Reassigned teacher's salary includes prior wage supplements when reassigned for health reasonsRemuneración de docente reubicado por salud incluye sobresueldos previos

III. CASE ANALYSIS

There was no controversy regarding the fact that, when the plaintiff was reassigned to administrative duties for health reasons (pursuant to Article 254 of the Labor Code (Código de Trabajo)), he was receiving a plus (plus) for an overload of interim lessons (recargo de lecciones interinas). Articles 118 of the Education Code (Código de Educación) and 13 of the Procedures Manual for Managing Teaching Personnel (Manual de Procedimientos para Administrar el Personal Docente) allow for imposing certain overloads (recargos) on teachers. It is true that this type of additional pay (sobresueldos) does not constitute an acquired right and that payment must be suspended when the employee, in the exercise of their regular duties, ceases to meet the requirements for its recognition. However, this matter does not concern an employee who, in the normal exercise of their duties, ceases to fall under the conditions that make the payment of the overload (recargo) viable; rather, it concerns a person who, for health reasons, is prevented from continuing to perform their regular duties. The appellant argues that numerals 167 and 174 of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto del Servicio Civil) were improperly applied, given that these norms presuppose the existence of a disability (incapacidad) or a special leave (licencia especial), which did not occur in this matter, as there is only a reassignment for health reasons. In relation to this argument, it must be noted that this Chamber has resolved numerous similar matters to the present one, without any circumstance being observed in the sublitem that would warrant a change of criterion. It has been held that in cases of this type, Executive Decree No. 19113 of July 28, 1989, called the Regulation on Special Leaves for Employees of the Ministry of Public Education (Reglamento de Licencias Especiales para los Servidores del Ministerio de Educación Pública) is applicable (without it being possible to consider, as alleged in the appeal, that this decree became unfounded upon the repeal of canon 167 of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto del Servicio Civil), since this was not the only norm that served as its basis). The first provision of that regulation states that it provides the rules and procedures that the aforementioned Ministry must follow to grant leave (licencia) to employees, due to the decrease in their faculties or aptitudes for work, derived from a work-related risk or a common illness. The second article reaffirms that leaves (licencias) shall be granted to those who suffer a decrease in their faculties and who are therefore unable to perform the functions and attributions of the position they had been exercising. In accordance with the provisions in numerals 5 and 8, employees for whom the CCSS or the INS declare a minor or partial permanent disability (incapacidad menor o parcial permanente) and recommend a change of functions, are entitled to a special leave (licencia especial). Now, canon 9 stipulates that prior to the granting of the leave (licencia), the Ministry shall proceed with the reassignment of the employee, which is ratified in the following norms, according to which “this special leave (licencia especial) may be suspended, at the discretion of the Minister of Public Education, for the purpose of assigning tasks and functions compatible with their personal conditions, with the medical recommendations and the academic background of the beneficiary, that are required on a temporary basis” and that “the Ministry of Public Education may make use of the human resources that are on special leave (licencia especial) for attending administrative, administrative-teaching, or technical tasks and functions, in any of its dependencies, when such services are required for the proper functioning of the institutions or to implement special programs”—which corresponds fully with Article 254 of the Labor Code (Código de Trabajo)—. Later, in ordinal 17 it is indicated: “The beneficiaries of the leaves (licencias) provided for in this regulation shall enjoy a subsidy (subsidio) equivalent to the totality of their salary in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto de Servicio Civil) and the Education Code (Código de Educación) on the matter”. It has been concluded that this regulation complements numeral 174 of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto del Servicio Civil), which makes no distinction between permanent or partial disabilities (incapacidades); hence, no distinction can be made for payment purposes between permanent and special leaves (licencias). Consequently, if at the time of reassignment the plaintiff was earning additional pay (sobresueldo) for interim lessons (lecciones interinas), his right is indisputable, in accordance with that special regulation, to have that plus (plus) included within his remuneration as an administrative official. In that line of thought, in judgment No. 308-2014 of this Chamber, it was explained: “In the opinion of the defendant, the additional pay (sobresueldos) known as alternate schedule (horario alterno) and technical advisory committee, are designed solely for those who perform teaching functions, when enrollment needs require it; and depending on the academic credentials of the official, so the plaintiff is not entitled to the payment of those pluses (pluses) if her position is now administrative in nature. However, it must be clear that in the present case, we are not facing a claim made by an official of the administrative sector of the Ministry of Public Education, for the recognition of the pluses (pluses) as an integral and indissoluble part of their salary. The situation under study differs from that assumption because here it is a matter of defining the correspondence of that right to a teaching official who, for health reasons, has had to be reassigned to an administrative position. The difference that the state representation intends to assert between 'disability (incapacidad)' and 'reassignment' ignores that the origin of both is an illness of the official that prevents them from remaining in active teaching service. It is for this reason that the applicable regulation in cases like this is not solely that related to the right to the recognition of alternate schedule (horario alterno), but that specially provided for this purpose. Of primary importance, the Regulation on Special Leaves Ministry of Public Education (Reglamento de Licencias Especiales Ministerio de Educación Pública) (Executive Decree number 19113 of July 28, 1989), whose Article 1 mentions that this regulation aims to establish the rules and procedures that the Ministry of Public Education must follow to grant leave (licencia) to its employees, due to the decrease in their faculties or aptitudes for work, arising from work-related risks or illness. For its part, numeral 2 establishes: 'The leaves (licencias) referred to in this regulation shall be granted to those employees who, due to the decrease suffered in their faculties or aptitudes, could not perform, without detriment to their health or the service, the functions and attributions corresponding to the position they had been performing as regular employees.' (The highlighting is added). Then, in accordance with Article 5, those employees regarding whom the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) or the National Insurance Institute (Instituto Nacional de Seguros), in their final assessment, declare a permanent minor disability (incapacidad menor permanente) or a partial or permanent disability (incapacidad parcial o permanente) and recommend a change of functions, are entitled to be granted a special leave (licencia especial). Article 8 specifically addresses the case of granting special leave (licencia especial) in the following terms: 'In accordance with the provisions of Article 5 above, the Ministry of Public Education shall grant a special leave (licencia especial) to those employees who find themselves in the following circumstances: a) That according to their ailment, the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) recommends in the final assessment of the treatment a change of functions. b) That in the final assessment of the effects of the work-related risk that occurred, the National Insurance Institute (Instituto Nacional de Seguros) determines a minor or partial permanent disability (incapacidad menor o parcial permanente) and recommends their return to service with a change of functions' (emphasis supplied). Subsequently, Articles 9 and 10, in order, establish: 'Prior to the granting of the leave (licencia) and in accordance with the availability of positions and the interested party's qualifications, the Ministry of Public Education shall proceed with their reassignment, transfer, or promotion, as applicable.' And, 'When the application of the provisions of the previous article is immediately viable, the special leave (licencia especial) shall be granted until the corresponding personnel movement can be carried out.' Furthermore, numeral 12 states: 'Likewise, the Ministry of Public Education may make use of the human resources that are on special leave (licencia especial) for attending administrative, administrative-teaching, or technical tasks and functions, in any of its dependencies, when such services are required for the proper functioning of the institutions or to implement special programs.' Finally, Article 17 says: 'The beneficiaries of the leaves (licencias) provided for in this regulation shall enjoy a subsidy (subsidio) equivalent to the totality of their salary in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto de Servicio Civil) and the Education Code (Código de Educación) on the matter' (emphasis supplied). Thus, this regulation complements and does not contradict the provisions of numeral 174 of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto de Servicio Civil), which reads: 'a) If the employee, at the time of going on disability (incapacitarse) due to illness or maternity, is earning additional salary for zonaje, for alternate schedule (horario alterno), or any additional pay (sobresueldo), they shall be entitled to a subsidy (subsidio) equivalent to the total salary they were earning at that time. b) Leaves (licencias) due to illness, whatever their duration, shall not interrupt the right employees have to receive the corresponding salary increases. c) For all legal purposes, both the subsidy (subsidio) and the aids referred to in Article 167 shall have the character of salary, and shall therefore be the basis for calculating pensions and legal benefits, among other items, that may correspond.' (The highlighting is added). The regulatory norms develop this express provision, contemplating indistinctly the right to compensation both for the case of permanent leave (licencia) and for the special one.” The argument that since the overload (recargo) was not worked, it cannot be paid is not acceptable, because this was due to the need to reassign the employee to functions different from teaching, for health reasons. The regulation confers the right to continue receiving, in those circumstances, "a subsidy (subsidio) equivalent to the totality of their salary". Hence, it cannot be concluded, as intended, that the nature of the overload (recargo) was distorted or that public funds are affected unjustifiably, since the norms applicable to the case are those that generate these legal consequences. For the foregoing reasons, it is not true that Articles 15 of the Public Administration Salary Law (Ley de Salarios de la Administración Pública) and 56 of the Law Against Illicit Enrichment in Public Service (Ley contra el Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la Función Pública) were violated. The former refers to the possibility that the limit of forty lessons per week may be exceeded when the service so requires, with the excess remaining as a temporary overload (recargo). This provision does not regulate the situation discussed here and is foreseen for the effective exercise of teaching functions, not for the cases of employees who enjoy a disability (incapacidad) or leave (licencia). The other norm, for its part, could not have been violated, as it refers to the penalization for the granting of improper additional pay (sobresueldos), which does not occur in the present case. It is worth noting that the criteria of other judicial offices, whether labor or contentious-administrative, do not bind this Chamber. Furthermore, what was decided is not opposed to the position of the Constitutional Court in the sense that overloads (recargos) are temporary in nature and do not constitute an acquired right, given that the trial does not refer to the situation of an active employee in functions that demand or not the overload (recargo), but rather the issue is limited to determining the remuneration that an employee who has not been able to continue performing their normal duties nor the overloads (recargos) they had been exercising, due to a health breakdown, should receive. In pronouncement No. 1246-2016 of this Office, it was expressed: “This Chamber has been clear in indicating that, in reassignments for health reasons, the salary must be maintained as requested by the plaintiff, inasmuch as, having been reassigned for health reasons to administrative functions, one is in a situation comparable to a partial disability (incapacidad parcial), since it is medically considered that if they continue teaching lessons, the employee's health would continue to deteriorate due to occupational risk and therefore their reassignment is recommended. Thus, Article 174 of the Civil Service Statute (Estatuto de Servicio Civil) is applicable to these cases, a numeral that does not differentiate between special and permanent leaves (licencias), or between leave (licencia) situations or disabilities (incapacidades), all of which originate from incapacitating health reasons. In this way, Article 174, in its subsection a) clearly mentions that if the employee is earning additional salary for items such as alternate schedule (horario alterno) or any other additional pay (sobresueldo) at the time of going on disability (incapacitarse), they are entitled to the payment of a subsidy (subsidio) equivalent to the total salary they were earning at that time. Although in the subjúdice there is no formally granted special leave (licencia especial), according to the respective Regulation, the truth is that in practice, a situation of partial disability (incapacidad parcial) is presented by virtue of which the reassignment contemplated in Article 22 bis of the Civil Service Statute Regulation (Reglamento del Estatuto de Servicio Civil) occurs. Therefore, the aforementioned Article 174 applies in this case, given that in attention to the principles that protect the workers' salary, as well as taking into account the right of the teacher not to be harmed by health reasons that arise beyond their will, they must be recognized the payment of their salary, just as they were receiving it before their reassignment, including the interim lessons (lecciones interinas) they had as overload (recargo).” The regulations confer the right to continue receiving, under those circumstances, “a subsidy equivalent to the totality of their salary.” Hence, it cannot be concluded, as is intended, that the nature of the surcharge (recargo) was distorted or that public funds are unjustifiably affected, since the rules applicable to the case are those that generate these legal consequences. For the foregoing reasons, it is not true that Articles 15 of the Ley de Salarios de la Administración Pública and 56 of the Ley contra el Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la Función Pública have been violated. The former refers to the possibility of exceeding the limit of forty weekly lessons when the service so requires, with the excess maintained as a temporary surcharge (recargo). Such a provision does not regulate the situation at hand here and is intended for the effective exercise of teaching functions, not for cases of employees who are on sick leave (incapacidad) or leave (licencia). The other rule, for its part, could not have been infringed, as it refers to the penalization for granting improper extra pay, which does not occur in this case. It should be noted that the criteria of other judicial offices, whether labor or contentious-administrative, are not binding on this Chamber. Furthermore, the decision is not contrary to the Constitutional Court's position that surcharges (recargos) are temporary in nature and do not constitute an acquired right, given that the judgment does not concern the situation of an active employee in functions that demand or do not demand the surcharge (recargo), but rather the issue is limited to determining the remuneration that must be received by an employee who has been unable to continue performing their normal duties or the surcharges (recargos) they had been exercising, due to a health impairment. In ruling no. 1246-2016 of this Office, it was stated: “This Chamber has been clear in indicating that, in reassignments (reubicaciones) for health reasons, the salary must be maintained as requested by the plaintiff, since, having been reassigned (reubicado) for health reasons to administrative functions, one is in a situation assimilable to a partial disability (incapacidad parcial), as it is medically considered that if the employee were to continue teaching, their health would continue to deteriorate due to occupational risk, and therefore their reassignment is recommended. Thus, Article 174 of the Estatuto de Servicio Civil is applicable to these cases, a provision that makes no distinction between special and permanent leaves (licencias especiales y permanentes), or between situations of leaves (licencias) or sick leaves (incapacidades), all of which originate from incapacitating health reasons. In this way, Article 174, in its subsection a), clearly mentions that if the employee is earning additional salary for items such as alternate schedule (horario alterno) or any other extra pay at the time of becoming incapacitated, they are entitled to the payment of a subsidy equivalent to the total salary they were earning at that moment. Although in the sub judice there is no special leave (licencia especial) formally granted, according to the respective Regulations, the fact is that, in practice, a situation of partial disability (incapacidad parcial) occurs by virtue of which the reassignment (reubicación) contemplated in Article 22 bis of the Reglamento del Estatuto de Servicio Civil takes place. Therefore, Article 174 mentioned applies in this case, since in consideration of the principles that protect workers' salaries, as well as taking into account the teacher's right not to be harmed for health reasons that arise beyond their control, the payment of their salary must be recognized, just as they were receiving it before their reassignment (reubicación), including the interim lessons they had as a surcharge (recargo).” Furthermore, the decision is not contrary to the position of the Constitutional Court to the effect that additional payments (recargos) are temporary in nature and do not constitute an acquired right, given that the judgment does not refer to the situation of an active employee performing duties that may or may not require the additional payment (recargo), but rather the issue is limited to determining the remuneration that must be received by an employee who has been unable to continue performing their normal duties nor the additional payments (recargos) they had been performing, due to a health impairment. In ruling no. 1246-2016 of this Office, it was stated: “This Chamber has been clear in indicating that, in reassignments for health reasons, the salary must be maintained as the plaintiff requests, because, having been reassigned for health reasons to administrative functions, the situation is comparable to a partial disability (incapacidad parcial), since it is medically considered that if they continued teaching, the employee's health would continue to deteriorate due to occupational hazard and therefore their reassignment is recommended. Thus, article 174 of the Civil Service Statute is applicable to these cases, a provision that does not differentiate between special and permanent leaves, or between leave or disability situations, all of which originate from incapacitating health reasons. In this way, article 174, in subsection a), clearly mentions that if the employee is receiving additional salary for items such as alternate schedule or any other supplementary pay (sobresueldo) at the time of becoming incapacitated, they are entitled to the payment of a subsidy equivalent to the total salary they were receiving at that time. Although in the case at bar there is no special leave formally granted, pursuant to the respective Regulation, the fact is that in practice, a situation of partial disability (incapacidad parcial) occurs by virtue of which the reassignment contemplated in article 22 bis of the Regulation of the Civil Service Statute takes place. Therefore, the aforementioned article 174 applies in this case, since in consideration of the principles that protect workers' salaries, as well as taking into account the right of the teacher not to be prejudiced for health reasons that supervene beyond their control, they must be recognized the payment of their salary, exactly as they had been receiving it before their reassignment, including the interim lessons they had as additional payment (recargo).”

"III. ANÁLISIS DEL CASO: No medió controversia en cuanto a que, cuando el actor fue reubicado en funciones administrativas por motivos de salud (con fundamento en el artículo 254 del Código de Trabajo), se encontraba percibiendo un plus por recargo de lecciones interinas. Los artículos 118 del Código de Educación y 13 del Manual de Procedimientos para Administrar el Personal Docente permiten imponer ciertos recargos a los docentes. Es verdad que esa clase de sobresueldos no constituyen un derecho adquirido y que debe suspenderse el pago cuando la persona servidora, en el ejercicio de sus funciones habituales, deja de cumplir los requisitos exigidos para su reconocimiento. No obstante, el presente asunto no versa sobre un servidor que, en el ejercicio normal de sus funciones, deja de estar en los supuestos que hacen viable el pago del recargo; sino de una persona que, por razones de salud, queda impedida para seguir ejecutando sus labores habituales. La impugnante manifiesta que se aplicaron indebidamente los numerales 167 y 174 del Estatuto del Servicio Civil, dado que dichas normas suponen la existencia de una incapacidad o una licencia especial, que en este asunto no se dieron, por cuanto solo existe una reubicación por razones de salud. En relación con ese planteamiento, ha de indicarse que la Sala ha resuelto numerosos asuntos similares al presente, sin que se advierta en el sublitem alguna circunstancia que amerite cambiar de criterio. Se ha estimado que en casos de este tipo resulta de aplicación el Decreto Ejecutivo n.° 19113 del 28 de julio de 1989, denominado Reglamento de Licencias Especiales para los Servidores del Ministerio de Educación Pública (sin que pueda considerarse, como se aduce en el recurso, que este quedó sin sustento al haberse derogado el canon 167 del Estatuto del Servicio Civil, pues no fue esta la única norma que le sirvió de sustento). En el primer precepto de esa reglamentación se señala que ahí se prevén las normas y procedimientos que debe seguir el citado Ministerio para conceder licencia a las personas servidoras, con motivo de la disminución de sus facultades o aptitudes para el trabajo, derivada de un riesgo del trabajo o de una enfermedad común. En el artículo segundo se reafirma que las licencias se concederán a quienes sufran una disminución en sus facultades y que por ello no puedan desempeñar las funciones y atribuciones del cargo que venían ejerciendo. De conformidad con lo preceptuado en los numerales 5 y 8, las personas servidoras a las que la CCSS o el INS les declaren una incapacidad menor o parcial permanente y recomienden un cambio de funciones, tienen derecho a una licencia especial. Ahora bien, el canon 9 estipula que de previo a la concesión de la licencia, el Ministerio procederá a la reubicación de la persona servidora, lo que se ratifica en las normas siguientes, según las cuales “esta licencia especial podrá ser suspendida, a juicio del Ministro de Educación Pública, a los efectos de asignar labores y funciones compatibles con sus condiciones personales, con las recomendaciones médicas y la formación académica del beneficiario, que con carácter temporal se requiera” y que “el Ministerio de Educación Pública podrá hacer uso del recurso humano que estuviere en disfrute de licencia especial para la atención de tareas y funciones de carácter administrativo, administrativo-docente o de carácter técnico, en cualquiera de sus dependencias, cuando tales servicios se requieran para la buena marcha de las instituciones o para implementar programas especiales” -lo cual guarda plena correspondencia con el artículo 254 del Código de Trabajo-. Luego, en el ordinal 17 se indica: “Los beneficiarios de las licencias previstas en este reglamentación gozarán de un subsidio equivalente a la totalidad de su salario con arreglo a lo dispuesto por el Estatuto de Servicio Civil y el Código de Educación sobre la materia”. Se ha concluido que esta normativa complementa el numeral 174 del Estatuto del Servicio Civil, el cual no hace diferencia entre incapacidades permanentes o parciales; de ahí que tampoco quepa realizar distinción para los efectos del pago entre las licencias permanentes y especiales. En consecuencia, si al momento de la reubicación el actor devengaba un sobresueldo por concepto de lecciones interinas, resulta indiscutible el derecho que tiene, conforme a esa normativa especial, a que dentro de su remuneración como funcionario administrativo se le incluya ese plus. En dicha línea de pensamiento, en la sentencia de esta Sala n.° 308-2014 se explicó: “En criterio del demandado, los sobresueldos conocidos como horario alterno y del comité técnico asesor, están concebidos únicamente para quienes desempeñan funciones de docente, cuando las necesidades de matrícula lo requieran; y dependiendo de los atestados académicos del funcionario o funcionaria, por lo que a la actora no le asiste el derecho al pago de esos pluses si su puesto es ahora, de naturaleza administrativa. Sin embargo, se debe tener claro que en la especie no se está frente al reclamo que hace un funcionario o funcionaria del sector administrativo del Ministerio de Educación Pública, para el reconocimiento de los pluses como parte integrante e indisoluble de su salario. La situación en estudio difiere de ese supuesto porque aquí se trata de definir la correspondencia de ese derecho a una funcionaria docente quien por razones de salud ha debido ser reubicada en un cargo administrativo. La diferencia que pretende hacer valer la representación estatal entre "incapacidad" y "reubicación" desconoce que el origen de ambas es una enfermedad del funcionario o la funcionaria que le impide mantenerse en el servicio activo de la docencia. Es por esta razón que la normativa aplicable en casos como este no es únicamente la relacionada con el derecho al reconocimiento de horario alterno, sino la especialmente prevista al efecto. De primera mano, el Reglamento de Licencias Especiales Ministerio de Educación Pública (Decreto Ejecutivo número 19113 del 28 de julio de 1989), cuyo artículo 1° menciona que esta reglamentación tiene por objeto establecer las normas y los procedimientos que deberá seguir el Ministerio de Educación Pública para conceder licencia a sus servidores o servidoras, con motivo de la disminución de sus facultades o aptitudes para el trabajo, sobrevinientes de riesgos del trabajo o enfermedad. Por su parte, el numeral 2 establece: ´Las licencias a que se refiere la presente reglamentación se concederán a aquellos servidores que, por la disminución sufrida en sus facultades o aptitudes, no pudieren desempeñar, sin detrimento de su salud o del servicio, las funciones y atribuciones correspondientes al cargo que venían desempeñando en calidad de servidores regulares´. (Lo resaltado es agregado). Luego, de conformidad con el artículo 5 tienen derecho a que se les conceda una licencia especial aquellos servidores y servidoras respecto de los cuales la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social o el Instituto Nacional de Seguros, en su valoración final, declaren una incapacidad menor permanente o una incapacidad parcial o permanente y recomienden un cambio de funciones. El artículo 8 trata específicamente el supuesto de la concesión de la licencia especial en los siguientes términos: ´De conformidad con lo establecido en el artículo 5° anterior, el Ministerio de Educación Pública, concederá una licencia especial a aquellos servidores que encuentren en las siguientes circunstancias: a) Que de acuerdo con su dolencia la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, recomiende en la valoración final del tratamiento su cambio de funciones. b) Que en la valoración final de los efectos del riesgo de trabajo acaecido, el Instituto Nacional de Seguros, determine una incapacidad menor o parcial permanente y recomiende su incorporación al servicio con cambio de funciones´ (énfasis suplido). Seguidamente los artículos 9 y 10, por su orden, establecen: "De previo a la concesión de la licencia y de acuerdo con las disponibilidades de plazas y con los requisitos del interesado, el Ministerio de Educación Pública, procederá a su reubicación, traslado o ascenso, según corresponda". Y, "Cuando fuere viable, en forma inmediata, la aplicación de lo dispuesto en el artículo anterior se concederá la licencia especial hasta tanto se pueda realizar el movimiento de personal correspondiente". Además, el numeral 12 señala: "Igualmente el Ministerio de Educación Pública, podrá hacer uso del recurso humano que estuviere en disfrute de licencia especial para la atención de tareas y funciones de carácter administrativo, administrativo-docente o de carácter técnico, en cualquiera de sus dependencias cuando tales servicios se requieran para la buena marcha de las instituciones o para implementar programas especiales´. Finalmente, el artículo 17 dice: ´Los beneficiarios de las licencias previstas en esta reglamentación gozarán de un subsidio equivalente a la totalidad de su salario con arreglo a lo dispuesto por el Estatuto de Servicio Civil y el Código de Educación sobre la materia´ (énfasis suplido). De modo que esta normativa complementa y no contradice lo dispuesto por el numeral 174 del Estatuto de Servicio Civil, que reza: ´a) Si el servidor, en el momento de incapacitarse por enfermedad o maternidad, estuviese devengando salario adicional por zonaje, por horario alterno, o cualquier sobresueldo, tendrá derecho a un subsidio equivalente al salario total que en dicho momento estuviese devengando. b) Las licencias por enfermedad, cualquiera que sea su duración, no interrumpirán el derecho que tienen los servidores para recibir los aumentos de sueldos correspondientes. c) Para todos los efectos legales, tanto el subsidio, como los auxilios a que se refiere el artículo 167, tendrán el carácter de salario, y serán, en consecuencia, la base para el cálculo de pensiones y prestaciones legales, entre otros extremos, que pudieran corresponder."(Lo resaltado es agregado). La normativa reglamentaria desarrolla esta expresa disposición, contemplando de manera indistinta el derecho a la indemnización tanto para el caso de la licencia permanente como de la especial”. El argumento de que como el recargo no fue laborado no puede ser pagado no es de recibo, pues esto se debió a la necesidad de reubicar al servidor en funciones diferentes a las de docencia, por razones de salud. La normativa confiere el derecho a que se siga percibiendo, en esas circunstancias, “un subsidio equivalente a la totalidad de su salario”. De ahí que no pueda concluirse, como se pretende, que se desvirtuó la naturaleza del recargo o que se afectan los fondos públicos de manera injustificada, puesto que las normas aplicables al caso son las que generan esas consecuencias jurídicas. Por lo expuesto, no es cierto que se hayan violentado los artículos 15 de la Ley de Salarios de la Administración Pública y 56 de la Ley contra el Enriquecimiento Ilícito en la Función Pública. El primero hace referencia a la posibilidad de que el límite de cuarenta lecciones semanales se sobrepase cuando el servicio así lo requiera, manteniéndose el exceso como un recargo de carácter temporal. Tal disposición no regula la situación que aquí se ventila y está prevista para el ejercicio efectivo de las funciones de docencia, no para los supuestos de personas servidoras que gocen de incapacidad o licencia. La otra norma, por su lado, no pudo resultar conculcada, pues se refiere a la penalización por el otorgamiento de sobresueldos improcedentes, lo cual no se da en la especie. Cabe acotar que los criterios de otros despachos judiciales, laborales o contencioso-administrativos, no vinculan a esta Sala. Luego, lo decidido no resulta contrapuesto a la posición del Tribunal Constitucional en el sentido de que los recargos tienen naturaleza temporal y no constituyen un derecho adquirido, dado que el juicio no se refiere a la situación de un servidor activo en funciones que demanden o no el recargo, sino que el tema se circunscribe a determinar la remuneración que debe percibir una persona servidora que no ha podido seguir efectuando sus labores normales ni los recargos que venía ejerciendo, en razón de un quebranto de salud. En el pronunciamiento n.° 1246-2016 de este Despacho se expresó: “Esta Sala ha sido clara al indicar que, en reubicaciones por motivos de salud, se debe mantener el salario como lo solicita el actor, por cuanto, al haber sido reubicado por motivos de salud en funciones administrativas, se está en una situación asimilable a una incapacidad parcial, ya que médicamente se considera que de continuar impartiendo lecciones, la salud del servidor continuaría en deterioro por riesgo laboral y por ello se recomienda su reubicación. Así, el artículo 174 del Estatuto de Servicio Civil resulta aplicable a estos casos, numeral que no hace la diferencia entre licencias especiales y permanentes, o entre situaciones de licencias o incapacidades, todas las cuales se originan en motivos de salud incapacitantes. De esta manera, el artículo 174, en su inciso a) menciona claramente que si el servidor está devengando salario adicional por rubros como el horario alterno o cualquier otro sobresueldo al momento de incapacitarse, tiene derecho al pago de un subsidio equivalente al salario total que en dicho momento estuviera devengando. Si bien en el subjúdice no existe una licencia especial formalmente otorgada, conforme al Reglamento respectivo, lo cierto es que de igual manera, en la práctica se presenta una situación de incapacidad parcial en virtud de la cual, se da la reubicación contemplada en el artículo 22 bis del Reglamento del Estatuto de Servicio Civil. Por ello, aplica en este caso el artículo 174 mencionado, ya que en atención a los principios que protegen el salario de los trabajadores, así como tomando en cuenta el derecho que asiste al docente de no verse perjudicado por motivos de salud que sobrevienen de manera ajena a la voluntad, debe reconocérsele el pago de su salario, tal y como lo venía percibiendo antes de su reubicación, incluyendo las lecciones interinas que tenía de recargo.”