4/1/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
learn that he was blamed for having instigated the mass resignation of the Filipino
crew. When he tried to explain his side, the agency told him that the action taken by
the Master was final and that it was not interested in his story.
For their part, the agency and Panstar argued that Flores, while in their employ,
insistently and rudely questioned the crew's working schedule, including the propriety
of requiring them to render overtime services. They claimed that Flores instigated the
crew to rebel against the authority of the Master, under the guise of questioning social
security and income tax deductions. As a result, the crew members became unruly,
arrogant, and impolite, and were even violent in expressing their views. They even
refused to obey the lawful orders of the Master and the senior officers, thus causing
dissension on board the vessel.
The agency alleged that sometime in September 1997, Flores prepared a petition for
five Filipino crew members from the engine department, demanding the ouster of 1st
Assistant Engineer Rodolfo Escarola, reportedly for incompetence and inefficiency; they
threatened mass resignation. To create further unrest and dissatisfaction, Flores
induced Sofronio Tibay, Herman Sebuando, Primitive Ferrer and Raymundo Angel, of
the same department, to write a letter to the ship management that they would be
taking their emergency leaves, one after the other, in November 1997. They charged
the vessel officers of mismanaging the crew. When confronted about the letter,
however, they denied most of the letter's contents, pointing to Flores as the author of
the letter. At Flores' instigation, the crew members threatened to disembark without
waiting for their replacements. The Master asked them to work for a less drastic
solution, but they maintained their threat.
In light of the growing unrest on board the ship and Flores' negative work attitude, the
Master, Capt. B.H. Mun, asked Flores to explain why he should not be administratively
sanctioned for (1) disrespecting his superior officers through his unruly, discourteous,
impolite and violent behavior; (2) inciting the crew to commit insubordination and
engaging in an activity which tends to create discontent among the crew or to destroy
harmonious relations with the principal; and (3) inefficiency and other infractions,
specifically: (a) staying at his quarters most of the time while on duty, leaving
unattended the messages from the charterer or from the Panstar office; (b) revealing
confidential messages to the crew without the Master's permission; and (c)
insubordination.
According to the agency and Panstar, Flores became enraged after he was informed of
the charges, but could only vehemently deny the accusations. The Master then decided
to separate Flores from the service as the former was convinced that the charges were
well-founded. The agency and Panstar claimed that Flores was paid his overtime pay,
salary for November 1997, and accrued vacation leave pay.
In a decision dated August 20, 1999, [4] Labor Arbiter Adolfo C. Babiano dismissed the
complaint for lack of merit. He found that the evidence the agency and Panstar
presented were convincing enough to prove that Flores was a serious threat to the
safety of the vessel and its crew. He noted that Flores failed to refute the agency's and
Panstar's allegations that he incited the crew to rebel against the authority of the
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/52684
2/10