PAL union slams SC ruling affirming legality of retrenchment

MANILA, Philippines—Saying the Supreme Court had “hijacked justice,” the flight attendants union of Philippine Airlines on Thursday decried the tribunal’s decision that affirmed its controversial recall of its “final” ruling on the legality of PAL’s retrenchment of 1,400 flight attendants.

Bob Anduiza, president of the Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines, said the high court ruling was also meant to “cover up the tracks” of the justices who also voted in October 2011 to recall its ruling and to “justify the meddling” of impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona.

“The Supreme Court hijacked justice for the 1,400 victims of PAL’s illegal retrenchment … We have been struggling and fighting for this case for the past 14 years. It is very difficult to fight against the rich and powerful in this country, especially where the Supreme Court is flip-flopping. When will we achieve justice?” Anduiza said in a statement.

“The Supreme Court has ruled three times already with finality. With this recall, the case has again been re-opened and it sets us up for tragedy,” he said.

“This ruling serves more of a cover-up of the justices’ tracks in suddenly recalling the September 7, 2011 decision last October 4, 2011. More particularly, this latest ruling attempts to justify the meddling of CJ Corona despite his assertion that he did not participate in this case, all at the expense of justice for the 1,400 flight attendants,” he added.

Anduiza noted that the Supreme Court had already ruled thrice in favor of the flight attendants. In July 22, 2008, the tribunal’s Third Division unanimously ruled that the retrenchment plan was illegal and it ordered PAL to pay full back wages to the flight attendants.

The flag carrier filed a motion for reconsideration but this was denied “with finality” on October 2, 2009. The court said “no further pleadings will be entertained.”

Undeterred, PAL filed a second motion for reconsideration on November 3, 2009 but the tribunal also dismissed it in September 2011. FASAP said Corona did not participate in these deliberations.

But suddenly on October 4, 2011, in a sudden flipping of its earlier rulings, the Supreme Court en banc resolved to recall the (September) decision because of mere letters from PAL lawyer Atty. Estelito Mendoza. This time, CJ Corona participated and took part in the case,” FASAP said.

“This is mainly why we volunteered to stand as witness against CJ Corona in the ongoing impeachment trial. Contrary to his claims in the media that he did not participate in the case, the truth is he meddled and acted to recall the final decision of the SC and reopened the case again.” Anduiza added.

FASAP noted that the court ruling affirming the recall “comes right smack as the Chief Justice is presenting its defense before the Senate impeachment court, raising suspicion as to the timing of the decision.”

“After three favorable rulings in the Supreme Court and despite the finality of the decisions, ‘and considering that at least ten SC justices had already ruled in favor of FASAP, why did the Supreme Court still reopen the case?” Anduiza said.

“There should be predictability and certainty of justice. Like in any game, there has to be an end. In basketball there are only four quarters to play and there is overtime in case of a tie. In our case, there is no tie, we already won three times, yet the Court still wants more overtimes or more reviews. If justice delayed is justice denied. Ours is even worse. Justice has been hijacked!” he added.

FASAP noted that Supreme Court Justice Lourdes Sereno wrote in her dissenting opinion that the tribunal wanted to maintain its “character as a court of last resort, it must stop giving never-ending refuge to parties who obstinately seek to resist execution of our final decisions on the sole ground of their counsel’s creativity in re-labeling a prohibited second motion for reconsideration, or the changing composition of the three Divisions of this Court.”

“Otherwise, the Court might as well lay to rest in the sepulcher the founding judicial principles of immutability of judgments and res judicata,” Sereno said.

On the other hand, the Philippine Airlines Employees Association said the decision of the Supreme Court was a “travesty of justice.” PALEA is also locked in a labor dispute with the flag carrier after 2,400 of its members were laid off last year.

“Only in the Philippines can a case that had already been ruled with finality twice by the highest court of the land still be reviewed once more on its merits. Indeed justice delayed is justice denied for 1,400 our sister and brother flight attendants,” said Gerry Rivera, PALEA president.

“FASAP’s case is relevant is PALEA’s fight since if the retrenchment of cabin crew in 1998 at a time when Philippine Airlines was bankrupt is illegal then so much more is the layoff of 2,400 ground staff after the flag carrier posted P3 billion in profit for its previous fiscal year,” he added.

Renato Magtubo, chairperson of the Partido ng Manggagawa, said the timing of the release of the Supreme Court resolution clearing Corona was “perfectly timed for the defense presentation in the impeachment case.”

“It leaves everyone thinking that it is part of the impeachment defense of Corona,” Magtubo said, adding that the plight of FASAP and PALEA reveals the failure of the labor justice system in the country.

“It is not just with the Supreme Court but even more with the graft ridden National Labor Relations Commission, National Mediation and Conciliation Board and Department of Labor and Employment that workers lose to the power of money of abusive capitalists,” he said.

“Workers demand reforms beyond the prosecution of Gloria and the impeachment of Corona. For workers at least get a taste of fair share of justice, the NLRC, NCMB and DOLE must be cleansed, and the policies of liberalization, deregulation and privatization that have led to thousands of closures and layoffs, and collapse of industry and agriculture must be rolled back,” Magtubo added.