SC reversal in PAL case ‘shocking to the conscience’ —labor group

A labor group on Tuesday slammed the Supreme Court decision favoring the Philippine Airlines (PAL) in a case filed by some 1,400 retrenched flight attendants and stewards.

In a statement, the Federation of Free Workers (FFW) said it was "shocked" by the SC's reversal of its earlier decision, noting it was done "at the instance of a letter of a famous Marcos lawyer."

"This (reversal) is shocking to the conscience and contrary to the basic principles of labor law and social justice which we learned in law school," said  FFW president Sonny Matula.

In a 55-page decision promulgated March 13, the SC en banc voted to set aside the SC special third division's ruling that ordered the reinstatement of the workers who were retrenched in July 1998.

The latest cap on the labor case came nearly 20 years after the retrenchment, and almost 10 years after the SC affirmed its ruling declaring the employees' dismissal as illegal.

Matula described the decision as "scandalous to the highest degree," saying the final order was reopened "by a mere letter."

"The decision in 2009 attained finality on Nov. 4, 2009 and once it attained finality, no other pleadings will be entertained by the high court, but this is scandalous to the highest degree, as the final order was reopened with alacrity by a mere letter," Matula said.

The high court's alleged "flip-flopping" of the case was included in the articles of impeachment against then-Chief Justice Renato Corona in 2012.

Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP) members had suspected that it was the series of letters sent by PAL's counsel, Estelito Mendoza, to the SC that prompted the court to recall the decision.

FASAP president Roberto Anduiza, in testifying before the Senate impeachment trial, insisted the high court "acted" on Mendoza's letters without giving FASAP an opportunity to comment on the matter.

The SC had earlier said letters from Mendoza, who served as counsel to the Marcos family and was solicitor general during the administration of the late President Ferdinand Marcos, merely pointed out technicalities in the handling of the case.

The March 13 resolution also granted PAL's two motions of reconsideration on the division's final affirmation of its decision that ordered the reinstatement of employees.

Out of nine justices who participated in the resolution, Associate Justices Marvic Leonen and Andres Reyes dissented.

Matula said the FFW stood by Leonen who, in his dissenting opinion, said: "This is an extraordinary case. Like in the Book of Revelation, it involves the miraculous resurrection of the dead: in this case, a dead case."

"Leonen is correct when he cited Rule 52 Section 2 of the Rules of Court in his dissent and said  'therefore, no motion for reconsideration or a resolution denying a motion for reconsideration of a decision may be filed by the same party," Matula said.

The FFW president added that allowing second and subsequent motions for reconsideration of the same decision "prevents the resolution of judicial controversies.”

"The scandalous reversal by the SC of its final decision is another heavy cross imposed on the shoulders of the workers, shocking the trade union movement in this season of lent," he said. —Margaret Claire Layug/KBK, GMA News