CASE TITLE: Saudi Arabia Airlines v.

Rebesencio

FACTS OF THE CASE: Respondents were Permanent Flight Attendants working for
petitioner Saudi Arabian Airlines (Saudia). They alleged that the they were illegally
terminated since it was made solely because they were pregnant. When
respondents informed Saudia of their pregnancies and processed their maternity
leaves, they were told to resign, otherwise they shall be terminated, which would
entail loss of benefits. Petitioner Saudia argued that its demand for resignation
was based on the “Unified Employment Contract for Female Cabin Attendants”
which stipulated that pregnancy of the Air Hostess will render her employment
contract void and she will be terminated due to lack of medical fitness. Faced with
the dilemma, respondents turned in their resignation letters.

ISSUE: Whether or not respondents voluntary resigned or were illegally

terminated

RULING: Respondents were illegally terminated. Constructive dismissal is

described as “involuntary resignation due to the harsh, hostile, and unfavorable
conditions set by the employer.” It is clear that the resignation was not voluntary
as first, respondents exerted all efforts to remain employed by filing appeal
letters; second, they intended to stay with Saudi as evidences by their availing of
maternity leaves, a temporary absence from employment and; third, it would be
unreasonable to leave one’s livelihood during a time of great need.
The Court also emphasized the glaringly discriminatory nature of Saudia’s
policy, as it “excludes from and restricts employment on the basis of no other
consideration but sex”. It is contrary to the constitutional policy on the
fundamental equality before the law of men and women.

RATIONAL/DOCTRINE:
Sec. 14, Article II of the 1987 Constitution provides that the State “shall ensure
the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.” Furthermore, the
Constitution states that “no person shall… be denied the equal protection of the
laws.”