{"id":25348,"date":"2014-09-10T11:15:54","date_gmt":"2014-09-10T03:15:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=25348"},"modified":"2014-09-10T18:11:55","modified_gmt":"2014-09-10T10:11:55","slug":"sc-deferred-order-to-pay-p62b-to-napocor-employees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2014\/09\/10\/sc-deferred-order-to-pay-p62b-to-napocor-employees\/","title":{"rendered":"SC deferred order to pay P62B to Napocor employees"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_24173\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-24173\" style=\"width: 300px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/08\/1200px-Supreme_Court_of_the_Philippines.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-24173\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/08\/1200px-Supreme_Court_of_the_Philippines-300x225.jpg\" alt=\"The Supreme Court of the Philippines building in Manila, Philippines. Photo by Mike Gonzalez \/ Wikimedia Commons.\" width=\"300\" height=\"225\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/08\/1200px-Supreme_Court_of_the_Philippines-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/08\/1200px-Supreme_Court_of_the_Philippines-1024x768.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/08\/1200px-Supreme_Court_of_the_Philippines.jpg 1200w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-24173\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">The Supreme Court of the Philippines building in Manila, Philippines. Photo by Mike Gonzalez \/ Wikimedia Commons.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>MANILA \u2013 The Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended the enforcement of its 2006 order allowing the National Power Corp. (Napocor) and Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp. (PSALM) to pay P62 billion in damages and back wages to its employees who were illegally retrenched in 2003.<\/p>\n<p>The court held in a resolution released last Tuesday to suspend the former decision, lifting the garnishment against Napocor and PSALM, as well as their creditors and depository banks, for payouts to petitioners.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe court\u2019s action today\u2026 stops the execution of the writs of garnishment and allows the court to determine who are entitled to be paid under the terms of its previous resolutions and how much each is entitled to be paid,\u201d the resolution said.<\/p>\n<p>It added that the decision was made in order to properly identify which terminated the employees who were entitled to back wages and how much should they receive.<\/p>\n<p>The original decision, dated Sept. 26, 2006 favored the NPC Drivers and Mechanics Association (Dama), nullifying NPC resolutions and that prompted employee termination in 2003.<\/p>\n<p>Two years later, a resolution was issued declaring that form the time of termination, the petitioners \u201chave the right to reinstatement or separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, pursuant to a validly approved separation program; plus back wages, wage adjustments, and other benefits accruing.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>PSALM, on the other hand took action last August, after the the 2006 ruling was upheld by the court and insisted that the NPC and PSALM has a liability on the benefits of the dismissed employees.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>MANILA \u2013 The Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended the enforcement of its 2006 order allowing the National Power Corp. (Napocor) &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":24173,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[95],"tags":[3194,2942],"class_list":["post-25348","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ph","tag-napocor","tag-sc","mauthors-lei-fontamillas","mauthors-philippine-canadian-inquirer"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25348","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25348"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25348\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/24173"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25348"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25348"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25348"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}