Published — June 1, 2022
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of your own lawyer to address your legal concerns, if any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
Learn more about wages and salary: Wages vs. Salary
YES!
Let us take for example the case of G&M (Phil.), Inc. vs. Willie Batomalaque (G.R. No. 151849, June 23, 2005).
In this case, Willie Batommalaque (“Willie”) was hired as a car painter by Abdul Aziz Abdullah Al Muhaimid Najad Car Maintenance Association (“Aziz”), a Saudi Arabian entity based in Riyadh. Willie was hired through G&M Philippines Inc.(“G&M”), for a two-year period with a monthly salary of US$370 which has the equivalent to 1, 200 Saudi Riyals.
In accordance with the employment contract, Willie started working for Aziz on March 10, 1992. Willie was expected to receive a monthly salary of 1, 200 Saudi Riyals.
However, Willie has received a monthly salary of 900 Saudi riyals for the first four months of his employment. For the fifth month up to the end of the 12th month, he received a monthly salary of 700 Saudi Riyals. Clearly, Willie received monthly salary which was way different from the supposed monthly salary of 1, 200 Saudi Riyals as reflected in his employment contract. For these reasons, Willie filed a complaint for underpayment of salaries and wages.
The question now is, “Is Willie entitled to receive the difference of amount in his monthly salary or wage?” YES! The Labor Arbiter finds the complaint for underpayment of salaries and wages meritorious and ordered Aziz, G&M and other respondents to pay Willie the amount of Five Thousand Five Hundred Saudi Riyals (SR 5, 500) or in Philippine Currency, as shown in their computation below:
Agreed Salary : ‘SR1, 200
Salary Received : ‘SR 900 for 5 months
‘SR 700 for 8 months
Salary differential
SR1, 200 – SR900 = SR300 x 5 mos. = SR1, 500
SR 1,200 – SR700 = SR500 x 8 mos. = SR4, 000
SR5, 500
Feeling aggrieved, G&M elevated the case. The Supreme Court AFFIRMED (with modification as to the amount of salary differential) the decision of the Labor Arbiter. Willie, according to the Supreme Court, is entitled to SR5, 200, not SR5, 500 representing the total deficient payment of his salaries.
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.
All rights reserved.
SUBSCRIBE NOW FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES!
[email-subscribers-form id=”4″]