SC pressed to junk wage hike challenge

Two construction companies and a fishing industry federation have asked the Supreme Court (SC) to dismiss a petition challenging the implementation of a Metro Manila minimum wage increase, arguing that a subsequent wage order has rendered the case moot.

Readycon Trading and Construction Corp., R-II Builders Inc. and the Alliance of Philippine Fishing Federations Inc., in a consolidated comment filed with the high court, said Wage Order NCR-28, which took effect on 26 September, had granted workers a new P60 daily wage increase, overtaking the relief sought in the pending petition.

Filed on 11 August by labor groups and party-list representatives, the petition challenges court orders that temporarily halted the implementation of the earlier Wage Order NCR-27. It provided for a P60 daily increase effective 25 July and another P25 increase scheduled for 20 January 2027.

The private respondents argued that the Supreme Court should dismiss the case because the challenged orders had lapsed and the wage board had issued a new order granting the first tranche of the increase.

Wage Order NCR-28 raised the daily minimum wage to P755 for non-agricultural workers and P718 for workers in agriculture, retail and service establishments employing fewer than 10 workers, and manufacturing establishments employing fewer than 10 workers.

The Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board in the National Capital Region issued the new order on 7 September and published it on 11 September. It took effect 15 days later.

Injunctions

The wage board said it issued the new order because NCR-27 had not been implemented following judicial injunctions.

The dispute stemmed from separate petitions filed by the construction companies and the fishing federation before regional trial courts in Pasig City and Navotas City, respectively.

The Pasig petitioners sought a judicial interpretation of Article 124 of the Labor Code, particularly whether the wage board was required to consider employers’ capacity to pay and the practical effects of a wage increase before implementing an order of such magnitude.

They maintained that their petition did not ask the court to set wages or substitute its judgment for that of the wage board.

The Pasig Regional Trial Court granted a temporary restraining order on 30 July and issued a writ of preliminary injunction on 13 August, conditioned on the posting of a P10-billion bond.

The respondents said the petitioners had not posted the bond as of the filing of their comment, leaving the injunction’s implementation subject to further proceedings.

In the Navotas case, the fishing federation challenged the same wage order but sought only a status quo ante order. The trial court set a clarificatory hearing but had not issued a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, according to the comment.