CA voids ruling on payment of airport employees’ allowance

Airport employees have suffered a legal setback after the Court of Appeals stopped the implementation of a court order for the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) to pay them their cost of living allowance (COLA ) and amelioration from 1999 up to the present.

In a 10-page decision, the CA’s Fifth Division granted the petition filed by MIAA seeking a reversal of the 2006 ruling of the Pasay Regional Trial Court branch 119 ordering the MIAA management to implement a 1999 circular by the Department of Budget and Management directing the integration of COLA and other allowances into the basic salaries of employees all over the country.

The appellate court agreed with MIAA’s contention that the trial court deprived the petitioners its right to due process when it failed to dismiss outright the petition filed by the Samahang Manggagawa sa Paliparan ng Pilipinas for its failure to implead DBM as an “indispensable party” in the suit

“As a real party in interest, DBM stands to be injured by the judgment in the case below. It is well-settled that if a suit is not brought in the name of or against the real party in interest, it is dismissible on the ground that the complaint states no cause of action. Concomitantly, the case below should have been dismissed outright for failure to implead DBM as party defendant,” said the ruling penned by Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier.

Associate Justices Rebecca de Guia-Salvador and Sesinando Villon concurred with the ruling.

The CA noted that the respondents named in the complaint filed by MIAA employees are considered “nominal parties” only because they are only implementing RA 6758 in accordance with the circular issued by the DBM.

“So, no judgment which in effect shall invalidate or set aside DBM Circular No. 10…, may be legally rendered without according DBM its day in court. This can only be achieved by impleading DBM as real party defendant in the case which sought to compel disbursement of public funds to cover appellees’ money claim…,” the decision stated.

The CA said the DBM should have been named as a party to the case because it is the agency tasked to implement Republic Act No. 6758 or the Salary Standardization Law and its implementing rules.

In February 1999, the DBM issued Circular No. 10 to implement RA 6758. The circular, which took effect in July that year, directs government agencies to integrate the allowances into the basic salaries of its employees.

However, MIAA employees said the management did not give their COLA and amelioration allowance. They brought the matter to the Pasay court, which ruled in favor of them. – SD/KBK, GMANews.TV