Introduction

In the Philippine civil service system, positions are classified based on their nature, duties, and tenure to ensure merit-based governance, efficiency, and protection of employees' rights. The Civil Service Commission (CSC), as the central personnel agency under Article IX-B of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, oversees position classification, appointments, and reclassifications. A key distinction exists between permanent and coterminous positions: permanent positions offer security of tenure, while coterminous ones are tied to a specific term, such as the tenure of the appointing authority or the duration of a project.

Reclassifying a permanent position to coterminous involves altering the fundamental character of the role, potentially affecting incumbents' rights. This process is governed by strict rules to prevent abuse, ensure compliance with constitutional protections, and maintain administrative stability. However, such reclassifications are rare and heavily restricted, as they could undermine the merit system and lead to politicization of the bureaucracy. This article explores the legal framework, procedural requirements, permissible instances, and inherent limitations of such reclassifications within the Philippine context.

Legal Basis for Position Classification and Reclassification

The primary legal foundations for position classification in the Philippine civil service are rooted in the Constitution, statutes, and CSC issuances. Article IX-B, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution mandates the CSC to establish a career service characterized by opportunity for advancement based on merit and fitness, with security of tenure as a cornerstone. This is reinforced by Presidential Decree No. 807 (Civil Service Decree of the Philippines, 1975), as amended by Executive Order No. 292 (Administrative Code of 1987), which defines the career service to include permanent positions.

Position classification is detailed in Republic Act No. 6758 (Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989), which established the Position Classification and Compensation System. Under this law, positions are grouped into classes based on duties, responsibilities, and qualification requirements. Reclassification, as defined in CSC Memorandum Circular No. 40, s. 1998 (Revised Omnibus Rules on Appointments and Other Personnel Actions), involves changing a position's class or salary grade due to substantial changes in duties or responsibilities, but it does not inherently alter the appointment status from permanent to temporary or coterminous.

Coterminous positions are specifically addressed in CSC Resolution No. 91-1631 (Rules Implementing the Administrative Code), categorizing them under the non-career service. These include positions that are confidential in nature, policy-determining, or coterminous with the incumbent (e.g., staff of elective officials) or a project. Section 14 of the Administrative Code distinguishes coterminous positions as those ceasing upon the expiration of the term of the office or project, without the security of tenure afforded to permanent roles.

The CSC's authority to approve reclassifications stems from its constitutional mandate, but any shift from permanent to coterminous must align with Section 2(3) of Article IX-B, which prohibits removal or suspension except for cause. Jurisprudence, such as in De los Santos v. Mallare (G.R. No. L-3881, 1950), emphasizes that security of tenure applies to permanent appointees, making arbitrary reclassifications tantamount to illegal dismissal.

Rules Governing Reclassification from Permanent to Coterminous

Reclassification in the Philippine civil service is not a blanket authority but a regulated process. The following rules apply specifically to attempts to convert permanent positions to coterminous ones:

Prior CSC Approval Requirement: Any reclassification must be submitted to the CSC for approval. Under CSC Memorandum Circular No. 12, s. 2003, agencies must justify reclassification based on a Position Classification Plan, demonstrating significant changes in functions. For a shift to coterminous status, the agency must prove the position has become primarily confidential, policy-determining, or project-based. Mere administrative convenience does not suffice.
Justification Based on Nature of Duties: Reclassification to coterminous is permissible only if the position's duties evolve to fit non-career criteria. For instance, CSC Resolution No. 02-0790 allows reclassification if a position becomes coterminous with an elective official's term (e.g., executive assistants). However, this applies prospectively; existing permanent incumbents cannot be automatically displaced.
Procedural Steps:
- Agency Evaluation: The head of the agency conducts a job audit or evaluation to document changes in duties.
- Submission to CSC: Proposals include a Position Description Form (PDF), organizational charts, and rationale. CSC regional offices review for compliance.
- Budgetary Considerations: Reclassifications must align with the General Appropriations Act (GAA) and Department of Budget and Management (DBM) guidelines, as per Joint Circular No. 1, s. 2017, ensuring no creation of new positions without funding.
- Employee Notification and Appeal: Incumbents must be notified, with rights to appeal under CSC rules on personnel actions.
Special Cases:
- Reorganization: Under Republic Act No. 6656 (Government Reorganization Act of 1986), reclassifications during bona fide reorganizations may occur, but coterminous conversions are limited to new structures. Permanent employees retain preference for reappointment.
- Local Government Units (LGUs): Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code) allows LGUs to reclassify positions, but CSC oversight ensures no violation of tenure. Coterminous positions in LGUs are typically for department heads or confidential staff.
- Project-Based Positions: If a permanent position shifts to a grant-funded project, it may be reclassified as coterminous under CSC-DBM Joint Circular No. 1, s. 2016, but only for the project's duration.
Documentation and Transparency: All reclassifications require publication in the CSC Bulletin of Vacant Positions or agency websites, promoting transparency and allowing challenges.

These rules emphasize that reclassification is not a tool for personnel manipulation but a mechanism for organizational efficiency.

Limits and Prohibitions on Reclassification

While reclassification is allowed under certain conditions, converting permanent to coterminous positions faces significant limitations to safeguard constitutional rights:

Prohibition on Violation of Security of Tenure: The Supreme Court in Canonizado v. Aguirre (G.R. No. 133132, 2001) ruled that reclassifying a permanent position to coterminous constitutes constructive dismissal if it results in the incumbent's removal without due process. Permanent appointees cannot be forced into coterminous status without consent or just cause.
Non-Retroactive Application: Reclassifications apply only to future vacancies. CSC Memorandum Circular No. 15, s. 1999, prohibits retroactive effects that displace incumbents. An existing permanent employee retains their status even if the position is reclassified.
Budgetary and Fiscal Constraints: DBM Circular No. 2004-3 limits reclassifications to available funds. Unfunded conversions to coterminous (which may involve different compensation) are void.
Prohibited During Election Periods: CSC Resolution No. 100023 bans personnel actions, including reclassifications, during election bans under the Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881), to prevent political interference.
Judicial and Administrative Remedies: Aggrieved parties can file protests with the CSC or petitions for certiorari with the courts. In Provincial Government of Camarines Norte v. Gonzalez (G.R. No. 185740, 2011), the Court voided a reclassification that effectively demoted permanent employees.
Specific Sectoral Limits:
- Education and Health: Positions in DepEd or DOH are predominantly permanent; coterminous reclassifications are rare and require sectoral laws like Republic Act No. 9155 (Governance of Basic Education Act).
- Judiciary and Constitutional Bodies: These are insulated; reclassifications must comply with independence principles under Article VIII of the Constitution.
Penalties for Violations: Agency heads face administrative charges under Republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards) for irregular reclassifications, potentially leading to dismissal or fines.

These limits ensure that reclassifications do not erode the career service's integrity, preventing patronage and instability.

Relevant Jurisprudence and Practical Implications

Philippine courts have consistently upheld restrictions on such reclassifications. In Dario v. Mison (G.R. No. 81954, 1989), the Supreme Court invalidated mass reclassifications post-EDSA Revolution that converted permanent roles without due process. Similarly, Aquino v. CSC (G.R. No. 92403, 1990) stressed that coterminous designations cannot supplant permanent appointments.

Practically, agencies rarely pursue such reclassifications due to legal risks. Instead, they opt for creating new coterminous positions or contractual hires. For incumbents, options include voluntary reassignment or separation benefits under CSC rules.

Conclusion

Reclassifying a permanent position to coterminous in the Philippine civil service is a tightly controlled process, permissible only under exceptional circumstances with CSC approval and robust justification. It is bounded by constitutional safeguards on security of tenure, fiscal responsibility, and administrative due process. While aimed at adapting to evolving governmental needs, any abuse risks judicial invalidation and sanctions. Agencies must prioritize merit and fairness, ensuring reclassifications enhance rather than undermine the civil service's foundational principles. Stakeholders, including employees and administrators, should consult CSC guidelines and seek legal advice to navigate this complex terrain effectively.