MORE than 100 job order (JO) workers in 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 in line with legal requirements.
Mandaue City Prosecutor Mary Francys Daquipil approved the recommendation of Associate Prosecutor Chauncey Boholst to dismiss the complaint, concluding that Lumapas acted within the scope of the law.
The prosecutors found that her refusal to sign payroll documents did not constitute a violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as her actions were done 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 Sections 3(e) and 3(f) of Republic Act (RA) 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
They alleged that despite fulfilling their tasks under the Clean and Green Program from January to April 2024, they were denied their monthly honoraria of P5,000 because Lumapas refused to certify the payroll.
The workers claimed Lumapas imposed additional requirements, including submission of Daily Time Records, Oaths of Office and proof of concurrence by the barangay council, which they argued were unnecessary. They accused her of abusing her authority and described her refusal to sign as an oppressive act.
In her defense, Lumapas admitted withholding her signature but argued that her actions complied with the Local Government Code and regulations from the Commission on Audit (COA).
She said the payroll documents lacked the essential approvals, including the signature of the barangay captain and council concurrence, which are required to ensure transparency.
Meanwhile, Barangay Captain Reb Cortes disagreed with Lumapas, stating that workers’ pay falls under the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses and does not need the council’s concurrence.
“At first, these job order employees did not need council approval because they are not barangay officials but are simply part of barangay programs,” Cortes said in an interview on Tuesday, Oct. 22, 2024.
Cortes said that while the council gave its concurrence in September, they were informed that the workers’ pay would not be retroactive for the months before the resolution was passed.
“Initially, we thought that approving the workers’ appointments would allow them to get paid from January to September, but now we are told retroactive payments are not allowed,” Cortes said.
Orogan, one of the complainants, expressed frustration, saying that their only demand was the compensation they earned through hard work.
“All we wanted was the honoraria we worked for. We didn’t ask for anything more,” said Orogan in Cebuano.
He added, “We are now in debt because we relied on our salary to pay off loans, but without it, how can we pay back what we owe?”
In its resolution, the prosecutor’s office found that Lumapas’ insistence on following regulatory requirements was in accordance with COA Circular 2023-004 and a 2021 Department of the Interior and Local Government advisory.
The prosecutor noted that these guidelines require proper documentation and council approval for job order appointments to be valid.
The findings concluded that Lumapas had no intention to gain personally or discriminate against the complainants. The delay in processing salaries was attributed to administrative procedures rather than misconduct.
“There is no evidence to support that the respondent acted with negligence, bad faith, or manifest partiality that would warrant an indictment under Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act,” the resolution stated.
“The refusal to sign the payroll was justified, and the allegations lacked sufficient evidence to establish criminal liability,” it added.
The case was ultimately dismissed for failing to meet the legal standard required under RA 3019.
Cortes said he empathized with the workers, particularly as the holiday season approaches.
“I feel sorry for them because Christmas is near, 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 September, following the council’s official concurrence through Barangay Resolution 21 on Sept. 13.
As a result, she argued that the workers could not claim honoraria for the months prior to the resolution.
On Oct. 14, employees, including tanods, Clean and Green personnel, Lupon members and drivers, held a silent protest at the barangay hall to demand the payment of their wages, which have been unpaid for the past 10 months.