Case Summary (G.R. No. L-26406)
Applicable Law
The pertinent legal framework includes the 1987 Philippine Constitution, specifically its provisions related to social justice and labor protection, and Republic Act No. 602 (Minimum Wage Law), along with the amendments made by Republic Act No. 4180.
Legal Background and Arguments
The petitioner sought to adjust its financial obligations by claiming that it could reduce the minimum salary for its monthly paid employees from P180.00 to P152.00 based on the interpretation of Section 19 of Republic Act No. 602. It argued that this section, prohibiting wage reductions below the minimum wage, should not apply to employers established after the enactment of the Minimum Wage Law, suggesting that the law only intended to protect employees of businesses that existed prior to its enactment.
Lower Court's Decision
The lower court rejected the petitioner's arguments, holding that Section 19 of Republic Act No. 602 remains applicable even after the amendment by Republic Act No. 4180. The court interpreted that Section 19 had not been repealed or rendered inoperative and emphasized the broader legislative intent of protecting employees and ensuring a decent living wage.
Interpretation and Legislative Intent
The ruling remarked on the statutory language's unmistakable intention to provide a minimum of P6.00 daily wage without facilitating methods for employers to evade this obligation. The court highlighted that accepting the petitioner's interpretation could undermine the constitutional mandate of social justice, protecting laborers' rights, and the objectives of Congress in ensuring the basic livelihood of workers.
Conclusion of the Appeal
Ultimately, the appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, d
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-26406)
Case Overview
- The case revolves around a petition for declaratory relief filed by Automotive Parts & Equipment Company, Inc. against the Secretary of Labor and the Director of the Bureau of Labor Standards.
- The petitioner sought to reduce the monthly salary of its employees from P180.00 to P152.00, interpreting the provisions of the Minimum Wage Law and its amendatory act.
- The lower court ruled against the petitioner, affirming the requirement to maintain the minimum wage.
Constitutional Context
- The decision emphasizes the constitutional principle of promoting social justice and protecting labor rights.
- It references the explicit mandate for increasing the minimum wage, which was raised to P6.00 daily, a P2.00 increment.
- The law’s language is deemed clear, making it difficult for employers to evade its provisions.
Petitioner's Claims
- The appellant argued that Section 19 of Republic Act No. 602, which prohibits the reduction of wages above the minimum wage, was misapplied to them.
- They contended that this provision only applied to employers in existence prior to the enactment of the law and should not affect them as a newer business.