By Mark Joseph M. Sanchez
THE WRIT blocking Metro Manila’s P60 wage increase should be lifted after the employers who obtained the injunction admitted they could not post the P10-billion bond required by the court, labor leaders said, arguing that the regional trial court (RTC) has no choice but to set aside the writ unless the condition for its issuance is met.
“Petitioners cannot retain the benefit of the preliminary injunction while declining, or concededly being unable to satisfy the very condition imposed for its issuance,” Federation of Free Workers President Jose Sonny G. Matula told BusinessWorld over the weekend.
He said the failure to post and secure approval of the bond means the writ could legally take effect, even if the court had granted the application for a preliminary injunction.
“The Aug. 13 order expressly made the bond a condition for issuance of the writ,” he said, citing Rule 58, Section 4(b) of the Rules of Court, which states that an injunction can only be issued upon approval of the required bond.
He added that the court’s own order leaves little room for interpretation because issuance of the writ depends on compliance with the bond requirement.
Mr. Matula also cited the Supreme Court ruling in Heirs of Melencio Yu versus Court of Appeals, which held that an order granting a preliminary injunction does not automatically entitle an applicant to enforcement.
“Unless and until the requisite injunction bond is posted and approved, the writ cannot issue and cannot restrain the implementation of Wage Order No. 27,” he said.
The issue arose after Readycon Trading and Construction Corp. and R-II Builders, Inc. informed Pasig City RTC Branch 152 that they did not have the money to post the P10-billion bond.
In an Aug. 16 manifestation shared by Mr. Matula, the companies asked the court to reduce the injunction bond.
They also asked the court to allow alternative arrangements, including a property bond, installment payments or a surety bond once insurance and surety companies regain accreditation before the court.
The petitioners argued that the bond effectively deprives them of the benefit of the injunction despite the court’s finding that the requirements for injunctive relief had been met.
The companies added that neither firm maintained cash reserves of P10 billion that could be posted without severely disrupting operations, payroll and contractual obligations.
The labor groups said the filing boosts the case for lifting the injunction rather than modifying it.
“The bottom line: no approved bond, no writ. No writ, no operative injunction. And no operative injunction means the P60 wage increase cannot be lawfully withheld,” Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa Secretary-General Josua T. Mata told BusinessWorld via Viber.
The first P60 tranche of the wage increase was supposed to take effect on July 25, while a second P25 tranche is scheduled for Jan. 20, 2027.
Mr. Mata said the bond issue leaves the court facing a straightforward legal question.
“The bond cannot cure a lack of jurisdiction,” he said. “Before debating the amount of the bond, the court must first confront the threshold question: Can it lawfully issue the injunction at all?”
In its Aug. 13 order, the RTC upheld its jurisdiction and found that the challenge raised a purely legal question. It also held that the injunction was “preservative” and concerned enforcement of an already concluded wage-setting proceeding.
Mr. Matula said workers should receive the P60 increase for the period during which no operative injunction exists.
“The employers who engaged the workers shall pay because they benefited from their work,” he said.
Mr. Mata estimated that workers have already been deprived of about P1.32 billion in wages, equivalent to P60 a day for 20 weekdays for 1.1 million workers.
“This is the real cost of the injunction: more than a billion pesos already missing from workers’ pockets,” he said.