You are on page 1of 3

Prohibition Regarding Wages

ROYAL PLANT WORKERS UNION v COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILS.-CEBU


PLANT

GR. NO. 198783, APRIL 15, 2013

DOCTRINE:

The operators’ chairs cannot be considered as one of the employee benefits


covered in Article 116 of the Labor Code. In the Court’s view, the term
"benefits" mentioned in the non-diminution rule refers to monetary benefits or
privileges given to the employee with monetary equivalents.

Such benefits or privileges form part of the employees’ wage, salary or


compensation making them enforceable obligations.

The above article speaks of non-diminution of supplements and other employee


benefits. Supplements are privileges given to an employee which constitute as
extra remuneration besides his or her basic ordinary earnings and wages. From
this definition, we can only deduce that the other employee benefits spoken of
by Article 100 pertain only to those which are susceptible of monetary
considerations.

ABS-CBN SUPERVISORS EMPLOYEES UNION v ABS-CBN BROADCASTING


CORPORATION

304 SCRA 489

DOCTRINE:

A check-off is a process or device whereby the employer, on agreement with the


Union, recognized as the proper bargaining representative, or on prior
authorization from its employees, deducts union dues or agency fees from the
latter's wages and remits them directly to the union. "It’s desirability in a labor
organization is quite evident. It is assured thereby of continuous funding. As
this Court has acknowledged, the system of check-off is primarily for the
benefit of the Union and only indirectly, for the individual employees.
The legal basis of check-off is found in statutes or in contracts. The statutory
limitations on check-offs are found in Article 241, Chapter II, Title IV, Book
Five of the Labor Code.

Article 241 speaks of three (3) requisites that must be complied with in order
that the special assessment for Union's incidental expenses, attorney's fees and
representation expenses, as stipulated in Article XII of the CBA, be valid and
upheld namely: 1) authorization by a written resolution of the majority of all
the members at the general membership meeting duly called for the purpose;
(2) secretary's record of the minutes of the meeting; and (3) individual written
authorization for check-off duly signed by the employee concerned.

FIVE J TAXI v. NLRC

236 SCRA 556

DOCTRINE:

Article 114 of the Labor Code provides the rule on deposits for loss or damage
to tools, materials or equipment supplied by the employer. A taxi company that
requires its drivers to make daily deposits to defray any shortage in their
“boundary” is covered by the said provision. However, requiring them to deposit
an amount to defray expenses for car washing is allowed in view of the practice
in the taxi industry for the drivers to restore the unit he has driven to the same
clean condition when he took it out.

PLDT v. ESTRANERO

GR.NO. 192518, OCTOBER 15, 2014

DOCTRINE:

Article 113 of the Labor Code that no employer, in his own behalf or in behalf
of any person, shall make any deduction from the wages of his employees,
except in cases where the employer is authorized by law or regulations issued
by the Secretary of Labor and Employment, among others. The Omnibus Rules
Implementing the Labor Code, meanwhile, provides that deductions from the
wages of the employees may be made by the employer when such deductions
are authorized by law, or when the deductions are with the written
authorization of the employees for payment to a third person. Thus, any
withholding of an employee's wages by an employer may only be allowed in the
form of wage deductions under the circumstances provided in Article 113 of the
Labor Code, as well as the Omnibus Rules implementing it. Further, Article
116 of the Labor Code clearly provides that it is unlawful for any person,
directly or indirectly, to withhold any amount from the wages of a worker
without the worker's consent.