DOLE, NWPC ordered to answer petition vs wage rationalization

The oral arguments on the disqualification case against presidential aspirant Sen. Grace Poe at the Supreme Court, Manila on February 2, 2016. INQUIRER PHOTO / NINO JESUS ORBETA

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) and the National Wage and Productivity Commission (NWPC) to answer a petition from various labor organizations claiming that Republic Act 6727 or the Wage Rationalization Act violates the equal protection of the law.

In a resolution, the high court en banc gave DOLE and NWPC 10 days to comment.

The petitioners–which include Ugnayan ng Maralita Laban sa Kahirapan (UMALAB KA) Partylist, senatorial candidate Walden Bello, National Federation of Labor (NFL), and Solidarity of Independent and General Labor Organizations–want the high court to stop the NWPC and all the Regional Tripartite Wage and Productivity Boards (RTWPB) from further issuing regional wage orders.

They also asked the high court to abolish the 17 regional wage boards in the Philippines and to set and standardize a national minimum wage all over the country.

Due to the enactment of RA 6727, there are different minimum wages set all over the country: as high as P481 in the National Capital Region (NCR) and as low as P250 in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).

“This disparitative absurdity is the effect of 26 years of implementing the provisions of RA 6727,” the petition stated, adding that such disparity has deprived over 62 million laborers nationwide.

The petitioners said the minimum wage set by NWPC and RTWPB failed to meet the  living wage suggested by various think tanks, including the IBON Foundation.

Data from IBON Foundation showed that in May 2012, the daily minimum wage is P446 while the family living wage is P1,017 with a wage gap of P571.

“Minimum wages in the country have long failed to provide for an adequate living wage for laborers. This is due to the fact that the criteria in determining minimum wages as defined by RA 6727 are patently erroneous, biased, and ultimately unconstitutional,” the petition stated. JE