Thursday, February 21, 2008 'Delay' in resolving case prompts picket
IN AN attempt to dramatize what they claim to be their 16-year old plight, some 30 former employees of the General Milling Corporation (GMC) rallied in front of the Court of Appeals yesterday.
Bearing placards, they cried for “justice” and stressed that the Supreme Court (SC) has resolved the legality of their claims.
They called on the justices of the division their case is pending before to act swiftly.
The rally was to begin at 2 p.m. but “protesters” took up their posts only after the news crew of a local television station arrived.
They told the guard they want to speak with a representative of the Court of Appeals (CA) and were immediately referred to the office of lawyer Stephen Ygnacio, the public information officer.
Briefing
Ygnacio spoke to Victor Lastimosa, vice president of the GMC Independent Labor Union, and briefed him on the status of the case, particularly on the motion for inhibition that the union had filed.
The motion was submitted after a similar “rally” at the CA last Nov. 23.
Ygnacio said the CA issued an order last Dec. 11, 2007, giving GMC five days upon receipt to submit its comment to the motion for inhibition.
GMC submitted its compliance only last Jan. 3. On the other hand, justices have as much as 90 days to study and rule on an issue before them.
The case between GMC and its labor, the protesters claim, is already 16 years old.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) has already ruled in favor of the union when it, last June 20, 2006, upheld the Oct. 27, 2005 findings of the Executive Labor Arbiter.
The ruling, in turn, was in subservience to an SC decision that upheld the validity of labor’s claim.
Briefing
The union moved for the issuance of a writ of execution but GMC went to the appellate court questioning the terms of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) and the computation of the amount for benefits.
The CA Special 20th Division, in a ruling penned by Associate Justice Stephen Cruz and concurred by Associate Justices Antonio Villamor and Francisco Acosta, dated Oct. 10, 2007, again upheld the union’s claim.
Union members, however, reached through their November 2007 rally.
They assailed the decision and said it reduced what they could lawfully claim–from P433.7 million to a mere P36.1 million and 6,372 sacks of rice.
In the dispositive portion of the decision, they said the CA only recognizes the union’s claim for the months of December 1991 to November 1993, as contained in their CBA with management.
However, in the body of the decision, the CA acknowledged that the computation for benefits starts from the moment the CBA took effect and lasts up to the moment a new CBA is concluded between the two parties.
Computation
Since no new CBA was concluded, the computation should be from December 1991 up to the time labor filed the motion for issuance of the writ of execution-March 22, 2005-which subsequently resulted in the elevation of the labor controversy to the CA.
The CA, they said, also excluded from the computation the benefits owed to some employees who signed quit claims even though GMC, at the height of the trial before the NLRC did not question it nor raised an appeal after the award was originally computed.
The CA likewise excluded in its computation remuneration from vacation and sick leave as well as salary differentials, dislocation allowance, the separation pay for those who voluntarily resigned when the company began having trouble–an estimated additional P27 million.
They wanted the appellate court to reconsider the ruling but, before that, they want the entire division to inhibit. (KNR)
