Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), petitionersVersus

National Wages and Productivity Commission and Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board-NCR, Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP)Facts:

1. October 15, 1990 Regional Board of National Capital Region issued Wage Order No. NCR-01, increasing the minimum wage of P17 daily in NCR. TUCP moved for reconsideration. So did PMAP.2. October 23, 1990 Regional Board issued Wage Order No.01-A amending NCR-01. All workers even those who already reach the minimum wage of P125 shall receive an increase by P17.

3. ECOP questions the validity of Wage Order NCR-01-A promulgated pursuant to RA No.6727RA 6727: An Act to rationalize wage policy determination by establishing the Mechanism and Proper Standards. Therefore, amending for the purpose Art. 99 of and incorporating Articles 120, 121, 123, 124, 126, and 127, into, Presidential Decree no. 442 as amended, otherwise known as the labor Code of the Philippines for Industrial dispersal to the countryside and for other purposes,4. ECOP appealed to National Wages and Productivity Commission. Dismiss by NWPC on November 6, denied reconsideration of the same on Nov. 14, 1990.

5. ECOP prayed for the reinstatement of W.O. No.NCR-01 which is anchored on the floor-wage method rather than the present which is implementing the ceiling method.

Issues:

1. W/N the Regional Board acted in excess of authority in passing W.O. No. NCR-01-A?

(RA 6727 according to ECOP should impose minimum wages not ceilings, promotes CBA and cannot pre-empt the same by implementing ceilings.)2. W/N there is invalid delegation of wage as a legislative function by RA 6727 to the Regional Board? Or unlawful act of legislation?(ECOP Insist: RA 6727 should not go beyond power to grant minimum wage adjustments and in the absence of clear statutory authority and boards may no more than adjust floor wages (not ceilings))

Held:

1. NO. The board did not act in excess in authority. The court is in opinion that Congress meant boards to be creative in resolving the annual question of wages w/out the labor and management knocking on the legislation door every time.

Act is not an effort to pass the buck or abdicate its duty but to leave questions of wages to the expertise of the experts

Court noted the increasing trend is the salary-cap method(ceiling) not the floor-wage method. CBA did not help much in the Wage Distortion problems but the cap-method did. RA 6727 intended to rationalize wages:1. Provide full-time boards to police wages round the clock

2. Giving the boards enough power to achieve goal

2. NO. There is no invalid delegation by RA 6727 or unlawful act of legislation by the Regional Board.

National Wage and Productivity Commission noted that determination of wages involve 2 methods; floor-wage and salary-ceiling. The 2nd method is used in the RA 6727.

Court is not convinced that the board performed an unlawful act of legislation. In fact it is, a. true wage-fixing

b. In the light of floor-wage method failure, the Court believes that the Commission correctly upheld the Regional Board of NCR. Act is meant to rationalize wages therefore having permanent boards decide wage rather than leaving wage determination to the congress year after year and law after law.

3. Justice Cruz, with the proliferation of specialized activities and their attendant peculiar problems, the national legislature has found it more necessary to entrust to administrative agencies the power of subordinate legislation.

DECISION:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED. No pronouncement as to the costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Melencio-Herrera, et al.