The answer to PAL's endless labor pains

What profits the airline that wins all its legal cases in courts of law but loses the trust of its own employees and the goodwill of its valued customers? Lately, PAL, the nation's flag carrier has practically ‘‘demolished’’ all its legal demons and won over its pilots, its ground personnel and now its flight attendants. The Philippine labor law and jurisprudence has been immensely enriched with judicial precedents established by PAL’s many cases. Almost twenty percent of SCRA (Supreme Court Review, Annotated), the country's leading chronicle of legal decisions, is dominated by legal doctrines that were created by PAL's endless foray into the labor and industrial relations legal battlefields. But the way it is turning out now, the people's reaction to this latest flip plop by the Supreme Court in the case involving PAL's flight attendants seems to be adverse to PAL’s position. And this case involving the flight attendants may yet prove to be PAL's ultimate Achilles' heel.

 What is worse, with all due respect, and we are sorry to say, is that the Highest Court of the land is being dragged down by this labor case that is turning out to be a big, big controversy. The colorful language of Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago sums it all: The SC is “teetering in the abyss of incredulity." Senator Franklin Drilon was also reported to have said that the SC did it again the way it was '' flip plopping'' in the cases involving the status of 16 cities, including Cebu's own Bogo and Carcar. Senator Kiko Pangilinan bewailed this ruling which he said could result in a serious backlash against the High Tribunal. The facts do not lie and the people are not stupid. They can read the fine prints and discern what are unwritten between the lines.

 It is beyond dispute that on 22 July 2008, the SC declared as illegal the dismissal of the 1,400 flight attendants. That would mean therefore, that management had to reinstate them to their positions, without loss of seniority rights and to pay them their full back wages and benefits from the time of the illegal termination up to actual reinstatement. On PAL's first motion for reconsideration, the SC, on 02 October 2009, affirmed its ruling and dismissed management's arguments based on substantive legal basis. In that ruling, the SC declared that the decision was FINAL and that no further pleading would be allowed. But, why did the Court allow a second Motion for Reconsideration on 02 January 2011? The people do not know the reason why. But in fairness to the Court, on 07 September 2011, the SC ruled with finality that indeed, the dismissal of the flight attendants was tainted with illegality. And so, the nagging question now is why, is it that, by the strength of a mere letter from PAL's counsel, the SC suddenly changed its ruling, this time, favoring PAL? This is the jugular question that is now the subject of too much speculations and innuendoes. We do not wish to join in those conjectures though. We stick to the merits.

 PAL has been winning practically all its legal battles in courts, tribunals, commissions and boards. But is it really winning the war in the minds and hearts of the people, including its own employees and most especially its customers? This is the crucial issue that matters most now. So what if it had its outsourcing program approved by both DOLE and Malacañan four or more times?

 Last month, PAL won a case against its pilots, when the Court of Appeals allowed it to proceed with its 730 million damage suit against ALPAP, its pilots' union which paralyzed the company with a very damaging strike in 1998. Also, last month, the National Labor Relations Commission gave PAL a legal victory when it dismissed a case of Unfair Labor Practice filed by PALEA, its union of ground personnel.

 With all due respect, the bottom line is very telling. PAL is losing money. It costs too much and earns too little. Its overhead is staggering and its is losing market shares every day of operation.

 These labor pains, all these woes that PAL is having now can be traced to the fundamentals in the art and science of leading and managing its human capital, its number one assets: its people. Perhaps what is needed is not winning court cases against one's employees but winning the respect, the loyalty and who knows, perhaps even the affections, of them.

PAL may need to go back to the basics. It is not just a matter of law, not just a matter rights, but also a matter of understanding people. That is the ultimate bottom line. No more and no less.