A Pasig court has issued a temporary restraining order that halts the implementation of the mandated minimum wage increase in Metro Manila, citing potential irreversible harm to businesses.
The order, spanning eight pages, was granted by Judge Marie Joyce P. Manongsong of Pasig City Regional Trial Court Branch 152 at the request of Readycon Trading and Construction Corp. and R-II Builders, Inc. The two companies sought to suspend Wage Order No. NCR‑27, which requires a daily increase in the minimum wage for private‑sector workers in the National Capital Region.
Wage Order No. NCR‑27 establishes an increase of P85 per day, to be applied in two stages: a P60 rise that began on July 25, followed by a P25 addition slated for January 20, 2027.
Judge Manongsong noted that the specific circumstances of the case warranted a temporary restraining order to pause the wage order’s implementation. She emphasized the need to balance the state’s duty to protect workers with the constitutional rights of employers. The court highlighted the importance of allowing businesses to maintain reasonable returns on investment and pursue growth.
Construction firms argued that the wage increase would be fully absorbed by their budgets, resulting in reduced profitability, sustained deficits, workforce reductions, and the possibility of suspending operations or closing work sites. They warned that sudden labor cost hikes could not be accommodated within existing project contracts. Readycon President Jesus Ignacio testified that the company would face more than P400,000 in additional payroll expenses from the wage increase alone.
Ignacio explained that construction firms calculate project costs during the bidding stage, making it difficult to absorb unexpected labor cost increases under current agreements. The testimony underscored the financial strain sudden wage hikes impose on construction operations. It also highlighted the broader challenge of maintaining profitability amid rising labor costs.
While affirming the state’s obligation to ensure a living wage, the court stressed that employers’ constitutional rights must also be protected. It warned that disregarding these rights could undermine economic recovery efforts. The ruling underscored the need for a balanced approach to wage policy and business viability.
The court cited the economic repercussions of the March 2026 closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the subsequent oil crisis as factors aggravating the financial burden on businesses. These events intensified the challenges faced by companies operating in the region. The ruling acknowledges the broader economic context in which the wage increase is being implemented.
Under the temporary restraining order, the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board‑National Capital Region and the National Wages and Productivity Commission are barred from enforcing the wage order until August 13. Petitioners were required to post a P1‑million bond to cover potential damages. A hearing for a preliminary injunction is scheduled for August 3.
The trial court had previously directed the parties to maintain the status quo pending further proceedings. This directive aims to prevent any immediate changes to the wage order while the case is reviewed.
A labor group condemned the petition, labeling it an attempt to deny workers the wage increase and threaten the integrity of the wage‑setting system. The group argued that employers should have pursued remedies under the Wage Rationalization Act rather than resorting to court action. It emphasized the importance of maintaining tripartite cooperation in wage negotiations. The condemnation reflects broader concerns about preserving the balance between workers’ rights and business interests.
The wage order’s first tranche, a P60 daily increase, took effect on July 25, while the remaining P25 is scheduled for implementation on January 20, 2027. This phased approach is intended to ease the transition for both workers and employers.
