BANKARD EMPLOYEES UNION-WORKERS ALLIANCE TRADE UNIONS, petitioner, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS RELATIONS COMMISSION n! BANKARD, INC., respon!ents. ".R. No. #$%&'( - )e*r+r #, %%$ Prin/ip0e1 W2e Distortion The mere mere factual existence existence of wage distortion distortion does not, however, however, ipso ipso facto result result to an obligation to rectify it, absent a law or other source of obligation which requires its rectication. )/ts1 Bankard, Inc. classies its employees by levels from evel I to evel !. "n #ay $%, &''(, its Board of )irectors approved a *ew +alary +cale, made retroactive to pril &, &''(, for the purpose of making its hiring rate competitive in the industry-s labor market. market. The *ew +alary +alary +cale +cale increased increased the hiring hiring rates of new employees, employees, to wit evels evels I and ! by one thousand pesos /0&,111.112, and evels II, III and I! by nine hundred pesos /0'11.112. ccordingly, the salaries of employees who fell below the new minimum rates were also ad3usted to reach such rates under their levels. s a result, the duly certied exclusive bargaining agent of the regular rank and le employees of Bankard/Bankard 4mployees 5nion67T52 pressed for the increase in the salary of its old, regular employees. Bankard maintained that there was no obligation on the part of the management to grant to all its employees the same increase in an across6the6 board manner man ner.. *otice of +trike was led on the ground of discrimination and other acts of 5nfair abor 0ractice /502. This was initially treated treated as a preventive mediation case on the ground that the issues raised were not strikable. 5pon the second notice of strike, the dispute was certied for compulsory arbitration. *89, *89, dismissed the case for lack of merit nding no wage distortion and also denied a reconsideration. 9 denied the same for lack of merit. :ence, this petition. Iss+e1 7hether or not the wage scheme increase used by Bankard constitutes wage distortion. 3e0!1 *". In Prubankers Association v. Prudential Bank and Trust Company , Company , the court has laid down the four elements of wage distortion, to wit /&.2 n existing hierarchy of positions with corresponding salary rates; /$2 signicant change in the salary rate of a lower pay class without a concomitant increase increase in the salary rate of a higher one; /(2 The elimination of the distinction between the two levels; and /<2 The existence of the distortion in the same region of the country.
*ormally, *ormally, a company has a wage structure or method of determining the wages of its employees. In a problem dealing with wage distortion, the basic assumption is that there exists a grouping or classication of employees that establishes distinctions among them on some relevant or legitimate bases. =or purposes of determining the existence of wage distortion, employees cannot create their own independent classication classication and use it as a basis to demand an across6the6board increase in salary. 7hether or not a new additional scheme of classication of employees for compensation purposes should be established by the 9ompany /and the legitimacy or viability of the bases of distinction there embodied2 is properly a matter of management 3udgment and discretion, and ultimately, perhaps, a sub3ect matter for bargaining negotiations between employer and employees. It is assuredly something that falls outside the concept of wage distortion. part from the ndings of fact of the *89 and the 9ourt of ppeals that some of the elements of wage distortion are absent, petitioner cannot legally obligate Bankard to correct the alleged wage distortion as the increase in the wages and salaries of the newly6hired was not due to a prescribed law or wage order. If the compulsory mandate under rticle &$< to correct wage distortion is applied to voluntary and unilateral increases by the employer in xing hiring rates which is inherently a business 3udgment prerogative, prerogative, then the hands of the employer would be completely tied even in cases where an increase in wages of a particular group is 3ustied due to a re6 evaluation of the high productivity productivity of a particular group, or as in the present case, the need to increase the competitiveness of Bankards hiring rate. n employer would be discouraged from ad3usting the salary rates of a particular group of employees for fear that it would result to a demand by all employees for a similar increase, especially if the nancial conditions of the business cannot address an across6the6board increase. 7age distortion is a factual and economic condition that may be brought about by di>erent causes. The mere factual existence of wage distortion distortio n does not, however, ipso facto result to an obligation to rectify it, absent a law or other source of obligation which requires its rectication. bsent any indication that the voluntary increase of salary rates by an employer was done arbitrarily and illegally for the purpose of circumventing the laws or was devoid of any legitimate purpose other than to discriminate discriminate against the regular employees, this 9ourt will not step in to interfere with this management prerogative. 4mployees are of course not precluded from negotiating with its employer and lobby for wage increases through appropriate channels, such as through a 9B. W3ERE)ORE, W3ERE)ORE, the present petition is hereby )4*I4) .
