Employees Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP) vs.

NWPC
[201 SCRA 759 (1991)]
Facts:
Petitioners ECOP questioned the validity of the wage order issued by the RTWPB dated October 23,
1990 pursuant to the authority granted by RA 6727. The wage order increased the minimum wage by
P17.00 daily in the National Capital Region.
The wage order is applied to all workers and employees in the private sector of an increase of P 17.00
including those who are paid above the statutory wage rate. ECOP appealed with the NWPC but
dismissed the petition.
The Solicitor General in its comment posits that the Board upon the issuance of the wage order fixed
minimum wages according to the salary method. Petitioners insist that the power of RTWPB was
delegated, through RA 6727, to grant minimum wage adjustments and in the absence of authority, it can
only adjust floor wages.
Issue:
Whether or not the wage order issues by RTWPB dated October 23, 1990 is valid.
SC Ruling:
The Court agrees with the Solicitor General. It noted that there are two ways in the determination of wage,
these are floor wage method and salary ceiling method. The floor wage method involves the fixing of
determinate amount that would be added to the prevailing statutory minimum wage while the salary
ceiling method involves where the wage adjustment is applied to employees receiving a certain
denominated salary ceiling.
RA 6727 gave statutory standards for fixing the minimum wage.
ART. 124. Standards/Criteria for Minimum Wage Fixing The regional minimum wages to be established
by the Regional Board shall be as nearly adequate as is economically feasible to maintain the minimum
standards of living necessary for the health, efficiency and general well-being of the employees within the
framework of the national economic and social development program. In the determination of such
regional minimum wages, the Regional Board shall, among other relevant factors, consider the following:
(a) The demand for living wages;
(b) Wage adjustment vis-a-vis the consumer price index;
(c) The cost of living and changes or increases therein;
(d) The needs of workers and their families;
(e) The need to induce industries to invest in the countryside;
(f) Improvements in standards of living;

(g) The prevailing wage levels;

(h) Fair return of the capital invested and capacity to pay of employers;
(i) Effects of employment generation and family income; and
(j) The equitable distribution of income and wealth along the imperatives of economic and social
development."
The wage order was not acted in excess of boards authority. The law gave reasonable limitations to the
delegated power of the board.