If not for journalist Victor C. Agustin, who obviously has a sharp ax to grind against the owners of the Philippine Daily Inquirer (PDI) that traces back to the days when he worked for that newspaper, the public and even friends in media would not have known about PDI former executive editor Jose Ma. Nolasco’s retirement pay predicament.
In a Facebook post, Agustin published the Court of Appeals Ninth Division decision on CA-G.R. SP No. 175698 listed as Jose Ma. D. Nolasco, petitioner versus National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Philippine Daily Inquirer, Inc., and Alexandra Prieto-Romualdez, Rudyard Arbolado and Renato B. Lao.
In his petition, Nolasco sought to annul and set aside the decision and resolution of public respondent NLRC 4th Division dated February 28, 2022 and July 29, 2022, respectively, for having been issued allegedly with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
The CA ruling established that Joey Nolasco started working at the PDI in 1985 as a political reporter, and rose through the ranks until he became executive editor, replacing the late Letty Jimenez-Magsanoc. He received a month basic pay of P187,376.57 and a monthly travel allowance of P58,523.43. On top of these, Nolasco received P70,000 from time to time out of PDI former chair Marixi Prieto’s personal funds, and this additional compensation was not reflected in his pay slip and was off the books of the company. The editor retired from the PDI on Feb. 25, 2019.
It would appear that Nolasco petitioned the NLRC to include the amount of P70,000 in his monthly compensation for the purpose of computing his retirement pay, but lost in that body. He then sought relief in the Court of Appeals.
In their decision penned by Associate Justice Rex Bernardo Pascual, the CA said the P70,000 additional compensation cannot be included in his monthly pay because it is “an act of liberality or gratuity and does not ripen into a right that is properly demandable by Nolasco.”
The court cited Mega Magazine Publications, Inc. et al., v. Defensor, which said, “grant of a bonus or special incentive, being a management prerogative, is not a demandable and enforceable obligation, except when the bonus or special incentive is made part of the wage, salary or compensation of the employee, or is promised by the employer and expressly agreed upon by the parties.”
Writer-TV host-columnist Victor Agustin commented that “the retired executive editor of the Philippine Daily Inquirer has found out that the off-the-books cash extended to him by his senoras not only stopped with his retirement, the extra monthly handout also does not count towards the computation of his modest retirement package.”
The Daily Chronicle commiserates with former executive editor Joey Nolasco and hope that despite this CA ruling, he can have other legal recourse to claim what is rightfully his. It is sad that this thing—the publication by Agustin of this CA decision—happened on the eve of Labor Day.
Labor Day reminds us that although media workers—if they are brilliant—may be better paid, well fed, and well taken care of by owners of media establishments, they are still basically members of the working class who need to fight every inch of the way for the fruits of their labor.
As colleague Vic Agustin pointed out in his FB post, it’s a Labor Day Lesson not just for Joey but for all of us in media.
Comentários