GR 170369; (June, 2010) (Digest)
G.R. No. 170369 ; June 16, 2010
KOREAN AIR CO., LTD. and SUK KYOO KIM, Petitioners, vs. ADELINA A.S. YUSON, Respondent.
FACTS
Adelina Yuson was a long-time employee of Korean Air, hired in 1975 and promoted to Passenger Sales Manager by 1999. In 2000, Korean Air suffered massive financial losses, leading it to implement a cost-reduction program. In August 2001, the company issued a memorandum offering an Early Retirement Program (ERP) to its staff, providing 1.5 months’ salary for every year of service. Yuson accepted this offer in writing on August 23, 2001.
However, Korean Air, through its General Manager Suk Kyoo Kim, informed Yuson on August 24, 2001, that she was excluded from the ERP because she was already scheduled for compulsory retirement on January 8, 2002. The company asserted the offer was not absolute but an invitation subject to management’s discretion, intended for employees with longer remaining service to achieve cost savings. Yuson contended that a perfected contract existed upon her acceptance and accused the company of bad faith and discrimination.
ISSUE
Whether a perfected contract of early retirement was created between Yuson and Korean Air upon her acceptance of the ERP offer, obligating the company to grant the enhanced benefits.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court ruled that no perfected contract of early retirement was created. The legal logic hinges on the principle of consent and the nature of the offer. For a contract to be perfected, there must be a meeting of the minds upon a definite offer and an acceptance thereof. The Court found that Korean Air’s memorandum was not a definite offer but merely an invitation to treat or a general announcement of a company program. Crucially, the memorandum stated the program was being offered to staff “upon discretion of management,” reserving the right to approve individual applications. This language negated any immediate and absolute offer.
Yuson’s acceptance, therefore, could not perfect a contract because the requisite consent from Korean Air was lacking; the company explicitly withheld its final approval. The ERP was a cost-saving measure aimed at employees with longer tenure, and granting it to an employee already at the brink of compulsory retirement would contradict its purpose. The Court emphasized that management retains the prerogative to set reasonable qualifications for such programs. Consequently, Yuson was only entitled to her standard retirement benefits under the Collective Bargaining Agreement, not the enhanced ERP package. The NLRC decision denying her claim was reinstated.