STIPULATION AGAINST MARRIAGE

Case:
Irish Arellano, a flight attendant of ABC Airlines, was dismissed from her job by reason of her
marriage. In dismissing her, the company invoked its policy which provides: Flight attendant
applicants must be single and will be automatically separated from employment in the event they
subsequently get married.
Irish disputed her dismissal on account of her marriage, invoking Art.135 of the Labor Code. The
company, on the other hand, also raised arguments that its flight attendants will get pregnant
upon getting married and the marriage will make them inefficient or less efficient. To add, the
company argued the policy has been enforced for many years and so far, no competent authority
has declared it illegal or unjust. It also claimed that it has openly adopted and enforced this
policy or regulation in good faith over the years believing it legally justifiable because of the
special circumstances under which flight attendants operate.
The company invoked the special occupation of flight attendants demand, a special set of labor
standards especially with respect to safety, health and aesthetics.
Questions:
1. What are the specific labor laws violated by ABC Airlines against Irish Arellano?
2. Present and evaluate reasons cited by ABC Airlines why they need to have single flight
attendants.
3. Is ABC Airlines justified in citing inefficiency as valid ground for termination? Explain.

Source:
http://www.laborlaw.usc-law.org/2010/02/11/prohibited-stipulations-in-employment-contract/

Answer:

Case Study Labor Law

HRM

1. By dismissing Irish Arellano, a flight attendant of ABC Airlines due to her marriage and
subsequent possibility of pregnancy will may render her less efficient by standards of the
company, ABC Airlines has violated Article 136 of the Labor Code of the Philippines which
has the following stipulation against marriage: " It shall be unlawful for an employer to
require as a condition of employment or continuation of employment that a woman
employee shall not get married, or to stipulate expressly or tacitly that upon getting
married a woman employee shall be deemed resigned or separated or to actually dismiss,
discharge, discriminate or otherwise prejudice a woman employee merely by reason of her
marriage."
2. The company policy of ABC Airlines states: Flight attendant applicants must be single and
will be automatically separated from employment in the event they subsequently get
married. According to the company, it is duly expected from female flight attendant who
gets married, will subsequently get pregnant and give birth. The company deems this to be
inefficient for the reason that a woman who is pregnant will no longer be as able as a non
pregnant woman in carrying out the tasks of a flight attendant. Since pregnancy is a
delicate situation, the physical activities of a pregnant woman may be hindered by her
condition. It is also expected that a between the last months of the last trimester, a
maternity leave will be applied by the flight attendant to let her body heal from giving
birth and to attend to her newborn. The company may have also foreseen the
complications of having a child to affect how the flight attendant will be performing her
duties. For example, in the event that the flight attendant's child will need her immediate
care, she may request an off time from work to attend to her child's needs. This is
perceived as inefficiency by the company as such instances may affect the company
operations.

3. ABC Airlines' citing "inefficiency" as a valid ground for terminating flight attendant Irish
Arellano because of her marriage is not justifiable. There is no concrete evidence that
being married may cause inefficiency. Despite the company having a policy citing that
flight attendants must be single and will be automatically separated from employment
when they get married, this is considered null and void and cannot be reinforced because
it violates a stipulation in our Labor code. Therefore, this is without force and effect.

Case Study Labor Law

HRM