Groups seek Supreme Court review of court order halting wage hike

MANILA, Philippines — Akbayan Partylist has asked the Supreme Court’s Judicial Integrity Office to review the actions of a Pasig City court after it issued orders suspending a newly approved minimum wage hike for workers in Metro Manila.

In a letter complaint filed on Tuesday, August 11, Rep. Percival Cendaña, representatives of Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa (Sentro), and several labor federations requested an administrative evaluation of Pasig Regional Trial Court Branch 152 before the high court.

“We write as concerned citizens and labor organizations with a direct and continuing interest in the integrity of the wage-fixing machinery established by Congress under Republic Act No. 6727, and in ensuring that the statutory safeguards governing the implementation and review of wage orders are observed,” the groups said.

The complaint centers on two interim orders issued by the trial court regarding Wage Order No. NCR-27:

• A status quo ante order issued by the Pasig RTC executive judge on July 24, 2026 — just one day before the wage hike was set to take effect.
• A temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by Branch 152 on July 30, 2026, which halted the wage order's implementation until Aug. 13, 2026, contingent on a P1 million bond.

The legal challenge against the wage order was filed by two construction firms seeking a petition for declaratory relief.

According to the groups, the trial court's orders conflict directly with Article 126 of the Labor Code, which explicitly prohibits lower courts from issuing preliminary injunctions or TROs against proceedings of the National Wages and Productivity Commission (NWPC) and Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Boards.

“The concern is particularly significant where, as here, the statutory framework expressly provides a mechanism for challenging a Wage Order and specifies the circumstances under which its implementation may be stayed,” the groups said.

Beyond their request for an evaluation, the groups urged the Supreme Court to issue guidance to lower court judges regarding labor injunctions and Rule 58 requirements.

They recommended that the proposed circular remind judges that Article 126 bars any order that effectively suspends a wage hike, reinforce that proper appeals belong with the National Wages and Productivity Commission, and warn that failure to comply with these restrictions will result in administrative sanctions.

• Latest
• Trending