Autoescuela Marroig

Plaza de Toros

Collective Bargaining Agreement Of Philippine Airlines

septiembre 15, 2021 By: admin Category: Sin categoría

In any event, a superficial reading of the parties` 1986-1989 CBA will immediately show that Article I(3) of that agreement made its provision applicable to all workers in the bargaining unit. The specific section specifically defined the scope of the KNA, i.e. in the case under consideration, the provision relating to the payment of the Christmas bonus, with the exception of the 13th month`s salary, was included without any conditions in the KNA 1986-1989 between the respondent PALEA and the petitioner PAL. The Christmas bonus, which must be paid in December of each year, is different from the 13th monthly payment due each year in May, which is why it has been called a semi-annual bonus. In these circumstances, it was logical to infer that the PAL petitioner intended to grant the members of the bargaining unit, represented by the respondent PALEA, a Christmas bonus that went beyond their legal obligation to grant the 13th month`s salary. Once it has been decided that the benefits of subject CBA also apply to non-regular workers belonging to the bargaining unit concerned, the next and decisive question is whether the 13th month or the half-yearly bonus can be assimilated to the Christmas bonus. Philippine Airlines (PAL) and its PAL Employees Association (PALEA) working group have ceded a five-year collective agreement (CBA) providing for “enhanced terms and conditions of employment” for their members. In refusing payment of the half-yearly bonus, the PAL petitioner argues that (1) the CBA does not apply to non-regular employees, so that not all benefits arising from this agreement can be claimed, including the half-yearly bonus; and 2) the company`s practice has always been not to extend the semi-annual bonus to employees who have not obtained regular status before May, when the bonus is paid. Therefore, to be eligible for benefits under the CBA, workers must be members of the bargaining unit, but not necessarily the work organization designated as the negotiator.

A “bargaining unit” has been defined as a group of workers of a given employer, consisting of all or less all of the workers who, in the collective interest of all workers, are most likely to serve the reciprocal rights and obligations of the parties in accordance with the collective bargaining provisions of the Act.33 The fact that employees are not part of the tariff unit and therefore do not fall under the KNA is unjustified and unfounded. For us, it is clear that the PAL petitioner excludes certain workers from KNA benefits only because they have not yet reached normal status before the deadline of 30 April 1988. There is no evidence that the non-regular status of the workers concerned at that date sufficiently distinguishes their interests from those of regular workers to exclude them from the tariff unit and benefits of the KNA. All terms and conditions of employment of employees in the bargaining unit are set out in this Agreement, which govern the relationship between the Company and such employees. . . .

Comments are closed.