ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[ G.R. No. 132162. January 26, 2000]
PHIL. WALLBOARD CORP. vs. NWPC, et al.
SECOND DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 26 2000.
G.R. No. 132162 (Philippine Wallboard Corporation vs. National Wages and Productivity Commission and Manila Lumber Employees and General Workers' Union.)
Before us is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court assailing two (2) decisions of Public respondent National Wages and Productivity Commission (NWPC) dated October 6, 1997 and December 16, 1997, denying the application of petitioner Philippine Wallboard Corporation (hereafter, "PWC") for extension of its one-year exemption from coverage of Wage Order Nos. NCR-04 and NCR-04-A.
The facts are:
On January 16, 1996, the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board-National Capital Region (RTWPB-NCR) issued Wage Order No. NCR-04 Section 1 of which provides, thus:
"Section 1. All private sector workers and employees in the National Capital Region receiving the prescribed minimum wage rate of ONE HUNDRED FORTY FIVE PESOS per day shall receive a wage increase of twenty pesos (P20.00) per day x x x."
On February 6, 1996, the RTWPB-NCR issued Wage Order No. NCR-04-A prescribing a formula for wage distortion.
On March 5, 1996, petitioner PWC filed with the RTWPB-NCR, an application for exemption from the aforesaid wage orders on the ground that it was a distressed establishment with an impaired capital of at least twenty-five percent (25%).
On September 2, 1996, said application was approved by the RTWPB-NCR. The dispositive portion of its Decision thus provides:
"WHEREFORE, premises considered, the application filed by PHILIPPINE WALLBOARD CORPORATION is hereby APPROVED. PHILLIPPINE WALLBOARD CORPORATION is hereby granted exemption from the implementation of Wage Order No. NCR-04 and NCR-04-A, for all employees in the National Capital Region, for a period of twelve (12) months effective 02 February 1996 until 01 February 1997. After the period of exemption shall have expired, Philippine Wallboard Corporation shall pay the corresponding minimum wage for all covered workers without need of further notice." 1 Annex "C" of the Petition, Rollo, p. 25. Emphasis supplied by the RTWPB-NCR.
On March 3, 1997, petitioner PWC filed a Motion for Reconsideration where it sought an extension of the period for exemption granted by the Board on the ground that it continued to suffer business reverses.
On March 11, 1997, the RTWPB-NCR denied the motion, citing Section 7 of Wage Order No. NCR 04 which expressly limits the period of exemption to a maximum of one (1) year from the effectivity of this wage order.
On June 30, 1997, petitioner appealed to the NWPC which, however, denied the same in the assailed Decision of October 6, 1997. It ruled, thus:
"Perforce, there is simply no legal basis upon which the extension of exemption being sought in the instant appeal will lie. Appellant, therefore, is entitled only to a maximum duration of exemption of one year under subject Wage Order.
It must be stressed, as we have done so in similar appeals of this nature, that the non-renewability of the one year exemption was purposely meant to protect workers from any deleterious effect of a prolonged exemption.
"Finally, it may not be amiss to note that in Cheng Ban Yek & Co., Inc. v. National Wages and Productivity Commission, et al., G.R. No. 112216, December 6, 1996, which involves the issue of whether or not this Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in denying the petitioners' request for extension of the one year exemption granted to it by the Board under Wage Order No. NCR-02 & NCR-02-A, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for certiorari after finding that no such grave abuse of discretion was committed by respondent Commission in denying the extension of exemption sought under the Wage Order." 2 Annex "A" of the Petition, Rollo, pp.20-21.
On October 23, 1997, petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration but the same was denied in the assailed Decision of December 16, 1997. 3 Annex "B" Petition, Rollo pp. 22-23.
Hence, this petition.
Petitioner insists that the NWPC committed grave abuse of discretion in denying petitioner's application for extension from Wage Order No. NCR-04 and NCR-04-A despite its worsening financial condition.
We disagree.
Section 7 of Wage Order No. NCR-04 categorically provides that exemption thereunder is to be granted for a maximum of only one year. The said section which states, viz:
"Section 7. The Board has the discretion to grant full or partial exemption to such employer with respect to the amount or period of exemption but in no case shall it exceed one (1) year from the effectivity of this Wage Order.
is clear and fixes the limit within which such exemption shall be valid. There are no exceptions.
The rationale for allowing a one-year exemption from coverage of the wage order is precisely to afford the parties affected thereby, more than sufficient time to cope with adverse financial conditions and make the necessary adjustments in order to comply with the mandated wage increases. To allow the petitioner to escape this obligation is tantamount to a judicial imprimatur of an attempt to evade the mandate of the wage order in question. This, we cannot tolerate.
WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is hereby DISMISSED. Petitioner is ordered to pay the corresponding minimum wage to all its covered workers effective 02 February 1997. Costs against petitioner.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) TOMASITA M. DRIS
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
