Labor Group Urges Swift Resolution of NCR Wage Hike Case

The Federation of Free Workers (FFW) is calling on the Pasig Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 152 to resolve the motion filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) seeking the dismissal of the case questioning an P85 wage increase in Metro Manila. The OSG filed its Motion to Resolve on September 3, stating that the jurisdictional issue is already “ripe for resolution” after the parties submitted their respective pleadings. The OSG has asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction, reconsider and set aside its August 13 order, and deny the application for a preliminary injunction against the wage order. FFW President and NAGKAISA! Chair Jose Sonny G. Matula said the jurisdictional issue should be resolved before the case proceeds further. “We are one with the OSG on this,” Mr. Matula said in a statement. “If the court has no jurisdiction, there is no reason to keep dribbling the ball while workers wait with empty pockets on the sidelines. Resolve it now.” Wage Order No. NCR-27 provides for a P60 daily increase effective July 25 and another P25 increase effective January 20, 2027, in the National Capital Region (NCR). The first tranche remains suspended after the Pasig RTC issued a preliminary injunction. FFW estimated that the P60 increase would have amounted to approximately P2.508 billion for roughly 1.1 million direct beneficiaries over 38 working days from July 25 to September 7. The group also cited an illustrative P1.938 billion based on a P30 adjustment for about 1.7 million workers potentially affected by wage distortion, bringing the combined estimated impact to about P4.446 billion. It stressed that the P30 figure is illustrative, and actual wage-distortion adjustments depend on applicable legal processes and workplace circumstances. FFW, along with NAGKAISA! affiliates and other labor groups, has sought to intervene in the Pasig case and a separate case before the Navotas RTC challenging the wage order. The groups have asked the courts to dismiss the petitions for lack of jurisdiction and lift the restraint against implementation. — Mark Joseph M. Sanchez