Professional Documents
Culture Documents
J00D – E2023
Wage – Wage Increase – Effects on Benefits
SC affirmed the NLRC, ruling that while as a rule 13 th month pay should not
include benefits in the computation, the fact that the company has continually
included the benefits in the computation for a long period led to it ripening
into a longstanding company practice. Thus, the company cannot now remove
the benefits under LC 100 or the rule on non-diminution of benefits.
Nothing explicit sa case about wage increase and effects on benefits but from
what I understand, because the computation of 13 th month pay is based solely on
daily wage rate any increase in wage rate also increases 13 th month pay (a
benefit).
Doctrine
Alternatively, 13th month pay computation if based on benefits other than the
mandatory daily wage rate if done voluntarily and continuously for a period of
time cannot then be removed by the employer under the principle of non-
diminution of benefits as mandated by LC 100.
RELEVANT FACTS
1. Present Case – Certiorari, assailing decision of CA which affirmed NLRC decision which
found petitioner guilty of illegal dismissal.
2. Dec. 28 1982 – respondent, Associated Labor Unions (ALU) filed a case for payment of
“13th month pay differentials”, in behalf of the rank and file employees of petitioner.
Seeking the recovery of the following sums that Davao allegedly left out of the
computation for the 13th month pay for 1982; contrary to company practice that has been
in place since 1975.
a. 13th month pay differential for the year 1982 – equivalent to sick, vacation and
maternity laves.
b. Premium for work done on rest days, special holidays.
c. Pay for regular holidays.
i. Defense:
1. That it erroneously included the items that were subject of the
complaint in the computation of 13th month pay for the years prior
to 1982. That this erroneous payment was only corrected in 1982
due to the 1981 ruling in San Miguel v. Inciong that clarified that
such benefits were not included in the computation for 13th month
pay.
3. March 7 1984 – Labor Arbiter Pedro Ramos – ruled in favor of respondent ALU,
ordering Davao to pay the 1982 – 13 th month pay differential to all of its rank and file
employees.
a. NLRC – affirmed the decision of the Labor Arbiter.
4. Led to the current petition.1
RULING
WHEREFORE, finding no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the NLRC, the
petition is hereby DISMISSED, and the questioned decision of respondent NLRC is
AFFIRMED accordingly.
Notes
2
Sick, vacation, maternity leaves + premiums for special holiday and rest day work + regular holiday pay
i
Sec. 2 (a) 'Thirteenth-month pay' shall mean one twelfth (1/12) of the basic salary of an employee within a
calendar year.
(b) 'Basic Salary' shall include all remunerations or earnings paid by an employer to an employee for services
rendered but may not include cost-of living allowances granted pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 525 or Letter
of Instructions No. 174, profit-sharing payments, and all allowances and monetary benefits which are not
considered or integrated as part of the regular or basic salary of the employee at the time of the promulgation of
the Decree on December 16, 1975."
ii
4. Overtime pay, earnings and other remunerations which are not part of the basic salary shall not be included
in the computation of the 13-
month pay."
iii
Labor Code - Art. 100. Prohibition against elimination or diminution of benefits. Nothing in this Book shall be
construed to eliminate or in any way diminish supplements, or other employee benefits being enjoyed at the time of
promulgation of this Code.