ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 143686.May 29, 2002]

PAL, INC. vs. AIRLINE PILOTS ASSN. OF THE PHILS.

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:�

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 29 MAY 2002.

G.R. No. 143686(Philippine Airlines, Inc. vs. Airline Pilots Association of the Philippines.)

This is a Motion for Reconsideration of our decision dated January 15, 2002, filed by respondent, based on the ground that the benefits due Captain Albino Collantes, a retiring pilot of petitioner, should be based on Article 287 of the Labor Code and not the 1967 PAL-ALPAP Retirement Plan. On the other hand, petitioner, in its Opposition, maintains that Article 287 does not apply to its pilots who retire before reaching the age of sixty years, more particularly Capt. Collantes who was retired at the age of forty-five.

The Motion for Reconsideration does not raise any plausible ground to warrant the setting aside of our Decision. As we have ruled therein, the benefits under Article 287 of the Labor Code are less than those that a retiring pilot may receive under both the 1967 PAL-ALPAP Retirement Plan and the 1972 PAL Pilots' Retirement Benefit Plan. Under the 1967 Plan, a pilot who retires or is retired shall receive whichever benefits are greater. Moreover, as pointed out by petitioner, Article 287 applies only "[i]n the absence of a retirement plan or agreement providing for retirement benefits of employees in the establishment"(Labor Code, Article 287, third paragraph).

Respondent contends that the funding for the 1972 PAL Pilots' Retirement Benefit Plan comes from the salaries of the pilots.However, this is belied by the provisions of the said retirement benefit plan, which states that "[t]he Plan will be wholly financed by the [petitioner];" and that "[n]o contributions will be required from the [pilots]" (1972 PAL Pilots' Retirement Benefit Plan, Article VI, Section 1).

ACCORDINGLY, the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED WITH FINALITY for lack of merit. No further pleadings will be entertained.

The Court further Resolves to:

(a) NOTE the entry of appearance of Perlas de Guzman Antonio Venturanza Quizon-Venturanza and Herbosa Law Firm, Suite 2603, 26^th Floor, Antel Global Corporate Center, Do�a Julia Vargas Avenue, Ortigas Center, Pasig City, as counsel for respondent, Ismael Lapuz, Jr.; and

(b) NOTE and GRANT the manifestation and motion of petitioner praying that its opposition dated February 27, 2002 to respondent's motion for reconsideration be considered as its comment thereon in compliance with the resolution of March 4, 2002.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE