Interim Report - Report No 125, 1971

Case No 652 (Philippines) - Complaint date: 17-DEC-70 - Closed

1. 60. The complaint of the Airline Pilots' Association of the Philippines (ALPAP) is contained in a communication dated 17 December 1970. This complaint was transmitted to the Government, which forwarded its observations thereon in a communication dated 27 January 1971.
2. 61. The Philippines has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and also the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 62. The complainants state that the airline pilots of the Philippines are locked in a struggle with the Philippine Airlines Management (PAL) over the principle of trade unionism and freedom of association. Following the settlement of a strike on 22 October 1970, state the complainants, when the pilots, in conformity with the decision of the Court of Industrial Relations, returned to work, the management dismissed the President, Mr. Gaston, and the officials of the Airline Pilots' Association for their trade union activities. The International Federation of Airline Pilots sent its Vice-President and its Deputy President who " found PAL guilty of harassment, victimisation and union busting acts ". The complainants continue that the pilots exhausted every legal remedy to resolve the problem but that the management remained intractable. The pilots, in desperation, resigned en masse in order to protest against the infringement by PAL of trade union rights.
2. 63. In its observations the Government indicates that, under the country's legislation, three courses of action are open to a workers' organisation which considers that there has been an infringement of trade union rights: it may have recourse to the government conciliation services to seek redress for its grievances; it may engage in concerted action to compel the management to desist from infringing trade union rights; or it may bring the management before the Court of Industrial Relations on charges of unfair labour practices. In the present case, the Government points out, the ALPAP, under Captain Felix Gaston, availed itself of the government conciliation services.
3. 64. The Government gives the following account of the facts. The Bureau of Labour Relations, which is the conciliation body of the Department of Labour, the Secretary of Labour himself and even the President of the Philippines tried for several months to conciliate the dispute between the ALPAP and the management of the Philippines Airlines. When all these efforts at conciliation failed, the union engaged in concerted action by going on strike to force the management to grant its demands. Again, the Government continues, during the strike, the Bureau of Labour Relations, the Secretary of Labour, and the President of the Philippines tried to conciliate but no solution emerged. The Government states that, in the meantime, up to 85 per cent of air transport services in the Philippines was paralysed, thus creating a crisis in the whole transport industry. Faced with such a crisis, the Government indicates, the President of the Philippines had to use his powers under section 17 of the Industrial Peace Act-by referring the strike to the Court of Industrial Relations for compulsory arbitration. The Court, after hearing the parties, ordered a return to work pending examination of the main issues raised before it. Instead of complying with this return to work order, the union filed a motion for reconsideration with the full Court, claiming the return to work order of the trial judge was not executory. After the hearing, the Government states, the full Court upheld the return to work order issued by the trial judge and the striking union substantially complied with it. However, the Government indicates, for " supposed technical failure " to return to work, Captain Gaston was dismissed by the management, " thus creating a hostile climate for the implementation of the return to work order of the Court. Reacting to the dismissal of Captain Gaston, the ALPAP threatened to make its members resign en masse and later on actually did so when the management refused to reinstate Captain Gaston ". In conclusion, the Government states that the issues involved in the dispute between ALPAP and the management of Philippines Airlines are now pending in the Court of Industrial Relations.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 65. Having taken note of the explanations supplied by the Government, the Committee considers that, before pursuing its examination of the case, and in order to be fully acquainted with the facts, it would be necessary, on the one hand, to obtain more detailed information regarding the exact reasons which the management of PAL claim to have justified the dismissal of Captain Gaston, President of ALPAP, and on the other hand, to be informed of the result of the proceedings before the Court of Industrial Relations concerning the dispute in question. Accordingly, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to request the Government to supply further information on the above matters.