your account will be banned without prior warning;
8. Refrain from posting pictures and offensive words or links. Violation of this rule shall give the administrator the right to delete your posts and ban your account without prior warning;
9. Please report to administrators if you see a user violating any of this guidelines;
10. Be respectful to the administrators and users; and
11. Please avoid text-message style substitution of words like “r” for “are” and “u” for “you”. If your message is difficult to understand the administrator shall inform you to rewrite your message.

Question Violation on rules of reassignment

2 years 3 months ago #10759 by iam_acedavid
iam_acedavid created the topic: Violation on rules of reassignment
I am a permanent employee whose appointment was station-specific. I was reassigned and was given duties inconsistent with the duties and responsibilities of my position. I complied with the reassignment order and performed the menial job. I did not file an appeal with the Honorable Commission. However, I am considering filing a complaint for constructive dismissal and violation of CSC rules on reassignment (Sec. 13(a)(3) of the ORAOHRA).

May I know the administrative sanction for violating the CSC rules on reassignment?

Thank you very much.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

2 years 3 months ago #10951 by Action Officer
Action Officer replied the topic: Violation on rules of reassignment
Mr./Ms. Ace David:

Thank you for using the CSC Legal Forum.

Pertinent to your query is Rule 13 of the 2017 Omnibus Rules on Appointments and Other Human Resource Actions (2017 ORAOHRA), as amended, provides as follows:

“Sec. 13. Other Human Resource Actions. The following human resource actions which will not require the issuance of an appointment shall nevertheless require an Office Order issued by the appointing officer/authority:

“a. Reassignment – movement of an employee across the organizational structure within the same department or agency, which does not involve a reduction in rank, status or salary.

“Reassignment shall be governed by the following:

“1. Reassignment of employees with station-specific place of work indicated in their respective appointments within the geographical location of the agency shall be allowed only for a maximum period of one (1) year. The restoration or return to the original post/assignment shall be automatic without need of any order of restoration/revocation of the order of reassignment.

x x x

“An appointment is considered station-specific when: (a) the particular office or station where the position is located is specifically indicated on the face of the appointment paper; or (b) the position title already specifies the station, such as Human Resource Management Officer, Accountant, Budget Officer, Assessor, Social Welfare and Development Officer, and such other positions with organizational unit/station-specific functions. Such position titles are considered station-specific even if the place of assignment is not indicted on the face of the appointment.

“2. If an appointment is not station-specific, the one-year maximum period of reassignment within the geographical location of the agency shall not apply. However, the employee concerned may request for a recall of the reassignment citing his/her reasons why he/she wants to go back to his/her original station. The reassignment may also be revoked or recalled by the appointing officer/authority or be declared not valid by the Civil Service Commission or a competent court, on appeal.

“3. Reassignment is presumed to be regular and made in the interest or exigency of public service unless proven otherwise or it constitutes constructive dismissal. Constructive dismissal exists when an official or employee quits his/her work because of the agency head’s unreasonable, humiliating or demeaning actuations, which render continued work impossible because of geographical location, financial dislocation and performance of other duties and responsibilities inconsistent with those attached to the position. Hence, the employee is deemed illegally dismissed. This may occur although there is no diminution or reduction in rank, status or salary of the employee.

“Reassignment that constitutes constructive dismissal may be any of the following:

“i, Reassignment of an employee to perform duties and responsibilities inconsistent with the duties and responsibilities of his/her position such as from a position of dignity to a more servile or menial job;

“ii. Reassignment to an office not in the existing organizational structure;

“iii. Reassignment ton an existing office but the employee is not given any definite set of duties and responsibilities;

“iv. Reassignment that will cause significant financial dislocation or will cause difficulty or hardship on the part of the employee because of geographical location; or

“v. Reassignment that is done indiscriminately or whimsically because the law is not intended as a convenient shield for the appointing/disciplining officer to harass or oppress a subordinates on the pretext of advancing and promoting public interest such as reassignment of employees twice within a year, or reassignment of career service officials and employees with valid appointments during change of administration of elective and appointive officials.
“Reassignment that results in constructive dismissal must be sufficiently established.” (Emphasis supplied)

Should you intend to file a non-disciplinary case pertaining to your reassignment, Section 68 (in relation to Section111) of the 2017 Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service provides, as follows:

“Section 68. Perfection of an Appeal or a Petition for Review. To perfect an appeal or a petition for review, the appellant/petitioner shall submit the following documents:

a. Memorandum containing the following:

1. grounds relied upon for the appeal/petition for review;

2. certified true copies of the assailed decision, resolution or order; and

3. certified true copies of documents or evidence relevant to the case.

The Memorandum shall be filed with the appellate authority, copy furnished the disciplining authority. The latter shall submit the records of the case, which shall be systematically and chronologically arranged, paged and securely bound to prevent loss, with its comment, within fifteen (15) days from receipt, to the appellate or higher authority.

b. Proof of service of a copy of the memorandum to the disciplining office;

c. Proof of payment of the required fee; and

d. A statement or certificate of non-forum shopping.

If the appellant/petitioner fails to comply with any of the above requirements within the reglementary period, the Commission shall direct compliance within a period of not more than ten (10) days from receipt thereof, with a warning that failure to comply shall be construed as failure to perfect an appeal/petition for review and shall cause its dismissal with prejudice to its refiling.

Filing should be made under Section 8, Rule 2 of the 2017 Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (2017 RACCS), provides that:

“Section 8. Cases Cognizable by Regional Offices. Except as otherwise directed by the Commission, the CSC ROs shall take cognizance of the following cases:

“X X X

“B. Non-Disciplinary

“X X X

“2. Decisions of appointing authorities within their geographical boundaries relative to protests and other human resource actions brought before them on appeal; XXX”.

We hope to have enlightened you on the matter.

AO 5

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Powered by Kunena Forum