SOCIAL SECURITY LAW

Prepared by: Atty. Edwin E. Torres (MSU Sept 2022)

1. The new law on social security, which replaced RA 8282, is RA 11199 (“Social Security Act
of 2018”). Its avowed objective is to protect its members and beneficiaries against the hazards of:

(a) disability;
(b) sickness;
(c) maternity;
(d) old age
(e) death and
(f) other contingencies resulting in loss of income or financial burden.

2. SOCIAL SECURITY VIS-A-VIS EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION: Claims under the Labor

Code for compensation and under the Social Security Law for benefits are not the same as to their
nature and purpose. The pertinent provisions of the Labor Code govern compensability of work-
related disabilities or when there is loss of income due to work-connected or work-aggravated
injury or illness. The benefits under the Social Security Law are intended to provide insurance
or protection against the hazards or risks of disability, sickness, old age or death, inter alia,
irrespective of whether they arose from or in the course of employment. 1

3. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM (SSS) VIS-À-VIS SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION (SSC):

The SSS is the body corporate. It functions and operates as an independent and accountable
government-owned-and-controlled corporation (GOCC) of the government. As such, it has the
right to sue and be sued. The SSC is the 9-member commission that directs and controls the
SSS. It is composed of:

A. Secretary of Finance – ex officio chairperson;

B. SSS President and Chief Executive Officer – vice chairperson;
C. Secretary of Labor – ex officio member
D. Three (3) workers’ representatives;
D. Three (3) employers’ representatives;

4. ADMINISTRATION: The general conduct of the operations and management functions of

the SSS shall be vested in the SSS President who shall serve as the chief executive officer
immediately responsible for carrying out the program of the SSS and the policies of the
Commission. The SSS President shall be a person who has had previous experience in the
technical and administrative fields related to the purposes of this Act. He shall be appointed by
the President of the Philippines.

5. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES: Disputes on social security coverage, benefits,

contributions and penalties are cognizable by the SSC. They will be heard by the SSC or any of
its members, or by hearing officers duly authorized by the SSC. Decisions of the SCC become
final and executor after 15 days from notification. But they are reviewable both upon the law and
the facts by the Court of Appeals on appeal within said number of days. If the SCC decision
involves only questions of law, the same shall be reviewed by the Supreme Court.

6. In exercising its power to settle any dispute with respect to SSS coverage, benefits and
contributions, the SSC cannot review or reverse decisions rendered by courts of law. Where a
court adjudged a spouse presumptively dead, the SSC cannot declare that the court decision had
been obtained through fraud because the spouse is actually alive. In interfering with and passing
upon the CFI decision, the SSC virtually acted as an appellate court. The law does not give the
SSC unfettered discretion to trifle with orders of regular courts in the exercise of its authority to
determine the beneficiaries of the SSS. Under the Civil Code, a subsequent marriage being
voidable is terminated by final judgment of annulment in a case instituted by the absent spouse
who reappears or by either of the spouses in the subsequent marriage. Under the Family Code,
the subsequent marriage is automatically terminated by the recording of the affidavit of
reappearance of the absence spouse. The termination of the subsequent marriage by affidavit
does not preclude the filing of an action in court to prove the reappearance of the absentee and
obtain a declaration of dissolution or termination of the subsequent marriage. If the absentee
reappears but no step is taken to terminate the subsequent marriage, either by affidavit or by
court action, such absentee’s mere reappearance, even if made known to the spouses in the
subsequent marriage, will not terminate such marriage. Since the second marriage has been
contracted because of a presumption that the former spouse is dead, such presumption continues
1
Ortega vs. SSC and SSS (G.R. No. 176150, 25 June 2008).
 2

in spite of the spouse’s physical reappearance, and by fiction of law, he or she must still be
regarded as legally an absentee until the subsequent marriage is terminated as provided by law. 2

7. An action for remittance of SS monthly contributions is not a type of money claim which
needs to be filed against the estate proceedings. Even after the distribution of the estate, claims
for taxes may be enforced against the distributees in proportion to their shares in the inheritance.
Similarly, employers are required to remit the contributions to the SSS by mandate of law. As
such, actions of this type should be treated in much the same way as taxes — that they are not
required to be filed against the estate and that they be claimed against the heirs of the errant
decedent.3

8. The benefits that are granted by the Social Security Law are the following:

A. Monthly Pension
B. Dependent’s Pension
C. Retirement benefits;
B. Death benefits;
C. Permanent disability benefits;
D. Funeral benefits;
E. Sickness benefits; and
F. Maternity leave benefit.

9. PERSONS COVERED: Coverage in the SSS shall be compulsory upon all employees
including kasambahays or domestic workers not over sixty (60) years of age and their employers.
The right of an employee to be covered by the Social Security Act is premised on the existence of
an employer-employee relationship.4 Spouses who devote full time to managing the household
and family affairs, unless they are also engaged in other vocation or employment which is subject
to mandatory coverage, may be covered by the SSS on a voluntary basis.

10. Coverage in the SSS shall also be compulsory upon such self-employed persons as may
be determined by the Commission under such rules and regulations as it may prescribe,
including, but not limited to the following:

(a) All self-employed professionals;

(b) Partners and single proprietors of businesses;

(c) Actors and actresses, directors, scriptwriters and news correspondents who
do not fall within the definition of the term "employee" in Section 8(d) of this
Act;

(d) Professional athletes, coaches, trainers and jockeys; and

(e) Individual farmers and fishermen.

11. Coverage in the SSS shall be compulsory upon all sea-based and land-based OFWs as
defined under RA 8042 Provided, That they are not over sixty (60) years of age. Manning
agencies are agents of their principals and are considered as employers of sea-based OFWs.
Manning agencies are jointly and severally or solidarity liable with their principals with respect to
SSS. There is a substantial distinction between sea-based OFWs and land-based OFWs.
Seafarers constitute a unique classification of OFWs. Their essential difference against land-
based OFWs is that all seafarers have only one (1) standard contract, which provides the rights
and obligations of the foreign ship owner, the seafarer and the manning agencies. The POEA-
SEC5 outlines all the duties and responsibilities of the foreign ship owners, manning agencies, and
seafarers within its coverage. As long as the seafarer is employed or engaged in overseas
employment in any capacity on board a ship, the POEA-SEC shall apply to him or her. 6

2
SSS vs. De Bailon (G.R. No. 165545, 24 March 2006).
3
SSC and Lamboso vs. Alba (G.R. No. 165482, 23 July 2008).
4
Social Security Commission vs. Rizal Poultry and Livestock Association, Inc. (G.R. No. 167050, 1 June 2011).
5
Standard Employment Contract.
6
Joint Ship Manning Group, Inc., et al. vs. SSS and SSC (G. R. No. 247471, 7 July 2020).
 3

12. Section 8(c) of the Social Security Law (RA 8282) that defines “employer” is broad enough
to include those persons acting directly or indirectly in the interest of the employer. That the said
provision does not contain the definitive phrase contained in Article 212(e) of the Labor Code
should not be taken to mean that a farm administrator, whose interests are closely linked with his
father-employer, do not come within the purview of the law. If under Article 212(e), persons
acting in the interest of the employer, directly or indirectly, are obliged to follow the government
labor relations policy, it could be reasonably concluded that such persons may likewise be held
liable for the remittance of SS contributions which is an obligation created by law and is the
employee’s right protected by law.7

13. There is no essential conceptual difference between the definition of “employee” under the
Labor Code and the Social Security Act. Therefore, where in a labor case the NLRC rendered
judgment that there is no employer-employee relationship between the parties, said judgment is
conclusive on the SSS case. In this case, there is res judicata in the concept of “conclusiveness
of judgment.”8

14. DEPENDENTS: Dependents are entitled to dependent’s pension and death benefit. The
dependents are the following:

(1) The legal spouse entitled by law to receive support from the member;

(2) The legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted, and illegitimate child who is
unmarried, not gainfully employed, and has not reached twenty-one (21)
years of age, or if over twenty-one (21) years of age, he is congenitally or
while still a minor has been permanently incapacitated and incapable of self-
support, physically or mentally; and

(3) The parent who is receiving regular support from the member.

For a minor child to qualify as a "dependent," the only requirements are that he/she must be
below 21 years of age, not married nor gainfully employed. The provision of Section 8(e) vested
the right of death benefit to a member’s illegitimate minor children irrespective of any proof that
they had been dependent on the support of the deceased.9

15. An SSS member submitted Form E-4 to the SSS with Edna and their three children as his
designated beneficiaries. However, it appeared that he submitted 10 years ago another Form E-4
designating another woman and their children as his beneficiaries. Can Edna claim dependent’s
benefits from the SSS as wife of said member? Answer: No. Section 8(e) and (k) of RA 8282
provides that it is legal spouse who is entitled to benefits as dependent of the SSS member. A
marriage contracted by any person during subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and
void, unless before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior spouse had been absent
for four consecutive years and the spouse present has a well-founded belief that the absent
spouse was already dead. In case of disappearance where there is danger under the
circumstances set forth in the provisions of Article 391 of the Civil Code, an absence of only two
years shall be sufficient. For the purpose of contracting a subsequent marriage under the
preceding paragraph, the spouse present must institute a summary proceeding as provided in this
Code for the declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of
reappearance of the absent spouse. Using the parameters outlined in Article 41 of the Family
Code, Edna, without doubt, failed to establish that there was no impediment or that the
impediment was already removed at the time of the celebration of her marriage to the SSS
member.10

16. BENEFICIARIES: Beneficiaries are either primary or secondary. The primary beneficiaries
are the following:

A. Dependent spouse until he or she remarries.

B. Dependent legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted, and illegitimate
children.

The dependent illegitimate children shall be entitled to fifty percent (50%) of the share of the
legitimate, legitimated or legally adopted children. In the absence of the dependent legitimate,
7
SSC and Lamboso vs. Alba (G.R. No. 165482, 23 July 2008).
8
SSC vs. Rizal Poultry and Livestock Association, Inc., et al. (G.R. No. 167050, 1 June 2011).
9
Signey vs. SSS, et al. (G.R. No. 173582, 28 January 2008).
10
SSC vs. Azote (G.R. No. 209741, 15 April 2015).
 4

legitimated children of the member, his/her dependent illegitimate children shall be entitled to
one hundred percent (100%) of the benefits. In the absence of primary beneficiaries, the
secondary beneficiaries take over to receive the benefits. The secondary beneficiaries are:

A. Dependent parents who shall be the secondary beneficiaries of the member.

B. In the absence of all the foregoing, any other person designated by the
member as his/her secondary beneficiary.

17. A wife who is already separated de facto from her husband cannot be said to be ‘dependent
for support’ upon the husband, absent any showing to the contrary. Such wife has the burden to
prove that she is dependent on her husband for support. Conversely, if it is proved that the
husband and wife were still living together at the time of his death, it would be safe to presume
that she was dependent on the husband for support, unless it is shown that she is capable of
providing for herself.11

THE BENEFITS

18. QUALIFICATION FOR MONTHLY PENSION: To be qualified for monthly pension, a

member must have:

A. Paid at least 120 monthly contributions prior to semester of retirement; and

B. Reached age 60 and is already separated from employment or has ceased to
be self-employed; or
C. Reached age 65.

If a member has reached age 60 at retirement but who does not qualify for monthly pension, he is
entitled to a lump sum benefit equal to the contributions paid by him and on his behalf. He may
also opt to continue the payments of the contributions. Upon the death of the retired member, his
primary beneficiaries as of the date of his retirement shall be entitled to receive the monthly
pension: Provided, That if he has no primary beneficiaries and he dies within sixty (60) months
from the start of his monthly pension, his secondary beneficiaries shall be entitled to a lump sum
benefit equivalent to the total monthly pensions corresponding to the balance of the five-year
guaranteed period, excluding the dependents’ pension.

19. DEATH BENEFITS: Upon the death of a member who has paid at least thirty-six (36)
monthly contributions prior to the semester of death, his primary beneficiaries shall be entitled to
the monthly pension: Provided, That if he has no primary beneficiaries, his secondary
beneficiaries shall be entitled to a lump sum benefit equivalent to thirty-six (36) times the monthly
pension. If he has not paid the required thirty-six (36) monthly contributions, his primary or
secondary beneficiaries shall be entitled to a lump sum benefit equivalent to the monthly pension
times the number of monthly contributions paid to the SSS or twelve (12) times the monthly
pension, whichever is higher.

20. Bonifacio became an SSS member in 1980. In his data record, he named common-law
wife Elena his and their eight children as his beneficiaries. Bonifacio was considered retired in
1989 and passed away in 1997. A few months prior to his death in 1997, Bonifacio married
Elena. Subsequently, Elena filed with the SSS an application for survivor’s pension. The SSC
denied her application because she was not a primary beneficiary “as of the date of his (i.e., of
Bonifacio’s) retirement” in accordance with Section 12-d of RA 8282. RULING: Section 12-d of RA
8282 violates the equal protection and due process clauses. As to the equal protection clause, a
classification must satisfy the following elements to be valid: (1) it must rest on substantial
distinctions; (2) it must be germane to the purpose of the law; (3) it must not be limited to existing
conditions only; and (4) it must apply equally to all members of the same class. Section 12-d
establishes two groups of dependent spouses as primary beneficiaries:

(1) Those dependent spouses whose respective marriages to SSS members were
contracted prior to the latter’s retirement; and

(2) Those dependent spouses whose respective marriages to SSS members were
contracted after the latter’s retirement.

The proviso was apparently intended to prevent sham marriages or those contracted by persons
solely to enable one spouse to claim benefits upon the anticipated death of the other spouse.

11
SSS vs. Aguas, et al. (G.R. No. 165546, 27 February 2006).
 5

However, classifying dependent spouses and determining their entitlement to survivor’s pension
based on whether the marriage was contracted before or after the retirement of the other spouse,
regardless of the duration of the said marriage, bears no relation to the achievement of the policy
objective of the law, i.e., "provide meaningful protection to members and their beneficiaries against
the hazard of disability, sickness, maternity, old age, death and other contingencies resulting in
loss of income or financial burden." The nexus of the classification to the policy objective is vague
and flimsy. Put differently, such classification of dependent spouses is not germane to the
aforesaid policy objective. For if it were the intention of Congress to prevent sham marriages or
those entered in contemplation of imminent death, then it should have prescribed a definite
"duration-of-relationship" or durational period of relationship as one of the requirements for
entitlement to survivor’s pension. The proviso "as of the date of his retirement" in Section 12-B(d)
in RA 8282 effectively disqualifies from entitlement to survivor’s pension all those dependent
spouses whose respective marriages to retired SSS members were contracted after the latter’s
retirement. The duration of the marriage is not even considered.

The proviso also runs afoul of the due process clause as it outrightly deprives the surviving
spouses whose respective marriages to the retired SSS members were contracted after the latter’s
retirement of their survivor’s benefits. There is outright confiscation of benefits due such surviving
spouses without giving them an opportunity to be heard. It has created the presumption that
marriages contracted after the retirement date of SSS members were entered into for the purpose
of securing the benefits under RA 8282. This presumption, moreover, is conclusive because the
said surviving spouses are not afforded any opportunity to disprove the presence of the illicit
purpose. The proviso, as it creates this conclusive presumption, is unconstitutional because it
presumes a fact which is not necessarily or universally true. 12

21. PERMANENT DISABILITY BENEFITS: (a) Upon the permanent total disability of a
member who has paid at least thirty-six (36) monthly contributions prior to the semester of
disability, he shall be entitled to the monthly pension: Provided, That if he has not paid the
required thirty-six (36) monthly contributions, he shall be entitled to a lump sum benefit
equivalent to the monthly pension times the number of monthly contributions paid to the SSS or
twelve (12) times the monthly pension, whichever is higher. A member who (1) has received a
lump sum benefit; and (2) is reemployed or has resumed self-employment not earlier than one (1)
year from the date of his disability shall again be subject to compulsory coverage and shall be
considered a new member.

(b) The monthly pension and dependents’ pension shall be suspended upon the reemployment or
resumption of self-employment or the recovery of the disabled member from his permanent total
disability or his failure to present himself for examination at least once a year upon notice by the
SSS.

22. Upon the death of the permanent total disability pensioner, his primary beneficiaries as of
the date of disability shall be entitled to receive the monthly pension: Provided, That if he has no
primary beneficiaries and he dies within sixty (60) months from the start of his monthly pension,
his secondary beneficiaries shall be entitled to a lump sum benefit equivalent to the total monthly
pensions corresponding to the balance of the five-year guaranteed period excluding the
dependents’ pension.

23. Permanent disabilities are either total or partial. The following disabilities shall be deemed
permanent total:

1. Complete loss of sight of both eyes;

2. Loss of two limbs at or above the ankle or wrists;
3. Permanent complete paralysis of two limbs;
4. Brain injury resulting to incurable imbecility or insanity; and
5. Such cases as determined and approved by the SSS.

Partial disability is the loss of the use of an anatomical part of the body.

24. While ‘permanent total disability’ invariably results in an employee’s loss of work or
inability to perform his usual work, ‘permanent partial disability,’ on the other hand, occurs when
an employee loses the use of any particular anatomical part of his body which disables him to
continue with his former work. Stated otherwise, the test of whether or not an employee suffers
from ‘permanent total disability’ is a showing of the capacity of the employee to continue
performing his work notwithstanding the disability he incurred. Thus, if by reason of the injury or

12
Dycaico vs. SSS and SSC (G.R. No. 161357, 30 November 2005).
 6

sickness he sustained, the employee is unable to perform his customary job for more than 120
days and he does not come within the coverage of Rule X of the Amended Rules on Employees
Compensability (which, in a more detailed manner, describes what constitutes temporary total
disability), then said employee undoubtedly suffers from ‘permanent total disability’ regardless of
whether or not he loses the use of any part of his body.13

25. Disability should be understood less on its medical significance than on the loss of earning
capacity. Permanent total disability means disablement of an employee to earn wages in the same
kind of work, or work of similar nature that he was trained for or accustomed to perform, or any
kind of work which a person of his mentality and attainment could do. It does not mean absolute
helplessness. Moreover, a person’s disability may not manifest fully at one precise moment in
time but rather over a period of time. It is possible that an injury which at first was considered to
be temporary may later on become permanent or one who suffers a partial disability becomes
totally and permanently disabled from the same cause. Hence, the petition of a covered employee
for the adjustment of his partial disability to total disability due to the degenerative condition of
his injury that prevents him from work is in order.14

26. FUNERAL BENEFIT: A funeral grant equivalent to Twelve thousand pesos (P12,000.00)
shall be paid, in cash or in kind, to help defray the cost of funeral expenses upon the death of a
member, including permanently totally disabled member or retiree.

27. SICKNESS BENEFIT: A member who has paid at least three (3) monthly contributions in
the twelve-month period immediately preceding the semester of sickness or injury and is confined
therefor for more than three (3) days in a hospital or elsewhere with the approval of the SSS, shall,
for each day of compensable confinement or a fraction thereof, be paid by his employer, or the
SSS, if such person is unemployed or self-employed, a daily sickness benefit x x x. In no case
shall the daily sickness benefit be paid longer than one hundred twenty (120) days in one (1)
calendar year x x x.

28. MATERNITY LEAVE BENEFIT: A female member who has paid at least three (3) monthly
contributions in the twelve-month period immediately preceding the semester of her childbirth or
miscarriage shall be paid a daily maternity benefit equivalent to one hundred percent (100%) of
her average daily salary credit for sixty (60) days or seventy-eight (78) days in case of caesarian
delivery x x x.

PENALTY

29. The elements of criminal liability under Section 22 of the SSS law are: (a) the employer
fails to register its employees with the SSS; (b) the employer fails to deduct monthly contributions
from the salaries and/or wages of its employees; and (c) having deducted the SSS contributions
and/or loan payments to SSS, the employer fails to remit these to the SSS.

30. Failure to remit collected SS premium is penalized under the Revised Penal Code. Since
Sec. 28 (h) of the Social Security Act (a special law) adopted the penalty from the Revised Penal
Code, the Indeterminate Sentence Law also finds application.15

31. Lack of criminal intent and good faith – as one’s failure to remit was brought about by
alleged economic difficulties, and he has already agreed to settle his obligations with the SSS
through a memorandum of agreement to pay in installments- is unavailing as defense for one’s
failure to remit SSS contributions and loan payments in violation of Section 28 (e), (f) and (h) of
the SSS Law. The violations charged pertain to the SSS Law, which is a special law. As such, it
belongs to a class of offenses known as mala prohibita. The law has long divided crimes into acts
wrong in themselves called acts mala in se; and acts which would not be wrong but for the fact
that positive law forbids them, called acts mala prohibita. This distinction is important with
reference to the intent with which a wrongful act is done. The rule on the subject is that in acts
mala in se, the intent governs; but in acts mala prohibita, the only inquiry is, has the law been
violated? When an act is illegal, the intent of the offender is immaterial. 16

32. "(f) If the act or omission penalized by this Act be committed by an association,
partnership, corporation or any other institution, its managing head, directors or partners shall
be liable for the penalties Provided in this Act for the offense.” This provision does not qualify that
the director or partner should likewise be a "managing director" or "managing partner." A mere
13
Vicente vs. Employees Compensation Commission (G.R. No. 85024, 23 January 1991).
14
SSC and SSS vs. CA,. et al. (G.R. No. 152058, 27 September 2004).
15
Mendoza vs. People (G.R. No. 183891, 3 August 2010).
16
Tan, et al. vs. Ballena, et al. (G.R. No. 168111, 4 July 2008).
 7

partner may be penalized under the above provision. Likewise, penalty under the above provision
is separate and distinct from the 3& penalty for non-remittance of contribution from the date it
falls due until paid pursuant to Section 22(a).17

33. The word “proprietor” connotes management, control and power over a business entity.
Hence, it is covered by the word “managing head” mentioned in Section 28(f). 18

34. Section 22(b), par. 2 of the SSS Law provides for a prescriptive period of TWENTY (20)
YEARS from the time the delinquency is known or the assessment is made by the SSS, or from
the time the benefit accrues, as the case may be, within which administrative and civil actions
may be commenced against the employer who failed to remit contributions. Criminal actions for
violations of the SSS law, on the other hand, prescribe in FOUR YEARS, as provided in Act No.
3326 (Act to Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized by Special Acts and
Municipal Ordinances).19

17
Garcia vs. SSC Legal and Collection, SSS (G.R. No. 170735, 17 December 2007).
18
Mendoza vs. People (G.R. No. 183891, 3 August 2010).
19