8/12/2019 [Digest]Pal v Nlrc

1/2

G.R. No. 55159 December 22, 1989PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., petitioner v. NA!I"NAL LA#"RRELA!I"NS C"$$ISSI"N %n& AR$AND" D"LINA, repon&ent.

'AC!S(

Dolina was admitted to the Philippine Airlines (PAL) Aviation School

for training as a pilot beginning 16 Januar 1!"#$

%he training agreement bound PAL to provide regular and permanentemploment to Dolina upon completion of the training course$ &n 'Januar 1!"* Dolina completed the course* and undertoo+ an e,uipment

,ualification course up to &ctober 1!"$ &n ! &ctober 1!"* the -ivilAeronautics Administration issued him a license as -ommercial Pilotand PAL then e.tended him a temporar appointment for si. (6) monthsas Limited /irst &fficer

0hen his appointment was due to e.pire on # April 1!"* Dolina had

onl logged eight four (2) hours and fift five () minutes fling

time* short of the minimum fling hours re,uired for regulari3ationas /irst &fficer

After the third e.tension of his appointment* Dolina completed the fling hours re,uirement* and thus on #1 4arch 1!"6 he applied forregulari3ation as /irst &fficer$

&n 1" August 1!"6* Dolina too+ a pschological e.amination wherein

his 5Adaptabilit ating5 was found to be 5unacceptable5

o 7e was sub8ected to an e.amination and interview b the Pilot

Acceptance 9ualifications :oard as part of the regulari3ation process*which e.amination revealed the following;

b$ Armando Dolina After thorough evaluation of thecandidate

8/12/2019 [Digest]Pal v Nlrc

2/2

Neiter c%n procee&in on %ppe%) be*ore te NLRC en b%nc be

coni&ere& % p%rt o* te %rbitr%tion procee&in.

In it bro%& ene, %rbitr%tion i te re*erence o* % &ip+te to %n

imp%rti%) tir& peron, coen b3 te p%rtie or %ppointe& b3

t%t+tor3 %+torit3 to e%r %n& &eci&e te c%e in controver3

6en te conent o* one o* te p%rtie i en*orce& b3 t%t+tor3

proviion, te procee&in i re*erre& to % comp+)or3 %rbitr%tion

In )%bor c%e, comp+)or3 %rbitr%tion i te proce o* ett)ement o*)%bor &ip+te b3 % overnment %enc3 -ic % te %+torit3 toinveti%te %n& to m%e %n %-%r& -ic i bin&in on %)) te p%rtie

0hen the Labor Arbiter renders his decision* compulsor arbitration is

deemed terminated because b then the hearing and determination of thecontrovers has ended$ An appeal raised b an aggrieved part from theLabor ArbiterL- en banc merel reviews the LaborArbiterL- had no authorit to order the continued pament of Dolina