We were confronted with one settled issue: The airline is in distress. They (Philippine Air Lines management officials) need reformatting of their corporation for it to survive.

What is the national interest? There are 10 million Filipinos overseas. With what has been  happening in the Middle East, one or two airlines capable  of going to the Middle East  to fetch our citizens, we cannot allow our national flag carrier and all the other carriers capable of reaching those destinations to become non-entities and lose that ability if there is a need to repatriate our countrymen.

We would want to sympathize with those in  PALEA who were gonna get an interim collective bargaining agreement, but the interest of 10 million-or-so outweigh the 2,000-or-so affected by PALEA.

There is no perfect solution to this mess, but it is part and parcel of the changing realities in the entire world…Hopefully there will be no more obstructions because of that we will appeal to the Supreme Court, perhaps to hasten the process.

No one could have  said it better than President Aquino himself.

In a regime of law, order, and due process, the SC has the last say, and what it says itself becomes part of the law of the land.

Luckily, the SC justices exercise judicial wisdom and statesmanship in admitting their own errors and correcting them to achieve what is just and right on the scales of the lady in blindfolds.  

The local business community also has a concurring opinion about the labor issue at PAL.  

In fact, one of the country’s largest business groups has backed  the decision of the SC to recall its supposedly final ruling on the termination of 1,400 flight attendants of PAL in 1998.

In a statement, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc. president Francis Chua said the High Tribunal “displayed extraordinary courage and grit for owning up to its mistake”.

“It’s not everyday that we see a Supreme Court correcting what it described as a misapplication of its own internal rules,” Chua added.

The SC “recalled” earlier this week its decision which had initially handed the victory to the Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines, declaring the termination of its members 13 years ago as illegal and ordering their reinstatement with back pay.

However, PAL counsel Estelito Mendoza wrote the SC, pointing to a technicality — that the court’s Second Division had issued a ruling, while the case was actually being tried by the Third Divison — prompting the court to recall its decision.

Chua said the SC has always been perceived as “infallible” and whose rulings were “cast in stone”. However, the case of FASAP versus PAL was “a clear example that the tribunal would not hesitate to recall a decision that it believes suffers from technical flaws,” he said.

“It’s easy to criticize our magistrates, especially in a case as controversial as the PAL-FASAP issue,” the PCCI chief added. “But what would we rather have? A High Court that insists it is right even when wrong, or a court that knows how to admit and correct its mistake? I think the latter is the real essence of justice?”

“I believe businesses in this country would be better off and more secure in the thought that our present Supreme Court is ready and willing to stand up for what is right despite criticisms,” he stressed.

As this developed, Chua urged the SC  en banc to swiftly resolve the case, which has dragged on for over a decade.

“In fairness to both parties, this case must have a final resolution so that the former cabin attendants can move on with their lives while the company can also plan for the future,” he said.

From a business standpoint, ther PCCI chief explained it would be extremely difficult for companies like PAL to make long-term plans as long as there is a pending case whose potential cost to the company could erode, if not wipe out, the firm’s equity.

Our thoughts. exactly.