Case Digest (G.R. No. 212426)
Facts:
Petitioner Armando G. Yrasuegui was employed by Philippine Airlines, Inc. (PAL) as an international flight steward. Standing 5'8" with a large frame, his ideal weight was set at 166 pounds under the Cabin and Crew Administration Manual. Beginning in 1984, PAL placed him on various leaves of absence and grounded him repeatedly for failing to meet prescribed weight limits. On April 26, 1989, he weighed 209 pounds and was removed from flight duty. Despite numerous warnings, leaves without pay, scheduled weight checks, and a ninety-day period to comply, his weight oscillated between 205 and 219 pounds through November 1992. On November 13, 1992, PAL served him a Notice of Administrative Charge for violation of weight standards, to which he replied on December 7, 1992, admitting the overweight condition and invoking alleged discrimination. After a clarificatory hearing, PAL terminated his employment effective June 15, 1993. The Labor Arbiter declared the dismissal illegal, ordering rCase Digest (G.R. No. 212426)
Facts:
- Background and Employment
- Petitioner Armando G. Yrasuegui served as an international flight steward of Philippine Airlines, Inc. (PAL). He is 5′8″ tall, large‐frame; ideal weight per PAL’s Cabin and Crew Administration Manual is 166 lbs.
- The Manual prescribes progressive discipline: verbal warning for 1–4 lbs overweight; written warning and removal from schedule for greater excess; weight checks every two weeks; termination if standards unmet within 90 days.
- Chronology of Weight Problems and Company Actions
- 1984–1985: PAL advised extended vacation leave (Dec 29, 1984–Mar 4, 1985) then leave without pay (Mar–Nov 1985) to reduce weight; petitioner complied intermittently.
- 1988–1989: Leave without pay (Oct 17, 1988–Feb 1989); Apr 26, 1989 removed from flight duty after weighing 209 lbs; multiple weight‐check schedules set.
- Feb 25, 1989: Weighed 215 lbs; status retained off‐duty. Oct 17, 1989: Weighed 217 lbs; petitioner signed commitment to reduce to 200 lbs by Dec 31, 1989.
- 1990: Failed to attend weight checks in Jan, Apr and Jun; Jul 30, 1990 weighed 212 lbs; remained non‐compliant and out of service.
- Administrative Charge and Dismissal
- Aug & Nov 1992: Petitioner’s weight checks showed 219 lbs and 205 lbs. Nov 13, 1992 served Notice of Administrative Charge; Dec 7, 1992 submitted answer admitting overweight and claiming condonation/discrimination; Dec 8, 1992 clarificatory hearing held.
- Jun 15, 1993: PAL terminated petitioner for failure to meet weight standards; motion for reconsideration denied. Petitioner filed complaint for illegal dismissal.
- Labor and Appellate Proceedings
- Labor Arbiter (Nov 18, 1998): Declared dismissal illegal; ordered reinstatement and backwages.
- NLRC (Jun 23, 2000): Affirmed as modified—full backwages inclusive of allowances; employer to choose physical or payroll reinstatement.
- Court of Appeals (Aug 31, 2004): Reversed NLRC; held weight standards are continuing qualifications under Art. 282(e) of the Labor Code; dismissed complaint; denied reconsideration May 10, 2005.
Issues:
- Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in holding that petitioner’s obesity is a ground for dismissal under Art. 282(e) of the Labor Code.
- Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in holding that petitioner’s dismissal can be predicated on the bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) defense.
- Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in holding that petitioner was not discriminated against when other overweight cabin attendants were given duties or promoted.
- Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in deeming petitioner’s claims for reinstatement and wages moot and academic.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)