Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 121 views

    Pal Vs Palea

    Uploaded by

    jzzafe2
    The document discusses a case between PAL and PALEA regarding the rights and privileges of four employees who were dismissed but later reinstated. The CIR ruled that the employees were entitled to bonuses, transportation allowances, sick leave, and passes during their period of layoff except for certain qualifications.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Pal Vs Palea

    Uploaded by

    jzzafe2
    121 views1 page
    The document discusses a case between PAL and PALEA regarding the rights and privileges of four employees who were dismissed but later reinstated. The CIR ruled that the employees were entitled to bonuses, transportation allowances, sick leave, and passes during their period of layoff except for certain qualifications.

    Original Description:

    Digest for Pal vs Palea

    Original Title

    Pal vs Palea

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses a case between PAL and PALEA regarding the rights and privileges of four employees who were dismissed but later reinstated. The CIR ruled that the employees were entitled to bonuses, transportation allowances, sick leave, and passes during their period of layoff except for certain qualifications.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    121 views1 page

    Pal Vs Palea

    Uploaded by

    jzzafe2
    The document discusses a case between PAL and PALEA regarding the rights and privileges of four employees who were dismissed but later reinstated. The CIR ruled that the employees were entitled to bonuses, transportation allowances, sick leave, and passes during their period of layoff except for certain qualifications.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    PAL vs PALEA (1967)

    Employees who ceased to work but are still deemed employees


    FACTS:
    4 Employees (members of PALEA) were dismissed by PAL in May 1950. In 1954, CIR en banc
    ordered the reinstatement of the employees to their former or equivalent position in the
    company with back wages from their date of reinstatement without prejudice to their seniority or
    other rights and privileges.
    On Nov 1960, PALEA moved for the execution of the CIR as regards the other rights and
    privileges specifically to: (1) Christmas bonus from 1950 to 1958; (2) accumulated sick leave;
    (3)transportation allowance during lay-off period; and (4) accumulated free trip passes, both
    domestic and international.
    By an order dated October 8, 1962, the CIR granted this motion, except as regards the sick leave
    of Onofre Grio and Bernardino Abarrientos, and the transportation allowance, which were
    denied.
    PAL maintains that the CIR has erred in acting as it did, because: (1) the aforementioned
    privileges were not specifically mentioned in the CIR resolution of July 13, 1954; (2) the order of
    the CIR dated October8, 1962, had, allegedly, the effect of amending said resolution; and (3) the
    clause therein "without prejudice to their seniority or other rights and privileges" should be
    construed prospectively, not retroactively.
    ISSUE: WON the reinstated employees were entitled to the other rights and privileges during
    the period of their lay-off
    HELD: Yes.
    CIR treated said employees as if they had not been absent from work and had been
    uninterruptedly working during the lay-off period. As a consequence, the employees involved in
    the case at bar are entitled to the Christmas bonus that PAL had given to all of its employees
    during said period, for said bonus, having been paid regularly, has become part of the
    compensation of the employees. Said employees are, likewise, entitled to transportation
    allowance and the corresponding sick leave privileges. These sick leave privileges are subject,
    however, to the following qualifications, namely: (1) that the accumulated sick leave cannot
    exceed 140 days, pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement between the PAL and the
    PALEA, effective in 1959; and (2) that, pursuant to the same agreement, which denies sick leave
    privileges to retired employees, Onofre Grio and Bernardino Abarrientos, who have retired, are
    not entitled to said privileges.
    The PAL's appeal as regards the free trip passes is, however, well taken, for the employees had
    no absolute right thereto, even if they had actually rendered services during the lay-off period.
    The free trip passes were given, neither automatically, nor indiscriminately. The employees had
    to apply therefore and their applications were subject PAL's approval.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy