In so short a time, the Corona-less Supreme Court (SC) appears to have quickly become an Aquino court, with the high court, led by acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio calling for a special en banc session to reverse its status quo ante (SQA) order issued in less than 24 hours.
Only a  week before the scheduled interviews for the next magistrate of the high court,  its members have voted to see things Malacañang’s way in connection with the increasingly volatile situation involving drivers and owners of city buses.
The SC  recalled  its earlier resolution which had ordered an SQA  enjoining the Department of Labor and Employment (DoLE) and Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) from implementing the fixed salary scheme for bus drivers and conductors.
Two magistrates, Associate Justices Lucas Bersamin and Roberto Abad,  were on official leave and did not vote during the special en banc session that was called by Carpio.
Following the recall of  the SQA, Malacañang can now implement the fixed salary scheme in lieu of the “payment by results or on commission basis, or by incentives” being given to bus drivers and conductors by the operators.
“Since there is no TRO (temporary restraining order) or status quo ante, the DoLE can implement its department order for a fixed salary scheme for bus drivers and conductors,” SC acting Public Information Office chief, lawyer Ma. Gleoresty Guerra said.
The Court said it “resolved to defer the issuance of the status quo ante order” and require the respondent agencies to comment within 10 days on the prayer for TRO of the petitioners  Provincial Bus Operators Association of the Philippines (PBOAP), Southern Luzon Bus Operators Association Inc. (SOLUBOA), Inter-city Bus Operators Association (INTERBOA) and City of San Jose Del Monte Bus Operators Association (CSJDMBOA).    
“This resolution supersedes the action taken by the Court en banc on July 10, 2012 on the same matter,” the SC added.
Guerra said the Justices agreed during their regular en banc session that there is legal basis and urgency to grant the SQA in favor of the bus operators.
She, however, failed to state why, after the same Justices had agreed on there being a legal basos and urgency to grant the SQA,  suddenly, in a brief span of less than 24 hours, did not the Justices now think that there is no longer any legal basis and urgency to retain their SQA.
The impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona had, as one of the charges in the impeachment leveled against him, his alleged flip-flopping on the Philippine Air Lines union case. This was railed against by an Aquino appointee in the SC due to Corona’s alleged bias for the previous president.
Noticeably too, there has been no opposition aired by Aquino’s first appointee, Associate Justice Lourdes Sereno, or for that matter Justice Carpio, on the quick issuance of the the earlier SQA, something she and Carpio made a big deal of when the Corona-led SC issued a TRO against Justice Leila De Lima’s ban on the travel of the former president, Gloria Arroyo.
Bus operators are asking the Court to nullify  DoLE’s Department Order No. 118-12, Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board Memorandum Circular No. 2012-001 and other related issuances for being unconstitutional as they impair existing obligations of contracts under the Bill of Rights in violation of Article III, Section 10 of the Constitution.
The petitioners  asked the High Tribunal to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) to enjoin the DoLE, the LTFRB and other government agencies from implementing the orders.
Under LTFRB Circular No. 2012-001, franchises of bus operators will be revoked if they fail to comply with the DoLE’s directive.
The petitioners pointed out that the D.O. No. 118-12 compels bus operators to abandon their existing hiring arrangements, such as “payment by results or on commissions basis, or by incentives ” or even existing collective bargaining agreements or such other practices or hirings that have not been prohibited by law.
They noted that the DoLE issued the order arbitrarily as it failed to conduct consultations with bus operators and other stakeholders in the transport industry.