LABOR groups and workers’ party-list representatives have asked the Supreme Court to stop lower courts from blocking regional minimum wage orders, arguing that judicial challenges must not undermine workers’ right to legally mandated pay increases.
Kamanggagawa Party-list Rep. Elijah Rumbaoa San Fernando, the Workers and Peasants’ Party of the Philippines, the Federation of Free Workers, the National Federation of Labor, Sentro, and other labor organizations filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition to stop the trial courts from proceeding with the cases and direct lower courts to dismiss outright petitions for declaratory relief or other actions challenging wage orders.
The labor groups also asked the high court to rule on the substantive issues should the case become moot. The case stemmed from separate legal challenges filed by construction companies and the fishing industry federation questioning aspects of the implementation of NCR Wage Order No. 27.
Construction companies Readycon Trading and Construction Corp. and R-II Builders Inc., along with the Alliance of Philippine Fishing Federations Inc., urged the court to dismiss the petition, saying it has been overtaken by events after the issuance of a new wage order granting workers a P60 daily increase.
In their consolidated comment and opposition filed on Sept. 29, the private respondents argued that the high court need not rule on the labor groups’ challenge because the National Capital Region wage board has already granted the same P60 increase sought by the petitioners.
The new Wage Order No. NCR-28 took effect on Sept. 26, providing a single-tranche P60 daily increase after the implementation of Wage Order No. NCR-27 was restrained by trial court orders.
Wage Order No. NCR-27, issued on June 23, provided for an P85 daily increase in Metro Manila — P60 effective July 25 and another P25 scheduled for Jan. 20, 2027.
Employers argued that the new wage order and the expiration of the challenged court orders had rendered the labor groups’ petition moot.
The Pasig City court issued a status quo ante order on July 24, followed by a temporary restraining order on July 30. In a separate case, the Navotas City Regional Trial Court scheduled a hearing on the fishing federation’s application for similar relief.
In opposing the petition, the employers argued that the Constitution protects not only workers’ rights but also enterprises’ right to reasonable returns on investments, expansion and growth.
They cited Article XIII, Section 3 of the Constitution and Article 124 of the Labor Code, which requires wage boards to consider factors including the fair return on capital invested and employers’ capacity to pay.
The private respondents also disputed the labor groups’ bid to obtain a blanket directive requiring lower courts to dismiss future challenges to wage orders, arguing that such relief goes beyond the scope of a petition for certiorari and prohibition.
They maintained that courts must retain the authority to review whether wage orders comply with the law, rather than automatically dismissing every legal challenge regardless of its merits.
